|
|
In recent months, environmentalists and economists have worked themselves into a frenzy over pay-as-you-drive auto insurance, also known as PAYD. If you believe the advance notices, this is the greatest thing to come down the pike since the double-double.
As the name implies, PAYD insurance more closely links the cost of a motorist's annual insurance policy to how much they drive. The concept has been touted by the authors of "Freakonomics" and has also received major ink in a number of publications, including The Times.
Now, PAYD is coming to California. California Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner released draft regulations Wednesday and has been a big proponent of PAYD. My colleague Marc Lifsher has the story in today's editions of The Times. When exactly PAYD will be available and which carriers will offer it is not yet known.
Proponents of PAYD claim it will result in people driving less to save money. And that's the part that always stops me. How do we know that knocking $200 to $300 off the cost of annual premiums yield that kind of behavior change? In my view, getting Californians to stop driving is kind of like getting them to stop breathing. Besides, we're not exactly living in a mass transit utopia.
So, I phoned Pascal Noel who with Jason Bordoff co-authored a study on PAYD in July for the Brookings Institution. They also did a follow-up report on how PAYD could impact Californians. Among their findings: 64% of California households would have lower premiums under PAYD, with an average savings of $276 annually per vehicle. Low income residents, in particular, would benefit and a majority of the citizenry would be driving less, they concluded.
How do you know?, I asked. Even the Brookings study says there is a paucity of data out there that shows that the few PAYD programs in existence have massively reduced driving.
"There is a ton of data that shows that when marginal driving costs rise, driving declines," Noel told me. "The most obvious source is gasoline prices." And, furthermore, he said there is widespread agreement in the economist community that such pricing triggers alter behavior.
Noel said there are other reasons to believe that PAYD will catch on. Among those:
Read on »
I've been following the escapades of the price of gas at the Chevron at the corner of Colorado and Hill in Pasadena for almost two months. In late June, the cost of a gallon of regular gas cost as much as $4.739 in late June.
And now look at this: $4.019 as of an hour ago. And this particular Chevron is one of the more expensive gas stations around this part of the San Gabriel Valley.
The national average for a gallon of regular is down to $3.66, down from its record of $4.114 on July 17, according to AAA. The California average is now $3.93, a big dip from its record of $4.61 on June 19.
As you are well aware, there has been an onslaught of media stories over the summer that higher gas prices have resulted in people driving less. On Tuesday, I posted a pair of maps from the Sigalert website showing traffic speeds during the Monday afternoon and Tuesday morning commute, and from the look of things traffic was sailing along at 50 mph or better in most parts of Los Angeles County.
I asked readers if this could be true.
Six left comments. Four said their drives have recently been better. KateNonymous, a regular reader, suggested that the traffic speed map on The Times' website is often "hideously wrong." The map is provided, by the way, by Sigalert.com.
The sixth comment came from Chris S., who lives in the Netherlands. I thought his comment was the most interesting because he, like me, is skeptical that people will suddenly cease driving. He wrote:
I personally don't think gas prices affect traffic jams in the long term situation. In the Netherlands, we had gas prices 15 years ago which would be called astronomic in the United States, yet the number of traffic jams increased with 10%, year after year. A "normal" rush hour accumulates easily 200 miles of traffic jam on the peak moment, while over 300 miles is also not uncommon in our small country (barely larger than metropolitan Los Angeles). Remember gas prices have been hovering above 5 dollars already 10 years ago, and recently even hit 10 dollars a gallon. I remember when the gas price hit 2.5 guilders a liter ($5 a gallon) about 8 years ago, and everybody talked about how much the traffic jams would decrease. Now we know better than that. High gas prices might initially scare off commuters, but in the long term, people just adjust their spending budget to the higher gas prices.
--Steve Hymon
Photo: Steve Hymon / Los Angeles Times
View Larger Map
A gruesome crash claimed the lives of three people last night in the Eagle Rock community of Los Angeles. Among the victims was a pregnant woman and a 12-year-old girl. Police blame street racing that resulted in a car wrapping around a tree, reports my colleagues Tami Abdollah and Jia-Rui Chongin a story published this morning on The Times' website.
The accident happened on Colorado Boulevard at the intersection with Highland View Avenue. That section of Colorado is six lanes wide and resembles a freeway -- even as it travels through the Eagle Rock business district.
Even with the 134 freeway having been built just to the north, Colorado still carries heavy east-west traffic and that traffic can move very fast. Two years ago, and just five blocks away from last night's accident, bollards were installed outside the door of Swork Coffee to prevent wayward cars from rolling into the store. Seriously.
-- Steve Hymon
Peugeot is holding its fifth annual auto design contest, with the theme "Imagine the Peugeot in the worldwide metropolis of tomorrow." You can go to the company's website and look at the 29 finalists and vote for your favorite.
The top design is from Oskar Johansen of Norway. Below is a car/unicycle design from Thierry Dumaine, of France. The bottom design comes from Pierlot Damien of Belgium.
I'm of the view that there may be a lot more mass transit in the future, but that individual cars aren't going to disappear. Here's hoping they evolve and adapt to a changing world.
--Steve Hymon
renderings: Peugeot
A couple of readers have asked me what happened Tuesday on the northbound 405 Freeway during the afternoon rush hour. One reader wrote in an e-mail that it took her two hours to get from West Los Angeles to Moorpark.
The problem was a fatal motorcycle crash on the northbound 405, just after the Skirball Center junction. Here's the explanation from the California Highway Patrol press release: "On 8-26-2008 at approximately 5:36 p.m. CHP units were dispatched to a call of a traffic collision involving a motorcycle rider and dump-truck towing a trailer on I-405 northbound, south of Ventura Blvd. The motorcycle was traveling northbound in the #2 lane, alongside the dump-truck who was traveling in the #3 lane. For unknown reasons the motorcycle rider lost control of his motorcycle and collided with the left side of the dump-truck. The motorcycle rider was ejected and struck by the left rear tires of the trailer, where he was dragged an undetermined distance as the dump-truck came to a stop. The motorcycle rider sustained fatal injuries due to the collision and was pronounced dead at the scene. The cause of this collision is still under investigation."
The victim was identified as Thomas Brough, 55, of North Hills. The driver of the dump-truck was identified as Ulices Cruz, 35, of Sylmar.
I think it's important to emphasize that fault hasn't been assigned. That said, I do want to point readers to a recent post here at Bottleneck Blog on the declining number of vehicle-related deaths in the U.S. and the rising number of motorcycle fatalities.
I also would like to encourage everyone on the freeways and roadways to please, please, please be careful. Earlier this year I wrote another story about Sunset Boulevard in Brentwood being closed after a fatal accident in which a motorcyclist hit a truck and got stuck under it.
-- Steve Hymon
The city of Los Angeles released its environmental impact report earlier this week for the proposed development of the parking lots at the Universal City subway stop. The report shows that the 1.5 million square feet of development, including a relocation of NBC Studios from Burbank, will add to traffic in the area by generating about 14,000 new car trips daily.
The Daily News has a complete story online, with the predictable headline "Universal gridlock disaster?" The story quotes Los Angeles Councilman Tom LaBonge and County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, both of whom say the development is too large -- as they've said in the past. The mayor's office continues to back the project, saying it creates needed jobs in the entertainment industry and is located atop a subway stop.
Here are 10 things worth knowing about the project and its impact on traffic:
1. The project's first phase includes a 24-story office tower and five-story studio space, with the second phase adding another 24-story office tower or hotel and residential building. The studio would host "The Tonight Show," which for decades has been taped in Burbank. NBC/Universal and its development partner Thomas Properties says it will bring 5,000 jobs to the city.
2. Most of the land is currently owned by Metro (the agency also known as the MTA). The agency has in recent years been looking for developers to build on land it owns at transit stops. This is part of that effort, although on a bigger scale. And, as I've written before, it will continue to be controversial because of possible traffic impacts.
Read on »
I took this screen shot of the SigAlert website Monday at 5:04 p.m. That's an awful lot of green for rush hour.
Blue stands for freeway speeds of 35 to 54 mph and green is 55 mph or over.
Then I took the screen shot below just after 8 this morning. A little more blue and red -- the 405 and Santa Monica Freeway are the main culprits -- but not all that bad.
Of course, it's the week before the three-day Labor Day holiday, so there are still people out on vacation and a lot of schools haven't returned from summer break.
My question for readers: Are these the driving conditions that you are really seeing out there?
And, if traffic is lighter because of high gas prices, is it worth the cost?
The comment board awaits.
--Steve Hymon
 As we predicted here last week, the price of a gallon of regular gas in California has fallen under the $4 threshold and now sits at $3.949, according to AAA. The price has been falling by 1 to 2 cents a day.
Over at the Chevron at the corner of Hill and Colorado in Pasadena that this blog has been watching, the price of a gallon of self-serve regular was at $4.099 as of noon.
Only Alaska and Hawaii still have average prices higher than $4 a gallon.
Of course, prices still have a way to fall before reaching their high-water mark for last year, when the price of a gallon of regular in California averaged about $3.40 in May, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
The question is whether gas prices will rise before the upcoming Labor Day holiday weekend. I just drove to the Bay Area and back this last weekend, and I can tell you that it sure doesn't seem that there are fewer people driving -- even though I know that's what the media and the U.S. Department of Transportation are saying, based on information from about 4,000 road sensors.
Nor are the people who are driving, driving well. In the space of 10 minutes last night in downtown San Luis Obispo, I watched three motorists -- including a tour bus -- blow through red lights. Memo to SLOPD: Revenue enhancement opportunities seem to await.
-- Steve Hymon
Chart: U.S. Energy Information Administration
Like many other readers of The Times, I read an article on our opinion page last week that carried the headline "A Big Surprise on Gas." And, indeed, co-authors Indur M. Goklany and Jerry Taylor wrote something that surprised me: they concluded that by their measure, gasoline was more affordable now than it was back in 1960.
Goklany and Taylor based their findings by measuring how much Americans spent on gas versus Americans disposable income (which is basically income after taxes) both in 1960 and now.
That's a reasonable calculation, of course, with one obvious problem: lumping everyone's incomes together in one big calculation wipes out the disparity in Americans' incomes.
Curious about their assertion, I began playing around with some statistics that are available to everyone on the web. Here's what I found:
1. If you visit the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis website, you can look up disposable income over the years, as well as the amount Americans spent on gas over the years.
Using the latest numbers available, I calcuated that Americans spent about 3.2% of their incomes on gas in the fourth quarter of 2007 versus 3.2% percent in the fourth quarter of 1960.
2. Next, I went to the U.S. Census Bureau website, thinking it may be a more accurate measure to see how much gas cost the average household. But I quickly encountered a bump in the road: the Census Bureau changed the way it calculates household income in 1967 and going back to 1960 would likely produce an inaccurate result, said Andy Hait, a Bureau statistician.
So, I went with the best numbers available and tried to determine how much 500 gallons of gas would cost the average household in 1967 compared to 1,000 gallons of gas 2006 (I was trying to account for the fact that Americans drive more now, albeit in more fuel efficient cars). The average price of a gallon of regular leaded was 33 cents in 1967 and $2.59 for a gallon of regular unleaded in 2006, according to the U.S. Energy Information Agency.
The result: Americans spent about 2% of their household income on gas in 1960 and 3.8% in 2006. I would advise taking that calculation with a grain of salt because of the variables involved: the fact that gas is more expensive in 2008 than 2006, the mileage driven by Americans now versus in the 1960s, the number of cars owned by Americans, the number of women working now versus then and so on.
3. Finally, I did the easiest calculation of all: I went to the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis' online inflation calculator and typed in the average price of a gallon of regular gas in 1960 -- 31 cents. The calculator said that if the price of gas tracked the rate of inflation, a gallon of regular should be $2.26 these days.
So there you have it -- like a lot of things involving statistics, determing how much gas costs Americans depends on how you look at it.
And, for what it's worth, I happen to think Goklanky and Taylor raised a very good point in their article: Americans tend to notice gas prices because of all the big signs and media attention focused on it. We tend to forget about all the other things we spend money on that didn't exist in 1960 -- like the iPhone sitting on my desk.
--Steve Hymon
 As noted earlier by my friends at LAist, parts of the 710 Freeway are going to be shut down Thursday night between 9 p.m. and 4 a.m. for filming purposes. Caltrans says the closure is to accommodate a new television program on the CW network called "Valentine" and that there are no explosions involved.
What? No explosions? As my colleague Veronique de Turenne from our L.A. Now blog just wrote in an e-mail to me, "Who shuts down a freeway without blowing stuff up? That's un-American."
I am in complete agreement. When the "Matrix Reloaded" closed a freeway (that's a shot from the movie) at least things got wrecked.
As for "Valentine," here's an excerpt from the very long description of the show on the CW website: Have you found your soul mate? Because, let's face it, these days it's not that easy. In a world where online dating shows millions of possibilities, they could walk right past you and you'd never know it. But thankfully, help is on the way. The gods of love are on the case. Turns out the Greek gods of myth and fable are alive and well ... and living among us in Mount Olympus, just off Hollywood's Laurel Canyon. From Executive Producer Kevin Murphy ("Desperate Housewives," "Reaper," "Ed") comes Valentine, a story about what a rare, strange, and often hilarious thing love is -- a gift that brings out the divine in all of us.
And later... And the gods need all the help they can get. If you think your family is complicated, imagine being stuck with the same band of misfits for thousands of years! They may think they're above the petty squabbles of men and women, but they're worse than any of us. With all the rivalries, affairs, and schemes, it's a wonder that any work gets done. And just wait until their relatives start showing up!
One of the characters apparently has a secret gun that he shoots at people to make them fall temporarily in love. Gives new meaning to "I'm hit," I suppose.
Details of the closure? They're after the jump ...
-- Steve Hymon
Photo credit: Melinda Sue Gordon / Warner Bros. Pictures
Read on »
One of the long-held arguments against congestion pricing or toll lanes is that they're not fair to low-income users. The tolls are the same for everybody and low-income earners get hit the hardest, so goes that line of thinking.
In fact, pretty much every politician I spoke to in the San Gabriel Valley has raised that point when talking about the proposal to convert the carpool lane on the 10 and possibly the 210 freeways into toll lanes.
Two local academics have concluded otherwise: tolls are a pretty fair way of raising money to build road capacity. In fact, they say, it's fairer than most other funding schemes.
The study comes from Lisa Schweitzer, an assistant professor of policy, planning and development at USC, and Brian Taylor, a professor of urban planning who heads up UCLA's Transportation Studies center. Taylor, in particular, has long been a vocal advocate of congestion pricing. The study has been published online in Transportation, an academic journal.
Their study is based on the toll lanes on the 91 freeway in Orange County. The two authors found that medium- and high-income earners tend to use the lanes the most -- and therefore are the ones paying for the debt service on the lanes.
They also looked at a scenario in which sales taxes collected from across the OC would be used to pay for the toll lanes. In that case, they concluded, low-income earners would be paying millions of dollars in taxes for something they don't use. Here's the key passage from their paper: "Using sales taxes to fund roadways creates substantial savings to drivers by shifting some of the costs of driving from drivers to consumers at large, and in the process disproportionately favors the more affluent at the expense of the impoverished."
I spoke to Schweitzer earlier today and she made it clear that she doesn't buy the congestion pricing-hurts-the-poor scenario. In her view, congestion pricing is a way to ration a resource often in short supply -- space on the road. She likes it because those who use it pay for it and that puts a direct cost on driving, instead of indirect costs such as at-large sales taxes.
"I think the equity issue is a magic bullet," she said. "Food prices go up, housing prices have gone up since Jesus was a carpenter, but no one" -- politicians, that is -- "ever brings that up."
I'm guessing some readers do not agree with the ivory tower on this one. Please direct your thoughts to the comment board.
-- Steve Hymon
Photo credit: Christine Cotter / Los Angeles Times
 The above map comes courtesy of the Gas Buddy website. As for the photo at right, it was taken a couple of hours ago at the corner of Fletcher and San Fernando Road in the Glassell Park area of Los Angeles.
Over the weekend, I saw an increasing number of gas stations with the price of regular fall under the $4 mark. The Times' Up to Speed blog reports that gas prices in California today are the lowest they've been since May, according to the U.S. Energy Department.
My question for readers: Are you driving more now? Did gas prices inspire you to drive less? Have your habits changed? Leave a comment please -- regular readers know that I've been skeptical that $4 gas was going to change driving habits in the long-term.
--Steve Hymon
photo: Steve Hymon / LAT
The Model T Ford is celebrating its 100th anniversary this year. In response, the Census Bureau this week culled its database and released a pile of auto-related statistics compiled over the years. As the Census Bureau release notes, the Model T is considered the car that "put America on wheels."
Here's a few excerpts from their news release, with the whole release, including links to Census Bureau tables, after the jump:
 79,000
The number of registered vehicles in 1905, shortly before production of the Model T started. About 77,000 were passenger cars, and 2,000 were other types of motor-driven vehicles. By 1925, near the end of the Model T’s run, there were 20.1 million registered vehicles, including 17.5 million passenger cars.
181,000
The number of passenger cars manufactured in 1910. Ten years later, the number was 1.9 million.
244.2 million
The number of motor vehicles registered in the United States in 2006. About 134 million of them were cars.
33.2 million
The number of registered vehicles in California in 2006, the most of any state. Texas was second with 17.5 million, followed by Florida, 16.4 million; New York, 11.3 million; and Ohio, 10.8 million.
20,770
The number of franchised new-car dealerships in the United States in 2007. This number was down from 24,825 dealers in 1990.
91%
Percentage of households with at least one vehicle available.
90%
Excluding those who worked at home, percentage of workers in 2006 who traveled to work in a car, truck or van.
45%
Among workers who used a car, truck or van to get to work, the percentage whose commute took less than 20 minutes. For 14%, the commute lasted 45 or more minutes.
-- Steve Hymon
Top photo: AFP / Getty Images; Bottom photo: Associated Press
Read on »
 It's time to check in with my favorite Chevron station at the corner of Hill and Colorado in Pasadena. Regular readers know that I've developed a habit of snapping photos of the big signboard there as gas prices change.
And change they have since early this week. The price of regular is down to $4.219 -- on Sunday it was $4.279.
AAA says the national average is down to $3.771 and the California average is sitting at 4.073 -- a 1.1 penny drop since yesterday.
Let's take a quick spin around some of the 'gas price' stories delivered by the media. I've come to the conclusion, by the way, that the more the media write about how high gas prices are, the more gas prices will fall. So, I'm just doing my part:
The Spectator, via Canadian News, reports that our friends in the Great White North haven't really changed their driving habits much.
Yet, Canadians do have common sense. The Greater Sudsbury area is considering an anti-idling ordinance and plans to crack down on buses that sit around doing nothing but burning gas, reports the Northern Life website. Go get 'em!
And, back in the homeland, Dow Jones reports, via the CNN website, that even as General Motors talks about more fuel efficient vehicles, it's still pushing its product line of mammoth-sized, gas-ingesting SUVs and trucks.
-- Steve Hymon
Photo credit: Steve Hymon / Los Angeles Times
I was trolling the Your Scene section of The Times' website and came across this reader-submitted photo. Unfortunately, the reader who submitted it -- someone with the screen name of Magawa -- didn't include any of the pertinent information, such as where it was taken and what the sign means.
A couple of readers left comments. One said it meant no siestas, another suggested it was telling motorists not to honk. Beats me. But Bottleneckers have long been known for their worldly ways and deductive skills, so I thought one of you could shed some light. Leave a comment and I'll update this post later.
-- Steve Hymon
Photo credit: Magawa
 This story has been reported in pieces in recent weeks, as statistics from states dribbled in. Now it's official: 2007 saw a 3.9% decline in road deaths since last year, according to the U.S. Department of Transportation.
The total number of deaths in the U.S. was 41,059, the lowest it has been since 1994. In California, the number of road deaths fell from 4,240 in 2006 to 3,974 in 2007, a 6.3% decline. The last time that California had fewer than 4,000 road deaths was 2001.
Overall, 35 of the 50 states reported fewer road deaths in '07 than in '06. Mary Peters, the secretary of USDOT, credited increased law enforcement and safer vehicles. The number of victims of alcohol-related crashes also fell from 13,491 in '06 to 12,998 in '07, a decline of 3.7%.
In addition, pedestrian deaths decreased from 4,795 in '06 to 4,654 in '07 and cycling deaths were down from 772 in '06 to 698 last year.
However, there were 5,154 motorcycle deaths in 2007 -- the highest number since the federal government began tracking deaths in 1975. That was a 6.6% increase from 2007 and represented 13% of all fatalities nationwide.
Tim Buche, president of the Motorcycle Safety Foundation, said that several factors may be at work. "First of all, we really ask car drivers to look out for us and respect our rights in the traffic mix," he said. "We are more vulnerable and it's important for them to give us our space."
Buche also said that too many motorcyclists are still not taking safety courses and cited federal statistics showing that speeding was a factor in 27% of motorcycle deaths and drunk riding a factor in 16% of fatal crashes. He also pointed to the fact that as gas prices have climbed in the last year, many people are returning to riding without updating their skills -- and are finding traffic has changed in recent years, with more high-profile vehicles on the road.
Twenty states have laws requiring all motorcyclists to wear helmets, 27 have laws requiring some riders wear helmets (usually younger riders) and three states -- Illinois, Iowa and New Hampshire -- have no helmet laws, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
More detailed statistics from California are expected to be released in the next few weeks, according to the state Office of Traffic Safety. Spokesman Chris Cochran said that provisional numbers show that motorcycle deaths also increased in California by 32 -- from 433 in '06 to 465 last year.
As for the overall decline in road deaths, Cochran said there didn't appear to be any one factor.
"Seat belt use has gone way up, the cars are better, the airbags and seat belts are better," he said. "DUI arrests are up, but I can't tell you how much. We're not only seeing more arrests, we're seeing the results of deterrence -- we're doing a lot more sobriety checkpoints."
-- Steve Hymon
Photo: Lori Shepler / LAT
Read on »
Beginning early tomorrow, a two-week construction project will limit access to the Riverside (91) Freeway’s La Sierra Avenue interchange in Riverside.
Crews will shut down the westbound 91 Freeway offramp to La Sierra Avenue and the eastbound onramp to the freeway, starting at 2 a.m. Wednesday, and the ramps will remain closed until the morning of Aug. 23, according to the Riverside Department of Public Works.
Motorists are advised to use alternate on- and offramps at Magnolia Avenue or Van Buren Boulevard. Closures affecting the westbound onramp and the eastbound offramp are scheduled for Aug. 22-26. Crews will be realigning the ramps to the new La Sierra Avenue overcrossing, city spokesman Austin Carter said.
The $38-million La Sierra interchange replacement project is a joint undertaking of the city, the county and Caltrans. The project is intended to reduce traffic congestion at La Sierra Avenue by replacing the four-lane bridge with a six-lane span -- to include dual left-turn lanes for easier access to the freeway -- and widening ramps from two to three lanes, Carter said. The project is slated for completion next summer.
-- City News Service
 I wanted to draw your attention to an intriguing post by my colleague Martin Zimmerman at The Times' Up to Speed blog.
Marty reports that auto data tracker Edmunds.com has found that interest among users of its website in smaller, fuel-efficient cars is declining while more users are seeking information on compact crossover SUVs.
And, more specifically, interest in gas-electric hybrids has fallen 34% since June. He writes: "With the initial shock of high gas prices fading, consumers are returning to rationality and again viewing gas consumption as just one of many factors when considering their next vehicle," said Edmunds.com Chief Executive Jeremy Anwyl. "And as gas prices actually decline, this trend could accelerate."
Read the whole post. Marty also quotes others who believe that gas prices are going to have to plummet a lot more than they have in recent weeks for Americans to return to buying larger cars.
Regular Bottleneckers know that I remain skeptical that our driving habits have forever changed in this summer of high gas prices.
For example, the media (including yours truly) jumped all over the U.S. Transportation Department's estimate last month that Americans drove 9.6 billion fewer miles in May 2008 than in May 2007. Now, let's think about that for a moment. There are about 202.8 million licensed drivers in the U.S, according to a 2006 estimate from the Federal Highway Administration.
So, let's do the math.
9,600,000,000 miles divided by 202,800,000 = 47.3 miles
In other words, the average American driver in May of this year drove about 47.3 miles less than a year earlier, according to Transportation Department estimates based on tracking vehicle counts in about 4,000 locations nationwide. I think that's significant, but the fact is that Americans still drove about 254.6 billion miles in May 2008, a number that speaks for itself.
-- Steve Hymon
Photo: Itsuo Inouye / Associated Press
I've been remiss this week in catching up with the price of regular at the Chevron station at the corner of Hill and Colorado in Pasadena. Regular Bottleneck readers know I'm thoroughly obsessed watching the station's sign.
The price as of this morning -- the photo is from Thursday evening -- was $4.319 for a gallon of regular. That's pretty high compared to many other stations around the region and, in fact, 10 cents higher than the $4.219 for sale at the Union 76 station a couple of blocks away at the corner of Hill and Walnut. One month ago the Chevron was hawking its regular gas at a clip of $4.719.
The national average for a gallon of regular is now $3.869, according to AAA, and the average in the Golden State is $4.159. The majority of states have an average below the $4 mark.
I get Google news alerts for news stories using the phrase "gas prices," meaning my email inbox is usually flooded. But it does provide a nice view of what's happening around the world -- and how the media are playing the story (to sum it up: We're up the creek sans paddle).
A few samples:
The Washington Post wonders if high gas prices will one day eliminate suburban sprawl; experts are mixed.
Out in Salt Lake City, the Tribune wonders if falling gas prices means people will begin driving more. Some interviewed say maybe, others maybe not.
The Wall Street Journal poses an old question: Why do gas prices rise quicker than they fall? One possible answer -- when prices begin to slip, there's less comparison shopping by consumers, so less pressure for gas stations to lower their price to compete.
Phil Kerpen, a contributor to the National Review, argues that Republicans should keep pressing to drill more oil -- that's what the people want.
The state of New York questioned a proposed rate hike by auto insurance carrier Geico because people are driving less, reports Forbes. Geico backed down.
The Billings (Mont.) Gazette wonders why gas prices remain high in the Rockies, particularly when there are three oil refineries in their area. The oil industry doesn't really answer their question and instead complains about Montana's fuel taxes.
And finally, my colleague Dan Neil takes a look at the flap between presidential candidates Sen. Barack Obama and Sen. John McCain over Obama's keep-your-tires-properly-inflated-remarks. Neil writes:
"When it comes to politics, conservation doesn't sell. Many Americans are allergic to the suggestion that they should change behavior or moderate consumption, particularly when it comes to their automobiles."
--Steve Hymon
photo: Steve Hymon / Los Angeles Times
Ever been approached by another motorist offering to detail your car while you're driving it? My colleague Tami Abdollah, a reporter on the California staff, recounts her fun little experience Sunday night:
It's about 6:05 p.m. Sunday and I'm driving north on La Cienega near Wilshire in West Los Angeles when a guy to my left in the passenger seat of a black Cadillac Escalade motioned for me to roll down my window. Directions? Sure. I roll my window down.
"So you see those scratches on the side of your car?" he told me. "I can fix those. I'm experienced with Audis, Volkswagens, all those. . . ." For cheap, he said.
It sounded like a scam. But, well, I was also curious and low on money. The small scratches had been there since Dec. 20, sometime between 7 and 7:30 p.m. (long story), and I hadn't had a chance to fix them. I thought, why not grab his info, see what he was offering and do a little price comparison?
"Do you have a website?" I yelled out the window, while we drove in sync, next to each other.
"Pull over for a sec," he said. The other people in his car, a blond-haired lady driving and three other guys in the back, were motioning for me to pull over. I felt pressured. I didn't like it.
"No, I can't, I'm on my way somewhere."
"Just pull over, we'll show you samples, just for a second, it'll be fast."
Live for the day, I thought. OK. Why not? I pulled over to a spot.
The Escalade came roaring up behind me. Odd, I thought. Looks like it's right off a dealer parking lot. No license plate, just an ad. Brand new, shiny black. Nice car. The guys took a while getting out of the car, and they left the engine with the blond lady behind the wheel and a couple guys in back. A guy with a shaved head with a black baseball cap, a tattoo on his right arm, baggy black pants and a white T-shirt got out of the passenger seat, and another man with stringy brown hair thinning at the top and crooked yellow teeth got out of the back of the SUV.
I was dressed in a nice T-shirt and jeans, on my way to visit friends. These guys came up to me, and the guy with the cap on, who first offered me the job, started telling me he was going to show me what they could do.
"Let me show you a sample," he said, and he walked over to the back bumper of my 1999 VW Jetta, whips out a can of spray paint and started spraying.
"Stop! What are you doing?!"
"Wait," he said. "It'll get darker. Look, the more I spray, the darker it gets."
The other man chimed in. "Look, it's getting darker. We'll spray, sand, wax, it's a pro job. I know this stuff, it's the best, cheapest job you'll get."
To find out whether that paint got darker, click below...
Read on »
The California Highway Patrol released more factoids today about vehicle thefts in California last year. As we reported yesterday, overall thefts were down in '07 by 8%, which followed a decrease of 5.5% in 2006. The most surprising news, perhaps, is that San Francisco County is where you are most likely to have someone make off with your ride.
The obvious question here is if the number of stolen vehicles keeps going down in the state, what factor does that play in determining auto insurance rates. Darrel Ng, a spokesman for the Department of Insurance, said that the agency looks at each auto insurance carrier's losses and profits when determining what rates to allow -- not the state's overall numbers on auto theft. The state numbers do, however, come into play indirectly. The fewer vehicles stolen, the fewer the losses of some insurance firms.
Now, some fun facts:
*227,412 vehicles were stolen in the state last year -- or about one every three minutes.
*60% of the stolen vehicles were cars, 29% personal trucks or vans, 3% motorcycles and 4% commercial trucks (think Sopranos!).
*The three most popular cars to steal are the Honda Accord, Honda Civic and Toyota Camry. The 1991 Accord was the most popular model to steal (4,265), followed by the 1990 Honda Accord (3,648) and then the 1992 Honda Accord (3,308). The CHP says they were popular cars in the first place and still have high resale value.
*The recovery rate for stolen cars dipped a little last year, from 95.6% in 2006 to 93.6% in '07.
*Los Angeles County, as usual, led the state in total number of stolen vehicles, with 62,109, although the county also has the most registered vehicles (7,586,782). That was nearly a 7% drop from 2006.
*The percentage of all registered vehicles that were stolen in the following counties was:
San Francisco, 1.3%
San Diego, 1.02%
San Bernardino, .82%
Kern, .85%
Los Angeles, .81%
Imperial, .78%
Riverside, .74%
Orange, .37%
Ventura, .25%
Santa Barbara, .23%
--Steve Hymon
The Reason Foundation, the group that promotes libertarian values, just released its annual highway report. California, predictably, had the worst urban freeway congestion --
along with Minnesota and North Carolina -- but the 9th fewest deficient
bridges. The state's urban freeways also ranked 48th in terms of their condition. Only New Jersey and Hawaii were worse in that category.
Here's an excerpt:
Despite welcome progress, the study highlights continuing problems. Just under one-quarter of all bridges remain deficient; 50 percent of urban interstates remain congested; accident rates are stubbornly high; and substantial urban interstate mileage remains in poor condition. The recent sharp increases in highway construction costs mean that fewer repairs can be made from the same dollars.
This is the key passage from the report, basically saying these are really hard problems to solve:
Another emerging issue in this long-term data is the question of appropriate goals. There is increasing evidence that some measures may have essentially irreducible ‘bottoms’ below which it may not be realistic to go. Since 2000, urban interstate congestion has hovered around 50 percent; the percent of rural primary roads in poor condition has remained near 0.75 percent; the percent of rural interstates in poor condition has remained near 2 percent; and the percent of rural primary roads with narrow lanes has remained close to 10 percent.
Although some states have achieved remarkably lower statistics, overall, the nation has found it difficult to reducer these statistics even though dollars have substantially increased. This suggests that combinations of system condition, unit costs, and background trends, such as traffic, make further progress problematic. On the other hand, substantial progress still seems possible for reducing accident rates, improving bridges, and improving urban interstate condition.
The whole report can be found by clicking here. The group also has a neat Google map with their findings.
Although the Reason Foundation certainly has a distinct political viewpoint, there really isn't much politics in their report. The group is also a big proponent of congestion pricing, as are many other organizations across the political spectrum.
--Steve Hymon
Since the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake and the Northridge quake in 1994, the state of California has been trying to seismically retrofit bridges across the state. Given the significant earthquake yesterday, I thought it would be a good time to provide an update.
Also, to be frank, as a transportation reporter I've been meaning to get up to speed on the issue of bridge safety. So that's how I spent this afternoon -- reading and talking and trying to understand the basic issues.
The state of California owns more than 12,000 bridges. Of those, Caltrans says that it in the past 20 years it has retrofit 2,189 of the 2,194 bridges that needed updates -- with many of those bridges on the freeways and other major routes that serve as major corridors.
 The remaining five bridges are the eastern span of the Oakland-Bay Bridge, the Ten Mile River Bridge on Highway 1 in Mendocino County, the High Street bridge on I-880 in Oakland, the 5th Street bridge on the 880 in Oakland and the Schuyler Heim Bridge that connects Long Beach to Terminal Island.
The Schuyler Heim will eventually be replaced, said David Anderson, a Caltrans spokesman. Like the eastern span of the Bay Bridge, it's less expensive to replace it than to rebuild it.
In addition, there are 479 bridges that are owned by cities and counties in California that need seismic upgrades and are eligible for funding from Prop 1B -- the $19.9-billion transportation bond approved by California voters in 2006.
Among these bridges that still need seismic updates are some noteworthy structures in the Southland. Eight cross the Los Angeles River in the city of Los Angeles, including the Sixth Street Bridge and  bridges on streets such as Main Street, Glendale Avenue, Vanowen Street and Tampa Avenue. The Los Angeles Conservancy has expressed concerns over the river bridges, in particular, saying that while the need for public safety must be met, any fixes should also consider the bridges' historical architecture.
There are 40-plus bridges that Los Angeles County must fix, including the Foothill Boulevard bridge over the San Gabriel River in the San Gabriel Valley and an Imperial Highway bridge over the San Gabriel River. In Riverside County, the Van Buren Boulevard bridge over the Santa Ana River needs an upgrade. So does the MacArthur Boulevard bridge at John Wayne Airport in Orange County.
Why am I listing these bridges? Because they are some of the same ones mentioned by my colleague Sharon Bernstein when she wrote about bridges in need of seismic upgrades in March 2006.
The California Transportation Commission, or CTC, doled out about $21 million of the seismic funds last week, on top of $13 million previously allocated. Both the Vanowen and Sixth Street bridges got money in that round of funding.
That allows cities and counties to seek Caltrans' approval of their project, which then allows the cities and counties to apply to the Federal Highway Administration for 88.5% of the cost of the project. That's how the bureaucracy works.
 The obvious question is what does the term "seismic upgrade" really mean? To put it simply, seismic upgrades are supposed to allow a bridge to withstand the maximum credible earthquake that could happen in any given area, said Anderson.
Of course, there are no guarantees. Intensive monitoring of earthquakes has revealed a lot of basic patterns about earthquake size, frequency and location (as the map at right shows) and scientists have mapped many of the region's faults. But there are a lot of variables when it comes to how earthquakes release energy. The bottom line is no one can say with certainty what kind of damage the next big quake may or may not cause.
"If you look at this whole planet of ours, the time window for which we have the [earthquake data is so short in geological terms," said Saiid Saiidi, a professor of civil engineering at the University of Nevada, Reno. "The science of seismology has progressed quite a bit in the last 30 years -- I may not know what the next big earthquake is going to be, but I can work on the structural side of it."
--Steve Hymon
Top photo: Steve Dykes / LAT
Bay Bridge photo: Ben Margot / AP
6th Street Bridge photo: Francine Orr / LAT
Earthquake map: U.S. Geological Survey
The California Highway Patrol just issued a news release saying that the state's vehicle theft rate dropped 8% in 2007. Statewide there were 227,412 vehicles stolen last year. The CHP says they'll provide a county-by-county list of auto theft rates in California on Thursday.
This comes on the heels of the annual report from the National Insurance Crime Bureau, which says that 2007 is likely to be on track to be the fourth straight year of declining auto theft in the United States.
Their list of the top 10 metro areas for auto theft are:
1. Modesto, Calif.
2. Las Vegas/Paradise, Nev.
3. San Diego/Carlsbad/San Marcos, Calif.
4. Stockton, Calif.
5. San Francisco/Oakland/Fremont, Calif.
6. Laredo, Texas
7. Albuquerque, N.M.
8. Phoenix/Mesa/Scottsdale, Ariz.
9. Yakima, Wash.
10. Tucson, Ariz.
-- Steve Hymon
Good evening Bottleneckers. I liked the juxtopation of really old and kinda old in this photo of the vessel California as it fires one of its cannons Wednesday near the Bay Bridge. I think the bridge wins in this battle.
photo: Lance Iversen / AP/San Francisco Chronicle
 There's an intriguing item on the agenda today for the Los Angeles City Council's Transportation Committee: The city is considering handing over a few parking spaces near UCLA and USC to the car-sharing firm Zipcar.
The firm already has rental cars available -- cars are kept in various locations, such as parking garages -- so the issue here is whether the city wants to make the program more visible by allowing some cars to have street locations.
Zipcar rents cars by the hour. The idea is that people who live nearby can easily access a car when they need one without all the hassles and expense of car ownership. Zipcar's website shows that cars rent from $9 an hour to $77 for an all-day rental on a Mini. Other cars are $66 for the day.
The big argument for a car-sharing program is that it is a good way to help more people take mass transit because it allows them to have a car when they most need it. The rest of the time they can get around by walking, cycling or public transport. It seems like an idea that could catch on here as the area continues to grow denser -- it's basically a rental car firm spread out to more locations.
-- Steve Hymon
Photo: Zipcar
Good evening, late night Bottleneckers. Nothing on TV, eh?
Tonight's fun photo comes from Beijing and shows a cab that appears to have become delayed in reaching its destination Tuesday. The good news, however, is that traffic is lighter now that officials have greatly restricted traffic in preparation for the Summer Olympics. The bad news, perhaps, is that people have space to drive.
--Steve Hymon
photo: Mark Rolston / AFP/Getty Images
posted: 3:35 p.m., July 22; updated 3:40 p.m., July 22.
In a recent interview with the Associated Press, the National Safety Council said it's collected enough data to show that road deaths are substantially down across the United States in the first five months of this year compared to the same time period in 2007. One likely reason: The sour economy and high gas prices mean people are driving less.
I think these numbers likely reflect a trend, but you should also know that many states (including California) and the federal government have not formally released crash data for 2007. Some groups and journalists have been trying to collect data in the meantime; USA Today recently had a story concluding also that roads are safer, although based on less data.
What is interesting about the Council's statistics is that they show a substantial decrease of 9% in road deaths overall. However, California has had 2% more deaths this year compared to last, although the number has dropped 5% from 2006.
I do think there is a reason to be cautious about the Council's numbers: Recent history suggests that the number of highway deaths from year to year doesn't move on the order of 9%. According to the federal data, over the last five years the number of deaths has not moved much in either direction, with deaths ranging from a low of 42,642 in 2006 to a high of 43,510 in 2005.
John Ulczycki, a spokesman for the Council, said he believes there may be several reasons for the drop. One is that states are cracking down more on the kind of behavior that leads to accidents -- drinking and driving, and speeding, for example. But he said the greater likelihood is that the bad economy and high gas prices mean people are driving less and, thus, crashing less.
The state-by-state numbers are after the jump.
--Steve Hymon
photo: Brian Vander Brug
Read on »
View Larger Map
posted: 2:05 p.m.
Caltrans today announced its preferred method for improving the 405-101 freeway interchange, which the agency says is one of the busiest in the world. But don't get too excited. The agency also says that it doesn't have the money to design or build the project, which is expected to cost about $135 million.
Still, this is one of those classic bottlenecks, and understanding why it doesn't work helps explain a lot of other bottlenecks on Southern California freeways.
The big problem is that entrance and exit ramps have been placed too close to one another. The particular issue on the 405 is that traffic trying to merge onto the freeway from the Burbank Boulevard onramp immediately must merge with traffic trying to leave the 405 for the exit to the 101 (the big yellow arrow is pointing to the ramp from the 405 to 101).
That means a lot of weaving and braking, the reason that the area scores low on Caltrans' measurement of traffic speeds. Between mid-2004 and mid-2007, that particular portion of the freeway also had a significantly higher accident rate than the statewide average (1.45 accidents per million miles driven compared to 1.09 per million miles driven statewide).
The other big mess is the ramp from the 405 south to the 101 west/north. It's a very tight turn and only a single lane. Caltrans says the ramp was built to handle up to 1,500 cars per hour, but during the morning rush on weekdays it averages 1,792 vehicles. The afternoon rush is better, but only slightly, with an average of 1,374 vehicles per hour using the ramp.
Two design flaws are obvious with the current setup: traffic trying to get onto the 405 from Burbank Boulevard has to merge into traffic trying to exit the 405.
Here's how Caltrans is proposing to fix it:
1. The existing one-lane ramp from the 405 south to the 101 west/north would be replaced with a two-lane ramp that allows speeds of 50 mph. In addition, the ramp would enter the 101 west of the 101's exit to Haskell -- so incoming 101 traffic doesn't have to mix with 101 traffic trying to get off the freeway.
2. The Burbank Boulevard on-ramp would be routed under the new 405-to-101 exit ramp, so that traffic won't enter the 405 south until after the 101 exit. That also eliminates access to both directions of the 101 for those entering the 405 from Burbank Boulevard.
3. The new two-lane bridge from the 405 to the 101 would cross the spillway away of Sepulveda Dam. Caltrans is saying the new bridge would be designed to match the dam's architectural style.
These types of bottlenecks are all over the region, where entrances and exits to freeways were built too close together. My favorite is in Pasadena, where traffic on the westbound 210 trying to exit to the leg of the 210 that continues to La Canada-Flintridge and beyond must mix with traffic trying to get on the 210 from four different entrances.
I asked Caltrans spokesperson Judy Gish if there was a timeline for the project. "There is no timeline because there are no funds at this point," she said. It should be noted that the proposal to increase the sales tax in L.A. County -- which may go to voters in November -- does not include money for this interchange.
What do you think? Will this work? Do you believe it will ever happen?
--Steve Hymon
 Remember that really fun proposal this past spring to convert the car pool lanes on a couple of local freeways to toll lanes?
Well, it's back and reformulated (somewhat) and will face a pair of legislative tests this week.
First, a refresher. Under the proposal the carpool lanes on the 110 south of downtown and the 10 between downtown and El Monte would become toll lanes (that's the 10 in the photo). The price of the tolls would vary by time of day.
The idea is to use the price to push down demand and speed the lane up. If you pay, you get a faster commute. Proponents say it's worth trying, since the federal U.S. Department of Transportation is offering about $210 million in federal grants to the area if we try it. The Bush Administration likes tolling for a myriad of reasons, the foremost being that it's a "market-based" solution to traffic.
Back to this week. On Wednesday, the California Transportation Commission is slated to vote on the proposal.
If the Commission says it is feasible, a bill then must be introduced and passed by the California Legislature by Oct. 15 to allow Los Angeles County to enter into an agreement with the feds.
If the Commission says congestion pricing smells bad -- or something to that effect -- then the toll lanes are dead.
Annette Gilbertson, a CTC spokesperson, told me today that the Commission's public discussions thus far indicate that members are leaning toward voting for the project.
On the other hand, six members of the House of Representatives last week submitted a letter to the Commission expressing their "deep concern" over the proposal. They complained about spillover traffic from the freeway -- i.e. motorists looking to avoid tolls -- and that local funds may be used to set up the toll lanes. The letter is after the jump.
The second hurdle comes Thursday when the Metro Board is scheduled to vote on whether to enter into an MOU -- that is, a "memorandum of understanding" -- with the feds. Here's a link to the Metro staff report to the board on the MOU.
The most interesting part, I think, is a phrase that says "vehicles that do not meet the minimum passenger occupancy" would be charged a toll. It also appears that Metro will have discretion to change that policy on the 110 if traffic in the carpool lanes worsens.
As we reported recently, the 110 was swapped for the 210 -- as a way to pacify complaints from San Gabriel Valley legislators. That was part of a deal to garner their support for another proposal to raise the sales tax in L.A. County to pay for more transportation projects.
It is also an abject lesson in transportation policy in California: the deal often trumps the substance.
Foothill Freeway users shouldn't think the 210 is out of the picture, at least not yet. Language in the MOU makes it clear that toll lanes on the 210 could go forward if funding becomes available.
Related: A Q&A on congestion pricing in L.A. County.
--Steve Hymon
photo: Spencer Weiner / LAT
Read on »
A reader named Alex apparently did not appreciate the Bottleneck Blog's foray into the world of Batman this morning. He wrote: Dear Steve
Please find another line of work. This belongs in a 7th grader's Creative Writing class, not in a paper as good as the L.A. Times. Do a service to yourself and to your colleagues, who acknowledge that there is too much violence, chaos, and turmoil going on in the real world that goes unreported, while articles that have 0 merit in both the artistic and the journalistic sense (such as this one) are still put to print.
If your job says "report on traffic", then you report traffic. You weren't hired to write stuff like this, and it is easy to see why.
On the chance that you were put up to writing this, being the traffic reporter and therefore getting minimal respect around the office, then I would suggest that you grow a pair and either write something worth reading or leave the paper for another one that will value your talent. This has got to serious.
On Behalf of Everyone who is Not Amused,
Alex
My response will be to quote the Joker: Why so serious?
--Steve Hymon
Just for fun, here's the story I would like to be writing today....
LOS ANGELES -- In a stunning development, Batman announced today that he was leaving Gotham and would soon relocate to the Los Angeles area.
In a short statement released to the media, Batman wrote: "It's time to reinvent myself. The days may be bright and sunny but the nights are about to become very, very dark."
Sources close to the Dark Knight said he had been ruminating on such a move for quite some time, but the tipping point came when the New York State Police recently wrote him a ticket for lane-splitting on the Batpod on the Taconic State Parkway. Lane-splitting on motorcycles is legal in California.
 Sources close to the Dark Knight cited several other considerations. The most important is that the violent crime rate is slightly higher in Los Angeles than in New York, according to preliminary FBI data for 2007.
Mobility, too, is rumored to have played an important part in Batman's decision. "If you can't get there, you can't crack some goon's rib cage in half with one lovely punch," said one source close to the Caped Crusader.
Although the Los Angeles area ranked worst in the Texas Transportation Institute's annual rankings of congestion, the New York/Gotham area wasn't far behind in the No. 16 slot. But recent news reports have shown that traffic is down slightly across some parts of the region and that Batman is closely watching a proposal in L.A. County to raise the sales tax to build many more miles of subway and light rail.
"Look, everyone knows there is no place more cinematic to beat the snot out of some thug than on a train," said another source close to Batman.
But some in the Superhero community say that other consideratinos have come into play -- and that  Gotham has long posed difficult challenges because of the often jammed bridges and tunnels required to enter the island upon which it sits.
Los Angeles, on the other hand, does not pose such geographic hurdles. And while traffic is bad, Batman apparently feels that it moves sufficiently well in the late night hours that it won't prevent him from chasing criminal elements around town.
In particular, Batman is said to have closely studied the most recent Caltrans traffic volume data and found that a route such as the 2 Freeway -- long considered a best-kept secret by locals -- is carrying less than half the number of cars as other Southland freeways. The 2 connects L.A. with La Canada-Flintridge, where large homes remain relatively cheap by Gotham standards and the hilly location could make an ideal spot for hiding secret lairs. The old Bronson Caves, pictured at left, in the Hollywood Hills are also said to be available.
The same source, however, said Batman does have deep concerns about the Santa Monica Freeway. "We looked at the Caltrans data and that thing is a mess almost all the time," the source said. "I definitely think it could be a problem, but Batman has shown a way of rising to the occasion."
There are complications, however. When The Times asked the California Highway Patrol recently if Batman would be eligible to use | |
