Los Angeles is built on a grid much like Toronto’s. Its suburbs have a population density similar to Toronto’s, which is considerably higher than that of the suburbs of the eastern cities we tend to view as friendlier to transit. A grid of buses is an ideal transit system for a decentralized city like L.A., and the city has already built much of the rapid transit backbone the model calls for. But what Los Angeles has never had, and what turns out to be the most essential element, is the unglamourous bus frequency on which Toronto’s success actually rests.

I'll admit that as a Transit Enthusiast I am, of course, predisposed to the noble Train. But the humble Bus has advantages -- the easiest to nail of course is adaptability and usability on streets without infrastructural modification. I think this is an intriguing take! I have some concerns, especially since LA's traffic patterns make buses almost as liable to slowdown as cars (bus lanes help, of course, but can only help so much), but more regular and reliable transit is always good.