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

661–670 of 689 posts

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

#661

Post by alkonaut »

Balgair wrote: post #647
alkonaut wrote: post #567

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

In LA, there are little to no bus lanes. Trying to introduce them is nonsense. You'd have to rip up the sidewalk too make the room. If you try to convert the street into having just one bus lane each way you have now converted 2/6 lanes into bus lanes, sometimes 2/4 lanes. The car traffic already extends for blocks/miles if you are trying to get onto the 405 from the Westside, bus lanes would extend it to a third to…

> you have now converted 2/6 lanes into bus lanes

Which only works if you can reduce traffic by an equivalent amount. Hence the congestion fees. The fee should clear up the lane AND pay for the bus to drive in the lane. Obviously, if there is no (reasonable) tariff that would actually make people not drive or change commute hours, then all you did was make it expensive to live in LA, while the public transit didn't improve. There is always a risk of that in the case of LA. But it might be worth trying at least.

> These problems are not going to go away anytime in the next decade to half century.

I completely agree - I think cities that are structurally messed up like LA have a long way to go, but that doesn't mean there aren't things that can be done. The question is what drives these changes. I think tolls, new zoning regulation, expanded public transit etc all have to be done, and no one action will solve the problem.

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

#662

Post by hermitdev »

drewbug01 wrote: post #658
officelineback wrote: post #653

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So the conditions change so quickly that opening Waze just before you leave doesn't at least give you a ballpark estimate?

Yes, actually. Crashes, for example, can't be predicted via Waze and periodically f * up your commute in an epic way. And they happen very quickly and the effects ripple through the system equally quickly.

Yup, happened again this morning for me. Same spot as last week. North bound accident between the Ohare Oasis & the 90/190 exit ramps. 2 lanes blocked. 40 minute estimate from when I left at 8am turned into 70 minutes by the time I arrived at work.

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

#663

Post by trome »

OrwellianChild wrote: post #640
trome wrote: post #606

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zoning is inherently racist, designed to keep the poor and working class out of areas of the city. It stunts economic growth to boot, and should be done away with entirely. That being said, the roadways are public property, and should be redesigned to be on a road diet, but building structures in the middle is perhaps not the best idea. Parkifying some sections, expanding others into plazas (while infilling parking t…

Not sure where you're going with the "zoning is racist" comment - I'm not talking about redlining here. In places like Seattle, much of the city is still zoned single-family, which is exclusionary to the poor and working class. The rezones happening in our city boost the building density permitted in most of the city while requiring that some of that extra capacity be dedicated to low-income units. It's net positive…

Dedicating units to low income housing means you've failed to build enough units despite demand, and zoning is likely at fault. Whether it be height caps or parking minimums jacking up the price, they need to go.

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

#664

Post by OrwellianChild »

trome wrote: post #663
OrwellianChild wrote: post #640

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure where you're going with the "zoning is racist" comment - I'm not talking about redlining here. In places like Seattle, much of the city is still zoned single-family, which is exclusionary to the poor and working class. The rezones happening in our city boost the building density permitted in most of the city while requiring that some of that extra capacity be dedicated to low-income units. It's net positive…

Dedicating units to low income housing means you've failed to build enough units despite demand, and zoning is likely at fault. Whether it be height caps or parking minimums jacking up the price, they need to go.

Agreed that lack of units is at fault. This kind of mandatory affordable housing is an attempt to mitigate displacement within neighborhoods dealing with gentrification. In my case, this is Seattle, which has no parking minimums, but has suffered from too many single-family zones and not enough dense zoning. The rezones are an attempt to correct these issues.

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

#665

Post by flat6turbo »

nkrisc wrote: post #648
flat6turbo wrote: post #624

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if you constantly travel while in LA, you're going to feel like you're constantly traveling.

Maybe I wasn't clear enough: my impression of LA is that what is considered a "normal" commute/travel time there is actually quite large and more that what might be considered normal in other cities.

residents don't cross the county 3-4x in a single day, only visitors do. it's not normal.

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

#666

Post by trome »

OrwellianChild wrote: post #664
trome wrote: post #663

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dedicating units to low income housing means you've failed to build enough units despite demand, and zoning is likely at fault. Whether it be height caps or parking minimums jacking up the price, they need to go.

Agreed that lack of units is at fault. This kind of mandatory affordable housing is an attempt to mitigate displacement within neighborhoods dealing with gentrification. In my case, this is Seattle, which has no parking minimums, but has suffered from too many single-family zones and not enough dense zoning. The rezones are an attempt to correct these issues.

Seattle needs to dezone MLK, Interbay and other major transit corridors and allow these areas to densify. The transit is there, and the property is either empty parking lots or 1 story slum commercial as the zoning restricts the area to a certain use. These areas should be replaced with dense, mixed use development.

We can have $800 apartments inside the city if we so choose, but with zoning forcing developers to build skinny dual towers and similar, we are forcing the minimum apartment price skywards.

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

#667

Post by OrwellianChild »

trome wrote: post #666
OrwellianChild wrote: post #664

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed that lack of units is at fault. This kind of mandatory affordable housing is an attempt to mitigate displacement within neighborhoods dealing with gentrification. In my case, this is Seattle, which has no parking minimums, but has suffered from too many single-family zones and not enough dense zoning. The rezones are an attempt to correct these issues.

Seattle needs to dezone MLK, Interbay and other major transit corridors and allow these areas to densify. The transit is there, and the property is either empty parking lots or 1 story slum commercial as the zoning restricts the area to a certain use. These areas should be replaced with dense, mixed use development. We can have $800 apartments inside the city if we so choose, but with zoning forcing developers to bui…

That's the plan! https://www.seattle.gov/Documents/Departments/HALA/Policy/MH...

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

#668

Post by Neeek »

inlined wrote: post #564
Neeek wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I'd hardly call my calls intrusive, a simple "What's the problem" followed by an explanation and a cursory "I'm on it." is usually all that the rest of the bus hears. Are you all really that precious?

People shouting in to their phones however... I feel like it's the kind of person with zero self awareness or care for their external, social impact that ruin it for the rest of us :P

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

#669

Post by Neeek »

gambiting wrote: post #589
Neeek wrote: post #504

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I'd absolutely take sitting for an hour in my own car over sitting on a bus. I get to control my own temperature, volume and smell - plus I get to listen to loads of audiobooks.

I never said it was for everyone but since you mentioned it, public transport where I live very rarely smells but I will agree that it can get too cold under some of the air con vents and having visited New York recently (I'm assuming you're American, apologies if you aren't) I totally understand not wanting to partake in the stank lottery.

Also, you don't have a pair of headphones? :P

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

#670

Post by Sohcahtoa82 »

beastcoast wrote: post #641
gambiting wrote: post #589

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd absolutely take sitting for an hour in my own car over sitting on a bus. I get to control my own temperature, volume and smell - plus I get to listen to loads of audiobooks.

As a tall person, I can't drive more than 30 minutes without needing a break for my legs. Stop-and-go traffic is especially hellish because I have to keep my feet on the brakes the whole time. Not a pleasant experience by any means.

Try doing it with a manual transmission.
Post reply on HN