A new report concludes that California's rough roads are "creating additional operating costs for drivers due accelerated vehicle deterioration, additional maintenance needs and increased fuel consumption." The Road Information Program (TRIP) pegs the financial damage at more than $650 per driver per year– compared with $413 nationally. San Diego's "street-maintenance failings" cost the average motorist some $684 a year. It's even worse in the City of Angels; bad roads in LA cost automobilists a whopping $778 per year. TRIP says 23 percent of America's major metropolitan roads "feature pavement in poor condition." In California, it's as high as 65 percent. To help the media fulfill its "this sucks and it's getting worse" meta meme, TRIP claims that "Travel on urban roads is increasing, and travel by large commercial trucks is growing even faster than travel by cars." No word when California will go for a double whammy– fix the roads and save the planet– by raising gas taxes.
This is interesting, I wonder what annual cost for motorists living in the Southeast Michigan / Detroit area would be. I thought Michigan was infamous for horrible roads.
You need an SUV to get around Detroit. Some of those potholes require some insane ground clearance.
It’s the same here in New England: Durning the winter, water gets into cracks in the roads by day, freezes at night, and over time, potholes emerge.
Some of them are large enuogh to chatter your teeth should you be unfortunate enough to drive into one at speed. (You can tell there’s one ahead when the car in front of you suddenly weaves around it.)
By spring, some roads look as if Mike Solowiow had coordinated an airstrike on them!
;-)
Part of the problem is weight and frequency. More vehicles with higher weight traveling roads that were designed to last x amount of time between repave. The higher rate of wear has accelerated the need for repaves, except the money’s not there.
I don’t mind much the roads (avoiding potholes is fun) but what I do worry about are the bridges… did yesterday’s engineers foresee today’s multi-ton trucks and cars used as everyday drivers?
I have lived in California my entire life and can attest to the deplorable conditions of the roads. I received my drivers license in 1972, and have witnessed the steady deterioration of the highways. When Gov. Pat Brown (Jerry’s father) was Gov in late 50’s and early 60’s there were excellent highways (and schools, and parks etc.), but much of the California budget now goes for social programs, the “education” system receives over 50% of the budget (and the schools are always poor mouthing for more), the prisons take up lots of money, health expenditures etc. California government has revenues over $110 billion a year, yet is facing a $20 billion budget shortfall.
There are roads out here still being used, wihtout anything more than minor improvements since the 50’s. (when there were half as many people in the state) Highway 46 from central California to the California coast is a prime example. Millions of people use this road every year and yet it remains a two lane (one lane each side) highway, same as it was 45 years ago. It is called “Suicide Alley” for a reason. Yet we Californians pay very expensive fuel taxes supposedly to go to highway improvement.
I have friends in Michigan, have driven around that state, the roads are far better than California.
Roads here in Chicago are horrible as well. Mainly thanks to the snow, and what Glenn Swanson had mentioned.
We just had a bad snowstorm a month or so ago. Afterwards, there were tons and tons of potholes on my commuting route alone I had never seen before. Every day now I feel like I’m driving through an obstacle course.
I can’t help but tense up as my car *BANGS* over horrible roads I can’t avoid. Sucks. Better start a side-fund for the inevitable suspension work…
As bad as CA roads are, I invite anyone that jumps on the critizing CA bandwagon to drive a few highways in the east.
Boston = TERRIBLE.
They oughtta rename Bean Town, Pot Hole City.
The absolute worst highways I’ve ever had the displeasure to have driven on…worse than anything I’ve experienced in CA, and I’ve lived here (Los Angeles) since 1944.
Pennsylvania Turnpike = The Keystone State aka the Road Cone State…if you can drive 5 miles without seeing a road cone, it’s a miracle!
I agree BKW, I live in the city of Boston and know of 3 HUGE potholes that would swallow my Legacy if I didn’t dodge them during my commute. I’m thinking of switching to an Outback next year and this only reinforces my decision.
One pothole is technically in Brookline and it actually causes a traffic jam because people are forced to drive around it. (~3.5 feet wide X ~5 feet long)
Yes the roads in California are in the worst shape I have ever seen them. Many well-used 2-lane highways are death roads (CA 46, CA 138) because the pols have been usurping road funds for “more politically sensitive” uses for decades. Why else would the 3 major north-south freeways in the country’s largest state (I-5, US 101 and CA 99) still be only 2 lanes per direction? There is no group of road users available who are willing and able to take on the bureaucracies who are wedded to the status quo. The auto clubs? Perish the thought. They would much sooner sell you insurance or a cruise package than actually lobby for drivers’ issues.
Funny, my classic 64 1/2 Mustang came with all the original owner’s records including the original sales contract. Tax and doc fees in April 1964 for a $3000 vehicle was $120. (The state sales tax was 4 %) (!!) Then, our freeways were the envy of the entire world. To say nothing of the University of California system (also world class) which offered free tuition for in-state residents. It would be sobering to see a reputable study that could quantify exactly how much auto-related sales and gas taxes are derailled into non-auto (and even non-transit) programs.
I live in the San Fernando Valley, and made a trip to San Diego last weekend. Interesting to see the 405 in some areas (Orange County) with fairly good pavement, while in LA, it’s horrendous. Maybe the Santa Monica crowd can do something about that??? Nah, there too busy cleaning up the urine puddles and smells out of their parking garages.
I lived in California for 30 years. I, too, thought that the roads were deteriorating faster than they could be kept up. Then I moved to Vermont.
Please…
Of course, you all surely heard about concern over major lay-offs at Cal-Trans back in the 80’s when someone developed a shovel that stood up by itself?
Having lived most of my life here in the beautiful San Fernando Valley, I must sadly concur. Maybe that’s why I drive a 23 year old Audi on our bombed-out roads.
As Rip Torn said in Defending Your Life: “…actually there is no Hell; but I understand Los Angeles is getting pretty close.”
No roads can be worse than Louisiana roads. Since they were the last state to mandate drinking age at 21 they missed out on federal road funding for several years as they held onto their lower drinking age and it shows.
While some areas may be worse than others, its probably pretty safe to say that the road infrastructure of the U.S. is falling apart and is in dire need of repair.
Probably a million reasons why, but I suspect that some of the blame can be placed on the fact that so few cities either encourage or have useful mass transit systems.
The more desirable mass transit becomes (particularly train/light rail/subway), the less pounding already deteriorating roadways take and the easier it becomes to repair/upgrade them.
Don’t worry, next year gas will hit $7 gallon and many of these problems will solve themselves!
So what state doesn’t have horrible roads?
If I read the report correctly, the cost per driver includes the fuel wasted sitting in traffic. I am guessing that most of the cost relates to fuel wasted (versus damage repair).
Therefore the primary problem in LA is congestion, not potholes. The only solutions to congestion are (1) more roads, (2) fewer cars, (3) More efficient roads.
Adding more roads will not really help in the long run. It will soon be saturated with more cars.
Therefore the only long term solution is to reduce demand. There needs to be a clean, safe, efficient, and comprehensive public transport alternative to driving. In the long run, that is the only viable solution.
Fellow Angelenos:
Remember when the 405 was first opened in 1963? You could drive from Renaldi Street to LAX in 25 minutes.
LOL ~ Try doing THAT today.
The 405 = the worlds LONGEST parking lot.
The 405 is named the San Diego Freeway ~ It does not go to San Diego!
Cal-Trans workers & their obligatory porta-potty.
With 8 workers, the usual scenario is: Two a comin’ two a goin’ one a p!ssin’ and three a waiting!
This is what happens when the environmentalist whackos take control of your state government. No new roads, no new powerplants, CA is reaping the rewards for it’s tree hugging over the past 30 years.
I had to laugh out loud seeing that the first two posts mention Detroit. As soon as I started reading the article, I immediately thought of an occasion where I got lost in Detroit. Absolutely the worst urban roads I’ve ever encountered.
HitGuy nailed it. A much larger share CA budget goes to Education and the Prison System compared to 20-30 years ago. Whenever expedient funding for road upkeep us diverted to other causes that score the politicians more points, be it bike paths or multi-billion dollar subways in LA that go nowhere.
Another factor here is that on a per mile traveled basis gas taxes have been increasing as cars get more efficient. Some one tooling along in a Prius or HCH is paying ~30% of the tax of the Suburban in the lane next to him. It gets more interesting still when you throw an electric or plug in into the mix.
As unpopular as it would be CA should increase gas and diesel taxes 0.25-.30/gallon and put the $ back into roads exclusively.
They should have a tax on containers moving through the LA/LB and Oakland ports. CA is cross subsidizing transportation by not making truck container haulers (drayage carriers) pay for their impact in terms of pollution and road degradation.
I was amazed by the much higher quality of roads when I moved to NV 3 years ago. The cities of Reno & Sparks actually tax gas & diesel $.10/gal just for road improvements. I don’t mind it as I can see where the $ is going.
Others have said it already, but probably the number one reason that California has such horrible roads is the diversion of gas tax money from the upkeep of the roads to the general fund and local pork. Same as the national government, state senators and assemblymen get earmarks to their districts for what amounts to public welfare. Building bike paths, local rail, subsidizing public transportation in general. Despite the people of the state voting to enact a law that requires gas tax money to be spent on roads, the state legislature with the blessing of the governor continues to “borrow” the gas tax money to fund studies of snail darter habitat, embryonic cell research, and other important road projects. Of course the other big drain on the highway fund is the cost of doing business in California. The environmental review process can hold up projects for years. For instance, Highway 12 through Santa Rosa has been shown as a future road on AAA maps for as long as I can remember. Raising taxes, as much as everyone seems to like it, will not result in better roads; it will result in better offices for Department of education beaurecrats.
Off topic, but…
Redstapler: Have you heard about the plan to fix the horrible pollution problems around the harbor, caused mainly by the old trucks owned/driven by Mexican nationals?
I read, I think in the LA Times, the Port Authority is planning to BUY new engines or repair old engines for all the old wrecks, at NO COST to the owners.
Hmmm, was that a pot-hole I just drove over?
No, just a biased press release and report from TRIP, a D.C. lobbying group. The tripnet.org “About Us” page offers no substantive information about them.
But here is a quote from their membership page: There are many reasons to become a TRIP supporter. Our supporters have access to information that is tailored to their interests. I imagine that those interests revolve around diverting more tax dollars from TTAC reader pockets to their member companies.
TTAC is generally good at “following the money” and telling us who is paying for things. I recall from past press releases that TRIP is a lobbying group for paving contractors, but I can not verify this. Might intrepid TTAC reporters have better luck at finding out who these guys are?