Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

latimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 689 posts

Re: To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

#191

Post by alkonaut »

nradov wrote: post #142
bit_logic wrote: post #109

The true solution to LA traffic will never happen. And that solution is buses. But not the current underfunded system that barely limps along. A massive number of buses, like 5x the current number. And combined with tolls for cars to get cars off the road. The large number of buses is critical because it greatly reduces wait time between transfers. It also allows adding express bus lines between major areas. But buse…

Buses in the LA region have a bad reputation because of other bus passengers. If you ride the bus you might have to sit next to someone who smells bad or plays loud music or acts out in inappropriate ways. That's why everyone who can afford it drives their own car: to be alone. The reputation would improve if they could get more "regular" people riding, but it's kind of a chicken-or-the-egg problem.

If it's a 20 minute commute by bus, or a 1hr commute by car then it's easy. You don't care what the next guy smells like.

Or if the first 2h pay of your day is used to pay for parking, then a bus ticket is attractive.

Re: To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

#192

Post by antognini »

Nav_Panel wrote: post #131
bit_logic wrote: post #109

The true solution to LA traffic will never happen. And that solution is buses. But not the current underfunded system that barely limps along. A massive number of buses, like 5x the current number. And combined with tolls for cars to get cars off the road. The large number of buses is critical because it greatly reduces wait time between transfers. It also allows adding express bus lines between major areas. But buse…

> the bad reputation of buses Buses have a bad reputation compared to other modes of transit because they're so easily re-routable. A political whim could shut down a whole bus route in a day, leaving commuters stranded. Rail signals long-term investment, and neighborhoods will grow around rail because they can guarantee it'll be there for years to come.

> Buses have a bad reputation compared to other modes of transit because they're so easily re-routable.

I've always thought that was an advantage for buses. With rail, you have to plan it to go through areas that are not only popular now, but will be popular in 30 years. If some neighborhood suddenly becomes the happening place 10 years from now, you have to build a whole new, expensive line. But with buses, you can just add a new route.

Re: To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

#193

Post by ghaff »

tapatio wrote: post #184
martinald wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you seen the central line at rush hour in London? It's horrendous[1]. We are talking >7people per sqm, plus significant waits to even get on the trains. But yet, 100k+s use it every day of all socioeconomic backgrounds. I'd imagine mostly middle class/upper middle class professionals. Why? 1) Traffic is terrible. It will take 1hr+ to do a journey the central line does in 15-20m. 2) Even if you want to drive, par…

London sounds terrible to live in, way too many people.

Commuting at rush hour can be pretty awful in just about every major city--New York, London, Paris, Tokyo... I wouldn't call any of those places terrible but, yes, there are a lot of people and it can be pretty mobbed if you try to travel at peak times.

Re: To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

#194

Post by tpae »

When I was in college, we had this legacy system for class signups. During class registration week, in order to prevent large amount of traffic, they issued "registration passes" which were time blocked in different groups.

Instead of introducing tolls, why not have daily commuters be added to a pool, and be issued a time slot for their commute?

Re: To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

#195

Post by edko »

tankerdude wrote: post #172

Simplest way: $5/gallon gas. When the costs for the road increase in that manner, there was a drastic drop in commuters and a big jump in mass transit. It has happened in the past when gas was steep. Perhaps it is time again to help reduce congestion. Right now, its not much more expensive to drive than to use light rail.

So what happens, for example, with neighboring counties, where there isn't any mass transit? Do they also pay $5/gallon, to help solve LA's problems? Or do they keep current gas prices, and get their roads clogged with Angelenos looking for cheaper fuel?

Re: To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

#196

Post by l1ambda »

chadgeidel wrote: post #166
l1ambda wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what is done in Minnesota. Pricing is dynamically adjusted every 3 minutes to keep traffic flowing at a minimum of 45mph (in practice more like 60+mph). When there is more traffic, the toll is priced higher. Electronic sensors monitor the traffic density and tolls are changed every three minutes. The best part is, it works!

Wow, I hadn't heard of this! Very interesting. Trying to find more info about this but not finding it on Minnesota DOT (the MnPASS site doesn't have results data) or other sites. Can you share a link?

Here you go:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MnPASS

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/mnpass/howmnpassworks.html

http://www.dot.state.mn.us/mnpass/pdf/mnpass-existing-and-fu...

Re: To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

#198

Post by kelsus »

I wanted to read these comments to see whether HN readership was with or against this argument, and instead everyone just decides they have better ideas or different arguments.

For what it's worth, I think this would be a great first start. It's an easy MVP (thinking agile here) to get data and then decide what the next potentially more costly step might be.

Re: To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

#199

Post by alkonaut »

bit_logic wrote: post #109

The true solution to LA traffic will never happen. And that solution is buses. But not the current underfunded system that barely limps along. A massive number of buses, like 5x the current number. And combined with tolls for cars to get cars off the road. The large number of buses is critical because it greatly reduces wait time between transfers. It also allows adding express bus lines between major areas. But buse…

> And that solution is buses. But not the current underfunded system that barely limps along

That's why a good toll system should fund the public transit. The higher you set the tolls, the more buses you can offer to those who find it too expensive.

Re: To fix L.A.'s traffic, we need tolls

#200

Post by gozur88 »

Nav_Panel wrote: post #131
bit_logic wrote: post #109

The true solution to LA traffic will never happen. And that solution is buses. But not the current underfunded system that barely limps along. A massive number of buses, like 5x the current number. And combined with tolls for cars to get cars off the road. The large number of buses is critical because it greatly reduces wait time between transfers. It also allows adding express bus lines between major areas. But buse…

> the bad reputation of buses Buses have a bad reputation compared to other modes of transit because they're so easily re-routable. A political whim could shut down a whole bus route in a day, leaving commuters stranded. Rail signals long-term investment, and neighborhoods will grow around rail because they can guarantee it'll be there for years to come.

It's more than that. At a personal level buses offer you all the disadvantages of mass transit with a side benefit of all the disadvantages of automobile travel. The only reason you would take a bus in Los Angeles is because you don't own a car.

Much of that could be fixed with enough investment, but we're talking a huge investment.

Post reply on HN