We're still No. 1

L.A. retains its title as the region with the worst traffic delays, but the IE is catching up:

Los Angeles and Orange counties have retained their infamous reputation as the worst region in the country for traffic delays, but the Inland Empire and the Ventura area are rapidly catching up, according to a national study released today. Researchers at the Texas Transportation Institute found that motorists in Los Angeles and Orange counties wasted an average of 72 hours in rush-hour traffic in 2005. That's one day shy of two full work weeks a year and 20 hours more than in 1985. In Riverside and San Bernardino counties, drivers wasted an average of 49 hours stuck in peak-period congestion during 2005. But the increase in delays since 1985 -- a stunning 40 extra hours -- is twice what Los Angeles motorists experienced.

Comments

[saintbumper]

Here’s a portable, spare, safety bumper that protects your vehicle from rear-end collision damage caused by Tailgaters, Uninsured Motorists, Bumper To Bumper Traffic, Distracted Drivers, Inattentive Cell Phone Users, Drivers With Poor Judgment, Text Messengers And Lousy, Stinking Parallel Parkers.

http://www.superbumper.com

[David]

Tokyo has an extensive subway system and they're in EARTHQUAKE country too. They seem to be doing just fine.

[nicholas]

Pam in Long Beach. It might take a while, but have you ever taken the blue line to the red line and then the metrolink from union station out to burbank?

not ideal and symbolic of our city's incomplete public transport infastructure (ie where is the downtown connector that would bring the blue line to union station? or an extension of the orange line through Burbank?), but we have to start somewhere?

best of luck!

[Phil Apino]

We need more people. Mayor Villar says we need to get used to living in a more vertical city.

If you don't like it.......leave.

Go to vertical New York. Tons of mass transit. Oh yeah, tons of traffic too!

[Jeremy R]

"Stop building "vanity" rail lines and improve the bus lines. LA is large and spread out. Buses are more practical because you can vary the bus lines as traffic patterns change. Also, does it make sense to dig a 30-mile tunnel in an area that is known for earthquakes????"

If you were an engineer all of your coworkers would laugh at you and you would get fired! you know nothing about seismic engineering. Yes, eathquakes shake the earth and yes they are underground, but that doesnt mean you are not safe in a subway during an earthquake! The great Bay Area eathquak damaged 4 freeways, but the BART kept on running :).

Also, SOME parts of LA are spread out and SOME places are extremely dense. Have you ever seen a google mashup on quality cultural attractiosn and high paying jobs? You would be shocked how CONCENTRATED LA is.

Lastly, transportation is a SYSTEM! Buses are great for transit dependents in a 3-4 mile radius. Rail is more efficient in urban areas spread acroos 6-10 miles. IT is s SYSTEM and a SYSTEM has MULTIPLE COMPONENTS that are good for different things.

walkWAYS, busWAYS, railWAYS, bikeWAYS, roadWAYS and highWAYS all make up PIECES of the SYSTEM. busWAYS, roadWAYS, and highWAYS are not the end all or be all.

We have 300 bus lines, and probably enough combined roads to make one long street from NY to LA (roudtrip). All we have is like 100 miles of track. That is pathetic! Single modalities dont work. Should we add 1000 bus lines?! Should we add another 1000, miles of roads?!?

Aside from that, some of your ideas are actually well thought out though.

[Tommy]

Here's my solution: NO MORE @#*%^ BUSES. It's time to stop pretending our slow and horrible bus system can EVER measure up to a rail alternative.

Our city needs TRAINS, TRAINS, TRAINS - effective, grade-separated elevated, light rail, and subway systems that serve our overly congested corridors, running on schedules and timetables we KNOW to be consistent. If a good subway system works in cities as diverse as Tokyo, Paris, New York, London, Moscow, and Mexico City, there is no further reason for Angelenos to shun the idea. Our grand experiment with buses should be considered every bit the failure it has become - a costly, traffic-choked nightmare that gets nobody across town in less than an hour.

[KavJack]

A friend of mine who lives there always used to mention two things about Arlington, TX,
(1) it is the largest City in the US without any type of public transportation
and
(2) Arlington is an anagram of 'Long Train' -
true - the Union Pacific L.A. to Chicago line runs right through the middle of Arlington.

Further notes - the Dallas Cowboys will play there in 2009 and Super Bowl 2011 will be played in Arlington.

[Dan W.]

"6. Stop building "vanity" rail lines and improve the bus lines. LA is large and spread out. Buses are more practical because you can vary the bus lines as traffic patterns change. Also, does it make sense to dig a 30-mile tunnel in an area that is known for earthquakes????"

Ara had a lot of great suggestions, but then she fell apart when she started espousing the BRU anti-rail agenda. Let's debunk them one by one.

Yes, L.A. is large and spread out, but so is London. There is nothing about size that makes rail less necessary. Perhaps the type of rail (heavy, light or commuter, above or below ground), but not rail itself. If you ask anyone commuting into the city in Paris, London, Berlin or New York whether they'd rather ride a train or a bus and which one is more reliable, they'd all say rail.

Yes, one can vary the lines as traffic patterns change with buses, but one of the things that changes traffic patters is the development that occurs around transportation hubs where rail occurs. If there is a new "hot spot" not connected to rail 30 years from now, then connect it. In New York, London, Paris and Berlin there is not a single station where rail has been built where it is no longer needed because the spot is no longer "hot" enough to suport it. That's an argument for expanding the rail system, not not building it.

As for the earthquake statement, I think the 1989 San Francisco Earthquake debunked this. The safest place to be seemed to be inside the BART tunnel. The BART system safely carried passengers under the bay after the Bay Bridge had fallen down to the quake. Subway tunnels can and are built earthquake safe.

I wish that Bus-only extrem..., er, "advocates" would stick to the first five points, which all have great merit.

However, once they start spouting their anti-rail agenda, they are going to find that there is now a critical mass of bus riders no longer willing to let them speak for them.

These are not "vanity" lines they are building. They are the spine of a long overdue transit system. If the auto industry hadn't lobbied to get us to abandon the red car lines in the first place, we'd already have a spine that is usable. These few rail lines we need to build are as indispensable as owning a pair of sensible shoes.

We need both strong rail and bus improvements. We need everything but more people driving their single-occupancy vehicles.

[David in Los Angeles]

"Have you ever heard of POPULATION CONTROL!!"

US population growth is almost stagnant, barely at replacement level, with - of course - the exception of legal and illegal immigration. My grandparents were LEGAL "aliens" (from central/eastern Europe) who eventually became US citizens. LA traffic is a mess because a) elected officials have REFUSED to give leadership to any sort of real solutions b) we have millions of families here illegally - sticking a finger in the eye of millions of would be immigrants from Africa/Asia/Middle East/Europe who would love to share in the American dream.

[Cathy]

Today I took the bus to work and I am sorry. Last night I carpooled with my husband to an event, leaving my car at work. No problem, it is only 9 miles to work, I will just jump on the bus. I left at 7:45 a.m. to catch the first bus. The bus was late, and very packed. I had to struggle to get on and stood the entire time. The crowded bus compounds the delay as it takes more time for people to get on and off. But I got to Fairfax and San Vicente in time for the approx. 8:30 arrival of the 550. I waited... and waited - for over 30 minutes. Finally a bus appeared. I asked the driver what happened and he said the 8:30 bus broke down.
Now, you have to know that the origin of the bus line is at Santa Monica and San Vicente in West Hollywood - only a few blocks away. You might think that they could send a backup bus. But no, they just leave everyone
stranded without any notice. Then, the broken bus which has been "fixed" passes our bus and continues on the route at the same time as our bus! What is the logic of that? All you get is a bus traffic jam as they leapfrog past each other. So, I arrived at work 30 minutes late.
I ride the bus frequently enough to know this happens all the time. I guess the MTA is covered since they state that the schedules are subject to change without notice, but I would love to bring a class-action suit against them for damages like lost wages, lost jobs. I will drive my car home. It will take an hour in the Friday traffic to Hollywood, but the bus is just too unreliable for regular use.
I pity the people who are forced to take the bus. They have no political clout and they are probably too exhausted to even file a complaint. They get up extra early to be sure they get to work on time and get home extra late.
Judging from the blog comments, no one has any sympathy - guess no one has kids or elders or handicapped relatives that can't drive. But this is why traffic is so bad. The bus is the last resort. And yet, the buses are so crowded, they are already operating at full capacity.
BTW, I would have taken the Red Line, but it is not near my house and doesn't go to where I work, so I have to transfer twice. That means more money and usually more delays.

[Cathy]

It might be good to have a transportation FAQ for this blog.
For earthquake concerns, here is a quote on Bart: The Bay Area Rapid Tansit (BART) system is a 75-mile long rail transit system that includes an underwater trans-bay tube that rests on the floor of the bay and was specially designed to accomodate earthquake motions and deformations. BART was virtually undamaged by the earthquake, and service was uninterrupted except for a short inspection period immediately following the quake.

Compare that with the double-decker freeways that "pancaked". Or the overpasses that collapsed in the Northridge quake. Not to mention the panic and traffic collisions liable to happen when the quake strikes. I think I would rather be on the Red Line than on the freeways!

[paul]

I can only laugh at your complaints.

I grew up in LA, so it was all I knew. Late last year, I moved out of CA for the first time.

Best decision ever.

No traffic.
Nice people (manners).
Diverse community.
Family oriented.
Tons of ethnic food (mexican, pho, thai, chinese, indian)
New home (3000 sq. feet, $300,000s)
Great weather

Thanks LA for letting me know what I DON'T miss.

-North Carolina

[WickedCommute]

"This whole traffic-transit issue is so ridiculous. Why don't people just live close to their jobs?

This is insane. Commuting is unnatural. We should all be closer to the communities where we work anyway - this is the real solution to long commutes!"

Yes, in a perfect world this would be ideal...but we don't live in a perfect world, do we? Easier said than done.

Believe it or not, there are many people in Los Angeles (like myself) who cannot afford the live in the area where they work (have you seen how much rent is going for in Santa Monica these days?). That is why they have to find a place to live where they can afford the rent.

I'm sure you'll probably retort with: Then why don't you just find a job closer to where you live?

Because life is not perfect. That's why.
Making general statements, such as yours, is a bit naive in this day and age.

[Paul]

JustinNative, if you'd like to lend me the money to live on the west side, be my guest.

[Cathy]

A lot of my coworkers here in downtown LA commute from Palmdale on Metrolink. Not a choice I would make, but if you have children and can't afford housing in LA.... Anyway, I have taken the Metrolink out to Palmdale. It is a long ride, but pretty comfortable. There are tables where you can read, work on your laptop, apply makeup or eat, sleep, etc without causing a traffic accident or more pollution in the air.

[Sargon Tooma]

Have you ever heard of POPULATION CONTROL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1

[Colleen Ancrile]

Live closer to work? I only live 11 miles and it takes an hour. That isn't a location issue, that is a transit issue. WE need more subway, aboveways, light rail, etc. We are 50 years behind our demand. That is the issue. Let's plan for the future not ten or twenty years ago. Let's not the high end neighbors deterimine the rest of our futures. That is the problem the westside elite who do not want the rest of us in their areas, pure crap. subways from the valley to oc, and from downtown to the sea. A girl can dream right?

[Ara]

The problem with LA traffic is not technical; it is political. Here are some simple suggestions (implemented in other cities or countries) that would cut down on congestion at relatively little cost:

1. Make MTA buses run on tokens instead of cash. No more waiting while the guy in front of you is finding change for a dollar (done in Curitiba, Brazil). Cuts down on the time a bus is waiting at a station.

2. Create bus platforms on congested lines to make it easy for people with mobility issues to quickly get on and off the bus (done in Curitiba, Brazil). Cuts down on the time a bus is waiting at a station.

3. Create dedicated bus lanes on surface streets during rush hour. No more buses cutting in front of drivers. Buses can cruise along at a normal clip (done in almost every major metropolitan city outside the US; yes, even old cities with narrow streets).

4. Extend existing metro and bus routes to reach major attractions, like the airport. There is no technical reason the Green Line could not go all the way to LAX instead of stopping at the extended parking lot. It was just political, because the Airport Authority did not want to lose parking revenues. Same answer to "why doesn't the red line go all the way to the beach?"; because Beverly Hills WASPs did not want the train going through their neighborhood and leaned on their Congressmen to withhold funding (done in every major city outside the US and in some cities in the US).

5. If you are going to have a rapid bus line the Orange Line, make sure the !@#$!#$!@$# traffic lights are coordinated so that you do not get accidents when the bus is crossing intersections. That way, the bus can drive at a reasonably high speed--contrary to what happened with the Orange Line. Or, build bus overpasses to avoid the problem altogether. Still cheaper than building a rail line.

6. Stop building "vanity" rail lines and improve the bus lines. LA is large and spread out. Buses are more practical because you can vary the bus lines as traffic patterns change. Also, does it make sense to dig a 30-mile tunnel in an area that is known for earthquakes????

LA is a large city, but if we improve the mass transportation system, we will increase the number of commuters using it. This will automatically reduce traffic congestion and improve air quality. But, because the city is divided into so many legislative divisions, and because the above-listed solutions require cooperation among different agencies, it is difficult to get any semi-reasonable solution through the morass of competing agencies and councils.

[Pam, Long Beach, California]

We need decent public transportation. It's absolutely ridiculous. I live in Long Beach and would LOVE to take public transportation to my job in Burbank, BUT there isn't any! It's a 45 minute to one hour drive in my car...taking public transportation would take me TWO AND ONE HALF HOURS ONE WAY! We need REAL public transportation...not just widening of freeways. We need monorails or subways or SOMETHING. As a Los Angeles native (grew up in Venice), L.A. is still the best!

[annafofanna]

"This whole traffic-transit issue is so ridiculous. Why don't people just live close to their jobs?

This is insane. Commuting is unnatural. We should all be closer to the communities where we work anyway - this is the real solution to long commutes!"

hell yes, commuting is unnatural. and miserable. and bad for the atmosphere. HOWEVER, it is not so simple as people just "living close to their jobs." last i checked, even police officers and firefighters had to commute from crap neighborhoods because they can't afford to live in the actual communities they serve. it's a nice idea, but the way things are set up these days (in socal, anyway), it's also a completely ridiculous one.
(no offense :)

[Caron]

LA is bearable IF YOU LIVE NEAR YOUR JOB. I live just over one mile from my office and I am certain that my general stress level is lower than the majority of Angelinos who undertake daily commutes upwards of 45 minutes each way.

Look, I am sympathetic to the fact that not everyone can AFFORD to live close to their place of employ. The housing crunch (in concert with abismal city planning) is the real root of the problem!

[Carlo's Upset!]

This problem that we cannot ignore now is the effect of waves of migrants from other cities who nest in L.A. with hopes of making it big. All of you who moved here with nothing but your 2-seater full of your belongings need to go back where you came from! More and more out-of-state cars vehicles pop up from nowhere. And what's funny is that the profile fits! 20 somethings who "feel" like they can just blend into L.A. What a poser!

[Sam]

The hell hole is not worth it, it is time to move.

[Armadillo by morning (up from San Antone)]

"Parking spaces outnumber people in Indiana County" (AP headline)
Yeah; but, does the RTD/MTA/LMNOP have a bus-stop there?

[lowrydr310]

Man, you guys need to relax. If LA drivers bother you that much, you should come to the Northeast (NY/NJ) and check out the drivers! LA drivers are polite and safe compared to 90% of the drivers in New Jersey and New York. Hardly anyone uses a turn signal, and people going 80 weave in and out of traffic to get farther ahead.

The real problem is people living too far away from where they work. People living on the coast work inland, and people inland work on the coast causing traffic congestion in both directions.