Archives

Adding capacity is the historic "cure" for traffic congestion, but doing so by building additional roadways is fast becoming a non-option. (http://www.aiadalists.org/newsroom/newsDetails.aspx?id=57245)

http://www.cleanmpg.com/photos/data/501/8_Lane_Traffic_Jam.jpg Les Jackson - AIADA - Dec. 11, 2006

Typical day in Los Angles, California. 8 Lanes and nowhere else to go.

The American public doesn’t universally agree on many subjects, but everyone agrees that traffic is badly congested nearly everywhere in the U.S. Commuters are increasingly frustrated and anxious, an emotional condition that leads to road rage, tailgating and aggressive driving. Traffic congestion extends over longer periods of time each day, making it difficult to plan trips around known bottlenecks. Everyone says the same thing: "I don’t have any time anymore." But is there any solution in sight?

Not really, but traffic planners are well aware of the problem. They note that congestion levels have steadily increased since 1982 and that those areas now classified as "medium-congestion" will, by 2013, have the same congestion as today’s "heavy" areas. Very few additional highways are being planned due to budget and environmental challenges and existing roads and bridges are deteriorating. Less than half the roadway lanes needed to maintain a constant congestion level have been added since 1982.

Here are some disturbing facts:

Areas with populations over 3 million will see minimum delays per traveler of 38 hours each year by 2013. Areas over 1 million will see delays of between 10 and 35 hours each year. Small areas (less than 500,000) will see delays of up to 25 hours each year.


In 2003, the wasted time and fuel due to congestion cost the U.S. population $63.1 billion. This translates to nearly $800 per traveler and 2.3 billion gallons of fuel!Most urban planners are studying a range of strategies including road widening, carpools and public transportation. None of these constitutes a single solution to the problem and it is doubtful that necessary gains can be made in either or all of these areas. For instance, to achieve a constant level of congestion 3 to 4 percent of all passenger vehicles on the road would have to become carpool vehicles. To accomplish the same effect through public transportation, existing transit systems would need to increase in size by one third. Neither of these is likely to happen. Major financial hurdles would have to be overcome to enlarge the public transportation system and significant cultural changes would be necessary to convince the public to dramatically increase carpooling.

While all this leads to a grim outlook, there are some ideas that are being pursued to cumulatively address the situation. The approaches currently seen as promising include: adding capacity; increasing the efficiency of the existing system; managing construction and maintenance; managing demand; and, alternatives to vehicle trips.

The last of these - delaying the time or avoiding the trip altogether - is the easiest and least expensive to accomplish. Many employers offer flexible work schedules to allow workers to arrive and leave outside of peak traffic periods. Still, others offer telecommuting options wherein employees can work from home by computer. There is significant reluctance on the part of employers to offer full-time telecommuting options, but over time these biases should change as systems to monitor activities arrive on the scene.

For those who must be at the office full-time there are some emerging "electronic" solutions for getting through traffic. Most metropolitan areas post the highways with signs indicating specific problems on a particular route and real-time traffic updates by tuning to AM radio stations. XM Satellite radio began offering real-time traffic updates on vehicle NAV systems last year. The technology shows where there are slowdowns on the individual’s route, how much additional time the trip will take and any alternate routes to get around the tie-up. The program is offered in several major metropolitan areas and is expanding across the country.

Adding capacity is the historic "cure" for traffic congestion, but doing so by building additional roadways is fast becoming a non-option. Capacity can be added on existing roadways in other ways, however. This can be accomplished by squeezing more traffic lanes into existing space, grade separations, better intersection designs, overpasses and carpool lanes. The British roundabout (traffic circle) is proving to be a great solution for single-lane roadways and now these clever devices are gradually being accepted all over the U.S.

Managing demand is a bit more challenging because people don’t want to change their habits or become inconvenienced. Some tools being used to manage demand are: better management of secondary-street access, the addition of cycle and pedestrian lanes, parking limitations and other "quality-of-life" techniques such as speed humps and one-way street designations.

Increasing the efficiency of the system is difficult, but very clever ideas have emerged over the past decade. Entry ramp metering, traffic signal timing, special event management, electronic toll collection, changeable lane direction and incident management (pushing damaged vehicles out of the traffic lanes while police take statements and file reports) all help to keep the flow at a maximum. And using some or all of these techniques actually has resulted in fewer crashes.

Managing construction and maintenance projects so that through-traffic isn’t significantly reduced is very hard to accomplish. It has been described as the equivalent of "re-carpeting the dance floor during the prom," by construction experts. Various techniques have been adopted to help in these projects, from contractor incentives to overnight work schedules.

One of the most controversial solutions to traffic congestion is the "fee for service" approach, in which those commuters who place a higher value on their time can pay a higher toll to use uncrowded lanes. Proponents argue that price is used to regulate demand for everything from telephones to food to theater seats, so why not charge what the market will bear to those who can afford it? Those against the concept argue that people less fortunate will be forced to spend more money on fuel and maintenance.

What can individuals do? Here are a number of effective steps that every driver can take:
Don’t leave late and expect to make up for lost time on the road. Always allow an extra 15 minutes for your trip.


Distractions lead to mistakes, and mistakes lead to hostility, so don’t talk on the cell phone or eat or try to catch up on paperwork while you drive.


The more you relax the easier the trip will be. So, take your favorite tunes with you and use that sound system.


Speeding actually causes a "wave effect," wherein traffic stops and moves like a toy Slinky. Keep the flow constant.


Know the territory and alternate routes. Carry maps with you or become an expert on that NAV system.


Ask your employer to let you try telecommuting for some specific period. If it works out, try to extend.


Use public transportation occasionally. The change of habit alone helps keep your sanity.

I don't know what to do about traffic. Wife and I rode in together today. But it doesn't look like thats going to happen for the rest of the week. Looks like Ive got some long days and evening this week.

As it is I leave 30 minutes before I really need to. Between the cell phone users, make up queens and breakfast eaters behind the wheel and then the ones that refuse to plan there day at all. I honestly feel theres no hope.

Our respective drives have really went in the crapper the last 3 years. It use to be a 45 min. drive to be anywhere in Tulsa from our drive way at rush hour times. Now its a hour to, two hours.

IMO the police really need to crack down on the red light runners. The grid lock creators that jam intersections. And scope out the folks that flat have no business driving. (excluding our elderly that scarficed everything for this country) I lost count of the idiots that caused traffic jams today cause they didn't have the basic skills needed to merge onto a freeway. Or even change lanes.

Enough of my rambling.

psy

Hi Psy:

___All very good points.

___As for myself, I leave up to 5 hours early for work while on nights during the week so as to miss the brunt of it heading in. There is no way I can fight a 3 - 4 hour jam every day and survive if I left just an hour and a half later :( In the morning, I take a nap in the car weather permitting until the morning rush is essentially over. I do have a carpooler I pick up about 2/3 the way into work and have to maneuver around that schedule as well. On the weekends, I just hit it because traffic is light either way … Except for the huge mall near us. I have some tricks for that too ;) While on weekend days, I leave 3 hours early and arrive over an hour early to work. Coming home is no problem. All based on working 12’s and having to drive in only 66% of the time vs. the 8 hour public. Next year we go back to 8’s (no fault of 73% of the voting membership who voted for 12’s again as it was a 75% super majority needed to keep them) and the two of three shift nightmares start all over again + the extra 90 + days of driving :(

___Anyway, timing is everything when trying to avoid the worst of it and the Accord’s FE bares this out. The guys I relieve seem to be happy with it as well as they get to go home an hour + early too :)

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Wow, glad my schedule allows for me to avoid traffic 98% of the time.

If business in general ran on a rolling 24-hour basis, none
of these "rush hour" problems would exist and you could go
get parts for that project at 3 in the morning too. This
9-5 trap that modern culture seems to have fallen into has
to be one of the stupidest institutions going.
.
_H*

Hi Hobbit:

___Yup. Working around the clock really sucks however. Look up the life expectancy loss of a shift worker. It is a huge cost in terms of my std. of living (knowing I will more then likely be dead ~ 5 years sooner then the next guy on average). That is about all that needs to be said wrt the 24/7 like business environment in order to save ourselves from traffic congestion :( It would definitely work to reduce traffic congestion but not without severe consequences … Traveling through downtown Chicago from 9:00 PM though 04:00 AM in the morning is a breeze compared to rush starting at about 05:30 - 09:00 AM. or 02:30 - 06:00 PM but would you like to sacrifice 5 years of your life for it?

___Good Luck

___Wayne

Sad to say that this mess is still better vs. the public transportation that is available to most people. I know someone who works in Boston and commutes from a suburb ~20mi or so south of the city. She also commutes at the peak of rush hour. Public transportation is an option, as there is a commuter rail line running through her town that links right to the T (subway for non-Bostonians).

But

She first has to drive 10-15 minutes to get to the commuter rail. Then it's something like 45 minutes or an hour to get to South Station to switch over to the T. Then she has to spend something like another half hour on the T to get to the stop closest to her office, which is something like a half mile away on foot. So it breaks down to ~1.5-2hrs on public transportation vs. the ~1-1.5hrs burning premium fuel alone in her BMW, which actually costs about half as much. What do you think she does?

I'm sorry to say that this is what we are up against. People want comfortable independence and minimal walking. IMO there are two possible solutions: better thought out and 1000x more extensive public transportation, or keeping the existing infrastructure and finding a way to make it work like public transportation. That means building and implementing the technology to take the human factor out of the equation.

Just imagine a line of 20 EVs tooling along from the outskirts at 80mph, tucked into an automated close-in draft while the "driver" sits comfortably keeping tabs on the computer, which is really doing all the work. As the fleet approaches, each vehicle breaks off to its own destination by cruising through smooth-flowing traffic without any red-light running (because there aren't red lights), cutting-off, or sitting in congestion. Some traffic is directed around heavily-travelled roads in real time to keep the load distributed across the grid. And, yes, everybody hypermiles :). That's my commuting eutopia.

brick,

I'd build on you EV vision and have cable-car power lines - toll tags would take care of the transaction.

Wayne,

I'd try to bet the statistics on graveyard shift work with more checkups, etc. If everything else is going well, I'd doubt the subtract five years stat.

Hi Chuck:

___These are stats we see w/ respect to our rotating shifts, rotating days off scheduling. The 5 years loss are real and there are a number of factors besides just dropping dead at 67 vs. 72 for example. Premature heart related deaths and traffic accident related deaths are way up for shift worker vs. the 9 to 5’er for some reason? About all I can add is it can be a stressful SOB to swing your schedule around every 3 weeks. With that swing however, I am allowed an easier and hopefully less stressful commute then many Chicagoans ~ 33% of the time.

___Good Luck

___Wayne

One Factor in the congestion equation that is ignored is the size of our cars. Let me give you an extreme example. If we take 1 mile x 8 lanes of that L. A. congestion pix, that gives us 42240 ft of usable lane ft. If we fill it with 20 ft. long SUVs and add a 10 ft space between SUVs we could get 1408 of them in there. If we fill the same 42240 ft. of lane ft. with 8 ft. Smart cars + 10 ft. we could get 2346 of them in there. That alone would pretty much end the congestion problems. Problem is it will never happen, people just arn't going to give up there Suburbans for Smarts, but even if we shortened the length of the average car from say 17 ft. to 15 ft , that would be enough room for 125 more cars.....Louis

Atypical swing shift around here is 4 days on 3 days off. Rotate to the next shift. Then 5 days on 2 days off, then rotate again. Then back to the 4/3, rotate. The glass plants do this here along with other companys.

It is a killer!!! You loose control of your internal 24/7 clock something awful. As a buddy of mine laided in his death bed dieing of cancer a few years ago said. "shift work was the worse mistake he ever made in his life." He spent over 20 years in the glass plants swinging. He miss his children growing up. He missed his wife growing old with him. He missed his friends he only got to see 1 week out of a month. And he never got to enjoy the money he made.

Im always saddened when I see somebody has to work rotateing shift. My buddy next door does it for the the big money in off shore drilling. Hes always exhausted, sick a lot more than I am. And basicly a wreck. His wife is sick of being alone for 2 or 3 weeks at a time. But hey,,, the Ramero's have more money than the Townsley's.

A lot of the congestion problem seems to go like this:

Jump in the car at the last minute and hope there is no gridlock. Occassionaly there is a traffic snarl and people do things to take a chance of another accident (which might have caused the first one). Meanwhile, some are doing things (eating, phoning, etc.) other than paying attention to the road that at the very least stress fellow drivers.

Frustrated by the stress of traffic, many choose to do things that exhasperate the situation. Some resort to more aggressive driving. Some purchace larger vehicle thinking it will command more respect, but it lengthens lines of traffic and harder to manuver.

Hi all--

I hope I'm not talking about something most already understand, but the solution to congestion isn't in building more lanes/roads, it's in NOT building them. I shall explain through the magical microeconomic concept of induced demand...

When a municipality increases the number of paved miles, it in effect makes the cost of driving cheaper to those who would have previously avoided it. So, if the interstate near you is widened from three lanes to four, you've added capacity and made it easier and less time-consuming (at the outset) for everyone to use the route. You've induced additional demand. Economically speaking, what happens is that the supply curve for roads has shifted out, allowing a greater number of demanders (drivers) to be satisfied at a price (congestion) lower than they would have previously been willing to pay.

To reduce congestion, the key is to make it more expensive for people to use their cars. Tolls, gas taxes, forgone highway projects will raise the cost of driving and force those who are unwilling to pay off the road and into alternatives that will themselves be more attractive and in demand.

For example, a few years back Hamilton County (Cincinnati), Ohio, tried to float a referendum on a one-cent sales tax issue to build light rail. Gas was cheap then and Cincinnatians are tied to their cars since we don't have effective mass transit in place. The anti-tax advocates were out in force, and the measure went down to resounding defeat, and instead they're widening highways and adding new exits. Add the cost of road projects, additional time spent in traffic and gas spent idling, and I imagine that penny sales tax would look cheap in retrospect.

Had they not "improved" the roads and allowed congestion to worsen and tried to float the referendum again this past spring with gas near $3, I wonder what would've happened? --RN

Twenty years ago, that exact idea was suggested for Dallas congestion. There was very little room for North Central Expressway (US75) to be expanded from 4 to 8 lanes. All kinds of ideas were suggested, and an OP/ED recommended doing nothing. It was eventually widened.

Traffic isn't too bad in the pittsburgh area. The only area where i think it is bad is in suburban boom areas (were the population has grown faster then the road system). The old coutry roads can't handel all the extra suburbers.