Live data from Hacker News

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

latimes.com

561–570 of 689 posts

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

#561

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ditto for Quito, Ecuador: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trolleybuses_in_Quito I'm now back in Australia, and despairing because my small city is putting in a light rail solution when a bus rapid transit option would be so much cheaper, given our low ridership. But buses aren't cool. :(

Which city is doing LRT? These can be more cost-effective in the long run at certain ridership levels, plus they're usually a better experience for the passenger. Busses just plain suck.

It could well be the Gold Coast, too, which has just finished its light rail in preparation for the Commonwealth Games next year.

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

#562
post #533

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know. I am from europe and visited a few north american cities in the past, including LA. No or bad public transport was the norm but LA was a whole other level. You get out of the airport and there is a endless line of car rental places after each other. That makes it clear to you that you won't get far without a car. Going into the city or out takes you on a ridiculous wide highway which is basically a perm…

Every large city has car rental places by the airport. That is where they are. It doesn't signify. I'm sure there are people who wouldn't like to visit your home town either.

I travel a lot for work and LA/OC is consistently the only city where I bother to get a rental car. Most places I'd want to go are far away from each other and public transit is often stigmatized and underdeveloped. I went to high school in orange county and the public bus took about an hour and a half to go about 10 miles. I live in San Francisco and gave my car to my family after a year or so of rarely driving it. Two years later and I can't really justify purchasing another.

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

#563

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. It's fast because the local government decided to support individual transport for once and built the tunnel complex.

LA has far more highways and roads. They support individual transport far more than Prague does. But they don't seem to be doing so well do they...

IMO, because of other regulations and taxes. Prague used to be mostly unregulated.

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

#564
post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

New York's public transit commuters have some of the worst commute times in the country, at 7.5-11 hours/week (45 minutes each way on the low end). For LA's drivers, even 37 minutes is pretty bad. [1] Public transit mitigates the environmental and public safety effects of traffic, but the "wasting your life in a slow-moving vehicle" problem is much worse with public transit (even rail). And no, that time is not reusa…

I'm going to have to disagree with the "wasting your life in a slow-moving vehicle" comment. I'd rather spend an hour and a half on a bus to work where I can take calls and work from my laptop/read a book/nap or whatever, than spend 45 minutes sitting in and/or dodging traffic where I am getting NOTHING done. Granted, if the bus is packed it can be difficult or impossible to get anything useful done also.

There's a special circle in hell for people taking calls in a crowded bus. Though to be fair it's several layers above the circle for people taking calls in a bathroom stall.

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

#565
Does this article think that Elon Musk is going to donate all the tunnels to the city for free? What he is creating is a network of toll roads, under the city. I'm sure he did his research and saw that adding one lane to the freeway cost 1.6B, and noticed that it was probably a lot cheaper to dig under the city, instead of paying incredibly high prices for land and supports. Billionaires love to act like "This morning I came up with this idea in the shower, and i thought it was cool so I'm going to move forward with it." Lets take a minute and think about some of the moves he's recently made. He has an electric car company, that is developing self driving car technology. He's stated that you could only use the self driving car through "Teslas network" for Uber like service. If tesla has the electric/self driving car market, a vast network of uncongested roads they will essentially have such a competitive advantage in major cities, that you'd be stupid to not use their service. More and more people using "Tesla Uber", will automatically declog the roads until theres a natural balance.

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

#566

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…

Same in Stockholm. I can't see how being funded by tolls vs being funded by tax money would change the corruption problem?

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

#567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

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.

Something needs to be done about the bus lanes then. Buses should drive in dedicated lanes, that's the whole point. If you are stuck in traffic on a bus then something isn't right.

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

#568

LA doesn't have a traffic problem. People just have overly high expectations. As someone who has also lived and commuted in lots of cities around the world, LA just doesn't have that much of a problem. What other major city in the world would you expect to be able to drive 15 miles through the centre at rush hour and get to your destination in under an hour (I'm using as reference Downtown LA to Santa Monica at 9am,…

> Downtown LA to Santa Monica at 9am That's against traffic. What does Santa Monica to Downtown LA at 9am take? A big problem in LA is that many people drive much longer distances than that, 30, 50, 70 miles one way in their commute.

I don't think so actually. In my experience eastbound 10 backs up about half an hour after westbound 10.

In my experience the morning commute is not as bad as the evening. SM to DT in the evening is easily 2 hours. Heck, it can take an hour to get out of SM. This is because commuting traffic mixes with beach/tourism/other.

The other problem is there is no "rush hour" as the grandparent implies. LA is constantly bad, whereas places like the Bay Area have distinct rush hours.

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

#569
People should pay for what they use. And the price for what they use should go up when demand for it is high.

After all, the most expensive construction is done to satisfy demand when demand is high.

And paying for what you use will spur people to use less of that valuable road space. Alternatives will increase as more people seek to avoid paying the actual costs for they had been using.

Yes, we do pay gas taxes. But that effectively translates into a subsidy for traveling when demand is high. It's not a reality-based price.

Imagine if government provided all the hotel rooms and you always paid the same price. Peak demand would be much higher than it is now. And there would be political pressure to build many more hotel rooms. And this construction would require higher taxes because the additional rooms would be the most expensive to build while also only being used when demand is higher.

Of course, we don't usually think of road space as space we are occupying, just like we occupy a hotel room. But it is.

How would we implement this? Regular commuters could have a fixed price they pay in advance. But they could get paid to delay their trip when traffic is particular bad. And those not planning ahead would pay a spot price, which would go up enough to deter non-planners from traveling and/or convince commuters to delay.

And if there is an uproar about making people pay to get to jobs when they cannot control when they start work, make the employer pay for these workers. If it costs workers more to do a job, the employer will have to pay them more to do it anyway, so why not get the support of those workers who don't understand this reality?

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

#570
post #556

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you provide a source which backs LA's metro area being denser than NYC's? I've yet to see any sort of metric (certainly not the US Census) that supports that claim.

Whenever I go to LA, it seems like an urban slum with no significant development of note (above 6 story) in most of LA. Its as though the land is worthless, even Oceanside has taller buildings than Long Beach or Riverside, and Oceanside is literally the middle of nowhere California! With that low density style of development, your not going to be able to justify a rail line that can move 20k people an hour, as there…

Bit unfair to Oceanside there, we are closer to San Diego (or to Orange County) than Santa Monica is to Long Beach.

Plus we are sat on the SoCal coast, not exactly middle of no-where...

Post reply on HN