The Evidence

Here it is, the Hummer driven by Jaime de la Vega, L.A.'s deputy mayor for transportation. To readers who have defended him on the basis of this being a smallish Hummer model, the H3, are you kidding?

The Hummer is a symbol of consumptive excess, whether it's the mid-size SUV model or not. The H3 is rated at 16 mpg in the city, and the idea of a transit chief behind the wheel, or, say, a governor, is somewhere between irresponsible and obscene. Is it any worse than driving any other mid-size SUV? Not much, but yes. The Hummer, originally designed for military use, makes a statement. It is not the statement a transit chief ought to be making, especially when global warming is a growing concern and lives are being sacrificed at war, in part to protect our right to burn as much fossil fuel as we please -- Steve Lopez.

Comments

[spankzilla]

Impossible, how GOOD your work is. I am realy surprised. http://boyspanking.iespana.es/

[spankzilla]

I have not found any mystake - great http://boyspanking.iespana.es/

[Jeffrey Stewart]

Work on the timing of traffic lights.

Travelling east on Santa Monica Blvd. in the evening, it is impossible to get from Barrington to Sepulveda without stopping at every light. What is even more frustrating is sitting at a green light at Purdue because the lights at Sawtelle and beyond are red. Time them to clear out the traffic at the front of the line first. It seems like a pretty basic idea.

I live in Miracle Mile and work in Santa Monica--a distance of exactly eight miles, most of it on Olympic Blvd. In the evenings, depending on when I leave, it can take me up to one hour and 15 minutes to drive those eight miles. 45 minutes of it is sitting between Barrington and Sepulveda, travelling about half a block before stopping again at the next red light. It's impossible to travel from my house to work without changing buses, even if I stayed on Olympic the entire way, so taking public transportation is not an efficient option.

I distinctly remember Villaraigosa running for mayor on a platform of fixing the traffic problems. When he won, he was certainly quick to move his family into the mayoral mansion, but hasn't done anything that I can tell to alleviate the traffic problems.

[ann zum(winkle)]

Steve et al,
There's a very elegant (yet fun and productive) solution to our traffic woes: let us individually construct our own personal freeways. Dan Bern mused about the possibilities in our very own town, and I hope he doesn't mind a link to his MySpace space:
http://tinyurl.com/2ccblm

Enjoy!

[Mike Rubio]

My solution to traffic has been to get a motorcycle. I'm now driving a sportbike. I can make it accross town from Sunland/Tujunga to Santa Monica (near the 405) in under 30 minutes almost any time irregardless of traffic.

[Milt Burdick]

At freeway interchanges paint (Very largee White paint) the number of the freeway you want to enter---Example downtown LA you don't know which lane goes to which freeway. Other examples 57north 60 east or west. 71,10 and the 57. 22 and 405.

Many, many more like this. We get in the wrong lane and cause traffic slow down and or accidents because of it being unclear what lane I should be in.

Resrict trucks to the second lane form the right.

[ted kensington]

I have some comments on diamond lanes:

1. They should be abolished. We paid for all the lanes, and should be able to use them all. How many people do we know who actually plan and team up and leave a car at home to ues a diamond lane? The answer is very, very few.

2. If we must have them, the second passenger should be required to be a licensed driver, who might otherwise be using a car on the freeway. To count a baby as a passenger is absurd. I know that a police officer won't always be able to tell if the second passenger qualifies, but he or she can tell if it is a baby.

3. Again, if we must have them, they should be restricted to rush hours, as they do in No. Ca. What is the sense of having diamond lanes working at midnight, or Christmas or Thanksgiving?

[Roy Nakano]

Los Angeles should consider a pilot project patterned after the "casual carpooling" model that has proven to be so successful in northern Virginia/Washington DC as well as in the northern California bay area.

A successful "slugging" operation (as it's called in Virginia/DC) should ideally be tried on a carpool lane that is separated from the main freeway lanes, and with beginning and end locations that have suitable areas for carpool passengers to congregate and for drivers to load and unload the passengers.

Los Angeles already has such a route, and it's the carpool lane on Highway 10 (the San Bernardino Freeway) between the El Monte bus terminal and the carpool ending junction at Alameda Street. The bus terminal and an area near the Alameda Street carpool entry point can serve as the passenger pick-up and drop-off points.

The cost to allow slugging on that route would appear to be minimal - i.e., a few signs and marking off areas for passengers to congregate. To avoid clogging up the carpool entry point on Alameda, perhaps a segment of the Metropolitan Water District or Union Station parking lot can be section off for the pick-up and drop-off points.

Ultimately, this can be a "win-win-win" situation for the casual carpool drivers (who can then use the carpool lane without being tied to the same carpool partners), the carpool passengers (who get free rides to-and-from the San Gabriel Valley), and for non-carpooling freeway travelers (who benefit due to fewer vehicles on the non-carpool lanes of the freeway).

Given the ideal route that already exists, I think this is an idea worth trying.

[Pete Martinez]

Simple solution to this traffic mess.

The system is based on the last number or letter of the license plate. Based on that requirement, the vehicle can not be moving on any road between the hours of 6 to 9 each morning and 4 to 7 each evening

Monday 0, 1, Letters
Tuesday 2, 3
Wednesday 4,5
Thursday 6, 7
Friday 8, 9, No plates

An immediate $200 fine for a violation. This will reduce congestion by
20 % and the inconvinience is minimal.

[Victoria Lynch-Knight]

Perhaps the DWP could limit its construction to the hours between 9 AM and 1 PM, or even better, work at night whenever possible. And I really don't understand why they need to block three lanes in order to fix a stoplight or a sidewalk, or why the installation of a left-hand-turn lane at Mandeville and Sunset is going to take 6 months to complete.

[Patrick]

I completely agree with Steve Lopez that public figures, especially those in charge of transportation dept.'s should not drive or own Hummers or any other heavy SUV's. These gas guzzling pigs are nothing but sleazy, rolling billboard statements that say "Oink, I don't care", indeed.

[Rosella A Alm]

Do as the ancient Romans did and as we did during the 1984 Olypmpics; restrict truck delivery times to 12:00m to 6:00am. It greatly relieved freeway traffic while the games were on.

Go full speed ahead with public transportation. I love the Metrolink and the red line subways, and take them as often as I can. I wish it went downtown more often. I can't understand why the trains by-passed the airports. They should also run later so that people attending later events could use them to return home afterwards.

I have been to London and Paris and see how a well developed public transportation system can be an incredible asset to a great city.

[James Scott]

Hey, at least Jaime de la Vega probably paid for the hummer out of his own pocket. He could have instead spent the public's money on traffic solutions such as the signs such as those that line Crenshaw Blvd. just south of I-10. Every day as I creep down that road, I'm reassured that terrible traffic has been outlawed by the signs that declare that this is a "NO GRIDLOCK ZONE." Traffic beware!

[Eric Neitzel]

One of the problems regarding mass transit is the total lack of coordination between cities. I drive from Culver City to Signal Hill (Long Beach) every day on the 405. I live 2 blocks from the Fox Hills Mall Transit Center and can walk there in less than 5 minutes. Why isn't there an express bus that goes from this transit center to a transit center in Long Beach, then I could hop a local bus to work. When I asked the MTA to configure a route for me they said (after waiting 3 weeks for an answer) that I would have to take a bus by surface streets to the LAX area, transfer to another bus, take that to Norwalk, transfer to another bus, then go to Long Beach. It would take 2 1/2 hours one way as compared to a 30-minute drive. Why bother?

The buses should operate just like in Europe or the airport system - major centers feeding to major centers by freeway, then local buses to go from there. In the seven years I have driven the above route (every day) I have not seen more than 10 MTA buses travelling the same route, and most of those are "Not in Service".

[Jason]

"Unlike most public transportation systems that are governmentally funded, many monorails abroad are own by private companies and give the city a portion of their yearly profit."

Public transportation in LA wasn't profitable before restrictive environmental regulations, ADA requirements, and public opposition. It definitely isn't profitable now.

Public transportation will not be profitable, nor should it have to be. It's an essential service that should be service oriented, not contingent on profit.

[Albert Jakobsen]

Adding extra traffic lanes will not solve the problem. They will cost biilions and take years to build, and as soon as the Mayor cuts the ribbon these lanes will also fill up within 20 minutes, and the traffic problem remains the same.
Opening up the carpools to regular traffic won't work either. It will only result in one more lane full of stopped cars.
There should be some measure to halt the import of automobiles into California until the number of cars is reduced to a reasonable level. After that you can only purchase a new car, if you turn in an old car at the same time.
Pie in the Sky? What else?
Albert Jakobsen
Arcadia, California

[Maria Elena Hernandez]

UTILIZE STREET PARKING LANES that have BACK ALLEYS to create extra lanes on bottlenecked streets (peak hours-11pm). Use the lanes for EXPRESS MTA, LOCAL TOLLEYS, BICYCLE LANES, etc. 3rd St. btx. Fairfax and La Cienega, for example, is perpetually bottlenecked and has a severe valet parking problem. The small businesses also have rear alleys (w/2-6 pkg. spaces). A few have small parking lots.

ELEVATOR CAR LIFT SYSTEMS will double or triple their parking spaces. Proprietors/employees park on the top tiers and the customers below. The parking lots can be leased to the City for public parking spaces. Valet services would rent them at night. The City/State would create a REBATE-TAX INCENTIVE-LEASE TO BUY w/ TAX. INCENTIVE. PLAN.

Oh yes, don't forget, we must have affordable family housing (not lofts/condos) with parks and ammenities in DTLA (lots of primo property there, the best). WORK IN or NEAR YOUR ZIP. Those of us who do deserve a tax break. Gas prices? What gas?

[Dan Kashinsky]

I like the idea of a monorail using the land of the Los Angeles River. In the Sunday Times this was suggested. It seems a great opportunity wasted. Any comments? Dan

[Bruce Clark]

Re: "The Hummer is a symbol of consumptive excess." Such comments are are a sign of self-righteousness excess. Getting all bent out of shape over another person's taste in cars isn't productive. Few people are so perfect that they should worry more about others' taste than seeing to it that they themselves are considerate, law abiding and polite in traffic so that the freeways keep moving.

[bennettjones]

There are some terrific ideas in these comments and with the traffic solved, LA would be a true paradise.

However, I'm surprised that so few have mentioned the bicycle, especially since bike usage seems to be growing.

It's my main way of getting around. I fill up my car once every two months at most. I never pay for parking or look for parking, i experience road euphoria as opposed to rage. I've even ridden from Silverlake to LAX to catch a plane. One can easily beat traffic during rush hour all over town. And it's a great way to stay in shape. Not for everyone, but if it were made socially acceptable it might take off like the Prius. Imagine seeing Harvey Weinstein on his way to a meeting on a used Diamondback! Well, scratch that, how about Penelope Cruz on a beachcruiser?

Now pardon my negativity, but I'd like to comment on two of the worst ideas posted:

1 - more motorcycles and scooters- ever lived in Indonesia? Far from way cool, even "quiet" motorbikes, when multiplied into the hundreds, would turn our streets into a 24 hour supercross. You don't even see Harleys in Indonesia and the noise is deafening. Not to mention the fatality rate in the US: 32 times that of cars mile for mile.

2 eliminating rent control-- the idea that this would encourage people to move closer to their jobs is false. It would force people to move wherever rents are cheap and increase drive times.

[Jason Hoppe]

We have multi story buildings, why not multi story highways?

Unfortunatley people here are not very willing to give up the comfort of their own car and private drive where ever they go.

It's like plumbing. A bigger house needs more and bigger pipes. The freeways are too small, double deck, tripple deck, what ever it takes to control the flow.

Then again, I wouldn't want to be on a muliti level highway, or in a multistory building when a 7.0 happens. :o)

[John Fisher]

My Plan:

pros: cuts smog, traffic, and CO2; better quality of life
cons: cuts 50% of car-related jobs

Aim:
to use existing infrastructure, reduce single-car gas-powered trips to a minimum.

1) charge a $10 toll to get on the freeway to all vehicles
2) rebate the toll to commercial vehicles monthly
3) dedicate one lane of all freeways to electric buses, with stops at current exits and intersections
4) at major intersections and exits use the land under the freeway to rent neighborhood electric vehicles (NEVs) on a per mile not per time charge. Walk up, insert card or RFID, drive away. Provide 2 seater, 4 seaters, tiny trucks and vans.

Commuters can now get rid of one family car, keeping one for longer trips, and depend on the NEVs for commuting and local trips. Spending $10 to get of town on an uncrowded freeway will seem cheap, workmen will be able to get to work, while still paying a penalty for getting on the freeway - carrying the monthly charge.

Tolls rates, commercial vehicle requirements, NEV costs can all be easily adjusted as experience requires. No new technology is required, no land need be purchased, the MTD runs the buses, competing vendors can run the NEV rentals. In an emergency the road is still open, and the wealthy can continue to do whatever they want.

Great plan, guaranteed to work, nobody will vote for it. Oh well - I moved out of town.

cheers

John

[Matthew McKelligon]

Re: Anti-Monorail NIMBY's in Kymberleigh's post:

Why can't we just sue the NIMBY-neighborhoods for impeding Los Angeles County's smart growth? Their opposition to necessary large-scale transit projects over the past several decades have handicapped this city as a whole. If a strong-fisted socialist government is the muscle that Europe flexes in order to implement comprehensive mass transit systems; then surely the American muscle would be our lack of tort reform and affinity for law suits.

[Kymberleigh Richards]

As a Metro public official who does not own a car and uses public transportation exclusively to get around (current Chair of the Metro San Fernando Valley Sector Governance Council), I sympathize with many of the comments here.

But I am also a realist and find myself having to strike a balance between ideals and what is feasible.

Here are a few facts that have been largely ignored by the media in their coverage of the Bus Riders Union's campaign on buses:

1. During the ten-year consent decree which expired in October, Metro added 1.4 million hours of service to the system, yet was prohibited from raising fares to cover the cost of that service. This has resulted in a structural operating deficit, because the reserve funds (which should have lasted thirty years or more) were repeatedly raided to provide that service.

2. Had Metro been able to annually adjust fares to keep pace with inflation over that ten year period, close to $700 million in additional fare revenues would have been collected in the past five years alone, which would have essentially paid for all that additional service.

3. The cost of fuel alone (notably, the compressed natural gas that runs the largest percentage of Metro's clean-air buses) has increased 117% just in the past five years and -- again -- fares did not increase to cover those costs.

Metro is no longer in a position to consider new solutions unless they come with funding attached. And monorails, while fondly embraced by many who grew up with Disneyland, simply are not the solution because NIMBY opposition to the elevated structures will kill any proposal for them.

The region had its chance, thirty years ago, to approve a 1% sales tax which would have both funded bus operations at a low fare and built more than 140 miles of subway and light rail. The ballot proposition went down to a sobering defeat; I have my sincere doubts that the voters would be any more inclined to vote differently now, because for too many, there is an attitude of "public transit is for someone else to use".

Discussions like these, and Steve Lopez continuing to hammer away at the issue, will change those attitudes over time, but it will be a slow process and we will have to take our improvements one at a time.

[Todd]

Here's my thought on BIG traffic in California, License plates start with a number (example) (2BDG714) take that starting number and depending what area the focus is on to reduce traffic (for instance) (Tustin) if your registration is sent to your address in Tustin (a focus area) and the first number on your license tag (2) you would only be able to drive if the calender date ends with a (2) (example 8/02/07 take the 02 and the first number on your license tag which is also a 2 and thats when you can drive.