Chris Segal
Assistant Perspectives Editor
Los Angeles is known for having some of the worst traffic problems in the world. Most local freeways convert to parking lots during peak rush hours, but now traffic is more than a mere hassle; it has now become a mayoral campaign issue.
Mayoral contender Bob Hertzberg has been making the rounds on talk radio shows to promote his ideas on how to solve Los Angeles’ traffic woes. He has dubbed this plan the Commuters’ Rights Bill. Hertzberg is charging that Major James K. Hahn is incapable of solving the traffic problem because of his poor attendance at Mass Transit meetings.
The bill has a number of interesting ideas but would actually do little to decrease the number of cars on the road during rush hour.
The first article of the bill bans road construction during rush hour. Keeping all lanes of traffic and all onramps open during rush hour would ease some congestion, but most major road work is done at night, which does not effect traffic during the peak hours of road usage.
Article two states that through “incentives and fees,” the city should reduce the number of heavy trucks on public streets during rush hour. Truck drivers log more hours on the road than most commuters. Truck drivers do not want to sit in traffic any more than commuters do, and try to avoid it without having to pay a fee or being paid by the city.
In addition, there are few alternatives for these heavy trucks. Are all the truck divers in the city of Los Angeles expected to pull over and wait for the end of rush hour in order to avoid fines?
If Hertzberg really wanted to make a difference, he would work to keep trucks in the slower lanes. Heavy trucks are, by law, only allowed in the two right lanes of the freeway unless passing. However, trucks can often be seen cruising in other lanes. Tightening enforcement of these rules would have a greater impact on congestion by freeing up the faster lanes to commuters.
The third article encourages businesses to develop programs to allow employees to work from home or telecommute for a city-tax credit. This clause is extremely vague. How substantial is the tax credit? Does the tax credit apply to those living in the city and commuting out or only businesses that have employees commute into the city? There are too many questions left unanswered for this article to have any effect on the parking-lot effect of the 405 during rush hour.
The fourth article says the mayor should put city employees on flexible hours to avoid rush-hour times and provide incentives for other businesses to do the same. Hertzberg’s plan is to use incentives to fix the problem of traffic. The biggest incentive is staying out of traffic itself. If it is was so easily avoidable, commuters would already be doing it.
The fifth and seventh articles actually offer some valuable suggestions on how to improve gridlock. These articles focus on traffic lights. The bill calls for “linking and synchronizing” lights to keep traffic moving on surface streets, which would be effective.
The seventh article calls for left turn signals to last longer to keep traffic moving through the intersection. Both ideas sound promising on their own, but working together the flow will most likely remain the same slow speed during rush hour.
The sixth article calls for clean and well-lit streets. A good plan, but one that will do little to improve the problem of congestion. With this improvement, commuters will be parking in a nicely paved parking lot on the 405.
The eighth article is this bill’s major flaw — using incentives to encourage other cities to help offset some of the financial burden LAX puts on the city of Los Angeles. The city of Los Angeles cannot offer tax incentives to other cities. What kind of incentive would there be? It would be great if all the surrounding cities had huge reserves and wanted to contribute to the city of Los Angeles, but that will never happen.
The roads to LAX cannot be closed to citizens of any of the surrounding cities or counties that didn’t fork over money to the city of Los Angeles.
The ninth article calls for the port of Los Angeles to be open 24 hours a day to keep heavy trucks from loading and then traveling on the freeways during rush hour. Truck drivers would rather miss traffic and save money on gas if the port were open later.
The final article calls for a “high-speed rail system” or “an expanded flyaway system” to help alleviate traffic. Great idea, since public transportation is so commonly used in Los Angeles.
Supposedly, the Los Angeles subway system alleviates some traffic during rush hour even though most people don’t even know that Los Angeles has a subway system.
Los Angeles is unlike any other metropolitan area. Here, the car rules the streets. Everyone wants a car and everyone thinks they need one. The Commuters’ Bill of Rights is more a public relations ploy than an actual solution.
Hertzberg is getting his name out there among the constituents through promoting this plan on talk radio during rush hour. It’s an ingenious marketing system — the commuters sitting in traffic are happy to hear all his vague and unlikely ideas while they wait with everyone else in gridlock.
Making traffic a hot button issue of the mayoral campaign is very smart of Hertzberg. It is much easier to attack an opponent on this topic because there is no easy solution to traffic.
The only real way to help ease congestion would be if everyone on the road were a good and considerate drivers — not a likely outcome. Don’t let a politician sweet talk you as you bang your head against the wheel in traffic listening to talk radio.
1-20-2005