We have talked mostly about traffic on the Westside, west of Beverly Hills. We haven't talked about the the 1, the 101, La Cienega or any of the other major streets carrying traffic north-south east of La Cienega.
As traffic moves east towards the mountains, it encounters a very densely populated and highly urban area built in a GRID. If traffic moving East slows down, it is probably because this area is gridlocked and cannot absorb the influx of any more cars from the West. This area and points East of it are the ones where a large chunk of the population actually lives. Evening rush hour is a big migration Eastward from the West, where the affluence really is and where most people work.
The traffic problem in this part of town boils down to the grid getting locked by the high volume of cars. The interesting thing is that this whole part of town is built along several major North-South roads (La Cienega, Crescent Heights, Fairfax, La Brea, Highland, Vine) and several East-West roads (Hollywood Blvd., Sunset Blvd., Santa Monica Blvd., Melrose Blvd., Beverly Blvd., Third Street, Wilshire Blvd., Olympic, Pico...). Most of the traffic moves along these roads. Inside the quadrants formed by these roads lie residential neighborhoods - riddled with stop signs and sometimes speedbumps - that frown on through traffic through their area.
The solution to the traffic problem is this part of town is obvious but politically explosive [See OPEN DISCUSSION #10: "...mum's the word! Don't give away the secrets."/Thinking BEYOND the GRID.]. To anyone who would rather drive through stop signs and even speedbumps rather than sit for hours stuck in bumper-to-bumper traffic, I'd say, use your discretion and find your way out of the gridlock as best you can. [wink! wink! pshssssssst! :-)]
This whole part of town is considered more traditional L.A. and probably more politically sensitive to any possible uglification by overpasses and skywalks that might change its character. This makes my idea of "speed coorridors" difficult to implement here. Apparently, Jerry Brown canceled two projects that would have created North-South freeways down the middle of the Westside. The only way left to speed up traffic then is East-West and viceversa along the North and South fringes of this part of the Westside - on the 101 and on I-10. The rest is all gridlock territory with no way out except through residential neighborhoods.
Going North-South, roads like La Cienega, Fairfax, Fairfax, La Brea, Highland, Vine, are oversaturated and need relief. For those who know, Crescent Heights is fast becoming the alternative to La Cienega to get to and from I-10 from West Hollywood. More roads like Crescent Heights should be prepared and opened for this kind of traffic. Or the gridlock shall never find relief in this part of the Westside.
Monday, May 29, 2006
What about the Westside East of Beverly Hills?
Sunday, May 28, 2006
L.A. DONE RIGHT <> L.A. DONE WRONG
L.A. DONE RIGHT <> L.A. DONE WRONG
We're going to start an L.A. DONE RIGHT <> L.A. DONE WRONG series. It's very important to see that the traffic congestion in many parts of the city (especially in the Westside) is caused by the things that have been designed and done WRONG, and how this congestion can be relieved by fixing the things that have been done WRONG and not repeating them.
This is also to show that the things that have been done RIGHT are excellent. The things that have been done WRONG are terrible and are at the very heart of the problem.
RIGHT: Public Parking off Third Street Promende in Santa Monica (rocks!)
WRONG: street parking with parking meters (sucks!)
----------------------------------------
RIGHT: SOUTH entrance ramp on the LEFT lane and NORTH entrance ramp on the RIGHT lane to the 405 from Santa Monica Blvd. (rocks!)
WRONG: SOUTH entrance ramp on the RIGHT lane and NORTH entrance ramp on the RIGHT lane to the 405 from Wilshire Blvd. (sucks!)
----------------------------------------
RIGHT: Palms pass OVER the 405 and all the streets before and after Century Blvd. that have overpasses OVER the 405 (rocks!)
WRONG: ALL the minor streets BLOCKED by the 405 from Sunset to Venice Blvds. (sucks!)
----------------------------------------
RIGHT: 90 Marina del Rey Freeway (rocks!)
WRONG: Cancellation of Laurel Canyon Freeway (SR-170) and the Beverly Hills Freeway (SR-2) by Jerry Brown (sucks!)
----------------------------------------
RIGHT: Bus pullout (or "turnout" or "indent") on Santa Monica Blvd between Canon and Beverly Dr. at old Beverly Hills Post Office (rocks!)
WRONG: Busstop for MTA 720 Red Rapid Bus on Wilshire at Westwood Blvd. (sucks!)
----------------------------------------
RIGHT: 405 Freeway juction with 90 Marina del Rey Freeway (rocks!)
WRONG: 405 Freeway junction with I-10 (bottleneck - more like a funnel! sucks!)
----------------------------------------
RIGHT: Six-lane Olympic Blvd. (3 lanes in each direction: rocks!)
WRONG: Four-lane Santa Monica Blvd. (2 lanes in each direction: sucks!)
----------------------------------------
This is, by no means, a complete list. We'll be adding to it as we go along...
Friday, May 26, 2006
WESTSIDE SOLUTION AT A GLANCE
WESTSIDE SOLUTION AT A GLANCE:
for Western part: from Santa Monica/Venice/Marina del Rey to Beverly Hills/West Hollywood
MANAGEMENT OF TRAFFIC RESOURCES
-Inter-city coordination: speeding up traffic "downstream/upstream" [GO!]
-Bus Pull-outs: freeing up the right lane for traffic to make it flow better [GO!]
-Protected Left Turn Arrows: at every major intersection to make traffic flow better [GO!]
-Left Turn Only lanes: whereever they are missing to make traffic flow better [GO!]
-Parking:
-Public Parking: get cars off the steets at affordable rates and free up roads for traffic
-Street Parking: on major 4-lane roads (like Crescent Heights from Santa Monica Blvd. to Pico), NO parking 7:00am-7:00pm
-Signs: clear, legible and visible signs everywhere leading drivers confidently to destination
-Road condition: Dips and Potholes: fix problems and maintain good condition of all major roads to make traffic flow better [GO!].
-Accident clean-ups: special task force to speed up clean-up and get traffic moving [GO!]
-Pedestrian Overpasses: "Skywalks" to create "speed corridor" from Barrington to Beverly Hills on
-Wilshire Blvd.
-Santa Monica Blvd.
-Olympic Blvd.
-Pico Blvd.
-Venice Blvd.
TRAFFIC REDIRECTION
The 405: giving the 405 a break
-Overpasses: on Sepulveda and Sawtelle over
-Wilshire Blvd.
-Santa Monica Blvd.
-Olympic Blvd.
-Pico Blvd.
-Venice Blvd.
-Short freeways like 90 (Marina Del Rey Fwy) to redirect traffic off the 405 to its destination
-Fixing bad design:
-WHEN possible, IF possible, widen bottleneck at I-10 junction
-WHEN possible, IF possible (preferably after building overpasses on Sepulveda and Sawtelle), elevate (or interr) the 405 over (under) ALL streets from Wilshire to Venice
EAST-WEST SPEED CORRIDORS: "virtual freeways" [GO!]
I-10: Giving I-10 a break:
After construction of traffic overpasses and pedestrian overpasses, keep lights GREEN from 3 to 5 minutes or longer, depending on traffic, to create "speed corridors" from Barrington to Beverly Hills on
-Wilshire Blvd.
-Santa Monica Blvd.
-Olympic Blvd.
-Pico Blvd.
-Venice Blvd.
MANAGEMENT OF CORPORATE RESOURCES: redefining the workday [STOP!]
-Rush Hour: tax incentives for companies to have staggered schedules one hour apart from 8:00am to 10:00am and 4:00pm to 7:00pm
MANAGEMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES: redefining "drive to work" [STOP!]
Partner with Hollywood to launch TV and radio educational campaign to encourage drivers to
-ride bus to work [GO!]
-bike to work (if feasible) [GO!]
-walk to work (if feasible) [GO!]
-be courteous to other drivers [GO!]
-keep leisure driving at a minimum on workdays [STOP!]
-avoid congestion and congested areas at rush hour [STOP!]
-NOT talk on cellphone while driving [STOP!]
Let's fix it! GO!
-----------------------------------------------
NOTE TO URBAN PLANNERS: START THINKING BEYOND THE GRID!
Thursday, May 25, 2006
Protected and unprotected lefts revisited: theory and practice
Anonymous has left a new comment on your post ""WHY" L.A. traffic sucks #4: Pesky annoying quirks: Unprotected Lefts":
Before you add protected left-turn signals to all major intersections, try reading the following document: Left-Turn Arrows.
Left-turn arrows can definitely help improve the flow of traffic at certain intersections, but not all. Have you ever thought of the cycle length of an intersection to be that of a pie of time that needs to be shared? When you add left-turn phasing, the more pieces you'll have to cut out of the "pie." The slices of time designated for the other movements, especially through movements, may have to be made smaller to accomodate the new slice of time for a protected left-turn. The pie can only be made so big sometimes.
Posted by Anonymous to L.A. traffic sucks: Let's fix it! at 5/23/2006 04:26:00 PM
italianesco replies:
Thank you for your interesting comment on protected left turns and for the link to the "Left Arrows" document.
What you and the source document you refer to say may be true. As I keep saying over and over again, though, everything having to do with traffic, especially in L.A.'s complicated, congested and confounding situation, is a trade-off. The theoretical "pie-sharing" properties of protected left turns may be one thing, but my observation, my experience and my perception of unprotected left turns in L.A. leads me to believe that they are contributing to the traffic mess and congestion.
In a heavy traffic, highly congested situation like L.A.'s, drivers get "ansy," edgy, hasty. They know that the only way to make it to their destination is to get past each intersection they come to. As far as I know, a YELLOW light means: "Proceed with caution and be ready to stop: the light is about to turn RED!" In L.A. a YELLOW light means: "KEEP GOING AS FAST AS YOU CAN AND MAKE IT ACROSS BEFORE THE LIGHT TURNS RED AT ALL COSTS AND NO MATTER WHAT." What this translates into in actual practice is that L.A. drivers are RUNNING RED LIGHTS at unbelievable rates and they are not only getting away with it but blocking left-turning vehicles. This also means that ONLY ONE OR TWO cars at the most are being able to turn left, when they may actually be a row of 5 to 7 cars or more waiting to make a left.
This situation gets complicated by pedestrians crossing the very same street the left-turning cars are heading into. EVEN with protected lefts, cars sometimes have to wait for slow-moving pedestrians to cross before they can get out of the intersection and be on their way. In an unprotected left situation, if there are pedestrians crossing that street at the last minute, chances are NO cars may be able to make a left turn.
The so-called "RIGHT ON RED" allowing vehicles to make a right turn even though the light is red, complicates the situation even further.
If there are cars zooming by on a yellow light until a millisecond before the light turns red, if there are pedestrians crossing the street and cars making a "right on red," how in the world can ANY cars, ANY cars AT ALL, make a left turn in an unprotected left situation?
This is the problem.
Every single car that is not allowed to make a left turn by this situation is stuck on that left turn lane until there are SO MANY CARS wanting to make a left turn that the left lane is affected. Sometimes there are cars with half their bodies sticking out onto the left lane waiting to get into the left turn only lane. Sometimes the whole left lane for half a block is filled with cars waiting to get into the left turn only lane.
I am convinced that the ONLY SOLUTION to this problem is to put in ENOUGH protected left turn arrows that give pedestrians and left-turning vehicles enough time to cross and turn left without jamming the intersection. They should be put in WHEREEVER THEY ARE NEEDED. And that probably means AT EVERY SINGLE MAJOR INTERSECTION.
Since NO urban planner seems to be able to think BEYOND THE GRID and most - if not all - cities have already been laid out and built in GRIDS, then you have four-way intersections with vechicles and pedestrians competing for crossing and turning. Whatever the "time pie" available for them to do so, you need to give everyone ENOUGH TIME to cross or turn. Or you'll have a jammed intersection - a jammed intersection that in turn will most likely be jamming the one before it and the one before that one.
Left turns are one of the most mismanaged traffic resources in L.A. Unprotected lefts are one of the contributing factors to the messy and seemingly uncontrollable congestion in L.A., and they need to be put in if angelenos want traffic to start flowing [GO!] more smoothly in their city.
Wednesday, May 24, 2006
Would taxing the Modern Hell (rush hour) turn it into the Modern Heaven (traffic-free cities)?
Would taxing the Modern Hell (rush hour) turn it into the Modern Heaven (traffic-free cities)?
Well, well, well... what'd'y'say? what'd'y'know?
Remember our post Rush Hour: the modern hell?
Well, guesswhat? An alternate solution to this problem and a lot of interesting analysis and background info. on congestion - The Solution to Traffic Congestion-BECKER- is offered by no less and no other than Nobel Prize winner economist Gary Becker of the University of Chicago in The Becker-Posner-blog - a blog by Nobel Prize winner economist Gary Becker of the University of Chicago and Court of Appeals Judge Richard Posner.
His solution? Tax access to heavily congested areas at heavily congested times (e.i., rush hour).
I think this is essentially anti-American: a tax on your freedom of movement (WHY was it that the American Revolution was fought again, pray tell?). I did propose on one of my posts that where a car goes and when it goes may have to be regulated and/or controlled somehow if we want to solve the traffic problem, but I would NEVER agree that it should be done by taxation. [STOP!]
As I propose on my blog, congestion - at least in the city of Los Angeles, CA, USA - should try to be relieved, first of all, by good management and improvement of existing resources, by redirection of traffic, and by providing enough Public Parking facilities to get cars off the roads and maximize traffic. [GO!]
To deal with the rush hour congestion problem, I suggest that companies be given tax incentives to have staggered schedules: "If company A starts working at 8:00am and company B at 9:00am and company C at 10:00am, that hour between them would also space out the volume of cars on the road heading in their direction. This is not an Utopian dream. This is something that local governments and local companies should be seriously considering. Just like urban planning needs to start steering away from the grid and the gidlock it causes, cities and their workforces need to start steering away from the rush hour the 9-to-5 workday causes." [see my post: post Rush Hour: the modern hell]
I believe that traffic congestion is not simply a function of the large volume of cars in an area of town, but a function of BAD design (the 405 freeway in L.A. is a great example - See my post:
WHY L.A. traffic sucks #2: Bad (or not exactly forward-looking) design), BAD urban planning (shouldn't we have gotten away from the GRID and the gridlock it causes long ago? See my post:
OPEN DISCUSSION #10: "...mum's the word! Don't give away the secrets."/Thinking BEYOND the GRID.), and BAD management of traffic resources (See my entire blog!).
In my opinion, an economist should be more concerned with this anachronistic, obsolete idea of the 9-to-5 workday and with trying to modify it rather than with suggesting to TAX your right to drive to work in order to relieve traffic congestion. If rush hour congestion is a function of anything, it is a function of the 9-to-5 workday. In Los angeles, traffic is quite passable (sometimes even wonderful!) from 10:00am to 3:00pm, which bears out that I am right. It is also, of course, and unquestionably so, a function of lifestyle: if you can take the bus, ride your bike, or walk to work, WHY DRIVE? But L.A. lifestyle dictates, as we jokingly echo in our post California Roll: You Know You're From LA When..., that, in L.A. "if your destination is more than 5 minutes away on foot, you're definitely driving." Is Mr. Becker suggesting that the only way to coax the public into changing lifestyle is by taxation?
The idea of taxation to relieve congestion sounds to me like an idea more out of desperation than a truly CREATIVE approach to a truly difficult and complex issue. I think all cities and their layouts and their problems are UNIQUE and NO one solution can apply to ALL of them, across the board - LEAST OF ALL, taxation. [STOP!]
I find Mr. Becker's analysis a lot better than his "solution."
--------------------------------
Read Mr. Becker's post The Solution to Traffic Congestion-BECKER
Read the "scientific solution" The Science of Traffic Jams
Photo collage by italianesco: Gary S. Becker on the 405: single lane ahead -> TOLLWAY!! Cough it up if you want to go anywhere in L.A.!! :-)
--------------------------------
Tuesday, May 23, 2006
WHY L.A. traffic sucks: On second thought - inter-city coordination
WHY L.A. traffic sucks: On second thought - inter-city coordination: WHO's controlling the DAMS?
LA City Nerd made a "technical clarification" [RE: "Just to clarify...] about our post WHY L.A. traffic sucks #1: Serving too many masters on your daily commute
"Major east/west streets that cross different jurisdictions are somewhat limited [...] The true coordination should really be focused between Beverly Hills & L.A. on Wilshire and Santa Monica Boulevards."
On second thought, I disagree. Let me explain.
Take Wilshire. Wilshire jams in three places: at the intersection with the 405/Westwood Blvd., which backs it up all the way to Ocean Blvd.; at the intersection with Santa Monica Blvd., which backs it up all the way to the 405; and in Beverly Hills (all those short cross-streets that intersect it), which backs it up all the way to the intersection with Santa Monica Blvd. By the time, it reaches Beverly Hills, Wilshire Blvd. has gone through three different cities: Santa Monica, Los Angeles (Brentwood/Westwood), Beverly Hills. And it has jammed and backed up traffic three times.
I don't know exactly under whose jurisdiction these three intersections fall. Wilshire will always be jammed at certain times of day unless traffic is allowed to flow through those three intersections. If making that happen requires the coordination of all three cities, then that's exactly what I'm talking about.
As far as I know, the same thing applies to Sunset Blvd., Santa Monica Blvd., Olympic, and Pico. They all go through three different cities. They all jam at roughly the same places (except that they don't intersect Santa Monica Blvd.). They all definitely jam at the intersection with the 405. All five of these roads -Sunset, Wilshire, Santa Monica, Olympic, Pico - are the five major roads carrying the load of traffic East to West and viceversa (let's leave I-10 out of this since it's not releveant to this issue). Except for Sunset, which goes through West Hollywood and Santa Monica Blvd, which, in addition to the other three cities, also goes through West Hollywood, they all go through at least three different cities.
I am sure some kind of inter-city coordination is required to make sure traffic on these roads flows smoothly. If Beverly Hills does anything, anything at all, slightly different to affect traffic as Wilshire goes East through it, then it is backing it up - by simple ripple effect - all the way to Ocean Blvd. in Santa Monica by way of Westwood.
The same is not true of the city of Santa Monica on Wilshire going East. Actually, the opposite is true. If traffic backs up in Santa Monica (the city, NOT the Blvd.), it frees up traffic on the rest of Wilshire. If you could somehow by magic stop ALL traffic going East on Wilshire at its intersection with the 405, the rest of Wilshire would be traffic-free all day.
It is the volume of cars and buses coming all the way from Santa Monica, and the cars and buses that increase that volume as sidestreets and the exit ramps of the 405 feed more into it, that eventually jams the whole corridor. My suggestion of turning these roads into "virtual freeways" by keeping the lights GREEN for 3 to 5 minutes or longer, would never work without some major inter-city coordination.
As traffic flows East or West, the cities DOWNSTREAM have to make sure their "DAMS" (those major traffic light intersections, anything, anything at all, that may affect traffic) allow enough "WATER" to flow through or the "RIVER" and the 'LAKE" UPSTREAM are going to overflow and flood.
Get it? A better analogy than that I cannot give you.
So WHO's controlling the DAMS?
---------------------------------
Photo collage by italianesco: Hoover Dam over Wilshire: Who's controlling the Dams?
Monday, May 22, 2006
WHY L.A. traffic sucks: Parking
As promised, we revisit the issue of parking - not as we did in our post WHY L.A. traffic sucks #6: Pesky annoying quirks: Street parking, which dealt with parking as a blockage to traffic, but parking as a blockage to the QUALITY OF DRIVING in L.A.
If ALL the cars in L.A. were in motion at the same time, I doubt there would be enough roads to hold them all. At times, it does seem they are ALL on the road. Where do ALL those cars go to park - during the day or night? Who knows! If you drive, you have - by necessity - to park sometime. Unless you are set up with nice parking spots at home and work, when and where to park is always an issue in L.A.
Whoever designed the Third Street Promenade in Santa Monica did the right thing. Those great Public Parking structures with the first hour FREE (additional hour $1.00!) are an excellent example of L.A. DONE RIGHT.
Problem is, the excellent Third Street Promenade parking design is THE EXCEPTION NOT THE RULE (and on busy weekends, those Public Parking structures are barely enough for that area of Santa Monica). In the rest of L.A., depending on where you are going and how long you need to be there, finding affordable, convenient parking can take you more than a few circles around the block. And then, if the parking you found is metered, you had better have enough coins to pay for it and a good reliable timer to make sure you don't go over your time by even one minute! If you do, chances are the fascist Parking Enforcement will be there writing you a ticket.
I was once in Hollywood looking for parking. The only spot I found had a broken meter - out of order, not working. I wasn't about to park there just like that. I saw a Parking Enforcement car going by and I flagged him down. I asked him what the deal was with the broken meter and whether I could park there. He said, "If the meter is broken, you can park there for two hours." I said, "ARE YOU SURE?" He said, "yep, that's the rule." I took his word for it.
Can you imagine my surprise when I come back to the car not even within an hour and I find a freshly minted parking ticket on my windshield? The whole street seemed to be swarming with these parking enforcement people. I saw another one go by and I flagged him down. "Hey! One of you guys said that if the meter was broken, I could park here for two hours free!! What's with this ticket on my windshield?" Apparently, this guy was the THIRD Parking Enforcement that had gone by checking the meters. There must be more of them than LAPD officers!
He said this, that and the other and that there was NOTHING he could do about it and to contact the City of L.A. Parking Enforcement Division on the back of the ticket and dispute it. Or just pay it. Or whatever.
I NEVER paid it. F#@&'em! (it was a car rental, anyway).
If you happen to be staying in West Hollywood near the Strip, you NEED a parking permit to park on most streets in that whole area - actually, in all of West Hollywood. When you look at the parking signs, you wonder whether you need a Ph.D. to figure the darn thing out! But if you have a permit, the thing to watch out for is the "No Parking - Street Cleaning" day. Don't forget the day, or the time, or sure enough, there'll be a %@$@#*@ ticket on your windshield. The city of West Hollywood is incredibly fascist about parking. [See "Parking Pestilence - L.A. Gets the Boot" for a great rant on parking in L.A., and especially, on getting tickets because of "street cleaning".]
I got my share of Hollywood parking tickets, West Hollywood parking tickets and Santa Monica parking tickets. It's a racket.
If we were living in Feudal times, L.A. Parking Enforcement would be the tax collectors of the day. If we were living in Nazi Germany, they would be the Gestapo.
The limited availability of affordable garage parking or of residences with enough parking, makes street parking a necessity. Street parking means parallel parking. Parallel parking means blocking the right lane long enough sometimes to disturb the normal flow of traffic. So the lack of enough conveniently located public parking structures affects traffic in L.A. - not to mention the other issues we already dealt with in our post WHY L.A. traffic sucks #6: Pesky annoying quirks: Street parking.
The other option, of course, is paid parking. If you can afford it, that is. I was once desperate to find a parking spot overnight for my car in West Hollywood, right off the Strip, near Crescent Heights. I didn't have a parking permit that night and I had already circled all the blocks in that whole area without luck. I asked the attendant of one of these paid parking places how much it'd cost me to park there overnight. The parking lot was almost empty. He checked with his boss on the cell phone. The price he quoted me was exhorbitantly outrageous. I said, "No way! Thanks, but no thanks!"
I wonder whether the paid parking business in L.A. is as strong a lobby locally as the health care and pharmaceutical industries are nationally. Somebody is making a pretty penny every weekend on all those paid parking facilities off the Strip and around L.A. Couldn't they just be taken over by the cities and turned into public parking facilities for EVERYBODY?
Here's a city that was designed for the car. Here's a city where, regardless of who you are (diehard biker, radical environmentalist), for one reason or another, sooner or later, one way or another, you are going to have to use, borrow, rent or buy a car. Here's a city where a car is a necessity but where you are PENALIZED for having a car through these PUNITIVE taxation in the form of parking tickets or your POCKETBOOK IS DRAINED paying for parking to the paid parking racket cartel.
This is what parking is like in L.A. There are just not enough parking spots. The meters don't work well or don't work at all sometimes. And you have fascist parking enforcement up the wazoo!
A little nightmare...
SOLUTION: WHAT CAN BE DONE TO FIX IT?
With all the money these tax collectors in disguise are raking up, the city of Los Angeles and West Hollywood should have enough funds to build enough Public Parking structures (first hour FREE, additional hour $1.00, maximum $5) ALL OVER the city to solve this problem and put these Parking Enforcement people to better use.
It doesn't take a genius to see that these cities (L.A., Santa Monica and West Hollywood - Beverly Hills is kind of cool about parking, I thought) have found a nice little source of revenue with this parking racket and they are probably not about to give it up.
If there's one thing, the residents of Car City, USA should be up in arms, raving mad about, parking is it!
Whatever happened to the "Proposition 13" tax revolt spirit I've read so much about? In the late 1970's the citizens of California got raving mad about escalating property taxes and drafted and passed "Proposition 13" to limit those taxes. I think it's time for another revolt - this time a revolt against this "taxation without representation"! Did you elect these parking enforcement people? Do they truly represent your interests? Do they add to the quality of life in L.A. or do they diminsh it?
In the spirit of the American Revolution, throw a Santa Monica Pier "tea party" - for lack of a Boston harbor :-) - and overthrow those King George's of Parking. GO!
---------------------------------
Check out: "Parking Pestilence - L.A. Gets the Boot". Great rant on parking in L.A.
---------------------------------
Photos: Upper left-hand: the symbol of fascist parking enforcement. Upper right-hand: Howard Jarvis (1903-1986) helped lead the campaign to pass Proposition 13 in 1978. It has saved Californians an estimated $400 billion and allowed millions of Californians to keep their homes. (Photo c1978-2005 Save Prop. 13 Committee). Photo courtesy of Save Proposition 13 Committee
Sunday, May 21, 2006
EDITORIAL, FULL INDEX AND RECAP
EDITORIAL: focused on FIXING THE PROBLEM
Someone has commented that I'm "channeling fear into brilliant creativity" with this blog. (I appreciate the compliment but I don't work for the Bush Administration. I ain't no Karl Rove! Not that the "brilliant creativity" part would apply to them, anyway - just the "channeling fear" part, I guess. They are Masters at that, that's for sure!).
I forgot to add a disclaimer to the blog entries I quoted yesterday, which I quoted to bring in other perspectives on the problem into the discussion (you can all feel free to comment as you wish).
That disclaimer should have read: "I neither endorse the comments below nor speak for their authors. I quote them to add different perspectives on this issue. As two of the quotes claim, traffic is WORSE elsewhere in the country than in L.A. This goes to show that we're trying to have a balanced view on the subject and that traffic has become a NATIONAL, NOT a LOCAL, problem. It is affecting ALL the metropolitan areas of the country. Solutions that work in L.A. might work elsewhere. Solutions that have worked elsewhere might work in L.A." (Or if you prefer legalese: "ALL OPINIONS STATED ARE THOSE OF THE INDIVIDUAL AUTHORS AND ARE NOT THE RESPONSIBILITY OF ITALIANESCO. ITALIANESCO SHALL NOT BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT, SPECIAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR INCIDENTAL DAMAGES INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, LOST PROFITS OR REVENUES, COSTS OF REPLACEMENT GOODS, LOSS OR DAMAGE TO DATA ARISING OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THIS SITE." :-)
I'd like to stay focused on FIXING THE PROBLEM, not on sensationalist bashing of a city. L.A. in a unique city, in a unique location, with unique weather. It's too bad that this is happening to this city. In order to fix the problem, we need to make people aware of the problem and the issues involved. I wouldn't go so far as to call it "channeling fear."
The person who made the comment obviously had not read the entire blog. This blog cannot be judged by one entry (well, just like no book should be judged by its cover, no blog should be judged by its latest entry). There's a cumulative progression of points we are trying to make here. Just like L.A traffic is a sum total of MANY different problems, this blog is a sum total of many different posts. Because of this, we need to do a RECAP of EVERYTHING we have said so far with a complete index - in addition to the search functions provided by blogger and technorati, this blog is also highly cross-referenced - so that you can have, at a glance, on one page, a good perspective on where this blog is coming from and where it is going. L.A. traffic sucks [stop!] - THAT can be easily proven. Let's fix it [go!] - THAT is the point of this whole thing - and the REALLY HARD part.
FULL INDEX AND RECAP: complete index of posts so far with summary.
Blogs are "counter-chronological" (your first post is at the very bottom) and should be read "bottom-up" ("counter-post-wise" :-). If you are trying to make a point and the order of posts is a key to that point, new readers may miss that point and judge the entire blog by the latest post, or some post found through blogger search or technorati, and stop reading.
Just like we need to do with L.A. traffic, this index and recap attempt to bring some "order out of chaos."
Post #1
Sunday, April 23, 2006
"L.A. traffic sucks! Let's fix it once and for all!
Fist post - introduction
"While the first part of the title says it all ("L.A. traffic sucks!"), it is the second part ("Let's fix it once and for all!") what we would like to concentrate on. Ranting and raving might bring attention to issues, but I doubt it ever solved anything. I would actually like to propose some simple SOLUTIONS that came to mind while driving around in that maze..."
Read the whole post: GO!
----------------------
Post #2
Monday, April 24, 2006
Do angelenos dream of electric "air surfing" and flying saucers?
"L.A. probably needs to take a very bitter pill to cure its chronic traffic artereosclerosis. But that's not what I'd like to concern myself with here. I'd like to focus on smaller, much smaller scale things that are "do-able" (like "good diet and exercise": get those "arteries" flowing!) without spending millions and without involving the politicians and the public in any major political struggle ("triple bypass surgery": a complete subway system). I'd like to make suggestions that, if followed, would speed up traffic ALMOST INSTANTLY and take ALMOST NOTHING to implement except a little determination to MAKE THINGS BETTER."
Read the whole post: GO!
----------------------
Post #3
Tuesday, April 25, 2006
WHY L.A. traffic sucks #1: Serving too many masters on your daily commute
Before proposing solutions, we might want to figure out WHY L.A. traffic sucks so bad. "WHY" there is a problem might yield some answers on "HOW" to solve it.[...]
Calling for uniform, standard and comprehensive traffic rules for the whole L.A. area (L.A. County) might be a good way to speed up traffic. Part of the traffic "artereosclerosis" of the place comes from its "patchwork design," from all these different cities having developed and doing things in ways that keep traffic from flowing smoothly as cars pass from one to the other."
Read the whole post: GO!
---------------------
Post #4
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
WHY L.A. traffic sucks #2: Bad (or not exactly forward-looking) design
"...the whole 405 from Sunset to Venice needs to ELEVATED (or INTERRED) to allow more traffic to flow UNDER IT (or OVER IT) east to west and west to east.
This is about as realistic a project as expecting a complete subway system or a monorail to be built any time soon.
The SOLUTION has to be keeping those lights GREEN long enough to allow as many cars as possible to flow past as many intersections as possible. In other words, these major streets (Sunset, Wilshire, Santa Monica, Olympic, Pico and Venice) should become for three to five minutes, if not longer, "virtual freeways."
Read the whole post: GO!
--------------------
Post #5
Wednesday, April 26, 2006
Putting "Ingenuity, Creativity and Resourcefulness" back into "American."
I came across Andrew's post "Begging for L.A. monorail" on his blog www.hereinvannuys.com. So sent him an e-mail about this blog.
On 4/26/06, andrew hurvitz replied:
Thank you. Your site is full of interesting ideas.
Andrew
www.hereinvannuys.com
I replied back:
If you like the ideas and think they'd be worth trying (they're a lot cheaper and more realistic than a subway system or monorail at this point), then please tell others about my blog. The only way to bring about change is to have enough people pressure enough politicians into making that change.
My ideas are all about putting "Ingenuity, Creativity and Resourcefulness" back into "American."
Read the whole post: GO!
-------------------------
Post #6
Thursday, April 27, 2006
WHY L.A. traffic sucks #3: Bus'em and clog'em
"While buses, as part of a public transportation systeam are good to move more people with fewer vehicles, in a city where millions refuse to take them and prefer to drive, they slow down traffic with their constant start and stops.[...]
The ONLY way that buses can stop and unload or pick up passangers without disturbing and slowing down traffic is by creating "INDENTS."[aka, "bus pullouts" or "bus turnouts"]
Read the whole post: GO!
---------------------
Post #7
Friday, April 28, 2006
WHY L.A. traffic sucks #4: Pesky annoying quirks: Unprotected Lefts
"There is NO QUESTION ABOUT IT: unprotected lefts are slowing down and clogging traffic in the L.A. area. [...]
At whatever cost, PROTECTED LEFTS need to be added to ALL major intersections WITHOUT EXCEPTION as soon as possible in the whole L.A. area. Period. Case closed. End of story."
Read the whole post: GO!
--------------------
Post #8
Friday, April 28, 2006
WHY L.A. traffic sucks: OPEN DISCUSSION #1: Up in Arms!
With this post, we started our OPEN DISCUSSION series: replying to comments "out in the open" on the blog itself rather "hidden" under comments. Also, as a way to let readers know that their views and opinions are valued and appreciated and to encourage them to participate. calwatch <> took issue with my suggestion of "bus pullouts" on the "WHY L.A. traffic sucks #3: Bus'em and clog'em" post.
"The problem with this idea is that by creating these "indents" (the actual term for them are bus pullouts), you are slowing down bus riders while they have to wait for traffic to clear. [...] Your idea is not transit friendly and would be vehemently opposed by transit riders, which despite the small number in LA are actually a somewhat powerful force."
I replied:
"This IS the problem. L.A . drivers, L.A. "transit riders", L.A. residents have a MESS on their hands. What are they going to do about it? SOMETHING HAS TO GIVE. If every simple solution to every single issue is going to have a politically significant "powerful force" opposing it, we might as well GIVE UP right now! Just live with the mess. I think this mess has grown to the unmanageable proportions it has reached precisely because NO ONE seems to have the POLITICAL WILL or the POLITICAL COURAGE to DO ANYTHING ABOUT IT, to really fix ANYTHING."
Read the whole post: GO!
--------------------
Post #9
Saturday, April 29, 2006
WHY L.A. traffic sucks #5: Pesky annoying quirks: NO "left only" lanes
Here we continued with our "Pesky annoying quirks" sub-series of posts on "WHY L.A. traffic sucks."
"Try any of the corners of Crescent Heights from Melrose to San Vicente and feel like flying into "road rage" as you're stuck forever behind someone turning left while all the smart ones whizz by on your right![...]
"This city is past the "urban explotion" point of NO return and is not going back to what it was 60 years ago anytime soon. Urban planners might as well deal with it and prepare Crescent Heights to be the ALTERNATE LA CIENEGA that it ALREADY is.
""LEFT ONLY" LANES NEED TO BE PUT IN ANYWHERE AND EVERYWHERE THEY ARE REQUIRED TO KEEP TRAFFIC FLOWING IN THE L.A. AREA."
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #10
Monday, May 01, 2006
WHY L.A. traffic sucks #6: Pesky annoying quirks: Street parking
IF PARKING IS ALLOWED, SOMEONE ALWAYS VIOLATES THE PARKING RULES AND PARKS PAST 7:00AM OR PAST 4:00PM AND CLOGS TRAFFIC FOR EVERYBODY ELSE. Why should one or two people have the right to clog and slow down traffic for everybody else? Either "left only" lanes need to be put in on that stretch of Crescent Heights and other places where they are needed or street parking cannot be allowed 7:00am to 7:00pm Monday-Sunday. PERIOD. CASE CLOSED. END OF STORY."
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #11
Monday, May 01, 2006
RE: "Just to clarify... " ["WHY" L.A. traffic sucks #1: Serving too many masters on your daily commute "]
LA City Nerd
"Major east/west streets that cross different jurisdictions are somewhat limited [...] Also, the east/west jurisdictions are limited to four: Los Angeles (City). west Hollywood, Beverly Hills, and then, on the western-most side of the area: Santa Monica. Hollywood is part of Los Angles City (as is Westwood, Brentwood, & Century City). The true coordination should really be focused between Beverly Hills & L.A. on Wilshire and Santa Monica Boulevards."
I reiterated my point:
"But whatever the technicalities and/or actual boundaries, I hope the suggestion is well-taken: there has to be some kind of coordination. If there already is, great. Perhaps they can crank it up a notch or two. If not, they need to get cracking on it! That's my whole point."
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #12
Monday, May 01, 2006
WHY L.A. traffic sucks: OPEN DISCUSSION #2
calwatch, licensed civil engineer, had a correction to make on
"Actually, your idea is already being implemented. In the June 2006 service change, all Rapid buses will continue to Santa Monica. The facts aren't correct, as an examination of a Rapid Bus schedule or field observation (which I have done several times despite being on the complete opposite side of town for me) will show, that "most" buses end at Westwood. Only 50% of them do."
I countered:
"The mathematical reality ("Only 50% of them do") may be one thing, the field observation may be quite another, but the perception may be the most important one. Because it is this PERCEPTION of a flawed and incomplete system, what makes most people give up on public transportation in America (I did!) or keeps them from even trying it. [...] I may be "idealistic" but I'd like to suggest solutions that are simple, very simple and "do-able" without a lot of politics and money."
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #13
Tuesday, May 02, 2006
WHY L.A. traffic sucks #7: Pesky annoying quirks: Accident clean-ups
"In ANY accident, they--the victims--should come first, they should be taken care of first. NO question about it, NO doubt about about it. NO ONE (I hope!) is arguing that. But (and here's the big "but"), at the same time, you can't paralize a whole city or whole sections of a city because something happened to one or two people. LIFE GOES ON. [,,]
My SOLUTION?
A SPECIAL TASK FORCE: A special task force should be created for the WHOLE of L.A. area to mobilize QUICKLY, clean up the accident--ANY ACCIDENT ANYTIME ANYWHERE--and get traffic moving as soon as possible."
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #14
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
WHY L.A. traffic sucks #8: Pesky annoying quirks: Dips and Potholes
"A modern city needs well-paved roads to keep traffic flowing smoothly. [...]
"A city of SO MANY MILLIONS OF PEOPLE who pay their taxes DESERVE WELL-PAVED ROADS. Torn-up roads full of dips and potholes affect traffic: there is NO question about it."
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #15
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
WHY L.A. traffic sucks: OPEN DISCUSSION #3:
calwatch takes issue with my idea to turn major roads into "virtual freeways" by keeping light GREEN from 3 to 5 minutes for long stretches over many intersections" in my post: "WHY L.A. traffic sucks #2: bad (or not exactly forward-looking) design".
"Once again, this idea [keeping light GREEN from 3 to 5 minutes for long stretches over many intersections] , while interesting, ignores the fact that at those side streets there are cars and pedestrians that want to cross the street. And they won't be able to do so in the hours you mention."
I countered:
"No, I did not ignore 'the fact that at those side streets there are cars and pedestrians that want to cross the street. And they won't be able to do so in the hours you mention.' I did say that some kind of north-south uninterrupted traffic would have to be allowed for traffic to flow east-west uninterrupted. Overpasses, or better, underpasses, might solve this problem. The pedestrians can EASILY be take care of with skywalks or pedestrian crossing tunnels. Many American cities already have them and use them."
He also mentioned the Laurel Canyon Freeway (SR-170) and the Beverly Hills Freeway (SR-2), which would have solved the north-south traffic problem in the middle of the Westside, but had been canceled by governor Jerry Brown.
I comment on the DAMAGE that politians without foresight can cause to a city, a state, a country.
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #16
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
WHY L.A. traffic sucks: OPEN DISCUSSION #4: "I only ride my bike in LA"/The Italian Solution
Bill German offered a suggestion from our WHY L.A. traffic sucks: OPEN DISCUSSION #1: Up in Arms!
"I only ride my bike in LA. (i get great gas mileage and my heart thanks me)"
I agreed and said I had done that in another city but that in L.A. the distances and traffic made bike-riding impractical and a bit dangerous.
I offered the Italian solution: Vespas!
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #17
Wednesday, May 03, 2006
WHY L.A. traffic sucks: OPEN DISCUSSION #5: "turnout lane for buses"/MTA vs. Big Blue Bus
Wad commented:
"MTA is responsbile for running the buses, but it cannot singlehandedly demand a turnout lane for buses. The roads and sidewalks are still the jurisdiction of the individual cities."
I countered:
"I brought up the issue of the 'turnout lane for buses' (or 'pullout' like calwatch calls it or 'indent' like I call it) mostly in regards to the great problem created by all those buses, especially the MTA 720 Red Rapid buses, around the intersection of Wilshire and Westwood. I have dealt with this issue at length already on several posts. I have also pointed out that there is a PARKING LOT on the very next block. And I would go so far as to scrap the whole 'turnout lane for buses' idea and suggest a new one: TURN THAT WHOLE PARKING LOT INTO A BUS STATION FOR ALL THE BUSES THAT GO THROUGH WESTWOOD.
That intersection is a mess, a mess compounded by the fact that ALL buses in that area lead to UCLA."
On my wishful thinking wish that the more professional and efficienct Big Blue Bus should take over from the MTA, he said:
"As for Big Blue Bus taking over bus service countywide, the city of Santa Monica does not want to oversee the county's transportation problem."
I countered:
"The 'pie' has been divided: you take this part of town and I take the rest. And we, the consumers, are stuck in the middle. [...]
This is why people give up on public transportation in America, and only those who can't afford a car (and the parking in L.A.!), ride the bus. Then you have millions of cars on the road and you have gridlock everywhere."
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #18
Thursday, May 04, 2006
WHY L.A. traffic sucks #9: Pesky annoying quirks: Signs
"L.A. is not a city exclusively for angelenos/locals and newcomers moving to the area. L.A. is a world destination, a city that attracts millions of tourists, businessmen, professionals, conventioneers, entertainment people and just plain visitors. A great number of such people on the road, completely lost or disoriented, at any one time, is a guaranty that traffic will be affected. Hesitant drivers slow down traffic. Confident drivers keep traffic flowing.
"SOMETHNG can be done to make sure there are CLEAR and VISIBLE signs leading you to them and leading you CLEARLY AND CONFIDENTLY to your destination."
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #19
Saturday, May 06, 2006
WHY L.A. traffic sucks: Open Discussion #6: Pedestrian Under/Overpasses
calwatch
"Actually, they thought of pedestrian underpasses years ago. [...] The reason they were all chained up and fenced was because people were living in them, and so were only opened during school hours, except bullies would use them to accost their prey. Finally they chained them all up and no one uses them even during school hours."
I comment:
"I'm sure that when it comes to traffic, there's little new under the sun. Perhaps what's going to work is applying the same old idea in a highly INNOVATIVE way."
And offer "skywalks" as an alternative...
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #20
Tuesday, May 09, 2006
WHY L.A. traffic sucks #10: Pesky, annoying quirks: L.A. drivers on cell phones!
Bushy offers s suggestion to solve this problem.
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #21
Thursday, May 11, 2006
The mirage of high gas prices: addiction-driven demand?
I came across two interesting posts while surfing the blogosphere on high gas prices and how they seem to improve traffic.
I comment on driving as a possible form of addiction and pose a challenge: "Academics and staticians interested in numbers might want to find out what are all those people doing on the road at ALL TIMES of day and night in L.A. One of the best solutions to the traffic problem may lie in the answers to that question."
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #22
Friday, May 12, 2006
WHY L.A. traffic sucks: that "monster," the 405 freeway...
The 405 needs little introduction. Every angeleno is familiar with it. What perhaps they haven't thought about is WHY it is such a problem. I explain and offer some immediate solutions based on the concept of REDIRECTING TRAFFIC. I cite the 90 Marina del Rey freeway as a "great example of what could be done to redirect traffic."
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #23
Saturday, May 13, 2006
WHY L.A. traffic sucks: L.A. drivers' "sense of entitlement..."
An anonymous commentator is glad I finally got around to the subject of L.A. drivers and offers, in a nutshell, the reason they "suck": their "sense of entitlement."
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #24
Saturday, May 13, 2006
I tie it all together and conclude: "America is the car, the freedom of the open road, individuality on wheels. Try to take that away and you'll get the second American Revolution."
I offer a tip on where to find the cheapest gas in the Venice/Santa Monica area.
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #25
Sunday, May 14, 2006
DRIVING TIPS: SMART FOXES vs. HERDS OF SHEEP.
"How do you get from A to Z? Driving tips to bypass heavy traffic and get there on time. SMART FOXES vs. HERDS OF SHEEP." That says it all.
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #26
Monday, May 15, 2006
SOLUTION TO "WHY L.A. traffic sucks #8: Pesky annoying quirks: Dips and Potholes"
Browsing through http://www.lacity.org I came across the solution to one of the problems I posted.
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #27
Tuesday, May 16, 2006
OPEN DISCUSSION #10: "...mum's the word! Don't give away the secrets."/Thinking BEYOND the GRID.
Studio City Nerd takes issue with my having revealed a by-pass secret on : "The reason that routes like the Palms bypass aren't clogged with traffic is that most people don't know about them. [...] So, mum's the word! Don't give away the secrets."
As I've done many times before, I counter that "SOMETHING'S GOT TO GIVE." Then I offer than the only solution to gridlock is to start thinking BEYOND THE GRID [GO!] and wonder whatever happened to "American ingenuity."
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #28
Thursday, May 18, 2006
Rush Hour: the modern hell
I offer a modern defitinition for "hell": rush hour, and spice it all with references to two good movies: Fellini's 8/12 and Hollywood's Falling Down with Michael Douglas. I offer a solution that has probably been thought about before but no one seems to have the courage to suggest or implement.
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #29
Friday, May 19, 2006
Testimonials from "out there" (the blogosphere) on L.A. and L.A. traffic.
"I have some road rage inside of me. Traffic, especially in Los Angeles, is a pet peeve of mine."
- Katie Holmes
I let other voices I came across from other blogs weigh in on the problem and give my readers a break from my voice.
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Post #30
Saturday, May 20, 2006
California Roll: You Know You're From LA When...
We lighten up and take a break from L.A.'s traffic problem and laugh about it for one post with a "thingie" (one of those lists) that has been making the rounds in myspace.com
Read the whole post: GO!
------------------------
Thirty (30) posts and counting!
Vote on the best posts so far!! GO! (click on comments below!:-)
------------------------
Make it viral. Make it vital...
Saturday, May 20, 2006
California Roll: You Know You're From LA When...
California Roll: You Know You're From LA When...
As promised, today we lighten up and laugh a bit. Are you ready for a good laugh? It's time to take a break from WHY L.A. traffic sucks and WHAT we can do about it. It's time to lighten up and laugh about L.A. and its traffic courtesy of ~G~, Jennifer, and jAx!. Thank you all!
I'm quoting mostly the traffic-related stuff. If you want to read the whole thing (funny), click on their names above...
You Know You're From LA When...
->You're driving on the 101 and see a clear-cut definition of where the smog begins and ends;
->You're sitting in traffic for at least an hour at any given part of the day;
->You begin to "lie" to your friends about where you are (i.e. "Yeah I'm, like, 20 minutes away") - when you know that it'll take you at least an hour to get there);
->You look around at the nice cars around you during traffic, thinking it'll be your favorite Laker or WB star;
->You know it's best not to be on the 405 at 4:05 p.m.;
->Getting anywhere from point A to point B, no matter what the distance, takes about "twenty minutes";
->You know what "sigalert", "PCH", and "the five" mean;
->If your destination is more than 5 minutes away on foot, you're definitely driving;
->Your TV show is interrupted by a police chase;
->You don't stop at a STOP sign, you do a California Roll;
->You've lost your car in the Century City Shopping Center parking lot;
->You've never bought oranges, flowers, cherries or peanuts on a freeway off-ramp;
->You drive next to a Rolls Royce and don't notice;
->You've started crossing a street and returned to the curb when the DON'T WALK sign started flashing;
->When giving directions, you follow up with the phrase: "With/Without traffic";
->Driving along, you see a high-speed police chase approaching in your rear view mirror. You don't panic or even flinch. Instead, you call your friends on your car phone and tell them you're on TV;
->You know that if you drive two miles in any direction you will find a McDonald's or a Starbucks;
->You live 10 miles from work. It takes you 60 minutes to get home;
->Walking out of Jamba Juice, you see that a movie is being shot on-location across the street;
->You are not happy, or even slightly excited that there may be a movie star there. You just say, "They f*ckin' better not be blocking my parking space";
->You've gotten parking tickets from parking in the red zone in front of your house;
->The gym is packed at 3pm...on a workday. [Here's the real reason L.A. traffic never lets up in! :-)];
->The workday starts at 10am...or whenever you get out of your therapy session. [Here's the second real reason L.A. traffic never lets up in! :-)];
->Any invitation comes with, "Starts at 8pm or as soon as you can get through traffic";
->The three hour traffic jam you just sat through wasn't caused by a horrific 9 car pile-up, but by everyone slowing down to rubberneck at a lost shoe lying on the shoulder;
->All the "cool gyms" allow pedestrians on the street a full-view of those working out. Literally, you can't drive by Wilshire without staring into L.A. Fitness. Perhaps a new form of window shopping?
->Your cell phone has left a permanant impression on the side of your head;
->You classify new people you meet by their Area Code. An "818" would never date a "562" and anyone from "323" or "213" is ghetto/second class. Best area code: "310" [this is SO true!!];
->You say you live in LA when really you live in a subsection of a subsection of a subsection of southern L.A.;
->You think you are better than the people who live "Over the Hill". It don't matter which side of the hill you are currently residing, you are just better than them, for whatever reason [this is SO true!!];
->You actually get these jokes and pass them on to other friends from Los Angeles.
-----------------------
Photo collage courtesy of italianesco (how'd you like my "California Roll"? :-)
-----------------------
Make it viral. Make it vital...
Friday, May 19, 2006
Testimonials from "out there" (the blogosphere) on L.A. and L.A. traffic:
Testimonials from "out there" (the blogosphere) on L.A. and L.A. traffic:
I have some road rage inside of me. Traffic, especially in Los Angeles, is a pet peeve of mine.
- Katie Holmes
You don't believe me, do you? My little counter on the right tells me that, so far, since I put in the counter, 160 people from 17 countries have viewed this blog. The great bulk of them-- 130 - from the U.S. And most of you, especially those of you from overseas, are probably going, "nah! it can't be that bad! He's just exagerating! Just ranting and raving!"Well, guesswhat? It's time for some testimonials! No, not about this blog, but about L.A. traffic! I'd like you to hear the voices of others echo what I've been saying. Also, it'd be good for you to hear what I've been saying in different words (my style can be a tad "academic", "intellectual" - if you know what I mean - or borderline "free-lance journalistic" sometimes and it may not be registering with everybody. These people out there speak the real vernacular! :-). If nothing else, I think you deserve a break from my "voice."
So let's hear other voices "out there" say it like it is lest someone accuses me of "L.A. bashing" or "California bashing" or "America bashing"!
Also, my friend Steev is going to be taking pictures. And you know what that means! "A picture is worth a thousand words!" (uh-oh! Are you ready?)
Testimonials from the blogosphere on L.A. and L.A. traffic:
These comments have been edited for length and relevancy only. All emphasis (bold, italics) is mine. Feel free to follow the links to their original source and read the whole comment in its original format. (And needless to say, all comments are those of the individual authors and are not the responsibility of italianesco. Cool?)
------------------------------
Lele from Houston, TX had this to say on her myspace .com blog
Monday, May 15, 2006
Los Angeles... A Curious Place...
I lived in L.A. for about 5 years or so. I left in '99, but when I go back, it still feels like home in many ways. [...]
Last year, I traveled to L.A. several times, and I am wondering how the land of all kinds of insanity has become so much more irrational. [...]
I am trying to reconcile in my head how L.A. can go on... I mean that. It's hard to explain, but here's trying. Everyone knows that L.A. holds the ingredients of an Apocalypse: fires, floods/mudslides, violence, earthquakes, El Nino... [...]
Since I left, traffic commute times have quadrupled - I am dead serious - quadrupled since 1999. At the same time, real estate prices have virtually matched that. What is going on? [...]
This city needs some serious re-planning. I haven't checked on whatever happened to the subway they tried to build (maybe finally did) since the huge sink hole on Sunset swallowed a car passing by in the initial construction stages that created - guess? - more riduclous traffic... Anyone wanting to move there (especially with a family) has to figure out how to live, work, and educate your kids in the same neighborhood (and I mean within blocks - maybe even walking distance). [...]
Why I am thinking about this now? Because I just got off the phone with the lovely concierge at a hotel in Hollywood where I will be for the next several days. We vented; so I vented here. Guess I wasn't done with the conversation when it ended. ;)
------------------------------------
Mike (orange_appled) from New Orleans had this to say on his livejournal.com blog
Still, there were two layovers I almost wanted to put, just because they were so memorable. The first was NYC. [...]
The other was my layover in L.A. The image of all that smog and all that traffic was horrendous. Eight lane highways with cars rushing (and the pollution they cause was so evident.) Just on that image alone, I do not want to visit Los Angeles, though I know there's a lot of positive things to be said for the city.
-----------------------------------
Bob, a political activist and webdesigner from LA, had this to say on his polizeros.com blog
Musings on politics: Anti-war, California, and otherwise
May 14, 2006
Auto dependence: it can’t last
Category: gas prices — Bob @ 6:49 am
On Thursday, I was forced to drive in the Westside of L.A. during rush hour, an area where I lived in for 15 years until moving four years ago. The traffic, which was bad then, was appalling. A drive which normally takes fifteen minutes took nearly an hour. All my sneaky shortcuts, the ones that used to be traffic-free, were bumper to bumper.
People I asked said, yeah, that’s what traffic is like now. If, like me, you’d rather be set on fire than drive in such traffic and deliberately organize your day so you don’t, then when forced to do so every six months or so, you can easily see how hideous and dysfunctional Westside traffic has become. And how it continually worsens, never gets better.
Jim Kunstler at Clusterfuck Nation has any number of wondrous rants on this subject, on how U.S. over-dependence on the automobile coupled with decreasing oil supply and rising prices will, sooner rather than later, create massive social dislocation and chaos.
But the problem is not going away. It’s not five or ten years down the road — it’s here, now. We’re in the zone. We’re entering a world of hurt. The pain will ebb and flow, as the pain of a fatal illness ebbs and flows over the days. The price of oil and gasoline will ratchet up and down, but along a discernable upward trendline.
Can we bust out of this narrow tunnel of fantasy? Can we imagine living differently? Can we turn more fruitful imaginings into action before the American scene becomes a much more disorderly place?
--------------------------------------------
Carmen had this to say on her myspace .com blog
before you get rachel's version here's mine...
Current mood: sleepy
the guy on the motorcycle was weaving in and out of traffic. he was doing what motorcyclists do when traffic is at a complete stop. the weaving between 2 lanes to pass cars. L.A. traffic is horrible and i was just trying to get from one lane into the next and this jerk comes out from nowhere and we barely miss each other by a good 2 inches. i stare in complete shock and he's giving me dirty looks because i dared to move into "his" lane as he tried to pass cars by speeding through [see our post WHY L.A. traffic sucks: L.A. drivers' "sense of entitlement..."]. he continued to stare back at me as he flew by and when he decided to pay attention to traffic again it was too late. he and his bike bounced off the back of the car in front of us and he landed on his feet with his helmet still attached to his head. we just stayed there watching the whole thing and trying to make sure he was okay but it looked like his pride was the only thing wounded. he looked annoyed, shook his head, looked at the other driver and then picked up his bike. she looked back at him made sure he was okay, gave him a peace sign and drove off. he took off and i still sat there, took in those 2 minutes and then took off also. i guess it was just another day in L.A. traffic because no one else seemed to give a crap.
---------------------------------
Blakely had this to say on her myspace .com blog
Friday, May 12, 2006
One for the road, two for the show. Get ready, traffic!
Hi guys -
I'm reporting from D.C. I'm on location to find a place to move in a few weeks. Seen some interesting stuff. Traffic on the DC area is nuts. It has to be worse than L.A. I mean it took me an hr and a half to go 30 miles today. [...]
--------------------------------
italianesco comments:
Is that possible? Can traffic anywhere be "worse than L.A."? Apparently so! Lump o* Shea* seems to concurr and says that "well actually the traffic in maryland is worse, check the stats!" See below!
--------------------------------
Lump o* Shea* had this to say on her myspace.com blog
[12 May 2006 | Friday] 4:52 PM - i'm going going...back back... to cali cali...
and i'm so excited. [...] i need a vacation, and i need the beach.... [...]
i have often dreamed of moving back to california, but well it's just not the type of place i would want to live. i love living in a big city - but l.a. is just too much... AND ALL THAT DAMN TRAFFIC! well actually the traffic in maryland is worse, check the stats! [...]
the superficiality (is that a word?) of los angeles is just a bit much for me, but it's one of - if not my FAVORITE city to visit... i love it there... so loose & carefree! everybody fits in somewhere & that's great. that kinda place i love - but it's just too much of a beautiful people place... too much cookie cutter-isms... i mean DON'T GET ME WRONG, that's everywhere (ESPECIALLY BALTIMORE) but ...ahh i don't know... i just don't wanna live in l.a. - end of story.
i can't wait to get there.
--------------------
This consultant Harris had this to say on his blog Codename: CATALYST
The Countdown
Filed under:Uncategorized — posted by harris on May 12, 2006 @ 8:54 pm
Alright - here’s the plan …
I plan on having a very informative teleseminar free of charge [...]
Oh and btw - I’m still in Los Angeles on vacation. Trying to squeeze in friends, family, fun and keeping CATALYST moving all at the same time is pretty challenging (especially with the wonderful traffic situation in L.A. - whew!) .....
--------------------------------
This gamer Joel, had this to say on his Joel's Press Hotel Press Room Mini-Blog after attending a weekend convention in L.A.
Joel's Press Hotel Press Room Mini-Blog
Hey, everybody! What a week—and...
Thirty dollars of parking later... You can stop worrying: I made it back to the convention center. Of course, while I was braving Las Angeles traffic, our roughneck Kotaku team was putting up lots more stories and video, [...]
------------------------
italianesco comments:
Very nice turn of phrase there, Joel: "...braving Los Angeles traffic" as in "braving the elements."
------------------------
Well? Do you believe me now?
Wait 'til you see the pics!
Tomorrow we lighten up with some funny thing on L.A. that's being making the rounds on myspace.com. A lot of it is about L.A. traffic... Enough of WHY it sucks and what we can do about it. Tomorrow we LAUGH about it...
----------------
Photo: collage by italianesco: "angelenos" face Carmen, Lump o* Shea*, Blakely, Bob, and Lele.
-------------------------
Make it viral. Make it vital...
--------------------------
