Freeway signs get smart

There's been a fascinating technical race in the last few years as different companies compete to give motorists real-time traffic information. The idea is that if motorists know there's traffic ahead, they may divert to a less-congested route.

The makers of in-car GPS systems and cellphones have been aggressively working on this. And, yes, radio traffic reporters try to provide motorists with that kind of information. But as most people know, radio traffic reports tend to be short -- and if they don't say anything about the road you're driving on, then you're often stuck in the wasteland of AM radio until the next report.

Now Caltrans district 7 -- which covers L.A. and Ventura counties -- is getting into the act. The agency earlier this week announced that it's putting four new message signs on Southland freeways that will actually compare travel times to the same destination on different routes. The signs activate on June 23.

Existing signs (pictured above) only tell you how long a trip on one freeway is expected to take. Compare that to one of the new signs that will be on the southbound 5 in Sun Valley. That sign will tell motorists the time it will take to travel to downtown L.A. on both the southbound 5 and the southbound 170. So, if it's 40 minutes on the 5 and 20 minutes on the 170 (unlikely as that may be), motorists can switch freeways.

"We're very confident that putting this information in commuters' hands will be a valuable tool," said Jeanne Bonfilio, a Caltrans spokeswoman.

Click below to keep reading...

It sounds neat, although it raises an obvious question: What happens if too many motorists actually pay heed to the signs and overcrowd a previous uncrowded freeway?

Bonfilio said that is a possibility, but that scenario also assumes that everyone traveling on the freeway is going to the same place. Rather, she said, the hope is to even the flows between different freeways.

That's a good point. And, in fact, it's the exact point made in the last article in The Times' traffic series, with today's article saying that reducing the number of vehicles on the road by a very small percentage amounts to big gains in terms of overall freeway speed.

The other three new signs will be located:

*On the eastbound 10 in El Monte, advising motorists of travel times to the 57 freeway via the 10 or the 60.

*On the westbound 10 in Baldwin Park, advising motorists of travel times to downtown L.A. via the 10 or the 60.

*On the westbound 60 near the City of Industry, advising motorists of travel times to downtown L.A. via the 60 or the 10.

What'cha think readers? Will this work? Or is it like trying to patch the Titanic with chewing gum?

related: a Times article on Nokia's attempt to gather and distribute real-time traffic data using GPS-enabled cell phones.

--Steve Hymon

Photo: Caltrans

Comments

[Lisa]

Studies have shown that every little bit helps when it comes to solving the traffic situation, so it's encouraging to see that the city is trying to help us out.
However, the fatal flaw here is that people will slow down to read, analyze, and decide on which route would be the best for them. I think this will be another problem rather than a solution.

[Bob]

This may all be well and good - the problem is that Trucks in the right lane tend to block these signs in heavy traffic when they are needed the most. When these type of signs started, they were in the middle of the freeways where those in cars could read the signs also.

Put the signs where the average motorist can read them. Also, lets get some light on the signs at night so we can see them.

[Tailback]

The problem with this scheme is that the few similar signs we have now aren't all that helpful.
One morning the eastbound 10 was completely closed before the 110 due to an accident yet the sigh one saw leaving Santa Monica was dark. The similar sign on the 101 usually displays outrageously optimistically short times to downtown.

Yes, these would help is someone could get them right.

[Dan]

This will definitely overcrowd the sign-suggested freeway. "(We shouldn't) assume that everyone traveling on the freeway is going to the same place." True, but at 6pm, everyone IS going the same direction. Everyone is going away from downtown or away from the west side.

As for the argument that "reducing the number of vehicles on the road by a very small percentage amounts to big gains in terms of overall freeway speed." The opposite is also true, a small increase in sign following drivers will destroy the previously smoothly running freeway.

Absolutely no foresight.

[tom]

uhhh...robert?

new law - no holding/looking at your phone while driving.

put that in your crystal ball and smoke it.

[Robert]

This is the biggest waste of money that Caltrans ever thought of.

Heres why: Everyone these days has a cell phone. In the next couple years, in some cases already (XM Navtraffic), the technology will have advanced to the point where real time traffic routing information can be sent to everyone on their phone based on where they are at and where they are going. That solves the problem for everyone, not just the people who happen to be driving past one of the 5 signs being put up. Caltrans needs to be working with the companies that are already developing the technology for delivery to all users.

Note to Caltrans: Please use your crystal ball to look at least several months into the future before reinventing the wheel at great cost and providing lesser service than is already commercially available.

[Larry Scholnick]

Another question about Variable Message Signs which display Time To Destination. For those signs which only display times to the nearest 5 minutes, is the time rounded using standard rules (2.5 to 7.49 displayed as 5), or is it always rounded up, or is it always rounded down?

[Larry Scholnick]

I've submitted questions about VMS (Variable Message Signs) to Caltrans and have never gotten a response. When a freeway is "wide open", is the time to reach a destination based on 55 MPH (the truck speed limit), 65 MPH (the car speed limit), or 75 MPH (what the fastest cars on the freeway are actually doing)? When the destination is an intersecting route (for example, on I-405 one of the destinations is US-101), is the time based on reaching the split (where one would take US-101 if that were one's intended route), or reaching the bridge (where one crossed US-101 if one were staying on I-405). There are times when the lanes leading to US-101 are congested for miles leading up to the interchange, while the through lanes are wide open; do the times always assume the use of the through lanes?