🚀 go-pugleaf

On 17 Dec 2001 10:14:19 -0800, David Masterson <dmaster@synopsys.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Dave Close writes:
>
>> Rick Damiani <rdamiani@newsguy.com> writes:
>>> Identifying peak traffic times in L.A. is pointless, as most of the
>>> freeways are in a near-perpetual state of congestion.
>
>> I can personally attest that this is not true. Driving from Glendale
>> to Costa Mesa starting about 2030 last Friday evening, the 50-mile
>> trip took almost exactly 50 minutes. I can't complain about
>> that. And the route passed through the East LA Interchange, so it
>> certainly should have met congestion if there were any.

I agree, I had to work until 2:00AM Monday, and made it door to door in 50 
minutes.  

>
>Maybe you were lucky?  It happens now and then...

I hit every green light and no traffic, but somehow didn't _feel_ lucky 
after working 13 hours while sick...

>
>
>> Still, there is something contradictory about allowing use of the
>> HOV lanes by anyone at off-peak times. Those are, by definition, the
>> times when you really don't need the extra capacity. And if you
>> justify the opening by saying that unexpected congestion can happen
>> at any time and deserves to be allieviated, then why shouldn't
>> expected congestion during rush hour also deserve to be allieviated
>> by opening the HOV lanes to all traffic?
>
>There is an old principle in computer science -- give the user twice
>the capacity he had before and he'll be looking to fill three times
>the capacity.  By personal observation, the same seems to apply to car
>traffic on the roads.  Therefore, giving the HOV lanes up to everyone
>at all times would seem not to lead to more people moving, but rather
>more people stuck in traffic.  With the HOV lanes, at least those
>people who do ride share move at a reasonable pace.


>
>> Someone is sure to respond with the tired mantra, "You can't build
>> your way out of congestion." Heard it, it fails the logic test. Of
>> course, you can reduce congestion by building more and better
>> roads. Does anyone think that airport congestion would get worse if
>> we built new and better airports? Would freeway congestion stay the
>> same if we hadn't rebuilt the Santa Monica Freeway after the
>> Northridge earthquake?
>
>Hmmm.  Your proposal is that you can never have too many roads?   And
>you can never have too many cars on those roads?  Sounds short-sighted
>to me.

Both of these ignore the critical point of congestion.  Add cars, not
much of a problem.  Hit the critical amount, big problem.  So adding
more/wider roads may help significantly, depending on how far past the
critical point you are.  Caltrans is actually quite good at quantifying
the point and predicting how growth patterns will affect it, the problem
is mainly political;  no one wants to raise taxes and condemn property.
(Well, I do, as long as NIMBY  :-)

>
>> At this time, with the failure to build responsibly for the last
>> thirty years, it will take a lot of building to solve the
>> problems. And the building will have to be faster than the rate of
>> traffic growth. If you build a tiny fraction of what's needed, you
>> won't solve anything.
>
>Wouldn't it be nice if the responsible building was done statewide or
>nationally.  Imagine an environment where:
>
>* you lived in a rural location as much as 100 miles from work
>* your rural community consisted of <100,000 people
>* the rural communities were arranged as spokes around work centers
>* your "commute", therefore, was:
>        ** walk to the community light-rail
>        ** light-rail to the HSR train at community center
>        ** HSR to downtown work location
>        ** Segway HT (Ginger) or Zap Scooter to work
>        ** Total time: <1 hour (maybe much less)
>* you communicated with your co-workers and sales contacts via VR
>
>If we built "responsibly" along these lines, how much would traffic
>congestion on highways be cut when the only traffic they need to carry
>is truck traffic for the delivery of goods?

I know!  Let's build an Information Economy!  I bet the stock market could
hit 30,000!

Funnily enough, I used to hope that where I live would soon develop most
of those points.  The place I worked was a short walk from where the 
train station was to be.  Well, the place moved, and they still haven't
built the commuter line (although it recently got funding, I believe).  And 
there is still no easy way to get from house to public trans, although
if they build what they are supposed to it would be a 3.5 mile downhill
bike ride to get there.  However, where I work now has troubles on the
other end, thy name is OCTD.  And there just aren't enough trains, I posted
my experience at the beginning of Oct in ca.driving.

And of course, I telecommuted in the mid-80's.  Lack of face time, bad.

jg
-- 
These opinions are my own. 
http://www.garry.to                                       Oracle and unix guy.
mailto:joel-garry@nospam.home.com                      Remove nospam to reply.