Ugh, I just can't hate this guy! I tried to criticize him but I can't.

Manhattan is roughly 25km by 3km and has a ton of density and subway lines. That's about the size of the blue line corridor between downtown LB and downtown LA. LA covers a lot of ground despite its high population density (as a regional average).

Ironically, Huntingon's Red Cars were instrumental in laying out that sprawling pattern decades before the private automobile made the sprawl even more intense.

I also believe that smart use of "ultra-express" buses, such as the 920 is entirely crucial in a town as sprawled as Los Angeles.

Sprawl is not why Metro runs 920. It's been cut back since it was created.

There was another Rapid Rapid, 940, that was the fastest version of the 40/740 trunk. It didn't even last a year.

Instead, we have silly ideas like imposing timepoints on Rapid (a Leahy idea), because it is easier for supervisors to monitor drivers at a central location. True, but it destroys the whole purpose of Rapid when it hangs around for 5-10 minutes waiting for the clock to catch up. Zero tolerance on leaving sharp during the owl period, and for low frequency routes, is essential. For higher frequency routes, I agree with Wad who calls for them to be dispatched more like rail lines, on a frequency basis.

Instead, we have a shiny new sign, http://www.ocregister.com/articles/freeway-county-buena-2495618-project-orange, to remind county residents where to not travel beyond. You people stay behind this sign and everything will be cool.

Orange County Republican

E.g. missing a bus that runs every hour because it shows up early . . . that's a soul-crushing experience.

As far as the Purple Line extension goes I was looking at some census figures from the year 2000 which say that only 4.1% of people in Santa Monica (SM) went to work by transit (on the census website under "economic characteristics") compared to 10.2% for the city of LA. Granted, much of the ridership would probably be coming into SM rather than going out since SM has more employment than job density . . .

We'll see if Expo Phase 2 can boost that transit ridership up at all. Hopefully. If not, it might make more sense to pursue a different route, like sending the subway through the Sepulveda Pass. Why send two lines to SM anyway?

One possible deterrent could be that any driver caught doing such pays for a *yearly* transit pass for the resultant disenfranchised riders. As it stands the MTA just laughs it off.

I also believe that smart use of "ultra-express" buses, such as the 920 is entirely crucial in a town as sprawled as Los Angeles.

At the right time of day, it can make a *huge* difference in time spent, not to mention the psychological boost of not crawling at a snail's pace.

Sounds like a great guy! And if he can get the buses to be on time more power to him. I'd be happy if he could just get them to show up in the 5 minute window including and after the timetable time. Early buses that show up and leave early really are a problem. I remember getting to the 761 bus stop at Hilgard and Westholme 5 minutes before the scheduled time, and apparently the bus must have arrived and left early, and the next bus was somehow late, as I ended up waiting 35 minutes for the bus. Taught me then that I might as well not even look at the time tables, as long as I know the alleged frequency of the service, because they are rarely on time. Some routes are better than others, of course.