Indiegogo: "SF Parking Carjacking: Help me beat this racket!"

SF Parking Carjacking: Help me beat this racket!

https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/sf-parking-carjacking-help-me-beat-this-racket--2/x/5921484#/story

Or

http://igg.me/at/beatparkingracket/x/5921484

Thanks!!!

Reader comment: "謝謝!! [Thank you!]"

好想談戀愛 has left a new comment on your post "Reader comment: "I have yet to hear the term 'unpr...":

^^ 謝謝你的分享，祝你生活永遠多彩多姿！.........................

[^ ^ Thank you for sharing, I wish you live forever in fun and excitement!]

Posted by 好想談戀愛 to L.A. traffic sucks: Let's fix it! at 4:17 AM

------------------

謝謝!! [Thank you!]

Reader comment: "I have yet to hear the term 'unprotected light.'"

www.accidentsinla.com has left a new comment on your post "OPEN DISCUSSION #12: "what does an unprotected lig...":

I deal with a lot of traffic accidents in my practice, but I have yet to hear the term "unprotected light."

What seems to be common these days is for people to receive a citation for making a right turn at a red light. Although, they are legal in California, drivers are required to stop (like at a stop sign) before making their right turn.


Posted by www.accidentsinla.com to L.A. traffic sucks: Let's fix it! at 9:36 PM

I don't know how many technical terms there are to refer to this, but as far as I know, an "unprotected light," or perhaps more rightly, an "unprotected left," is a green light that allows you to turn (usually left) without an exclusive right-of-way. In other words, you can turn (usually left) but only after all oncoming traffic coming straight at you in the opposite direction to yours has passed. A "protected left turn light" would be a green light with an arrow giving you exclusive (e.i. protected) right-of-way to turn left. There are very few such "protected left turn lights" in L.A., and it is my contention that that fact contributes to the traffic problem as I explained in several posts.

The right terminology is only incidental. Call it what you will. It is the concept, and its effect on traffic, what matters...

Thanks for the comment.

[Reader comment] "SPEED CORRIDORS: North-South": worst ideas ever.

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "SPEED CORRIDORS: North-South":

worst ideas ever.

Posted by Anonymous to L.A. traffic sucks: Let's fix it! at 11:12 PM

nando replies:

Thanks for the comment and for reading the blog.

With such an attitude, though, I very much doubt that any traffic problem in L.A., or in any other complex metro area, will ever be solved.

ANY ideas, even the "worst ideas ever," are better than none. And I've said it before and I'll say it again, this unbelievably complex and multi-faceted problem of traffic will never be solved unless a mosaic of solutions is TRIED, at least TRIED, to see what works and what doesn't. We'll never know if it will work unless we try. No one solution will work. There is no panacea to the traffic problem. Multiple ideas in a well-orchestrated attempt will need to be tried.

Sure, there is a cost in trying any idea. But who says that it has to be implemented in a large area at a high cost. It should be tried in a small area first and at the lowest possible cost. And go from there...

RE: "Biking works for local trips but L.A. is too spread out for this to work. "

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 9:00 PM, Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Biking: If Portland can do it, why can't L.A. can ...":

L.A. is nearly 4 times the size of Portland and with a larger commuter work force. Biking works for local trips but L.A. is too spread out for this to work.



Posted by Anonymous to L.A. traffic sucks: Let's fix it! at 7:00 PM

nando replies:

See, this is the problem. If you look at everything from an "all-or-nothing,""black-and-white," "the glass-is-half-full-or-half-empty" perspective, then you'll miss the "something's," the "shades of grey," and the "bottles" from which you could "fill that glass"!

Extreme situations call for extreme solutions or any solution that helps. In such a situation, everything and anything helps; every little bit helps. Obviously, this reader hasn't read the blog. The blog calls for a mosaic of solutions, because, obviously, NO one single solution will ever work or will ever be implemented.

No one is suggesting that you bike from Santa Monica to Hollywood. But if I remember right, the MTA Rapid Red buses do have bike racks on front. You could actually load up your bike onto the bus on the bike rack, ride all the way to wherever the Rapis Bus (or any other bus) takes you, and then bike from there to wherever you need to go. It is perfectly do-able! I myself did it in Austin. And people are actually doing it in L.A.

Also, this kind of "solution" will only work, obviously, at the local level. Santa Monica could have its own Portland-like (or Paris-like) biking program. Westwood should have its own. Beverly Hills should have its own. West Hollywood its own, and so on and so forth... Thinking city-wide and in centralized, LA-mandated terms, will, of course, defeat any such idea. The best ideas start locally and spread out as word-of-mouth and benefits make the rounds.

This is the kind of defeatist mentality ("Biking works for local trips but L.A. is too spread out for this to work. ") that keeps any solution or solutions from being tried or implemented.

Back in the 16th century, the Spanish conquistadores actually thought that California was an island! One of the early Spanish explorers started the idea and it just got perpetuated until they discovered that, hey, it wasn't true at all. Will Durant once wrote that "everything is impossible until it is done" (Obama anybody?). So don't ever say that "L.A. is too [whatever] for this to work. " Try it. Give it a real good try. And then go from there.

I think this whole nation (especially under this new visionary Kennedy-like administration) and this whole world are going to be moving in that direction: the direction of trying what has never been tried before, the direction of finding solutions to problems that had never thought possible before. That's the only way this earth will be able to support a 6 billion or a 10 billion or a who-knows-how-many billion population world that owns who knows how many millions or billions of automobiles.

Think about it.

RE: [Reader comment]: "The traffic problem has many factors..."

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "Open Discussion: Subway: "...ready to be taxed for...":

The traffic problem has many factors...

-Old streets that were never meant for buses (let alone the mega buses, that are stretched twice as long. Say on Vermont in Koreatown. Just completely insane to run these huge buses all day on these old dilapidated streets.Say Vermont and Washington. It creates chaos on the right lane.

-The freeways are from the 50's. Hopeless. The pasadena freeway, lol. Its a joke in 2008.

-Overzealous builders.

-Lack of leadership.

-Huge gap in the rich and the poor. Terrible schools. If 30 or 40% of highschool kids drop out, that must keep adding pressure on the bus system. And lots of other factors.

Posted by Anonymous to L.A. traffic sucks: Let's fix it! at 6:52 PM
----------------------------------------

He is right, of course, and I agree and thank this reader for his comment. I am sure, though, that each one of us can come up with a list of factors contributing to the problem.

But like I always said, the only reason I pointed out the reasons for the problem, or the only reason I created the blog in the first place, was to come up with SOLUTIONS to the problem, not to "rant and rave" about it like some may have believed. I was, and I am, only interested in SOLUTIONS to the problem. I really see no other reason to talk about it. Academic discussions can be left to the academics and their hypothetical but impractical "solutions" can be left where they belong: in academia. Real solutions to real life problems should be seriously considered.

I believe this is a serious problem, perhaps one of the most serious problems facing metropolitan areas the world over this century. Somebody somewhere in positions of power, influence and authority should start making it a priority to find ways to solve it.

Relocating to LA: reader asks for suggestions to get around

On 3/31/08, Corey wrote: Corey has left a new comment on your post "Telecommuting: count the benefits": Relocating to LA:

Readers, I'm in the process of relocating to LA from Washington, DC (which has its own traffic problems). My fiancee has accepted a position in West Hollywood, and we're looking to live in the Fairfax, mid-wilshire neighborhood. Great for her, and I like the city, so I'm happy. I've been interviewing with a company based in Grenada Hills, and it seems like a really good fit for me. However, it's all the way up there. Since I'm not from LA, I have a few questions:Is the 405 just as bad northbound in the mornings and southbound in the evenings as the other way? It seems that most of the traffic would be from the valley to west LA, but I don't know. Is there any other good way to get over the hollywood hills? Here in DC, I cycle commute, and 20 miles each way isn't that big of a deal, but that probably isn't an option when I have a mountain range between me and my destination. Any public transit options? MTA says I need to leave at 6:50 to get to work by 9:00 via public transit, which is ridiculous. Or is this idea hopeless and should I focus my search in the LA basin and forget about the valley?

Any advice would be great, feel free to drop me an e-mail at corey@lanummusic.com

Posted by Corey to L.A. traffic sucks: Let's fix it! at 12:42 PM

nando replies:

Hi Corey,

I haven't updated that blog in quite a while since I really don't live in L.A. anymore. While I lived there, I got really interested in the traffic challenges the city poses--as you can probably read from my blog (I'm still interested in the issue, but like just like with everything else, too many people take this stuff too personally so any comment you make on the situation is taken as a reflection on them or their city of their country...)

I hope the readers of my blog (if there any still!) have offered some suggestions. But let me offer you some. I know the L.A. area really well and I was an expert at "scurrying" around traffic jams and finding my way to where I was going as fast as possible.

If you are going to be living in "the Fairfax, mid-wilshire neighborhood," and you are going to be possibly working in Grenada Hills, it would be absolutely crazy to even think of taking the 405 to get to the Valley. I guess this is all theoretical for you right now and you have been looking at a lot of maps and talking to the MTA on the phone. FORGET ALL THAT! The reality on the ground in L.A. is totally different from what any of that may suggest.

First of all, if you are in "the Fairfax, mid-wilshire neighborhood," the best way to get to the Valley is (yes, you hit the nail in the head yourself!) OVER THE MOUNTAIN! Go to Crescent-Heights (which is just a few blocks West of Fairfax) and go NORTH. On the corner with Sunset Blvd., Crescent Heights will turn into Laurel Canyon Road. GO UP THE MOUNTAIN AND DOWN INTO THE VALLEY on Laurel Canyon. Bear in mind, though, that you may not be the only one with the same idea! There may be a little jam of sorts in both directions since Lauren Canyon is only a two-lane road, one lane in each direction. There is a bus, though, the 218, if I remember right, which, by the way, runs on Fairfax, turns left on Santa Monica Blvd. and then goes up Cresecent Heights and Laurel Canyon and into the valley. Once in the Valley, there are Rapid Buses going up and down Ventura Blvd.

Another way to get to the Valley relatively quickly from "the Fairfax, mid-wilshire neighborhood," would be to take Highland all the way to the 101 and from there north to Grenada Hills. The 101 is nearly always jammed from Hollywood to Downtown in both directions. But there is a chance that early in the morning it may be okay in the north direction.

If you can help it, STAY OFF THE 405!! It's nearly always jammed in both directions from LAX to the Valley, except early on Sunday mornings and after 9:00 or 10:00pm at night. I nearly always avoided it like the plague. But that's me. I have a very, very low tolerance level for traffic jams. They drive me insane! If you don't mind them, knock yourself out by driving on the 405! It wouldn't make any sense at all, though, for you to try to get to Grenada Hills by going West on Wilshire all the way to the 405 and then taking the 405 North! It'd be absolute madness to do that! It'd make NO sense at all!

If you want my advice, don't make any decisions until you actually LIVE the reality on the ground in L.A. This "aerial reconnaissance" thing you're doing of this highly congested city is okay to familiarize yourself a bit with the geography of the place, but there's nothing like actually living it. Traffic is a reality of life in L.A. and a challenge to all its residents. It'll become a part of your life, a part of your very psyche. You cannot do anything without weighing traffic into the equation, and even then it'll haunt your dreams at night. Sometimes you'll wonder whether it's even worth it. Still, millions of people live with it everyday. I myself couldn't take it anymore. Before I moved out, I was living and working in the same area (working near LAX and living in El Segundo. That little "town," by the way, is one of L.A.'s best kept secrets, nested there between a major international airpoirt and an oil refinery!).

Oh, since you are married, one thing you and your wife may want to do, is try to take advantage of the many HOV (High Occupancy Vehicle) lanes on most freeways where only cars with two or more people can go. Watch out, though, for the lane-splitting bikers on their motorcycles! They have a right to ride the HOV lanes and they zoom in and out of ALL lanes at hair-raising speeds! (see one of my blog entries on lane-splitting!)

If you have any more questions, feel free to ask me. I know the L.A. area like the palm of my hand! I'd be happy to help you get "settled in" traffic-wise!

Take care and good luck!

nando