traffic engineers,please help me understaned something.
 

For the past 30 years, a section of three lane street flows well during our rush hour traffic, for a couple of miles anyway. One day, they shut down one lane and turn it into a two lane street. Some areas were two lanes for the past 30 years is now one lane with with some kind of spacing or flowers in the middle. Sections of Fwy that used to have 5 lanes is now four with a huge shoulder enough to park a two or maybe three fire trucks side by side. I am thinking we want to keep the flow of traffic open not choke it to death. Traffic is now jammed llike hell, so WTF is the deal? Anyone know why? We are working backwards here.

You're not the only one suffering. Here they've started taking 6 lane roads that were normally not too bad, and turning them into 4 lane roads with 2 dedicated bus lanes. Now the traffic lanes are gridlocked while the bus lanes remain mostly unused.

Downtown it's worse... removing busy car lanes and replacing them with bicycle lanes. This is a town where the roads are snow-covered 4 months of the year! Bike lanes... sheesh!

"They" want you on a bus/train. Just go along with the plan and no-one gets hurt.

Another one is where you have 3 lanes, they choke it down to 2 lanes for no apparent reason, then open it back up to 3 lanes.

On on 80 between Sac & Roseville, there's an overpass where they built a sort of "moat" around the columns in the media supporting the overpass. They could have an an extra lane on either side if it weren't for that. The moat makes no sense - there are several feet of nothing on each side between the column and the barrier.

"Roadway beautification", "alternative transportation facilitation" and "traffic calming" are some of the buzz phrases I've heard recently.

They all mean "less pavement available for cars" and "slower flow".

They all cost money too.

Boat lane? :D

traffic engineers are no longer in control... Politicians know best. (or so they believe)

My sister got hurt, and was fortunate not to have been killed right there

Before I moved here, Houston put in Bike lanes all over the place. They are almost unused because it is too friggen hot here most of the year.

Oh, and don't bother using them, because they are full of broken glass and junk. One of my buddies was yelled at by the police for not using the designated bike lane. IF he had stopped, we would have explained the broken glass, etc, in the bike lane. Nope, he pulled behind us and without any warning started yelling at us over the loud speaker.

Taking lanes away is hella stupid. We just turned I-10 from 3 lanes per side with a oneway HOV into 5 lanes per side plus 2 HOV lanes each direction. This has made a huge impact on commuting.

i suspect all these closed lanes are slated for toll lanes in the future.

Pretty sad, eh? The previous generations built infrastructure for the masses. Turns out that they built it for the politicians who would usurp control.

Part of the reason for this narrowing of traffic lanes is the perception of law enforcement, politicians and insurance companies (think lobbyists) that "excessive" speed is the root cause of all traffic accidents. The belief is that speed will be reduced by squeezing down the roadways. And you know what...it works! Everywhere I've seen this done, traffic slows to a crawl during peak usage and frustration ensues. I'm also starting to see nice sweeping transitions between perpendicular roadways re-aligned to become sharp, almost 90-degree bends. The reasoning is the same...gotta slow them maniacs down!
Here in town, a nice 4-lane major street thru a business district was reduced to 2 lanes with the parking spaces widened to the point where a locomotive could be parked at the curb. Many complained and it finally came out that this was done to appease the businesses along that street who were complaining that traffic was flowing by "too fast" and not noticing their establishments. Now it's possible to walk faster than the flow of traffic thru there during the commute and certain weekend time slots.

Maybe this was a "shovel-ready job"?

That is not even the worst traffic faux pas around here.

The downtown area is set up with one way streets that used to make it easy to get to and from the downtown area, with freeway exits and entrances on the main streets going to and fro. The people who bought houses in those areas got tired of all the traffic, something that made their homes significantly less expensive, and started complaining about it. They built "traffic calming" measures, which included blocking off the main roads in and out of the downtown area and large, poorly marked, cement traffic islands. It used to be very convenient to go down there and spend money. Now, not so much, with the expected devastating effect on businesses there.

We're getting choked by bike lanes and traffic lights. The city is putting out stop signs at a colossal rate. Hard inside residential neighborhoods are countless 4 way stops. If anyone added up the extra gas and pollution, it might serve to show how idiotic this is.

as a employee of a public agency it pisses me off that they continue to do this in town here to add bicycle lanes. restrict resident parking, massive suicide lanes for the sake of new bike lanes. the funding is often garnered by the local agency from the feds to promote bike usage.

worst part is the bikers often go two or three abreast and still crowd out into the remaining lane. not to mention the damage to the pavement by the grinding off of the old stripe and roadway markers, the expense of relocation the traffic signal loops that detect car to alert signals. i paved a street 2 years ago that they with in a year did a lane reduction scaring the new paving and having to cut surface loops in where as we place them and over lay in the original configuration.

i also have to notify the management if i am going to attend a public meeting as a citizen, not an employee.

+1, the acceleration of stop and go traffic is a big waste. Just sitting there is a big waste. Car's tend to be most efficient at 35-60MPH depending an aero and gearing.

Same for "rush hour", there are a ton of stuff that is using extra brakes("environment") and gas. I have flexibility working a manufacturing job that only works one shift, I'm free to come in early and leave late, so I may get in three hours before we "open" just to miss traffic, take a 3 1/2 hour long lunch, and leave when its dark on days I don't have any other things to do.

As for high speed rail, they should aim for regular speed rail, there's no energy savings in 180MPH trains over 80MPH trains.

Why are lights so piss poor timed outside of downtowns? Guranteed to get stopped at 50% of the lights on a trip. The frontage road near where I live, 100% guranteed to get stopped at every light. 20 years later of the same timings, I know what speed I have to do to miss the red lights.

have you met our mayor or something. come on glen it's time to drink the kool-aid.

The local traffic controversy is the main street through downtown PDX connecting west to east, Burnside St. It is two lanes each direction, no parking, narrow sidewalks with no room for trees, sidewalk cafes, even three to walk abreast without losing your head to a bus mirror. Traffic flow is terrible. Almost every intersection is "no left turn" for 25 blocks, and that doesn't help much. The solution that has been proposed for years is to make Burnside one-way, with the next street over then being one-way in the opposite direction. Both streets would be two traffic lanes, wide boulevard sidewalks with shade trees, and a lane of parking. The lights would be timed to about 25-30 mph which would be a big improvement over the current actual speed. It would be great. The same setup works a treat on the other part of Burnside, east of the river. Hasn't happened. Lots of opposition from businesses and condos on that adjacent street.

You guys who are pretending that traffic congestion analysis and solution-finding is just oh so simple, consider this: There are so many complex and intricate facets to this problem that it's a wonder we've accomplished what we have. Congested traffic did not just happen overnight. No, it took a whole lot of politicians and a TON of your money to develop this congestion. To paraphrase the great director John Huston "We can make 'em bad. It takes a little longer and costs a little more, but we can make 'em bad"

I understand the slow down for business. To me, this is forcing someone to watch commercials. the area I am talking about has a train track on one side and huge industrial buildings on the other. I am just trying to find out the reasoning for the narrowing of the lanes. the old two lanes going up and two going the other way were wide lanes with a double yellow in the middle. Drivers often stay on speed limit. With the flowers and the center island, people are scare and are often limping along at 30-35 mph instead of 40. It serve no purpose but spend unnecessary money on dumb plants and waste water to keep them alive. So, this kind of crap is happening all over cities in the US not only in CA where we have crazy traffic jams?

Until this thread came up I thought it was just here?

Unnecessary traffic "calming" islands..some in the middle of intersections.. check
Excessive bike lanes everywhere.. we even have "bike boulevards".. check
Roadways choked down to single lanes.. often by adding more bike lanes.. check
Planting exotics that require watering/tending.. often tall enough to obscure visibility on turns.. check
Turning main two lane, one-way arteries into two way residential streets.. check

No one has mentioned roundabouts yet? We've got them everywhere! Sure they might work in Europe but obviously no one ever considered that trunks (and cars) are a lot smaller there. They make them so small that a semi can't make it around without rolling over the curbs on both sides!

At least you don't have snow to hide the islands. They will do a serious job on your rim if you slam one that you can't see!

Perhaps the cause of traffic congestion isn't simple, but the idea that reducing the flow of traffic through "calming measures" will help could only have come from someone simple.

Traffic does not respond well to Bernoulli's Principal... cars can not speed up to pass through a venturi like air can.

Roundabouts are the most idiotic creation imaginable. All the delays of a 4-way stop spread out over five times the area, creating unusable dead space in the center. What an idea!

Those stupid things are all over the northeast. ALL of them are ridiculous. Chalk one up for CA - I think I saw two in the entire time I was there.

Of course we don't have those stupid stop lights on freeway onramps though... ;)

Our traffic are ususlly going 5 -10 mph under the posted speed limit due to the amount of cars we have here. With all the chocking that been going on, they are almost at a stand still. It use to take 10 min to get through a section, not its taking 20-25 minutes.

I understanding businesses want foot traffic and have people notice their shops. If the traffic is so bad that no one is moving along and the lack of parking spaces (all meters and 15 dollar parking fees. We need to start another thread for this), I sure will not go into those stores. Their are cutting their own throat?

Island requires another thread. Don't get me started, but I will.

We have wide streets in some of these older neighborhood with a four way stops. They put in a 50' dia. island with plants(again waste water and men hour) right in the middle with 4 way stops. Drivers now don't know what to do. instead of going once the other cars starts up on the other side, they wait until the other car clears the intersection. The lanes going around the island is really narrow, so they are going 5 miles an hour. Traffic is backed up for two blocks. There were only a few cars there before this damn thing was build. this is in a residential area. I am sure the neighbor loves it.

Come on back, you will see a little more.

Thoses stop signs are good at the fwy. it keeps people who come onto the fwy slowly so they yield instead of expecting drivers that are already in the flow of traffic yield to them. They keep idiots at bay. I don't like them but they work.

The one traffic circle near my house works fine. It serves some fairly major streets, they would need a traffic signal and left turn lane, otherwise. The circle allows a continuous flow instead of one direction at a dead stop while the other has a green or a turn arrow. When circles serve small roads that otherwise would only need a 4 way stop sign, then I don't see the advantage.

You're looking at it from the wrong perspective. During off hours, consider it your own personal skidpad. Drift the tail out safely, or see if you can get a knee down.

Here is a nice model for trafic simulation, pretty cool.

Dynamic traffic simulation

I really miss the days before my teenage son had a street lamp jump out in front of my old Blazer. I would go out of my way when going home from work just to continue straight across the middle of one of those. Judging by the foot deep ruts in the Spring, I wasn't the only one. :D

LOL! I love how you think! Of course this is what I use highway onramps for, hence my disdain for those silly fun-killing traffic lights. Yeah, freeway ahead - accelerate to 40, 45, 50, 55... Oh wait what's that? A red light?!? Slam on brakes, stop then re-accelerate. Great for mileage - not.

IMO they're even more fun in the snow or rain, POP. I've also used Storrow (the curvy part by MGH) to test out trailing throttle oversteer and opposite lock handling on cars before. One of the benefits of residency--your commute is never in traffic.

I must ask. Are you guys seeing more and more stop signs where they are really not necessary. How about no right turn on red? For the past 100 years we made right turns on red in those areas. Suddenly a sign goes up, with a cop sitting around hiding somewhere, and traffic is backed up for blocks. Is that happening where you are? I am trying to understand what the hell's going on. Are they creating traffic jams for no reason. I can't believe there are no traffic engineers or insiders on this subject here.

I definitely saw that trend in Long Beach when I lived there; they made a bunch of the streets one way, put stop signs at EVERY (and I mean EVERY) intersection and added bike lanes on every single street. As a cyclist it was nice but even I thought it was unnecessary and ultimately overkill. For years those streets had been fine to ride on and the biggest hazard was not traffic flow but cars backing out of angle spaces on the side of those streets. The bike lanes did nothing to combat that problem - idiots still would just throw it in "R" and whip it backwards - bike lane or no bike lane - without looking. So other than being able to say "hey we've got bike lanes on all these residential streets" and "we have a dedicated network of bike routes (including some actual paths) that are all connected", I'm not sure what it accomplished. The whole effort really seemed Lime kind of a waste of white paint. Also, since there were now 4-way stops at every single intersection for blocks and blocks and blocks, it was impractical and annoying to bike those streets. For those who don't bike, if you think having to constantly cycle between speeding up and slowing down / stopping every 100 yards for miles-long stretches is annoying in a car, try it on a bicycle. Yeah it's maybe good if you're doing sprints or trying to learn how to clip in / out but it gets awfully annoying awfully fast and is a big waste of energy versus doing what I always did - getting on 4-lane Ocean Boulevard and just humming along in the right lane at 25 or so mph - no stop signs (arterial street), just the occasional traffic light which more often than not would be green in the Ocean direction. No bike lane but far more enjoyable riding (up to speed cruising) than going one or two blocks inland and having to make 4-5 guaranteed stops in the distance light-to-light on the main drag (which would probably be green and not require a stop).

Dedicated bike PATHS are best - bikes work best when riders can get up to speed and jam away without all the constant stop-and-go. Obviously not always practical but I always found the over-use of mandatory stops in all directions for cars AND bikes to be horribly inefficient.

Thankfully my current town has one real traffic light (a couple of flashing ones), a handful of stop signs (i think they're all two-way also), and three full-time cops on the payroll - they seldom dicker around with traffic enforcement and you know what? It seems to work fine. I've seen one wreck since I moved here. One. And I read in the police report that it involved a guy who was drunk, not "excessive speed".

Yeah, like so many topics, push the button and be flooded with conditioned responses, sans consideration of different, varying circumstances and/or understanding of why what is being done where.

Regarding this particular situation:

From (my local little rag) the above:

"Plans for the expansion, which aims to prevent further gridlock on the coastal corridor, have met with support from traffic-weary commuters."

"They've also received strong opposition from several local citizen and environmental groups concerned about the widening's effect on coastal views and the lagoons that run under the freeway."

I live along this corridor and I'm sensitive to environmental issues. The flow in and out of the lagoons will be no more affected than it is now. I support the expansion.

As far as effect on coastal views goes, screw the gawkers! Let them take the leisurely coastal route where there are ten times the number of views.

I haven't had to commute using I5 for many years (gawd it's gotten horrible!) but I do drive down to San Diego on occasion - and 9 times out of 10 it's a miserable trip, 7days a week.