Traffic apps turned L.A.’s neighborhoods into ”shortcuts” • Hacker News Board

Re: Traffic apps turned L.A.’s neighborhoods into ”shortcuts”

#191

Post by ambicapter » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 1:50 PM UTC

noxToken wrote: post #182

kenned3 wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These "NIMBY" people always make me laught. if you dont want to have a ton of traffic dont buy a house on a major road. There is a street on the subdivision i live in with the same issue. it is the main entry point to the subdivision. people bought houses there, then fought the city for years over traffic? they put up stop signs, speed bumps, etc. they wanted the lower house prices associated with living on main road…

> if you dont want to have a ton of traffic dont buy a house on a major road. You're not wrong, but Waze directs traffic down roads that aren't considered main thoroughfares. That's part of the issue. There are paths to work that I would have never imagined had I not used Waze, and plenty of those routes take me through quiet neighborhoods. A good example is the shunting yard I encounter. Most of the time, trains are…

What does using Waze have to do with ignoring road signage?

Re: Traffic apps turned L.A.’s neighborhoods into ”shortcuts”

#192

Post by HillaryBriss » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 1:52 PM UTC

usefulcat wrote: post #187

ascagnel_ wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Posting signs would also mean dedicating police resources to enforcement, which tends to be a pretty unpopular use of public services. The proper option would be for Waze to work with LA/LADOT to mark roads, but it seems like they are either unable or actively hostile to resolving the core issue of overloading streets.

> Posting signs would also mean dedicating police resources to enforcement How would it /necessarily/ require dedication of additional police resources? Are you implying that there is some actual or legal requirement for the city to do so? If not, I don't see how posting a few more NTT signs is significantly different from the status quo, namely that there are already not enough police to enforce all traffic laws in…

The police would not be required to add resources to enforce these laws. But without enforcement the signs would make very little difference to LA drivers.

Re: Traffic apps turned L.A.’s neighborhoods into ”shortcuts”

#193

Post by matt-attack » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 1:53 PM UTC

floatingatoll wrote: post #150

It’s disappointing to see LADOT neglecting to use a road management tool already at their disposal to stop Waze’s abuse of their residential zones: No Thru Traffic. Posting NTT signs at entry points into residential neighborhoods and specifying even as little as a $5 fine would make entry for thru routing unlawful, stopping Waze. Whether or not the city enforces these signs would be irrelevant, as long as the traffic…

And to what end? I’m of the firm belief that the good done by Waze far outweighs the cost to the NIMBYs. In LA we have a traffic crisis. Sorry but your government built and tax funded residential street is just as much mine to use as it is yours. I won’t speed through it but I sure as hell have a right to use it as much as the local home owners.

The city should not be doing what your suggesting until they’ve solved the traffic crisis and provided actual solutions.

The freeways are parking lots. Housing costs in the city are insane. So workers are forced to have longer and longer commutes. And the city’s infrastructure crawls to a halt at rush hours.

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Or the one.

Re: Traffic apps turned L.A.’s neighborhoods into ”shortcuts”

#194

Post by HillaryBriss » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 1:57 PM UTC

TimTheTinker wrote: post #75

s_Hogg wrote: post #30

LA is a very strange place to me - I read about all this havoc, but whenever I fly in there and do stuff it seems fairly quiet and almost somnabulent.

Try commuting into the greater LA area during rush hour. It’s really something else. Once I was taking my then-fiancé to LAX for an 11:30am flight. About 2-3 hours into the drive, we were on the 105 in completely stopped traffic. A man in a convertible next to us began to absolutely lose it, smacking the steering wheel with loud, desperate yelling “ARRGH!!” again and again. We decided he must have been late to a mand…

+100

Re: Traffic apps turned L.A.’s neighborhoods into ”shortcuts”

#195

Post by HillaryBriss » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 2:03 PM UTC

valiant-comma wrote: post #2

When these articles show up now and again, it’s not clear to me why the various impacted cities don’t choose to ban through traffic. Some articles have implied that this is not possible. Los Altos did this a while back[1]. Is there a legal issue the communities surrounding Los Angeles want to avoid, that Los Altos simply took the risk on? [1] https://slate.com/business/2017/06/suburbs-finally-figured-o...

It can be controversial. It can pit the wealthy against the working class: a well-off hillside neighborhood may demand that its streets be off-limits to through traffic. But this would mean that another, poorer neighborhood's residents are denied an important route to work. And the question comes up: aren't these public streets? Don't the streets belong to everyone?

Re: Traffic apps turned L.A.’s neighborhoods into ”shortcuts”

#196

Post by Nasrudith » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 2:04 PM UTC

I'm not sure if it is a cultural thing or different problem scales but the whole complaint strikes me as massive narcissistic self-entitlement to public resources.

In my northeastern experience everyone uses neighborhoods as shortcuts when the normally faster roads are congested enough that it is faster in spite of the lower speed limit and increased stops.

Re: Traffic apps turned L.A.’s neighborhoods into ”shortcuts”

#197

Post by edh649 » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 2:05 PM UTC

rahimnathwani wrote: post #189

simplesleeper wrote: post #80

Transport for London Tech Lead here. In London, we have been collaborating with google waze - we provide them with information at the local level. Streets that waze should not use for route finding (e.g. roads with schools) can be blocked for use by Waze. Both local councils and TfL can provide this data. The main difference between Waze and Google Maps is that Waze uses real time traffic data. There are multiple map…

"when the roads are mostly paid for by the cost of the London Underground" Taxes on fuel used in motor vehicles (duties and VAT) are something like 30bn GBP/year in the UK. London has about 1/6th of the UK's population, so let's assume 5bn/year comes from London. That's 5x the annual operating profit of London Underground[0]. Government income and expenditure is fungible, so it's hard to determine precisely whether X…

For reference, from the 2019/20 TFL Budget, direct operating surplus' are:

Streets -£167m

Buses: -£722m

Rail: -£49m

Underground: £823m

Elizabeth Line: -£267m

Other: £9m

Professional Services: -£560m

Property: £69m

Media: £145m

[0] http://content.tfl.gov.uk/tfl-budget-2019-20.pdf

Re: Traffic apps turned L.A.’s neighborhoods into ”shortcuts”

#198

Post by waylandsmithers » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 2:08 PM UTC

msluyter wrote: post #122

I try to minimize not total driving time, but something I call "agony" (term borrowed from Hipmunk). So, I'll take meandering side streets over a stop-and-go highway if it means I'm moving most of the time, even if the total wallclock time is greater. Or I'll take 3 right turns to avoid a harrowing left hand turn. Anything that keeps my blood pressure down. AKA, "long cuts." Assuming there are at least some out there…

Yes! Something here in Boston that Google and Waze never take into account is that there are some left turns that at rush hour that can really only be accomplished by the most aggressive drivers. Sorry, I'm not doing that.

Re: Traffic apps turned L.A.’s neighborhoods into ”shortcuts”

#199

Post by HillaryBriss » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 2:09 PM UTC

If the city's failure to prevent gridlock at major intersections across the city is any guide, LA will never get a handle on this problem. It will never have enough DPT and police to enforce any proposed solution.

Re: Traffic apps turned L.A.’s neighborhoods into ”shortcuts”

#200

Post by intopieces » Tue, Sep 03, 2019, 2:11 PM UTC

devit wrote: post #164

intopieces wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Induced_demand

Am I the only one that finds that using that theory to justify not adding capacity is utterly idiotic? If you add capacity and it ends up being all used up, it just means you didn't add enough and should add even more if possible! Kind of like saying that in a famine it's useless to provide more food because it's going to be eaten all up anyway since some people are no longer dying of famine...

Your counter argument does not account for negative externalities resulting from increase road travel.

Have you ever been to LA? 16 lanes of traffic and still clogged. Poorer air quality. Suburbs miles from work.

Better yet, have you ever been to China? They are already leaning this lesson of induced demand, as have Singapore.

From too-low fuel taxes to too wide roads, driving is far too cheap in the US thanks to these subsidies. Wider highways is not the answer.

In other words, making highways wider not only does not solve congestion, it makes other problems worse in the process.