Traffic debate echos

The lively debate on the Bottleneck Blog is echoing elsewhere on the web. Here's some sample linkage:

Metroblogging Los Angeles weighs in ("Make Pico and Olympic one-way streets during peak hours").

Blogger Ken Reich praises Steve's work, while MetroRider LA seems more dubious.

Blogger SaigonBob has a bone to pick with one L.A. politico and his response to traffic problems.

Chasing Clean Air offers one solution, while Patterico believes one issue -- illegal immigration and traffic -- has gone largely undiscussed.

Not surprisingly, Autoblog Green takes issue with Jaime de la Vega's Hummer.

Comments

[kathryn jaeger]

This is my father's solution to dealing with traffic - for a pretty impatient guy I think he's come up with a nice little theme song:

I am a patient driver,
As patient as I can be!
I don't care if they cut in front!
Or even tailgate me!

I am a patient driver,
Just put me to the test!
I don't care what driver do!
I'm sure to come out best!

I am a patient driver.
Especially on the 405!
Anyone tries to slow me down,
Better soon learn how to drive!

Yes, I'm a patient driver,
Just put me to the test!
On the 405 it's them or me,
At patience I'm the best!

I've proved I'm a patient driver,
For on the 405 one day,
Fifteen cars careened together!
To get out of my way!

I'll end this freeway story,
Top driver on the 405!
To test I'm patient driver!
You see I'm still alive!

Frank Keeney (Los Angeles)

[Fred Reimer]

As the ultimate solution: What would the impact of one-way San Diego or Santa Monica freeways during rush hours be? Run the Santa Monica one-way West from City Hall in the morning rush, and East in the evening rush. Run the San Diego South from the Valley in the morning, and North in the evening rush hours. Adjust directions for the South Bay, and for East LA/San Gabriel Valley. And wouldn't a rush hour one-way Ventura/Hollywood be the royal road (8-10 lanes in one direction!) for commuters.

As an alternative, steal some lanes from one side or the other of the freeway during rush hour. That would give extra lanes to the freeway direction needing them while allowing reduced traffic flow in the opposite direction.

[Fred Reimer]

Fellow travelers,
There has been a lot of discussion about traffic flow on the East/West streets. Many of the North/South streets (e.g., Neilson/Ocean, Barrington, Bundy, 26th, Centinela, Lincoln, Sepulveda, Motor, La Cienega/Brea, Vine, Highland, et al) also have congestion problems. Since motorists often turn from East/West streets onto North/South streets - and vice-versa, the entire street grid needs to be considered in any overall traffic solutions involving one-way streets. For example, what good does it do to have one-way East/West streets at certain times of day if tie-ups/delays at their intersections with congested two-way North/South streets ties up the East/West streets. Traffic lights and/or traffic cops will need to coordinate the East/West and North/South flows.

Somehow just considering two East/West streets may be insufficient given the magnitude of the traffic problems. Multiple streets may need to be considered. One-Way "experiments/demos" could be very carefully planned and be done for short periods of time (e..g, a week) to see if the idea has merit. Beverly Hills and its surrounding areas would probably be an excellent place for such an demo because the traffic can be miserable there.

Here's the possible set-up for rush hour (Note that there is an even number of streets so that "North"/"South" pairs can be utilized. Which street of a pair had north-bound traffic, and which street had south-bound traffic would be determined by the prevailing morning and afternoon traffic flows.):
>>> North/South one-ways: Doheny, La Cienega, Robertson and Beverly (From Sunset to Pico)
>>> East/West one-ways: Olympic, Pico, Wilshire and Santa Monica (from Fairfax to Avenue of the Stars)

Santa Monica/West LA is another frightful traffic place. Here's a rush hour "one-way experiment" for that area:
>>> North/South one-ways: Lincoln, Bundy/Centinela, Sepulveda and Westwood/Overland (from Sunset to Washington)
>>> East/West one-ways: San Vicente, Wilshire, Santa Monica, Olympic, Pico and Venice (from Overland/Westwood to Lincoln)

Public notifications, advertisements, signage, traffic light re-programming, traffic cops ("shepherds") and perhaps training would be required. The traffic benefits might be worth it. If the experiments/demos are successful, similar ones could be performed in other SoCal high traffic density areas - with the experiment being extended to to include freeways!

Sidebars:
1) Building (expensive) over/underpasses at various surface street intersections to avoid traffic delays/disruptions due to lights may require mini-cloverleafs to be built at the intersection to allow motorists to turn right/left in the absence of traffic lights.

2) Our roads and public transportation move millions of motorists and vehicles from everywhere to everywhere daily, with more travelers and vehicles added each month. All of the proposed solutions need to be considered in the light of that volume and the "latent capacity", which is the amount of traffic that potentially could be on the roads if "road space" were available. For example, when two additional new freeway lanes are added, "latent capacity" is what fills them up rather quickly after the ribbon-cutting. Arguably, adding a "diamond lane" or a couple of freeway lanes is more of an expensive "feel good" solution than a viable solution to traffic congestion. Expensive solutions which yield only short-term congestion benefits don't seem like a good idea.

[Greg Golden]

Wilbur Avenue is interrupted at the railroad tracks as a safety precaution. Back in the 1950's, BOTH east-west railroads were operating in the Valley, and most major streets crossed the tracks at grade level (no bridges). There was frequent train traffic, and cars stopped for the R/R signals. It worked OK for decades, because there was not too much car traffic. Later, as traffic built, the authorities wanted to improve traffic and so built underpasses and bridges to keep auto traffic moving without regard to train traffic. Witness Reseda Blvd., Sepulveda Blvd., Van Nuys Blvd., Woodman Ave., Laurel Canyon Blvd., etc.

Apparently many other major streets did not get the underpasses for lack of space or funding or need-- I'm not sure on this. For example, Balboa Blvd., Woodley Ave., Coldwater Canyon Ave., Tujunga Ave. all still have the original grade crossings with flashing lights, gates, and bells. And there are still delays and occasional accidents.

And plenty of less important streets just got cut off at the railroad: Like Wilbur, White Oak, Kester, Hazeltine, Fulton, etc. No go, no accidents.

So your idea of building Wilbur "through" would sure help, but "they" won't do it as a grade crossing due to safety. And what would it cost to build an underpass?

[Greg Golden]

Richard Smith suggests slow drivers stay right-- hello, I believe this IS already a law in Calif. In my book, slow means slower than the limit. If I'm going at 65 in a 65 zone and you want to go faster, who is correct? But by the same token, the authorities need to decide on appropriate speed limits then enforce them. I am a bit confused by the state posting 55mph signs on most downtown freeways, while allowing traffic to move at 65 or 70. Which am I to believe, the signs or the un-enforcement?

[Richard Smith]

If you look at a map of Los Angeles, you see hundreds of miles of surface streets. Why not make them more efficient so that fewer people need to get on freeways?

My suggestion is to install relatively lightweight bridges over major intersections. There would be a single lane in each direction, designed only for commuter cars. This would allow through traffic to go through without stopping, and the traffic light time could be shortened in that direction because less traffic would be using it. This would allow more time for traffic coming in the other direction, and for those making turns.

If your really want to make them more efficient, make an underground lane under the bridge, for traffic on the cross street.

If you really want to go nuts, you could make a traffic circle under the bridge so that traffic would only have to yield, and not necessarily stop. During moderate or low traffic periods, nobody would have to stop!

All of this is low tech, and would work just fine even during a power failure. If you only allow commuter cars, light weight bridges could be used. They could be constructed something like the framing you see on steel roller-coast rides, could be pre-fabricated and installed practically over night.

[Bill Holder]

One way to relieve traffic congestion is to raise the driving age to 18 and require a high school diploma to acquire a driver's license. Kids need the exercise in walking as well as needing to be focused on their studies. If they work a part-time job, they can take the bus to get there. No diploma, no license. Not old enough, no license. Ignore the whining that will inevitably come from the kids, their parents, the auto makers, and insurance companies. It's a minor sacrifice that can be made for the greater good (relief of traffic congestion).

[Richard Smith]

You often find slow drivers in the fast lane of the freeway. Why not make it the law that slow traffic has to keep right? It is already the law in several states and other countries. It could be enforced using helicopters with long lense cameras, sort of like the stop light cameras.

[Allen Price]

If this is the proper forum for Steve Loopez's "Bottleneck Blog.
I propose the city widen Wilbur Ave and make it a through street from Parthenia St. to Nordhoff St to relieve the traffice nightmare that exists on Reseda Blvd..

There are not enought through streets accross the Valley.

Also, more of the main streets should be posted up to 40 MPH like they did on Woodley Ave.

[Ken Droz]

Bravo to Steve for at least establishing a mechanism to create new ideas that can eventually be addressed....hopefully by SOMEBODY!

2 quick ideas to consider...

#1) Change red arrows for special left turns into BLINKING RED ARROWS! This way cars can turn when the traffic clears, and not have to wait unnecesssary minutes, sitting there just for nothing.

#2) As much as we all want to reward car-pooling, the Diamond lanes go barely used way too often. Since car-pooling is primarily a workweek necessity, why not open the lanes up during non-rush hour periods, and weekends, when the fwys. get so clogged anyway during recreational periods.

Thanks for the opportunity.