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

331–340 of 689 posts

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

#331

Post by Touche »

Osiris wrote: post #307

This is just a band-aid. Same with adding buses, lanes, trains, etc. When something goes wrong in software we usually try to resolve it by finding a root cause. There are a lot of cars on the roads. Why? People live far away from their work. Why? All the office buildings are in one central place. Why? ... Etc. The solutions to the root causes, whatever they are, are, unfortunately, a lot more complex and expensive th…

Yes, this. Also, maybe those people who drive so far into offices to sit at a desk all day clicking buttons in a web app... Maybe those people don't need to be driving into an office at all. Or maybe just one day a week. Or, if you can't trust your employees to work from home, maybe there should be neighborhood working spaces where you can have a supervisor with your employees as they click buttons in a web app, but do so only a couple of miles from their house.

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

#332

Post by Balgair »

Symbiote wrote: post #282
Balgair wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you think that money from tolls is actually going to go to buses and improved public transit and not just into some Bel-Air businessman's brother's pocket, I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.

I know things are done differently in America, but the profit from London's congestion charge is invested in public transport by law . For at least the first few years, it was entirely spent on improvements to buses -- giving much more capacity, and faster journeys due to the reduced congestion. * Schedule 23 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999, to be precise, but the whole act is a 500 page PDF, so my curiosity…

This is also true here, but someone has to build or design those improvements to buses. The contract will typically go to someone's brother's shell company or something, especially in California. The approach to the Golden Gate Bridge cost a million dollars per foot of road. Yes, seismic this-and-that, environmental reports, noise studies, etc, but the corruption is just rampant in Cali.

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

#334

Post by Touche »

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.

Am I horrible person to want higher end trains again (like there used to be)? So I can pay double but have the confidence that my fellow passengers have jobs and families they care about and don't have voices in their head. Does this make me a bad human to want this?

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

#335

Post by amclennon »

I recently attended a transit planning meeting in Austin where they discussed the idea of combining demand driven tolls that provide free access to express buses.

I think this approach provides an excellent alternative to trains (which Austinites keep voting down) because:

- It addresses the issue where buses are slowed down by other traffic.

- It has the potential to convince people to take buses when total travel time is faster than driving and the cost of the toll is too great to use routinely.

- It has a low financial impact on tax payers, making it more likely to be approved.

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

#337

Post by Balgair »

engx wrote: post #311
Balgair wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Problem is, in LA at least, the bus and the car are about the same amount of time. Maybe a smidge longer for the bus. So most people that can afford to will take a car to avoid the cranksters, shockingly rude bus patrons, and the chance of a 'piss bus' on their way home.

A bus anyway in LA is substantially longer than driving. LA traffic is so annoying that a lot of people would likely take the bus if it was faster. If there were 10x more busses, and I could pay $10 for an all day pass, I'd take the bus every other day. Especially if the higher cost limited those who unfortunately use mass transit as temporary shelter. (And find some alternative temporary no strings attached shelter…

Depending on traffic, the bus is typically about the same, maybe 5 minutes more on the hour long ride I took for 2 years under the 405 everyday. You have to add in the time it takes to find parking for your car, which a bus does not do. Yes, some days are worse, some are better, but for me it was about the same for a hour+ commute.

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

#338

Post by sanswork »

astrodust wrote: post #314
sanswork wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://www.metrolinx.com/en/projectsandprograms/transitexpan...

Yes, Toronto, Australia. Obviously.

Is it even still on any rail network? I know it use to be way at the top on the Cityrail posters but a quick check now and it looks like it's been replaced with a coach service.

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

#339

Post by FullMtlAlcoholc »

This is a terrible solution. This will disproportionately affect the working poor. Think of all the people who work in Malibu. Hardly anyone who works a service job there live in the 'Bu.

This is effectively a tax on lower income people who had to move away from the city because they couldn't afford it. Buses aren't a good solution, as they double the amount of transit time vs a car. Advocating buses would be another tax on time.

There are no easy solutions LA traffic which is why it remains such a problem. An expansion of the subway system would be a good start, but eminent domain needs to trump NIMBY-ism to keep the costs down.

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

#340

Post by vkou »

xienze wrote: post #310
vkou wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tear up all the parking lots, and half the roads. Or, actually, just tear up the parking lots. You can do it by taxing under-utilized land. It's obviously never going to happen, so people will keep spending ~$3-5,000/year on vehicles, and ~$1,000-2000/year on parking, for the dubious privilege of spending up to two hours a day in traffic. On the bright side, if you live that far from work, your housing is probably ch…

> On the bright side, if you live that far from work, your housing is probably cheap. And that's exactly why things are the way they are. Shockingly, given the choice, most people would happily trade a long commute for the ability to spread out and not pay through the nose for the privilege of being crammed on top of other people.

Only because the costs of that lifestyle are socialized - either someone else pays them, or you can't opt out.

Surburban sprawl is unsustainable, but is paid for by new development, parking is free, or cheap, highways aren't tolled, costs of pollution aren't factored into your bill at the pump... When you live in the city, you still pay these costs, but you don't get to reap any of the benefits.

Post reply on HN