Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
Commute Times are DOWN in LA
Commute Times are DOWN in LA
Click on the link for the full article.
* w w w .latimes . com /news/printedition/front/la-me-traffic12-2008may12,0,836023.story
less-traveled?
Gary Friedman / Los Angeles Times
A sampling of residents, traffic reporters and technical data
indicates that as gas prices climbed and the economy faltered, there
were notable traffic decreases on some freeways.
By Steve Hymon and Jia-Rui Chong, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
May 12, 2008
The Freeway Performance Measurement System, a computer database
overseen by UC Berkeley and Caltrans, provides several examples.
The morning commute from Simi Valley to Los Angeles averaged 61
minutes in April 2007 when gas cost a little more than $3 a gallon but
fell to 55.1 minutes last month. Also significant are numbers from the
Inland Empire, where the morning drive from Riverside to Ontario fell
nearly 13% -- from 41.5 minutes in April 2007 to 36.2 minutes this
April.
Also down in early May was the number of incidents reported to the
California Highway Patrol in Los Angeles County -- the belly of the
traffic beast. Accidents and breakdowns are thought to cause about 50%
of all congestion.
In most cases, the difference in commuting times is small and
typically ranges from one to five minutes.
But there is evidence of fewer cars on the road. In Orange County,
Caltrans officials said that road sensors had shown a slight drop in
the average number of vehicles each day on freeways such as the 91 and
405 and that toll road business was down about 6%.
The region's ubiquitous traffic reporters are noticing a change.
"Things have definitely become a lot thinner out there," said Meghan
Reyes, an airborne reporter for KNX-AM 1070 Newsradio, who first
noticed a shift in late March.
On Thursday, for example, the usually busy 5 Freeway was moving
smoothly through the Newhall Pass, and on the northbound 101, the
afternoon traffic was backed up from the Cahuenga Pass only to Santa
Monica Boulevard -- not all the way to downtown, she said.
Caltrans in Los Angeles County could not provide data on Friday
because, officials said, their computer had crashed.
The latest numbers on gas sales, from January, show that consumption
was down 4.5% compared with January 2007, according to the state Board
of Equalization, and has been declining over the last two years.
Meanwhile, ridership on mass transit has continued on an upswing.
Metrolink commuter trains are averaging about 46,000 passengers each
weekday, up from 44,000 a year ago. "Our riders aren't the
transit-dependent," said spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell.
"They have cars. Many of them were driving alone on the freeway."
--
"Dave's not here, man!"
- Tommy Chong
Click on the link for the full article.
* w w w .latimes . com /news/printedition/front/la-me-traffic12-2008may12,0,836023.story
less-traveled?
Gary Friedman / Los Angeles Times
A sampling of residents, traffic reporters and technical data
indicates that as gas prices climbed and the economy faltered, there
were notable traffic decreases on some freeways.
By Steve Hymon and Jia-Rui Chong, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
May 12, 2008
The Freeway Performance Measurement System, a computer database
overseen by UC Berkeley and Caltrans, provides several examples.
The morning commute from Simi Valley to Los Angeles averaged 61
minutes in April 2007 when gas cost a little more than $3 a gallon but
fell to 55.1 minutes last month. Also significant are numbers from the
Inland Empire, where the morning drive from Riverside to Ontario fell
nearly 13% -- from 41.5 minutes in April 2007 to 36.2 minutes this
April.
Also down in early May was the number of incidents reported to the
California Highway Patrol in Los Angeles County -- the belly of the
traffic beast. Accidents and breakdowns are thought to cause about 50%
of all congestion.
In most cases, the difference in commuting times is small and
typically ranges from one to five minutes.
But there is evidence of fewer cars on the road. In Orange County,
Caltrans officials said that road sensors had shown a slight drop in
the average number of vehicles each day on freeways such as the 91 and
405 and that toll road business was down about 6%.
The region's ubiquitous traffic reporters are noticing a change.
"Things have definitely become a lot thinner out there," said Meghan
Reyes, an airborne reporter for KNX-AM 1070 Newsradio, who first
noticed a shift in late March.
On Thursday, for example, the usually busy 5 Freeway was moving
smoothly through the Newhall Pass, and on the northbound 101, the
afternoon traffic was backed up from the Cahuenga Pass only to Santa
Monica Boulevard -- not all the way to downtown, she said.
Caltrans in Los Angeles County could not provide data on Friday
because, officials said, their computer had crashed.
The latest numbers on gas sales, from January, show that consumption
was down 4.5% compared with January 2007, according to the state Board
of Equalization, and has been declining over the last two years.
Meanwhile, ridership on mass transit has continued on an upswing.
Metrolink commuter trains are averaging about 46,000 passengers each
weekday, up from 44,000 a year ago. "Our riders aren't the
transit-dependent," said spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell.
"They have cars. Many of them were driving alone on the freeway."
--
"Dave's not here, man!"
- Tommy Chong
Re: Commute Times are DOWN in LA
On May 12, 10:52 am, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"
<xeton2...@yahoo . com > wrote:
> Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...@yahoo . com > wrote innews:delg24pj5oo4h3moolcn=
7sjv5l4e1ci5va@4ax . com :
>
>
>
>
>
> > Click on the link for the full article.
>
> > * w w w .latimes . com /news/printedition/front/la-me-traffic12-2008may1
> > 2,0,836023.story
>
> > less-traveled?
> > Gary Friedman / Los Angeles Times
>
> > A sampling of residents, traffic reporters and technical data
> > indicates that as gas prices climbed and the economy faltered, there
> > were notable traffic decreases on some freeways.
> > By Steve Hymon and Jia-Rui Chong, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
> > May 12, 2008
>
> > The Freeway Performance Measurement System, a computer database
> > overseen by UC Berkeley and Caltrans, provides several examples.
>
> > The morning commute from Simi Valley to Los Angeles averaged 61
> > minutes in April 2007 when gas cost a little more than $3 a gallon but
> > fell to 55.1 minutes last month. Also significant are numbers from the
> > Inland Empire, where the morning drive from Riverside to Ontario fell
> > nearly 13% -- from 41.5 minutes in April 2007 to 36.2 minutes this
> > April.
>
> > Also down in early May was the number of incidents reported to the
> > California Highway Patrol in Los Angeles County -- the belly of the
> > traffic beast. Accidents and breakdowns are thought to cause about 50%
> > of all congestion.
>
> > In most cases, the difference in commuting times is small and
> > typically ranges from one to five minutes.
>
> > But there is evidence of fewer cars on the road. In Orange County,
> > Caltrans officials said that road sensors had shown a slight drop in
> > the average number of vehicles each day on freeways such as the 91 and
> > 405 and that toll road business was down about 6%.
>
> > The region's ubiquitous traffic reporters are noticing a change.
> > "Things have definitely become a lot thinner out there," said Meghan
> > Reyes, an airborne reporter for KNX-AM 1070 Newsradio, who first
> > noticed a shift in late March.
>
> > On Thursday, for example, the usually busy 5 Freeway was moving
> > smoothly through the Newhall Pass, and on the northbound 101, the
> > afternoon traffic was backed up from the Cahuenga Pass only to Santa
> > Monica Boulevard -- not all the way to downtown, she said.
>
> > Caltrans in Los Angeles County could not provide data on Friday
> > because, officials said, their computer had crashed.
>
> > The latest numbers on gas sales, from January, show that consumption
> > was down 4.5% compared with January 2007, according to the state Board
> > of Equalization, and has been declining over the last two years.
>
> > Meanwhile, ridership on mass transit has continued on an upswing.
> > Metrolink commuter trains are averaging about 46,000 passengers each
> > weekday, up from 44,000 a year ago. "Our riders aren't the
> > transit-dependent," said spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell.
>
> > "They have cars. Many of them were driving alone on the freeway."
>
> Just as i predicted. People are driving less and they're drivning slower
> and that means fewer crashes and thus better flow of traffic. We can make
> it even better by lowering speed limits and taking away the licenses of
> speeders and drunk drivers.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I think you have misread. The article talks about INCREASED SPEEDS,
not DECREASED SPEEDS!
The article mentioned that speeds are back up to 75 MPH on I-105. If
you predicted that people would drive slower, your prediction was
wrong.
On May 12, 10:52 am, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"
<xeton2...@yahoo . com > wrote:
> Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...@yahoo . com > wrote innews:delg24pj5oo4h3moolcn=
7sjv5l4e1ci5va@4ax . com :
>
>
>
>
>
> > Click on the link for the full article.
>
> > * w w w .latimes . com /news/printedition/front/la-me-traffic12-2008may1
> > 2,0,836023.story
>
> > less-traveled?
> > Gary Friedman / Los Angeles Times
>
> > A sampling of residents, traffic reporters and technical data
> > indicates that as gas prices climbed and the economy faltered, there
> > were notable traffic decreases on some freeways.
> > By Steve Hymon and Jia-Rui Chong, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
> > May 12, 2008
>
> > The Freeway Performance Measurement System, a computer database
> > overseen by UC Berkeley and Caltrans, provides several examples.
>
> > The morning commute from Simi Valley to Los Angeles averaged 61
> > minutes in April 2007 when gas cost a little more than $3 a gallon but
> > fell to 55.1 minutes last month. Also significant are numbers from the
> > Inland Empire, where the morning drive from Riverside to Ontario fell
> > nearly 13% -- from 41.5 minutes in April 2007 to 36.2 minutes this
> > April.
>
> > Also down in early May was the number of incidents reported to the
> > California Highway Patrol in Los Angeles County -- the belly of the
> > traffic beast. Accidents and breakdowns are thought to cause about 50%
> > of all congestion.
>
> > In most cases, the difference in commuting times is small and
> > typically ranges from one to five minutes.
>
> > But there is evidence of fewer cars on the road. In Orange County,
> > Caltrans officials said that road sensors had shown a slight drop in
> > the average number of vehicles each day on freeways such as the 91 and
> > 405 and that toll road business was down about 6%.
>
> > The region's ubiquitous traffic reporters are noticing a change.
> > "Things have definitely become a lot thinner out there," said Meghan
> > Reyes, an airborne reporter for KNX-AM 1070 Newsradio, who first
> > noticed a shift in late March.
>
> > On Thursday, for example, the usually busy 5 Freeway was moving
> > smoothly through the Newhall Pass, and on the northbound 101, the
> > afternoon traffic was backed up from the Cahuenga Pass only to Santa
> > Monica Boulevard -- not all the way to downtown, she said.
>
> > Caltrans in Los Angeles County could not provide data on Friday
> > because, officials said, their computer had crashed.
>
> > The latest numbers on gas sales, from January, show that consumption
> > was down 4.5% compared with January 2007, according to the state Board
> > of Equalization, and has been declining over the last two years.
>
> > Meanwhile, ridership on mass transit has continued on an upswing.
> > Metrolink commuter trains are averaging about 46,000 passengers each
> > weekday, up from 44,000 a year ago. "Our riders aren't the
> > transit-dependent," said spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell.
>
> > "They have cars. Many of them were driving alone on the freeway."
>
> Just as i predicted. People are driving less and they're drivning slower
> and that means fewer crashes and thus better flow of traffic. We can make
> it even better by lowering speed limits and taking away the licenses of
> speeders and drunk drivers.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
I think you have misread. The article talks about INCREASED SPEEDS,
not DECREASED SPEEDS!
The article mentioned that speeds are back up to 75 MPH on I-105. If
you predicted that people would drive slower, your prediction was
wrong.
Re: Commute Times are DOWN in LA
On 2008-05-12, larry_scholnick@yahoo . com <larry_scholnick@yahoo . com > wrote:
> I think you have misread. The article talks about INCREASED SPEEDS,
> not DECREASED SPEEDS!
Ssshhhh. Let the troll think it's right.
--
Steve Sobol, Victorville, CA PGP:0xE3AE35ED w w w .SteveSobol . com
Geek-for-hire. Details: * w w w .linkedin . com /in/stevesobol
On 2008-05-12, larry_scholnick@yahoo . com <larry_scholnick@yahoo . com > wrote:
> I think you have misread. The article talks about INCREASED SPEEDS,
> not DECREASED SPEEDS!
Ssshhhh. Let the troll think it's right.
--
Steve Sobol, Victorville, CA PGP:0xE3AE35ED w w w .SteveSobol . com
Geek-for-hire. Details: * w w w .linkedin . com /in/stevesobol
Re: Commute Times are DOWN in LA
Steve Sobol wrote:
> On 2008-05-12, larry_scholnick@yahoo . com <larry_scholnick@yahoo . com > wrote:
>
> > I think you have misread. The article talks about INCREASED SPEEDS,
> > not DECREASED SPEEDS!
>
> Ssshhhh. Let the troll think it's right.
>
> --
> Steve Sobol, Victorville, CA PGP:0xE3AE35ED w w w .SteveSobol . com
> Geek-for-hire. Details: * w w w .linkedin . com /in/stevesobol
Ssshhhh. Let the troll think it's important!
Steve Sobol wrote:
> On 2008-05-12, larry_scholnick@yahoo . com <larry_scholnick@yahoo . com > wrote:
>
> > I think you have misread. The article talks about INCREASED SPEEDS,
> > not DECREASED SPEEDS!
>
> Ssshhhh. Let the troll think it's right.
>
> --
> Steve Sobol, Victorville, CA PGP:0xE3AE35ED w w w .SteveSobol . com
> Geek-for-hire. Details: * w w w .linkedin . com /in/stevesobol
Ssshhhh. Let the troll think it's important!
Re: Commute Times are DOWN in LA
On May 12, 3:02 pm, larry scholn...@yahoo . com wrote:
> On May 12, 10:52 am, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"
>
>
>
> <xeton2...@yahoo . com > wrote:
> > Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...@yahoo . com > wrote innews:delg24pj5oo4h3moolcn7sjv5l4e1ci5va@4ax . com :
>
> > > Click on the link for the full article.
>
> > > * w w w .latimes . com /news/printedition/front/la-me-traffic12-2008may1
> > > 2,0,836023.story
>
> > > less-traveled?
> > > Gary Friedman / Los Angeles Times
>
> > > A sampling of residents, traffic reporters and technical data
> > > indicates that as gas prices climbed and the economy faltered, there
> > > were notable traffic decreases on some freeways.
> > > By Steve Hymon and Jia-Rui Chong, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
> > > May 12, 2008
>
> > > The Freeway Performance Measurement System, a computer database
> > > overseen by UC Berkeley and Caltrans, provides several examples.
>
> > > The morning commute from Simi Valley to Los Angeles averaged 61
> > > minutes in April 2007 when gas cost a little more than $3 a gallon but
> > > fell to 55.1 minutes last month. Also significant are numbers from the
> > > Inland Empire, where the morning drive from Riverside to Ontario fell
> > > nearly 13% -- from 41.5 minutes in April 2007 to 36.2 minutes this
> > > April.
>
> > > Also down in early May was the number of incidents reported to the
> > > California Highway Patrol in Los Angeles County -- the belly of the
> > > traffic beast. Accidents and breakdowns are thought to cause about 50%
> > > of all congestion.
>
> > > In most cases, the difference in commuting times is small and
> > > typically ranges from one to five minutes.
>
> > > But there is evidence of fewer cars on the road. In Orange County,
> > > Caltrans officials said that road sensors had shown a slight drop in
> > > the average number of vehicles each day on freeways such as the 91 and
> > > 405 and that toll road business was down about 6%.
>
> > > The region's ubiquitous traffic reporters are noticing a change.
> > > "Things have definitely become a lot thinner out there," said Meghan
> > > Reyes, an airborne reporter for KNX-AM 1070 Newsradio, who first
> > > noticed a shift in late March.
>
> > > On Thursday, for example, the usually busy 5 Freeway was moving
> > > smoothly through the Newhall Pass, and on the northbound 101, the
> > > afternoon traffic was backed up from the Cahuenga Pass only to Santa
> > > Monica Boulevard -- not all the way to downtown, she said.
>
> > > Caltrans in Los Angeles County could not provide data on Friday
> > > because, officials said, their computer had crashed.
>
> > > The latest numbers on gas sales, from January, show that consumption
> > > was down 4.5% compared with January 2007, according to the state Board
> > > of Equalization, and has been declining over the last two years.
>
> > > Meanwhile, ridership on mass transit has continued on an upswing.
> > > Metrolink commuter trains are averaging about 46,000 passengers each
> > > weekday, up from 44,000 a year ago. "Our riders aren't the
> > > transit-dependent," said spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell.
>
> > > "They have cars. Many of them were driving alone on the freeway."
>
> > Just as i predicted. People are driving less and they're drivning slower
> > and that means fewer crashes and thus better flow of traffic. We can make
> > it even better by lowering speed limits and taking away the licenses of
> > speeders and drunk drivers.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> I think you have misread. The article talks about INCREASED SPEEDS,
> not DECREASED SPEEDS!
>
> The article mentioned that speeds are back up to 75 MPH on I-105. If
> you predicted that people would drive slower, your prediction was
> wrong.
Plus, heavy traffic keeps speeds DOWN.
You do not have the drive San Diego Freeway at 7:30 AM to know
that.
Michael
On May 12, 3:02 pm, larry scholn...@yahoo . com wrote:
> On May 12, 10:52 am, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"
>
>
>
> <xeton2...@yahoo . com > wrote:
> > Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...@yahoo . com > wrote innews:delg24pj5oo4h3moolcn7sjv5l4e1ci5va@4ax . com :
>
> > > Click on the link for the full article.
>
> > > * w w w .latimes . com /news/printedition/front/la-me-traffic12-2008may1
> > > 2,0,836023.story
>
> > > less-traveled?
> > > Gary Friedman / Los Angeles Times
>
> > > A sampling of residents, traffic reporters and technical data
> > > indicates that as gas prices climbed and the economy faltered, there
> > > were notable traffic decreases on some freeways.
> > > By Steve Hymon and Jia-Rui Chong, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
> > > May 12, 2008
>
> > > The Freeway Performance Measurement System, a computer database
> > > overseen by UC Berkeley and Caltrans, provides several examples.
>
> > > The morning commute from Simi Valley to Los Angeles averaged 61
> > > minutes in April 2007 when gas cost a little more than $3 a gallon but
> > > fell to 55.1 minutes last month. Also significant are numbers from the
> > > Inland Empire, where the morning drive from Riverside to Ontario fell
> > > nearly 13% -- from 41.5 minutes in April 2007 to 36.2 minutes this
> > > April.
>
> > > Also down in early May was the number of incidents reported to the
> > > California Highway Patrol in Los Angeles County -- the belly of the
> > > traffic beast. Accidents and breakdowns are thought to cause about 50%
> > > of all congestion.
>
> > > In most cases, the difference in commuting times is small and
> > > typically ranges from one to five minutes.
>
> > > But there is evidence of fewer cars on the road. In Orange County,
> > > Caltrans officials said that road sensors had shown a slight drop in
> > > the average number of vehicles each day on freeways such as the 91 and
> > > 405 and that toll road business was down about 6%.
>
> > > The region's ubiquitous traffic reporters are noticing a change.
> > > "Things have definitely become a lot thinner out there," said Meghan
> > > Reyes, an airborne reporter for KNX-AM 1070 Newsradio, who first
> > > noticed a shift in late March.
>
> > > On Thursday, for example, the usually busy 5 Freeway was moving
> > > smoothly through the Newhall Pass, and on the northbound 101, the
> > > afternoon traffic was backed up from the Cahuenga Pass only to Santa
> > > Monica Boulevard -- not all the way to downtown, she said.
>
> > > Caltrans in Los Angeles County could not provide data on Friday
> > > because, officials said, their computer had crashed.
>
> > > The latest numbers on gas sales, from January, show that consumption
> > > was down 4.5% compared with January 2007, according to the state Board
> > > of Equalization, and has been declining over the last two years.
>
> > > Meanwhile, ridership on mass transit has continued on an upswing.
> > > Metrolink commuter trains are averaging about 46,000 passengers each
> > > weekday, up from 44,000 a year ago. "Our riders aren't the
> > > transit-dependent," said spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell.
>
> > > "They have cars. Many of them were driving alone on the freeway."
>
> > Just as i predicted. People are driving less and they're drivning slower
> > and that means fewer crashes and thus better flow of traffic. We can make
> > it even better by lowering speed limits and taking away the licenses of
> > speeders and drunk drivers.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> I think you have misread. The article talks about INCREASED SPEEDS,
> not DECREASED SPEEDS!
>
> The article mentioned that speeds are back up to 75 MPH on I-105. If
> you predicted that people would drive slower, your prediction was
> wrong.
Plus, heavy traffic keeps speeds DOWN.
You do not have the drive San Diego Freeway at 7:30 AM to know
that.
Michael
Re: Commute Times are DOWN in LA
On Mon, 12 May 2008 18:07:48 -0700 (PDT), Michael Ejercito
<mejercit@hotmail . com > wrote:
>On May 12, 3:02 pm, larry_scholn...@yahoo . com wrote:
>> On May 12, 10:52 am, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"
>>
>>
>>
>> <xeton2...@yahoo . com > wrote:
>> > Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...@yahoo . com > wrote innews:delg24pj5oo4h3moolcn7sjv5l4e1ci5va@4ax . com :
>>
>> > > Click on the link for the full article.
>>
>> > > * w w w .latimes . com /news/printedition/front/la-me-traffic12-2008may1
>> > > 2,0,836023.story
>>
>> > > less-traveled?
>> > > Gary Friedman / Los Angeles Times
>>
>> > > A sampling of residents, traffic reporters and technical data
>> > > indicates that as gas prices climbed and the economy faltered, there
>> > > were notable traffic decreases on some freeways.
>> > > By Steve Hymon and Jia-Rui Chong, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
>> > > May 12, 2008
>>
>> > > The Freeway Performance Measurement System, a computer database
>> > > overseen by UC Berkeley and Caltrans, provides several examples.
>>
>> > > The morning commute from Simi Valley to Los Angeles averaged 61
>> > > minutes in April 2007 when gas cost a little more than $3 a gallon but
>> > > fell to 55.1 minutes last month. Also significant are numbers from the
>> > > Inland Empire, where the morning drive from Riverside to Ontario fell
>> > > nearly 13% -- from 41.5 minutes in April 2007 to 36.2 minutes this
>> > > April.
>>
>> > > Also down in early May was the number of incidents reported to the
>> > > California Highway Patrol in Los Angeles County -- the belly of the
>> > > traffic beast. Accidents and breakdowns are thought to cause about 50%
>> > > of all congestion.
>>
>> > > In most cases, the difference in commuting times is small and
>> > > typically ranges from one to five minutes.
>>
>> > > But there is evidence of fewer cars on the road. In Orange County,
>> > > Caltrans officials said that road sensors had shown a slight drop in
>> > > the average number of vehicles each day on freeways such as the 91 and
>> > > 405 and that toll road business was down about 6%.
>>
>> > > The region's ubiquitous traffic reporters are noticing a change.
>> > > "Things have definitely become a lot thinner out there," said Meghan
>> > > Reyes, an airborne reporter for KNX-AM 1070 Newsradio, who first
>> > > noticed a shift in late March.
>>
>> > > On Thursday, for example, the usually busy 5 Freeway was moving
>> > > smoothly through the Newhall Pass, and on the northbound 101, the
>> > > afternoon traffic was backed up from the Cahuenga Pass only to Santa
>> > > Monica Boulevard -- not all the way to downtown, she said.
>>
>> > > Caltrans in Los Angeles County could not provide data on Friday
>> > > because, officials said, their computer had crashed.
>>
>> > > The latest numbers on gas sales, from January, show that consumption
>> > > was down 4.5% compared with January 2007, according to the state Board
>> > > of Equalization, and has been declining over the last two years.
>>
>> > > Meanwhile, ridership on mass transit has continued on an upswing.
>> > > Metrolink commuter trains are averaging about 46,000 passengers each
>> > > weekday, up from 44,000 a year ago. "Our riders aren't the
>> > > transit-dependent," said spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell.
>>
>> > > "They have cars. Many of them were driving alone on the freeway."
>>
>> > Just as i predicted. People are driving less and they're drivning slower
>> > and that means fewer crashes and thus better flow of traffic. We can make
>> > it even better by lowering speed limits and taking away the licenses of
>> > speeders and drunk drivers.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> > - Show quoted text -
>>
>> I think you have misread. The article talks about INCREASED SPEEDS,
>> not DECREASED SPEEDS!
>>
>> The article mentioned that speeds are back up to 75 MPH on I-105. If
>> you predicted that people would drive slower, your prediction was
>> wrong.
> Plus, heavy traffic keeps speeds DOWN.
>
> You do not have the drive San Diego Freeway at 7:30 AM to know
> that.
But which factor is most important in crashes ... speed, or
sheer traffic density ?
At REALLY slow speeds, I'd say density doesn't matter. No suprises.
At MODERATE speeds though, I'd say density is more important - the
more cars per square whatever, the more chances of interaction per
minute/hour/whatever plus less time to react.
At HIGH speeds I suspect speed alone pushes ahead. More chances of
interactions per minute simply because you're moving along more
quickly (and have much less time to see trouble coming) even if
density isn't terribly high.
Combine high speed AND high density - which I've seen on various
beltways at quitting time fridays - and disaster looms. One little
mistake anywhere up the line and you get chain-reaction crashes
because (a) you can't see and (b) there's nowhere to go when/if
you DO see.
Now if we were all Germans, we might be able to get away with the
higher speed+density factors ... but we ain't. Americans are pretty
lousy drivers, forever distracted or nearly asleep, often driving
poorly-maintained vehicles. Not the WORST drivers in the world, but
pretty bad.
SO, especially around larger urban areas, traffic engineers face
some serious problems. If they drop the speed limits, they increase
density beyond the danger point at peak hours. If they increase
speed limits they can clear traffic quicker, lowering density, but
cause more wrecks BECAUSE of the speed.
There's no all-purpose "happy medium" here - meaning that FIXED
speed limits are counterproductive. Dump the metal signs and
replace them with electronic displays. This isn't expensive
nowdays ... many ways to beam data to the sign. However it does
require hiring extra people to watch/adjust traffic - or
commissioning one really smart traffic-management computer
system - which IS somewhat expensive.
Cost/benifit ratios must be calculated of course, preferably
erring on the side of safety. Wrecks are EXPENSIVE - to the
city, to insurers, to businesses. How many dollars are lost
if 10,000 employees are 90 minutes late to work due to traffic
crashes ? Millions, possibly PER-DAY if wrecks become frequent.
In 10 years, lots of cars will start to be equipped with an
auto-drive system, which will drive better than most humans.
Computer-managed traffic flow will come to have a whole new
meaning as groups of cars are entrained and micro-managed as
unit objects by the citys' system. Speed AND density can be
combined then ... so long as humans are no longer part of
the equation. We can be Americans, eating our breakfast burrito
while reading the paper and tuning the radio, while our cars
can be Germans :-)
ANYhow ... it's NOT an easy equation - and some of the variables
change during the course of each day. Anyone suggesting quick
fixes also has a bridge to sell you ....
On Mon, 12 May 2008 18:07:48 -0700 (PDT), Michael Ejercito
<mejercit@hotmail . com > wrote:
>On May 12, 3:02 pm, larry_scholn...@yahoo . com wrote:
>> On May 12, 10:52 am, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"
>>
>>
>>
>> <xeton2...@yahoo . com > wrote:
>> > Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...@yahoo . com > wrote innews:delg24pj5oo4h3moolcn7sjv5l4e1ci5va@4ax . com :
>>
>> > > Click on the link for the full article.
>>
>> > > * w w w .latimes . com /news/printedition/front/la-me-traffic12-2008may1
>> > > 2,0,836023.story
>>
>> > > less-traveled?
>> > > Gary Friedman / Los Angeles Times
>>
>> > > A sampling of residents, traffic reporters and technical data
>> > > indicates that as gas prices climbed and the economy faltered, there
>> > > were notable traffic decreases on some freeways.
>> > > By Steve Hymon and Jia-Rui Chong, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
>> > > May 12, 2008
>>
>> > > The Freeway Performance Measurement System, a computer database
>> > > overseen by UC Berkeley and Caltrans, provides several examples.
>>
>> > > The morning commute from Simi Valley to Los Angeles averaged 61
>> > > minutes in April 2007 when gas cost a little more than $3 a gallon but
>> > > fell to 55.1 minutes last month. Also significant are numbers from the
>> > > Inland Empire, where the morning drive from Riverside to Ontario fell
>> > > nearly 13% -- from 41.5 minutes in April 2007 to 36.2 minutes this
>> > > April.
>>
>> > > Also down in early May was the number of incidents reported to the
>> > > California Highway Patrol in Los Angeles County -- the belly of the
>> > > traffic beast. Accidents and breakdowns are thought to cause about 50%
>> > > of all congestion.
>>
>> > > In most cases, the difference in commuting times is small and
>> > > typically ranges from one to five minutes.
>>
>> > > But there is evidence of fewer cars on the road. In Orange County,
>> > > Caltrans officials said that road sensors had shown a slight drop in
>> > > the average number of vehicles each day on freeways such as the 91 and
>> > > 405 and that toll road business was down about 6%.
>>
>> > > The region's ubiquitous traffic reporters are noticing a change.
>> > > "Things have definitely become a lot thinner out there," said Meghan
>> > > Reyes, an airborne reporter for KNX-AM 1070 Newsradio, who first
>> > > noticed a shift in late March.
>>
>> > > On Thursday, for example, the usually busy 5 Freeway was moving
>> > > smoothly through the Newhall Pass, and on the northbound 101, the
>> > > afternoon traffic was backed up from the Cahuenga Pass only to Santa
>> > > Monica Boulevard -- not all the way to downtown, she said.
>>
>> > > Caltrans in Los Angeles County could not provide data on Friday
>> > > because, officials said, their computer had crashed.
>>
>> > > The latest numbers on gas sales, from January, show that consumption
>> > > was down 4.5% compared with January 2007, according to the state Board
>> > > of Equalization, and has been declining over the last two years.
>>
>> > > Meanwhile, ridership on mass transit has continued on an upswing.
>> > > Metrolink commuter trains are averaging about 46,000 passengers each
>> > > weekday, up from 44,000 a year ago. "Our riders aren't the
>> > > transit-dependent," said spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell.
>>
>> > > "They have cars. Many of them were driving alone on the freeway."
>>
>> > Just as i predicted. People are driving less and they're drivning slower
>> > and that means fewer crashes and thus better flow of traffic. We can make
>> > it even better by lowering speed limits and taking away the licenses of
>> > speeders and drunk drivers.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> > - Show quoted text -
>>
>> I think you have misread. The article talks about INCREASED SPEEDS,
>> not DECREASED SPEEDS!
>>
>> The article mentioned that speeds are back up to 75 MPH on I-105. If
>> you predicted that people would drive slower, your prediction was
>> wrong.
> Plus, heavy traffic keeps speeds DOWN.
>
> You do not have the drive San Diego Freeway at 7:30 AM to know
> that.
But which factor is most important in crashes ... speed, or
sheer traffic density ?
At REALLY slow speeds, I'd say density doesn't matter. No suprises.
At MODERATE speeds though, I'd say density is more important - the
more cars per square whatever, the more chances of interaction per
minute/hour/whatever plus less time to react.
At HIGH speeds I suspect speed alone pushes ahead. More chances of
interactions per minute simply because you're moving along more
quickly (and have much less time to see trouble coming) even if
density isn't terribly high.
Combine high speed AND high density - which I've seen on various
beltways at quitting time fridays - and disaster looms. One little
mistake anywhere up the line and you get chain-reaction crashes
because (a) you can't see and (b) there's nowhere to go when/if
you DO see.
Now if we were all Germans, we might be able to get away with the
higher speed+density factors ... but we ain't. Americans are pretty
lousy drivers, forever distracted or nearly asleep, often driving
poorly-maintained vehicles. Not the WORST drivers in the world, but
pretty bad.
SO, especially around larger urban areas, traffic engineers face
some serious problems. If they drop the speed limits, they increase
density beyond the danger point at peak hours. If they increase
speed limits they can clear traffic quicker, lowering density, but
cause more wrecks BECAUSE of the speed.
There's no all-purpose "happy medium" here - meaning that FIXED
speed limits are counterproductive. Dump the metal signs and
replace them with electronic displays. This isn't expensive
nowdays ... many ways to beam data to the sign. However it does
require hiring extra people to watch/adjust traffic - or
commissioning one really smart traffic-management computer
system - which IS somewhat expensive.
Cost/benifit ratios must be calculated of course, preferably
erring on the side of safety. Wrecks are EXPENSIVE - to the
city, to insurers, to businesses. How many dollars are lost
if 10,000 employees are 90 minutes late to work due to traffic
crashes ? Millions, possibly PER-DAY if wrecks become frequent.
In 10 years, lots of cars will start to be equipped with an
auto-drive system, which will drive better than most humans.
Computer-managed traffic flow will come to have a whole new
meaning as groups of cars are entrained and micro-managed as
unit objects by the citys' system. Speed AND density can be
combined then ... so long as humans are no longer part of
the equation. We can be Americans, eating our breakfast burrito
while reading the paper and tuning the radio, while our cars
can be Germans :-)
ANYhow ... it's NOT an easy equation - and some of the variables
change during the course of each day. Anyone suggesting quick
fixes also has a bridge to sell you ....
Re: Commute Times are DOWN in LA
On Mon, 12 May 2008 12:52:13 -0500, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are
MURDERERS" <xeton2001@yahoo . com > wrote:
>Scott in SoCal <scottenaztlan@yahoo . com > wrote in
>news:delg24pj5oo4h3moolcn7sjv5l4e1ci5va@4ax . com :
>
>> Click on the link for the full article.
>>
>> * w w w .latimes . com /news/printedition/front/la-me-traffic12-2008may1
>> 2,0,836023.story
>>
>> less-traveled?
>> Gary Friedman / Los Angeles Times
>>
>> A sampling of residents, traffic reporters and technical data
>> indicates that as gas prices climbed and the economy faltered, there
>> were notable traffic decreases on some freeways.
>> By Steve Hymon and Jia-Rui Chong, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
>> May 12, 2008
>>
>> The Freeway Performance Measurement System, a computer database
>> overseen by UC Berkeley and Caltrans, provides several examples.
>>
>> The morning commute from Simi Valley to Los Angeles averaged 61
>> minutes in April 2007 when gas cost a little more than $3 a gallon but
>> fell to 55.1 minutes last month. Also significant are numbers from the
>> Inland Empire, where the morning drive from Riverside to Ontario fell
>> nearly 13% -- from 41.5 minutes in April 2007 to 36.2 minutes this
>> April.
>>
>> Also down in early May was the number of incidents reported to the
>> California Highway Patrol in Los Angeles County -- the belly of the
>> traffic beast. Accidents and breakdowns are thought to cause about 50%
>> of all congestion.
>>
>> In most cases, the difference in commuting times is small and
>> typically ranges from one to five minutes.
>>
>> But there is evidence of fewer cars on the road. In Orange County,
>> Caltrans officials said that road sensors had shown a slight drop in
>> the average number of vehicles each day on freeways such as the 91 and
>> 405 and that toll road business was down about 6%.
>>
>> The region's ubiquitous traffic reporters are noticing a change.
>> "Things have definitely become a lot thinner out there," said Meghan
>> Reyes, an airborne reporter for KNX-AM 1070 Newsradio, who first
>> noticed a shift in late March.
>>
>> On Thursday, for example, the usually busy 5 Freeway was moving
>> smoothly through the Newhall Pass, and on the northbound 101, the
>> afternoon traffic was backed up from the Cahuenga Pass only to Santa
>> Monica Boulevard -- not all the way to downtown, she said.
>>
>> Caltrans in Los Angeles County could not provide data on Friday
>> because, officials said, their computer had crashed.
>>
>> The latest numbers on gas sales, from January, show that consumption
>> was down 4.5% compared with January 2007, according to the state Board
>> of Equalization, and has been declining over the last two years.
>>
>> Meanwhile, ridership on mass transit has continued on an upswing.
>> Metrolink commuter trains are averaging about 46,000 passengers each
>> weekday, up from 44,000 a year ago. "Our riders aren't the
>> transit-dependent," said spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell.
>>
>> "They have cars. Many of them were driving alone on the freeway."
>
>Just as i predicted. People are driving less and they're drivning slower
>and that means fewer crashes and thus better flow of traffic. We can make
>it even better by lowering speed limits and taking away the licenses of
>speeders and drunk drivers.
I'm just happy to see people leveraging the RAIL SYSTEM
more nowdays. It was always the most efficient way to
move volumes of people in and out of cities. It's ESPECIALLY
economical for moving cargo ... beats the snot out of a
2500 mile journey by 18-wheeler.
Trains had come to be seen as "yesterdays tech" ... left
to rot here, even though europe and Japan put a lot of
money into their rail systems. Hey, we had SUVs and really
cheap gas ... so who needed trains ........
Anyway, side benifits of the gas crunch - most people will
buy SMALL cars, but wind up taking the trains more often.
Vastly more cargo will go by train too. Highway traffic
volume will decrease somewhat, reducing accidents and
extending the life of the infrastructure. Overall national
fuel consumption, and thus our 'dependency', will decrease.
BAD side ... everything will cost more, sometimes a LOT more,
and wages ain't gonna go up very much.
On Mon, 12 May 2008 12:52:13 -0500, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are
MURDERERS" <xeton2001@yahoo . com > wrote:
>Scott in SoCal <scottenaztlan@yahoo . com > wrote in
>news:delg24pj5oo4h3moolcn7sjv5l4e1ci5va@4ax . com :
>
>> Click on the link for the full article.
>>
>> * w w w .latimes . com /news/printedition/front/la-me-traffic12-2008may1
>> 2,0,836023.story
>>
>> less-traveled?
>> Gary Friedman / Los Angeles Times
>>
>> A sampling of residents, traffic reporters and technical data
>> indicates that as gas prices climbed and the economy faltered, there
>> were notable traffic decreases on some freeways.
>> By Steve Hymon and Jia-Rui Chong, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
>> May 12, 2008
>>
>> The Freeway Performance Measurement System, a computer database
>> overseen by UC Berkeley and Caltrans, provides several examples.
>>
>> The morning commute from Simi Valley to Los Angeles averaged 61
>> minutes in April 2007 when gas cost a little more than $3 a gallon but
>> fell to 55.1 minutes last month. Also significant are numbers from the
>> Inland Empire, where the morning drive from Riverside to Ontario fell
>> nearly 13% -- from 41.5 minutes in April 2007 to 36.2 minutes this
>> April.
>>
>> Also down in early May was the number of incidents reported to the
>> California Highway Patrol in Los Angeles County -- the belly of the
>> traffic beast. Accidents and breakdowns are thought to cause about 50%
>> of all congestion.
>>
>> In most cases, the difference in commuting times is small and
>> typically ranges from one to five minutes.
>>
>> But there is evidence of fewer cars on the road. In Orange County,
>> Caltrans officials said that road sensors had shown a slight drop in
>> the average number of vehicles each day on freeways such as the 91 and
>> 405 and that toll road business was down about 6%.
>>
>> The region's ubiquitous traffic reporters are noticing a change.
>> "Things have definitely become a lot thinner out there," said Meghan
>> Reyes, an airborne reporter for KNX-AM 1070 Newsradio, who first
>> noticed a shift in late March.
>>
>> On Thursday, for example, the usually busy 5 Freeway was moving
>> smoothly through the Newhall Pass, and on the northbound 101, the
>> afternoon traffic was backed up from the Cahuenga Pass only to Santa
>> Monica Boulevard -- not all the way to downtown, she said.
>>
>> Caltrans in Los Angeles County could not provide data on Friday
>> because, officials said, their computer had crashed.
>>
>> The latest numbers on gas sales, from January, show that consumption
>> was down 4.5% compared with January 2007, according to the state Board
>> of Equalization, and has been declining over the last two years.
>>
>> Meanwhile, ridership on mass transit has continued on an upswing.
>> Metrolink commuter trains are averaging about 46,000 passengers each
>> weekday, up from 44,000 a year ago. "Our riders aren't the
>> transit-dependent," said spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell.
>>
>> "They have cars. Many of them were driving alone on the freeway."
>
>Just as i predicted. People are driving less and they're drivning slower
>and that means fewer crashes and thus better flow of traffic. We can make
>it even better by lowering speed limits and taking away the licenses of
>speeders and drunk drivers.
I'm just happy to see people leveraging the RAIL SYSTEM
more nowdays. It was always the most efficient way to
move volumes of people in and out of cities. It's ESPECIALLY
economical for moving cargo ... beats the snot out of a
2500 mile journey by 18-wheeler.
Trains had come to be seen as "yesterdays tech" ... left
to rot here, even though europe and Japan put a lot of
money into their rail systems. Hey, we had SUVs and really
cheap gas ... so who needed trains ........
Anyway, side benifits of the gas crunch - most people will
buy SMALL cars, but wind up taking the trains more often.
Vastly more cargo will go by train too. Highway traffic
volume will decrease somewhat, reducing accidents and
extending the life of the infrastructure. Overall national
fuel consumption, and thus our 'dependency', will decrease.
BAD side ... everything will cost more, sometimes a LOT more,
and wages ain't gonna go up very much.
Re: Commute Times are DOWN in LA
On May 12, 3:12 pm, b...@barrk . net (B1ackwater) wrote:
> On Mon, 12 May 2008 12:52:13 -0500, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are
>
>
>
>
>
> MURDERERS" <xeton2...@yahoo . com > wrote:
> >Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...@yahoo . com > wrote in
> >news:delg24pj5oo4h3moolcn7sjv5l4e1ci5va@4ax . com :
>
> >> Click on the link for the full article.
>
> >> * w w w .latimes . com /news/printedition/front/la-me-traffic12-2008may1
> >> 2,0,836023.story
>
> >> less-traveled?
> >> Gary Friedman / Los Angeles Times
>
> >> A sampling of residents, traffic reporters and technical data
> >> indicates that as gas prices climbed and the economy faltered, there
> >> were notable traffic decreases on some freeways.
> >> By Steve Hymon and Jia-Rui Chong, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
> >> May 12, 2008
>
> >> The Freeway Performance Measurement System, a computer database
> >> overseen by UC Berkeley and Caltrans, provides several examples.
>
> >> The morning commute from Simi Valley to Los Angeles averaged 61
> >> minutes in April 2007 when gas cost a little more than $3 a gallon but
> >> fell to 55.1 minutes last month. Also significant are numbers from the
> >> Inland Empire, where the morning drive from Riverside to Ontario fell
> >> nearly 13% -- from 41.5 minutes in April 2007 to 36.2 minutes this
> >> April.
>
> >> Also down in early May was the number of incidents reported to the
> >> California Highway Patrol in Los Angeles County -- the belly of the
> >> traffic beast. Accidents and breakdowns are thought to cause about 50%
> >> of all congestion.
>
> >> In most cases, the difference in commuting times is small and
> >> typically ranges from one to five minutes.
>
> >> But there is evidence of fewer cars on the road. In Orange County,
> >> Caltrans officials said that road sensors had shown a slight drop in
> >> the average number of vehicles each day on freeways such as the 91 and
> >> 405 and that toll road business was down about 6%.
>
> >> The region's ubiquitous traffic reporters are noticing a change.
> >> "Things have definitely become a lot thinner out there," said Meghan
> >> Reyes, an airborne reporter for KNX-AM 1070 Newsradio, who first
> >> noticed a shift in late March.
>
> >> On Thursday, for example, the usually busy 5 Freeway was moving
> >> smoothly through the Newhall Pass, and on the northbound 101, the
> >> afternoon traffic was backed up from the Cahuenga Pass only to Santa
> >> Monica Boulevard -- not all the way to downtown, she said.
>
> >> Caltrans in Los Angeles County could not provide data on Friday
> >> because, officials said, their computer had crashed.
>
> >> The latest numbers on gas sales, from January, show that consumption
> >> was down 4.5% compared with January 2007, according to the state Board
> >> of Equalization, and has been declining over the last two years.
>
> >> Meanwhile, ridership on mass transit has continued on an upswing.
> >> Metrolink commuter trains are averaging about 46,000 passengers each
> >> weekday, up from 44,000 a year ago. "Our riders aren't the
> >> transit-dependent," said spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell.
>
> >> "They have cars. Many of them were driving alone on the freeway."
>
> >Just as i predicted. People are driving less and they're drivning slower
> >and that means fewer crashes and thus better flow of traffic. We can make=
> >it even better by lowering speed limits and taking away the licenses of
> >speeders and drunk drivers.
>
> I'm just happy to see people leveraging the RAIL SYSTEM
> more nowdays. It was always the most efficient way to
> move volumes of people in and out of cities. It's ESPECIALLY
> economical for moving cargo ... beats the snot out of a
> 2500 mile journey by 18-wheeler.
>
> Trains had come to be seen as "yesterdays tech" ... left
> to rot here, even though europe and Japan put a lot of
> money into their rail systems. Hey, we had SUVs and really
> cheap gas ... so who needed trains ........
>
> Anyway, side benifits of the gas crunch - most people will
> buy SMALL cars, but wind up taking the trains more often.
> Vastly more cargo will go by train too. Highway traffic
> volume will decrease somewhat, reducing accidents and
> extending the life of the infrastructure. Overall national
> fuel consumption, and thus our 'dependency', will decrease.
>
> BAD side ... everything will cost more, sometimes a LOT more,
> and wages ain't gonna go up very much.
Well, as someone who likes cars and is seriously trying to take the
train, I must say I'm more and more disappointed. Since the trains
are more crowded, they are getting more persnickety about who gets to
ride Amtrak downstairs, where paper sign say reserved for seniors and
ADA. They are announcing that they will be cracking down (it has been
abused a lot). A conductor told me specifically that they will be
cracking down, with a teenage girl sitting across the aisle from me,
behind him - I think he was just doing it that way to avoid directly
making the teenager uncomfortable. So I asked him if I needed a note
from my doctor. He never answered, but the guy with claw-hands
thought it was pretty funny (I was being serious).
Having bought a second car solely for this, I'm pretty committed to
it, but I'm about to give up. Wednesday and Thursday the train was
late enough so I wound up driving, Friday I worked from home, so I
wound up having to make extra trips to the station to shuffle cars
around avoiding parking time limits - and I'm pissed because I checked
the web site before I went to the station, and it lied. So I've paid
for the pass, and pay for gas and wear-and-tear too, bug doesn't have
the NVH of the big Chrysler, and I've wasted time on trains that don't
come, and stress in the morning "will I make it?" Crap.
Yes, they're treating me like cargo, and it does seem traffic is
noticeably lighter (except still, the last 3 miles before I get off
the freeway). That new Vette is looking better and better.
I also heard the traffic reporter on 1070 mention this.
jg
--
@home . com is bogus.
Oh no, I'm late!
On May 12, 3:12 pm, b...@barrk . net (B1ackwater) wrote:
> On Mon, 12 May 2008 12:52:13 -0500, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are
>
>
>
>
>
> MURDERERS" <xeton2...@yahoo . com > wrote:
> >Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...@yahoo . com > wrote in
> >news:delg24pj5oo4h3moolcn7sjv5l4e1ci5va@4ax . com :
>
> >> Click on the link for the full article.
>
> >> * w w w .latimes . com /news/printedition/front/la-me-traffic12-2008may1
> >> 2,0,836023.story
>
> >> less-traveled?
> >> Gary Friedman / Los Angeles Times
>
> >> A sampling of residents, traffic reporters and technical data
> >> indicates that as gas prices climbed and the economy faltered, there
> >> were notable traffic decreases on some freeways.
> >> By Steve Hymon and Jia-Rui Chong, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
> >> May 12, 2008
>
> >> The Freeway Performance Measurement System, a computer database
> >> overseen by UC Berkeley and Caltrans, provides several examples.
>
> >> The morning commute from Simi Valley to Los Angeles averaged 61
> >> minutes in April 2007 when gas cost a little more than $3 a gallon but
> >> fell to 55.1 minutes last month. Also significant are numbers from the
> >> Inland Empire, where the morning drive from Riverside to Ontario fell
> >> nearly 13% -- from 41.5 minutes in April 2007 to 36.2 minutes this
> >> April.
>
> >> Also down in early May was the number of incidents reported to the
> >> California Highway Patrol in Los Angeles County -- the belly of the
> >> traffic beast. Accidents and breakdowns are thought to cause about 50%
> >> of all congestion.
>
> >> In most cases, the difference in commuting times is small and
> >> typically ranges from one to five minutes.
>
> >> But there is evidence of fewer cars on the road. In Orange County,
> >> Caltrans officials said that road sensors had shown a slight drop in
> >> the average number of vehicles each day on freeways such as the 91 and
> >> 405 and that toll road business was down about 6%.
>
> >> The region's ubiquitous traffic reporters are noticing a change.
> >> "Things have definitely become a lot thinner out there," said Meghan
> >> Reyes, an airborne reporter for KNX-AM 1070 Newsradio, who first
> >> noticed a shift in late March.
>
> >> On Thursday, for example, the usually busy 5 Freeway was moving
> >> smoothly through the Newhall Pass, and on the northbound 101, the
> >> afternoon traffic was backed up from the Cahuenga Pass only to Santa
> >> Monica Boulevard -- not all the way to downtown, she said.
>
> >> Caltrans in Los Angeles County could not provide data on Friday
> >> because, officials said, their computer had crashed.
>
> >> The latest numbers on gas sales, from January, show that consumption
> >> was down 4.5% compared with January 2007, according to the state Board
> >> of Equalization, and has been declining over the last two years.
>
> >> Meanwhile, ridership on mass transit has continued on an upswing.
> >> Metrolink commuter trains are averaging about 46,000 passengers each
> >> weekday, up from 44,000 a year ago. "Our riders aren't the
> >> transit-dependent," said spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell.
>
> >> "They have cars. Many of them were driving alone on the freeway."
>
> >Just as i predicted. People are driving less and they're drivning slower
> >and that means fewer crashes and thus better flow of traffic. We can make=
> >it even better by lowering speed limits and taking away the licenses of
> >speeders and drunk drivers.
>
> I'm just happy to see people leveraging the RAIL SYSTEM
> more nowdays. It was always the most efficient way to
> move volumes of people in and out of cities. It's ESPECIALLY
> economical for moving cargo ... beats the snot out of a
> 2500 mile journey by 18-wheeler.
>
> Trains had come to be seen as "yesterdays tech" ... left
> to rot here, even though europe and Japan put a lot of
> money into their rail systems. Hey, we had SUVs and really
> cheap gas ... so who needed trains ........
>
> Anyway, side benifits of the gas crunch - most people will
> buy SMALL cars, but wind up taking the trains more often.
> Vastly more cargo will go by train too. Highway traffic
> volume will decrease somewhat, reducing accidents and
> extending the life of the infrastructure. Overall national
> fuel consumption, and thus our 'dependency', will decrease.
>
> BAD side ... everything will cost more, sometimes a LOT more,
> and wages ain't gonna go up very much.
Well, as someone who likes cars and is seriously trying to take the
train, I must say I'm more and more disappointed. Since the trains
are more crowded, they are getting more persnickety about who gets to
ride Amtrak downstairs, where paper sign say reserved for seniors and
ADA. They are announcing that they will be cracking down (it has been
abused a lot). A conductor told me specifically that they will be
cracking down, with a teenage girl sitting across the aisle from me,
behind him - I think he was just doing it that way to avoid directly
making the teenager uncomfortable. So I asked him if I needed a note
from my doctor. He never answered, but the guy with claw-hands
thought it was pretty funny (I was being serious).
Having bought a second car solely for this, I'm pretty committed to
it, but I'm about to give up. Wednesday and Thursday the train was
late enough so I wound up driving, Friday I worked from home, so I
wound up having to make extra trips to the station to shuffle cars
around avoiding parking time limits - and I'm pissed because I checked
the web site before I went to the station, and it lied. So I've paid
for the pass, and pay for gas and wear-and-tear too, bug doesn't have
the NVH of the big Chrysler, and I've wasted time on trains that don't
come, and stress in the morning "will I make it?" Crap.
Yes, they're treating me like cargo, and it does seem traffic is
noticeably lighter (except still, the last 3 miles before I get off
the freeway). That new Vette is looking better and better.
I also heard the traffic reporter on 1070 mention this.
jg
--
@home . com is bogus.
Oh no, I'm late!
Re: Commute Times are DOWN in LA
On Mon, 12 May 2008 17:44:46 -0700 (PDT), jgar the jorrible
<joel-garry@home . com > wrote:
>On May 12, 3:12=A0pm, b...@barrk . net (B1ackwater) wrote:
>> On Mon, 12 May 2008 12:52:13 -0500, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> MURDERERS" <xeton2...@yahoo . com > wrote:
>> >Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...@yahoo . com > wrote in
>> >news:delg24pj5oo4h3moolcn7sjv5l4e1ci5va@4ax . com :
>>
>> >> Click on the link for the full article.
>>
>> >> * w w w .latimes . com /news/printedition/front/la-me-traffic12-2008may1
>> >> 2,0,836023.story
>>
>> >> less-traveled?
>> >> Gary Friedman / Los Angeles Times
>>
>> >> A sampling of residents, traffic reporters and technical data
>> >> indicates that as gas prices climbed and the economy faltered, there
>> >> were notable traffic decreases on some freeways.
>> >> By Steve Hymon and Jia-Rui Chong, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
>> >> May 12, 2008
>>
>> >> The Freeway Performance Measurement System, a computer database
>> >> overseen by UC Berkeley and Caltrans, provides several examples.
>>
>> >> The morning commute from Simi Valley to Los Angeles averaged 61
>> >> minutes in April 2007 when gas cost a little more than $3 a gallon but
>> >> fell to 55.1 minutes last month. Also significant are numbers from the
>> >> Inland Empire, where the morning drive from Riverside to Ontario fell
>> >> nearly 13% -- from 41.5 minutes in April 2007 to 36.2 minutes this
>> >> April.
>>
>> >> Also down in early May was the number of incidents reported to the
>> >> California Highway Patrol in Los Angeles County -- the belly of the
>> >> traffic beast. Accidents and breakdowns are thought to cause about 50%
>> >> of all congestion.
>>
>> >> In most cases, the difference in commuting times is small and
>> >> typically ranges from one to five minutes.
>>
>> >> But there is evidence of fewer cars on the road. In Orange County,
>> >> Caltrans officials said that road sensors had shown a slight drop in
>> >> the average number of vehicles each day on freeways such as the 91 and
>> >> 405 and that toll road business was down about 6%.
>>
>> >> The region's ubiquitous traffic reporters are noticing a change.
>> >> "Things have definitely become a lot thinner out there," said Meghan
>> >> Reyes, an airborne reporter for KNX-AM 1070 Newsradio, who first
>> >> noticed a shift in late March.
>>
>> >> On Thursday, for example, the usually busy 5 Freeway was moving
>> >> smoothly through the Newhall Pass, and on the northbound 101, the
>> >> afternoon traffic was backed up from the Cahuenga Pass only to Santa
>> >> Monica Boulevard -- not all the way to downtown, she said.
>>
>> >> Caltrans in Los Angeles County could not provide data on Friday
>> >> because, officials said, their computer had crashed.
>>
>> >> The latest numbers on gas sales, from January, show that consumption
>> >> was down 4.5% compared with January 2007, according to the state Board
>> >> of Equalization, and has been declining over the last two years.
>>
>> >> Meanwhile, ridership on mass transit has continued on an upswing.
>> >> Metrolink commuter trains are averaging about 46,000 passengers each
>> >> weekday, up from 44,000 a year ago. "Our riders aren't the
>> >> transit-dependent," said spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell.
>>
>> >> "They have cars. Many of them were driving alone on the freeway."
>>
>> >Just as i predicted. People are driving less and they're drivning slower
>> >and that means fewer crashes and thus better flow of traffic. We can make=
>
>> >it even better by lowering speed limits and taking away the licenses of
>> >speeders and drunk drivers.
>>
>> =A0 =A0I'm just happy to see people leveraging the RAIL SYSTEM
>> =A0 =A0more nowdays. It was always the most efficient way to
>> =A0 =A0move volumes of people in and out of cities. =A0It's ESPECIALLY
>> =A0 =A0economical for moving cargo ... beats the snot out of a
>> =A0 =A02500 mile journey by 18-wheeler.
>>
>> =A0 =A0Trains had come to be seen as "yesterdays tech" ... left
>> =A0 =A0to rot here, even though europe and Japan put a lot of
>> =A0 =A0money into their rail systems. Hey, we had SUVs and really
>> =A0 =A0cheap gas ... so who needed trains ........
>>
>> =A0 =A0Anyway, side benifits of the gas crunch - most people will
>> =A0 =A0buy SMALL cars, but wind up taking the trains more often.
>> =A0 =A0Vastly more cargo will go by train too. Highway traffic
>> =A0 =A0volume will decrease somewhat, reducing accidents and
>> =A0 =A0extending the life of the infrastructure. Overall national
>> =A0 =A0fuel consumption, and thus our 'dependency', will decrease.
>>
>> =A0 =A0BAD side ... everything will cost more, sometimes a LOT more,
>> =A0 =A0and wages ain't gonna go up very much.
>
>Well, as someone who likes cars and is seriously trying to take the
>train, I must say I'm more and more disappointed. Since the trains
>are more crowded, they are getting more persnickety about who gets to
>ride Amtrak downstairs, where paper sign say reserved for seniors and
>ADA. They are announcing that they will be cracking down (it has been
>abused a lot). A conductor told me specifically that they will be
>cracking down, with a teenage girl sitting across the aisle from me,
>behind him - I think he was just doing it that way to avoid directly
>making the teenager uncomfortable. So I asked him if I needed a note
>from my doctor. He never answered, but the guy with claw-hands
>thought it was pretty funny (I was being serious).
Just wait until they hire "stuffers" like they use in Japan, to
jam a few more people into the train car before the doors close.
You'll REALLY get to know the guy with lobster hands :-)
Passenger rail service is unprepared to handle the influx of
people who would LIKE to start using trains more often. The
only really populated system in this country covers the DC-to-
Boston northeast corridor, and even its becoming overloaded.
Elsewhere there are extremely few passenger trains, even
few CARS, to be had. Amtrack runs a line from around Miami
north, but it's -A- line pretty much ... you'd have hell
taking a train from Miami to, say, Chattanooga or Nashville
or Little Rock. If a few million people suddenly want do do
that, well, no cars, no passenger-friendly infrastructure.
Maybe a million folks could do the 'Boxcar Willie' thing ?
>Having bought a second car solely for this, I'm pretty committed to
>it, but I'm about to give up. Wednesday and Thursday the train was
>late enough so I wound up driving, Friday I worked from home, so I
>wound up having to make extra trips to the station to shuffle cars
>around avoiding parking time limits - and I'm pissed because I checked
>the web site before I went to the station, and it lied. So I've paid
>for the pass, and pay for gas and wear-and-tear too, bug doesn't have
>the NVH of the big Chrysler, and I've wasted time on trains that don't
>come, and stress in the morning "will I make it?" Crap.
With fuel prices on an ever-upwards spiral, distance has
become the enemy. Depending, you may find it necessary to
move a LOT closer to where you work. The days of the long-
distance monday-friday commuter are coming to a nasty end.
It is going to be a few YEARS before the railways outside
of todays most-popular routes get fully up to speed so they
can handle large volumes of commuters/travelers.
Note that fuel prices seem to be destroying even the
airlines - the ticket prices and cargo fees have risen
considerably this year and the remaining airlines are
STILL bleeding money like pigs with their throats cut.
So where are all those travelers gonna go ? Well, either
NOWHERE ... or on trains and busses. These are gonna be
the 'airlines' of the early 21st century. The "Jet Set"
now goes by Greyhound.
>Yes, they're treating me like cargo, and it does seem traffic is
>noticeably lighter (except still, the last 3 miles before I get off
>the freeway). That new Vette is looking better and better.
Second time you have to fill the tank, it won't look so
good anymore. Try a Harley - most get around 50 mpg and
they're even more fun than a 'Vette. If you live where
there's a real winter, try one of those Russian military
bikes with the powered sidecar instead.
>I also heard the traffic reporter on 1070 mention this.
Pre-WW2, "travel" used to be an exotic experience, and
relatively expensive. It's very rapidly gonna return to
that sort of thing. I think this summer is gonna be the
last fling ... after which people will conclude that it's
too expensive to vacation afar, too expensive to live
far from where they work, from where they shop, from
where the kids go to school, from ... well ... from
ANYTHING important.
A more "local" mindset will come to prevail, by necessity.
Housing, business and commerce will rearrange themselves to
fit the new paradigm. Alas, it will be a decade or more before
everything really falls into place and the new system is
running smoothly. Meanwhile ... it's gonna be a PAIN !
On Mon, 12 May 2008 17:44:46 -0700 (PDT), jgar the jorrible
<joel-garry@home . com > wrote:
>On May 12, 3:12=A0pm, b...@barrk . net (B1ackwater) wrote:
>> On Mon, 12 May 2008 12:52:13 -0500, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> MURDERERS" <xeton2...@yahoo . com > wrote:
>> >Scott in SoCal <scottenazt...@yahoo . com > wrote in
>> >news:delg24pj5oo4h3moolcn7sjv5l4e1ci5va@4ax . com :
>>
>> >> Click on the link for the full article.
>>
>> >> * w w w .latimes . com /news/printedition/front/la-me-traffic12-2008may1
>> >> 2,0,836023.story
>>
>> >> less-traveled?
>> >> Gary Friedman / Los Angeles Times
>>
>> >> A sampling of residents, traffic reporters and technical data
>> >> indicates that as gas prices climbed and the economy faltered, there
>> >> were notable traffic decreases on some freeways.
>> >> By Steve Hymon and Jia-Rui Chong, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
>> >> May 12, 2008
>>
>> >> The Freeway Performance Measurement System, a computer database
>> >> overseen by UC Berkeley and Caltrans, provides several examples.
>>
>> >> The morning commute from Simi Valley to Los Angeles averaged 61
>> >> minutes in April 2007 when gas cost a little more than $3 a gallon but
>> >> fell to 55.1 minutes last month. Also significant are numbers from the
>> >> Inland Empire, where the morning drive from Riverside to Ontario fell
>> >> nearly 13% -- from 41.5 minutes in April 2007 to 36.2 minutes this
>> >> April.
>>
>> >> Also down in early May was the number of incidents reported to the
>> >> California Highway Patrol in Los Angeles County -- the belly of the
>> >> traffic beast. Accidents and breakdowns are thought to cause about 50%
>> >> of all congestion.
>>
>> >> In most cases, the difference in commuting times is small and
>> >> typically ranges from one to five minutes.
>>
>> >> But there is evidence of fewer cars on the road. In Orange County,
>> >> Caltrans officials said that road sensors had shown a slight drop in
>> >> the average number of vehicles each day on freeways such as the 91 and
>> >> 405 and that toll road business was down about 6%.
>>
>> >> The region's ubiquitous traffic reporters are noticing a change.
>> >> "Things have definitely become a lot thinner out there," said Meghan
>> >> Reyes, an airborne reporter for KNX-AM 1070 Newsradio, who first
>> >> noticed a shift in late March.
>>
>> >> On Thursday, for example, the usually busy 5 Freeway was moving
>> >> smoothly through the Newhall Pass, and on the northbound 101, the
>> >> afternoon traffic was backed up from the Cahuenga Pass only to Santa
>> >> Monica Boulevard -- not all the way to downtown, she said.
>>
>> >> Caltrans in Los Angeles County could not provide data on Friday
>> >> because, officials said, their computer had crashed.
>>
>> >> The latest numbers on gas sales, from January, show that consumption
>> >> was down 4.5% compared with January 2007, according to the state Board
>> >> of Equalization, and has been declining over the last two years.
>>
>> >> Meanwhile, ridership on mass transit has continued on an upswing.
>> >> Metrolink commuter trains are averaging about 46,000 passengers each
>> >> weekday, up from 44,000 a year ago. "Our riders aren't the
>> >> transit-dependent," said spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell.
>>
>> >> "They have cars. Many of them were driving alone on the freeway."
>>
>> >Just as i predicted. People are driving less and they're drivning slower
>> >and that means fewer crashes and thus better flow of traffic. We can make=
>
>> >it even better by lowering speed limits and taking away the licenses of
>> >speeders and drunk drivers.
>>
>> =A0 =A0I'm just happy to see people leveraging the RAIL SYSTEM
>> =A0 =A0more nowdays. It was always the most efficient way to
>> =A0 =A0move volumes of people in and out of cities. =A0It's ESPECIALLY
>> =A0 =A0economical for moving cargo ... beats the snot out of a
>> =A0 =A02500 mile journey by 18-wheeler.
>>
>> =A0 =A0Trains had come to be seen as "yesterdays tech" ... left
>> =A0 =A0to rot here, even though europe and Japan put a lot of
>> =A0 =A0money into their rail systems. Hey, we had SUVs and really
>> =A0 =A0cheap gas ... so who needed trains ........
>>
>> =A0 =A0Anyway, side benifits of the gas crunch - most people will
>> =A0 =A0buy SMALL cars, but wind up taking the trains more often.
>> =A0 =A0Vastly more cargo will go by train too. Highway traffic
>> =A0 =A0volume will decrease somewhat, reducing accidents and
>> =A0 =A0extending the life of the infrastructure. Overall national
>> =A0 =A0fuel consumption, and thus our 'dependency', will decrease.
>>
>> =A0 =A0BAD side ... everything will cost more, sometimes a LOT more,
>> =A0 =A0and wages ain't gonna go up very much.
>
>Well, as someone who likes cars and is seriously trying to take the
>train, I must say I'm more and more disappointed. Since the trains
>are more crowded, they are getting more persnickety about who gets to
>ride Amtrak downstairs, where paper sign say reserved for seniors and
>ADA. They are announcing that they will be cracking down (it has been
>abused a lot). A conductor told me specifically that they will be
>cracking down, with a teenage girl sitting across the aisle from me,
>behind him - I think he was just doing it that way to avoid directly
>making the teenager uncomfortable. So I asked him if I needed a note
>from my doctor. He never answered, but the guy with claw-hands
>thought it was pretty funny (I was being serious).
Just wait until they hire "stuffers" like they use in Japan, to
jam a few more people into the train car before the doors close.
You'll REALLY get to know the guy with lobster hands :-)
Passenger rail service is unprepared to handle the influx of
people who would LIKE to start using trains more often. The
only really populated system in this country covers the DC-to-
Boston northeast corridor, and even its becoming overloaded.
Elsewhere there are extremely few passenger trains, even
few CARS, to be had. Amtrack runs a line from around Miami
north, but it's -A- line pretty much ... you'd have hell
taking a train from Miami to, say, Chattanooga or Nashville
or Little Rock. If a few million people suddenly want do do
that, well, no cars, no passenger-friendly infrastructure.
Maybe a million folks could do the 'Boxcar Willie' thing ?
>Having bought a second car solely for this, I'm pretty committed to
>it, but I'm about to give up. Wednesday and Thursday the train was
>late enough so I wound up driving, Friday I worked from home, so I
>wound up having to make extra trips to the station to shuffle cars
>around avoiding parking time limits - and I'm pissed because I checked
>the web site before I went to the station, and it lied. So I've paid
>for the pass, and pay for gas and wear-and-tear too, bug doesn't have
>the NVH of the big Chrysler, and I've wasted time on trains that don't
>come, and stress in the morning "will I make it?" Crap.
With fuel prices on an ever-upwards spiral, distance has
become the enemy. Depending, you may find it necessary to
move a LOT closer to where you work. The days of the long-
distance monday-friday commuter are coming to a nasty end.
It is going to be a few YEARS before the railways outside
of todays most-popular routes get fully up to speed so they
can handle large volumes of commuters/travelers.
Note that fuel prices seem to be destroying even the
airlines - the ticket prices and cargo fees have risen
considerably this year and the remaining airlines are
STILL bleeding money like pigs with their throats cut.
So where are all those travelers gonna go ? Well, either
NOWHERE ... or on trains and busses. These are gonna be
the 'airlines' of the early 21st century. The "Jet Set"
now goes by Greyhound.
>Yes, they're treating me like cargo, and it does seem traffic is
>noticeably lighter (except still, the last 3 miles before I get off
>the freeway). That new Vette is looking better and better.
Second time you have to fill the tank, it won't look so
good anymore. Try a Harley - most get around 50 mpg and
they're even more fun than a 'Vette. If you live where
there's a real winter, try one of those Russian military
bikes with the powered sidecar instead.
>I also heard the traffic reporter on 1070 mention this.
Pre-WW2, "travel" used to be an exotic experience, and
relatively expensive. It's very rapidly gonna return to
that sort of thing. I think this summer is gonna be the
last fling ... after which people will conclude that it's
too expensive to vacation afar, too expensive to live
far from where they work, from where they shop, from
where the kids go to school, from ... well ... from
ANYTHING important.
A more "local" mindset will come to prevail, by necessity.
Housing, business and commerce will rearrange themselves to
fit the new paradigm. Alas, it will be a decade or more before
everything really falls into place and the new system is
running smoothly. Meanwhile ... it's gonna be a PAIN !
Re: Commute Times are DOWN in LA
On May 13, 5:58 am, b...@barrk . net (B1ackwater) wrote:
> On Mon, 12 May 2008 17:44:46 -0700 (PDT), jgar the jorrible
>
>
> >Well, as someone who likes cars and is seriously trying to take the
> >train, I must say I'm more and more disappointed. Since the trains
> >are more crowded, they are getting more persnickety about who gets to
> >ride Amtrak downstairs, where paper sign say reserved for seniors and
> >ADA. They are announcing that they will be cracking down (it has been
> >abused a lot). A conductor told me specifically that they will be
> >cracking down, with a teenage girl sitting across the aisle from me,
> >behind him - I think he was just doing it that way to avoid directly
> >making the teenager uncomfortable. So I asked him if I needed a note
> >from my doctor. He never answered, but the guy with claw-hands
> >thought it was pretty funny (I was being serious).
>
> Just wait until they hire "stuffers" like they use in Japan, to
> jam a few more people into the train car before the doors close.
> You'll REALLY get to know the guy with lobster hands :-)
:-)
At least the tourists will feel at home.
>
> Passenger rail service is unprepared to handle the influx of
> people who would LIKE to start using trains more often. The
> only really populated system in this country covers the DC-to-
> Boston northeast corridor, and even its becoming overloaded.
> Elsewhere there are extremely few passenger trains, even
> few CARS, to be had. Amtrack runs a line from around Miami
> north, but it's -A- line pretty much ... you'd have hell
> taking a train from Miami to, say, Chattanooga or Nashville
> or Little Rock. If a few million people suddenly want do do
> that, well, no cars, no passenger-friendly infrastructure.
> Maybe a million folks could do the 'Boxcar Willie' thing ?
>
> >Having bought a second car solely for this, I'm pretty committed to
> >it, but I'm about to give up. Wednesday and Thursday the train was
> >late enough so I wound up driving, Friday I worked from home, so I
> >wound up having to make extra trips to the station to shuffle cars
> >around avoiding parking time limits - and I'm pissed because I checked
> >the web site before I went to the station, and it lied. So I've paid
> >for the pass, and pay for gas and wear-and-tear too, bug doesn't have
> >the NVH of the big Chrysler, and I've wasted time on trains that don't
> >come, and stress in the morning "will I make it?" Crap.
>
> With fuel prices on an ever-upwards spiral, distance has
> become the enemy. Depending, you may find it necessary to
> move a LOT closer to where you work. The days of the long-
> distance monday-friday commuter are coming to a nasty end.
I've said since I've moved here, I'd move only if it were at least a
sideways move. An equivalent house (and everything else, like
neighborhood, schools and so on) near where I work would be somewhere
north of $2M, without the acreage. I could come up with the down
payment, but I don't think anyone would pay me enough to make the
payments.
>
> It is going to be a few YEARS before the railways outside
> of todays most-popular routes get fully up to speed so they
> can handle large volumes of commuters/travelers.
This one is mostly single-tracked, couple weeks ago there were two
suicides involving my train - one ten minutes after I got off, a few
days later another a half-hour before I boarded - well, would have
boarded, since it never showed up.
>
> Note that fuel prices seem to be destroying even the
> airlines - the ticket prices and cargo fees have risen
> considerably this year and the remaining airlines are
> STILL bleeding money like pigs with their throats cut.
>
> So where are all those travelers gonna go ? Well, either
> NOWHERE ... or on trains and busses. These are gonna be
> the 'airlines' of the early 21st century. The "Jet Set"
> now goes by Greyhound.
>
> >Yes, they're treating me like cargo, and it does seem traffic is
> >noticeably lighter (except still, the last 3 miles before I get off
> >the freeway). That new Vette is looking better and better.
>
> Second time you have to fill the tank, it won't look so
> good anymore. Try a Harley - most get around 50 mpg and
> they're even more fun than a 'Vette. If you live where
> there's a real winter, try one of those Russian military
> bikes with the powered sidecar instead.
I've worked with several people who've done this (one guy put big
miles on several 'Wings). But that's too much fun for me, I wouldn't
last a week. It's 62 miles each way of socal freeway, yeech. Sold my
bike not long ago 'cause I'm too decrepit to ride it anyway (actually,
I was getting it going to use as the end-of-train-ride vehicle, but it
needed too much work and I was unsure if my health would hold out. As
it happens, I'm much better now, but I think the guy that bought it is
happier than I would have been. He has several [it's a cult-bike
now], and had a couple extra carbs to slap on.) I've always wanted a
Sportster 1200, but the reality is it would be a garage-bike.
>
> >I also heard the traffic reporter on 1070 mention this.
>
> Pre-WW2, "travel" used to be an exotic experience, and
> relatively expensive. It's very rapidly gonna return to
> that sort of thing. I think this summer is gonna be the
> last fling ... after which people will conclude that it's
> too expensive to vacation afar, too expensive to live
> far from where they work, from where they shop, from
> where the kids go to school, from ... well ... from
> ANYTHING important.
Yes, wiping out the middle class is not politically favorable. Near
where I live is one of the original work/live cities (Rancho
Bernardo), and naturally the people who work there don't live there,
and the people who live there are retired or don't work there. And of
course, Irvine where I work is another, and I wouldn't live here
unless, well, see above. A quick gander at zillow for some crappy
house bicycling distance from where I work, 3bed 2 bath 2 story, two
car garage, nothing yard, jammed in with neighbors, no view $800K. As
opposed to my house, twice as big, single story, ocean view, over an
acre, in a much nicer area, third the taxes... not a frikken chance.
>
> A more "local" mindset will come to prevail, by necessity.
> Housing, business and commerce will rearrange themselves to
> fit the new paradigm. Alas, it will be a decade or more before
> everything really falls into place and the new system is
> running smoothly. Meanwhile ... it's gonna be a PAIN !
It will take far longer. San Diego was going after infill
development, but with the crash, will take years to recover.
jg
--
@home . com is bogus.
So, let's cut bus service for the poor and disabled.
* w w w .signonsandiego . com /uniontrib/20080513/news 1m13nctd.html
On May 13, 5:58 am, b...@barrk . net (B1ackwater) wrote:
> On Mon, 12 May 2008 17:44:46 -0700 (PDT), jgar the jorrible
>
>
> >Well, as someone who likes cars and is seriously trying to take the
> >train, I must say I'm more and more disappointed. Since the trains
> >are more crowded, they are getting more persnickety about who gets to
> >ride Amtrak downstairs, where paper sign say reserved for seniors and
> >ADA. They are announcing that they will be cracking down (it has been
> >abused a lot). A conductor told me specifically that they will be
> >cracking down, with a teenage girl sitting across the aisle from me,
> >behind him - I think he was just doing it that way to avoid directly
> >making the teenager uncomfortable. So I asked him if I needed a note
> >from my doctor. He never answered, but the guy with claw-hands
> >thought it was pretty funny (I was being serious).
>
> Just wait until they hire "stuffers" like they use in Japan, to
> jam a few more people into the train car before the doors close.
> You'll REALLY get to know the guy with lobster hands :-)
:-)
At least the tourists will feel at home.
>
> Passenger rail service is unprepared to handle the influx of
> people who would LIKE to start using trains more often. The
> only really populated system in this country covers the DC-to-
> Boston northeast corridor, and even its becoming overloaded.
> Elsewhere there are extremely few passenger trains, even
> few CARS, to be had. Amtrack runs a line from around Miami
> north, but it's -A- line pretty much ... you'd have hell
> taking a train from Miami to, say, Chattanooga or Nashville
> or Little Rock. If a few million people suddenly want do do
> that, well, no cars, no passenger-friendly infrastructure.
> Maybe a million folks could do the 'Boxcar Willie' thing ?
>
> >Having bought a second car solely for this, I'm pretty committed to
> >it, but I'm about to give up. Wednesday and Thursday the train was
> >late enough so I wound up driving, Friday I worked from home, so I
> >wound up having to make extra trips to the station to shuffle cars
> >around avoiding parking time limits - and I'm pissed because I checked
> >the web site before I went to the station, and it lied. So I've paid
> >for the pass, and pay for gas and wear-and-tear too, bug doesn't have
> >the NVH of the big Chrysler, and I've wasted time on trains that don't
> >come, and stress in the morning "will I make it?" Crap.
>
> With fuel prices on an ever-upwards spiral, distance has
> become the enemy. Depending, you may find it necessary to
> move a LOT closer to where you work. The days of the long-
> distance monday-friday commuter are coming to a nasty end.
I've said since I've moved here, I'd move only if it were at least a
sideways move. An equivalent house (and everything else, like
neighborhood, schools and so on) near where I work would be somewhere
north of $2M, without the acreage. I could come up with the down
payment, but I don't think anyone would pay me enough to make the
payments.
>
> It is going to be a few YEARS before the railways outside
> of todays most-popular routes get fully up to speed so they
> can handle large volumes of commuters/travelers.
This one is mostly single-tracked, couple weeks ago there were two
suicides involving my train - one ten minutes after I got off, a few
days later another a half-hour before I boarded - well, would have
boarded, since it never showed up.
>
> Note that fuel prices seem to be destroying even the
> airlines - the ticket prices and cargo fees have risen
> considerably this year and the remaining airlines are
> STILL bleeding money like pigs with their throats cut.
>
> So where are all those travelers gonna go ? Well, either
> NOWHERE ... or on trains and busses. These are gonna be
> the 'airlines' of the early 21st century. The "Jet Set"
> now goes by Greyhound.
>
> >Yes, they're treating me like cargo, and it does seem traffic is
> >noticeably lighter (except still, the last 3 miles before I get off
> >the freeway). That new Vette is looking better and better.
>
> Second time you have to fill the tank, it won't look so
> good anymore. Try a Harley - most get around 50 mpg and
> they're even more fun than a 'Vette. If you live where
> there's a real winter, try one of those Russian military
> bikes with the powered sidecar instead.
I've worked with several people who've done this (one guy put big
miles on several 'Wings). But that's too much fun for me, I wouldn't
last a week. It's 62 miles each way of socal freeway, yeech. Sold my
bike not long ago 'cause I'm too decrepit to ride it anyway (actually,
I was getting it going to use as the end-of-train-ride vehicle, but it
needed too much work and I was unsure if my health would hold out. As
it happens, I'm much better now, but I think the guy that bought it is
happier than I would have been. He has several [it's a cult-bike
now], and had a couple extra carbs to slap on.) I've always wanted a
Sportster 1200, but the reality is it would be a garage-bike.
>
> >I also heard the traffic reporter on 1070 mention this.
>
> Pre-WW2, "travel" used to be an exotic experience, and
> relatively expensive. It's very rapidly gonna return to
> that sort of thing. I think this summer is gonna be the
> last fling ... after which people will conclude that it's
> too expensive to vacation afar, too expensive to live
> far from where they work, from where they shop, from
> where the kids go to school, from ... well ... from
> ANYTHING important.
Yes, wiping out the middle class is not politically favorable. Near
where I live is one of the original work/live cities (Rancho
Bernardo), and naturally the people who work there don't live there,
and the people who live there are retired or don't work there. And of
course, Irvine where I work is another, and I wouldn't live here
unless, well, see above. A quick gander at zillow for some crappy
house bicycling distance from where I work, 3bed 2 bath 2 story, two
car garage, nothing yard, jammed in with neighbors, no view $800K. As
opposed to my house, twice as big, single story, ocean view, over an
acre, in a much nicer area, third the taxes... not a frikken chance.
>
> A more "local" mindset will come to prevail, by necessity.
> Housing, business and commerce will rearrange themselves to
> fit the new paradigm. Alas, it will be a decade or more before
> everything really falls into place and the new system is
> running smoothly. Meanwhile ... it's gonna be a PAIN !
It will take far longer. San Diego was going after infill
development, but with the crash, will take years to recover.
jg
--
@home . com is bogus.
So, let's cut bus service for the poor and disabled.
* w w w .signonsandiego . com /uniontrib/20080513/news 1m13nctd.html
Re: Commute Times are DOWN in LA
On Tue, 13 May 2008 17:45:09 -0700 (PDT), jgar the jorrible
<joel-garry@home . com > wrote:
>On May 13, 5:58=A0am, b...@barrk . net (B1ackwater) wrote:
>> On Mon, 12 May 2008 17:44:46 -0700 (PDT), jgar the jorrible
>>
>>
>> >Well, as someone who likes cars and is seriously trying to take the
>> >train, I must say I'm more and more disappointed. =A0Since the trains
>> >are more crowded, they are getting more persnickety about who gets to
>> >ride Amtrak downstairs, where paper sign say reserved for seniors and
>> >ADA. =A0They are announcing that they will be cracking down (it has been
>> >abused a lot). =A0A conductor told me specifically that they will be
>> >cracking down, with a teenage girl sitting across the aisle from me,
>> >behind him - I think he was just doing it that way to avoid directly
>> >making the teenager uncomfortable. =A0So I asked him if I needed a note
>> >from my doctor. =A0He never answered, but the guy with claw-hands
>> >thought it was pretty funny (I was being serious).
>>
>> =A0 =A0Just wait until they hire "stuffers" like they use in Japan, to
>> =A0 =A0jam a few more people into the train car before the doors close.
>> =A0 =A0You'll REALLY get to know the guy with lobster hands :-)
>
>:-)
>
>At least the tourists will feel at home.
>
>>
>> =A0 =A0Passenger rail service is unprepared to handle the influx of
>> =A0 =A0people who would LIKE to start using trains more often. The
>> =A0 =A0only really populated system in this country covers the DC-to-
>> =A0 =A0Boston northeast corridor, and even its becoming overloaded.
>> =A0 =A0Elsewhere there are extremely few passenger trains, even
>> =A0 =A0few CARS, to be had. Amtrack runs a line from around Miami
>> =A0 =A0north, but it's -A- line pretty much ... you'd have hell
>> =A0 =A0taking a train from Miami to, say, Chattanooga or Nashville
>> =A0 =A0or Little Rock. If a few million people suddenly want do do
>> =A0 =A0that, well, no cars, no passenger-friendly infrastructure.
>> =A0 =A0Maybe a million folks could do the 'Boxcar Willie' thing ?
>>
>> >Having bought a second car solely for this, I'm pretty committed to
>> >it, but I'm about to give up. =A0Wednesday and Thursday the train was
>> >late enough so I wound up driving, Friday I worked from home, so I
>> >wound up having to make extra trips to the station to shuffle cars
>> >around avoiding parking time limits - and I'm pissed because I checked
>> >the web site before I went to the station, and it lied. =A0So I've paid
>> >for the pass, and pay for gas and wear-and-tear too, bug doesn't have
>> >the NVH of the big Chrysler, and I've wasted time on trains that don't
>> >come, and stress in the morning "will I make it?" =A0Crap.
>>
>> =A0 =A0With fuel prices on an ever-upwards spiral, distance has
>> =A0 =A0become the enemy. Depending, you may find it necessary to
>> =A0 =A0move a LOT closer to where you work. The days of the long-
>> =A0 =A0distance monday-friday commuter are coming to a nasty end.
>
>I've said since I've moved here, I'd move only if it were at least a
>sideways move. An equivalent house (and everything else, like
>neighborhood, schools and so on) near where I work would be somewhere
>north of $2M, without the acreage. I could come up with the down
>payment, but I don't think anyone would pay me enough to make the
>payments.
Hey .... now THERE'S an idea ...... !
If millions of people need to relocate much closer to their
places of employment so fuel bills won't kill 'em ... some
mechanism for coordinating so-called "sideways moves" would
make it a LOT easier. A web-based service, possibly managed,
possibly just more of a posting/matching engine.
Provide a description of YOUR property, neighborhood,
improvements and a property-tax number so the value can
be somewhat authenticated. Then search for the closest
matches within x-miles of where you work. It could be
as simple as ten questions - rating homes, surroundings
and such from "1" to "5", providing square-footage and
a just value.
The idea is to SWAP properties of essentially equal overall
value, not for anyone to really profit from deal - except
in terms of their future commuting costs. A smaller house,
but with a better view or better nearby schools, would
rank the same as a larger house in a slightly lesser
environment.
Anyhow, such a service lets you KNOW about potential even-swap
deals where YOU need to move.
>
>>
>> =A0 =A0A more "local" mindset will come to prevail, by necessity.
>> =A0 =A0Housing, business and commerce will rearrange themselves to
>> =A0 =A0fit the new paradigm. Alas, it will be a decade or more before
>> =A0 =A0everything really falls into place and the new system is
>> =A0 =A0running smoothly. Meanwhile ... it's gonna be a PAIN !
>
>It will take far longer. San Diego was going after infill
>development, but with the crash, will take years to recover.
If fuel prices stay where they are or get even higher,
the whole "commuting" idea HAS to be trashed. Not just
commuting to work, but having to make long circuits for
ones daily business - shopping, kids 2/from school, rec,
food and such. The emphasis HAS to be on a lot more stuff
BEING near and COMING from nearby.
Of course not EVERYTHING can be supplied from a
mile down the road, but the more the better. Every
mile saved is a lot of MONEY saved - plus it will
decrease our national energy dependence and CO2
output figures too.
I advocate the re-establishment of smaller neighborhood
stores and entertainment centers. Less fuel is consumed
by a truck delivering to a string of ten small stores
serving 1000 people daily than by 1000 people all driving
an average of ten miles each way to a "superstore" way
out on the edge of town. Yea, the choices are a bit nicer
at the superstore, but there's an associated cost for it
both personal and national. Priorities will have to be
ordered.
FOOD ... except in the most polar climes, a perfectly good
and acceptable variety of foods can be grown on LOCAL farms
instead of trucked in from distant locations. Might revive
the idea of genuinely "local cusine" too. "Farmers markets"
can suppliment, or even replace, many "supermarkets". With
less fuel involved in transportation and refrigeration, the
food will be cheaper (and fresher too). Won't have to buy
those picked-hard-and-green-two-weeks-ago tomatoes anymore ...
In short, the new theme has to be "Closer". The OPTION for
travel or acquiring distant goods will remain of course, but
Joe Average is gonna need to count his deflated pennies from
now on. Fuel costs alone use up a LOT of those pennies unless
Joe starts taking geography into consideration.
On Tue, 13 May 2008 17:45:09 -0700 (PDT), jgar the jorrible
<joel-garry@home . com > wrote:
>On May 13, 5:58=A0am, b...@barrk . net (B1ackwater) wrote:
>> On Mon, 12 May 2008 17:44:46 -0700 (PDT), jgar the jorrible
>>
>>
>> >Well, as someone who likes cars and is seriously trying to take the
>> >train, I must say I'm more and more disappointed. =A0Since the trains
>> >are more crowded, they are getting more persnickety about who gets to
>> >ride Amtrak downstairs, where paper sign say reserved for seniors and
>> >ADA. =A0They are announcing that they will be cracking down (it has been
>> >abused a lot). =A0A conductor told me specifically that they will be
>> >cracking down, with a teenage girl sitting across the aisle from me,
>> >behind him - I think he was just doing it that way to avoid directly
>> >making the teenager uncomfortable. =A0So I asked him if I needed a note
>> >from my doctor. =A0He never answered, but the guy with claw-hands
>> >thought it was pretty funny (I was being serious).
>>
>> =A0 =A0Just wait until they hire "stuffers" like they use in Japan, to
>> =A0 =A0jam a few more people into the train car before the doors close.
>> =A0 =A0You'll REALLY get to know the guy with lobster hands :-)
>
>:-)
>
>At least the tourists will feel at home.
>
>>
>> =A0 =A0Passenger rail service is unprepared to handle the influx of
>> =A0 =A0people who would LIKE to start using trains more often. The
>> =A0 =A0only really populated system in this country covers the DC-to-
>> =A0 =A0Boston northeast corridor, and even its becoming overloaded.
>> =A0 =A0Elsewhere there are extremely few passenger trains, even
>> =A0 =A0few CARS, to be had. Amtrack runs a line from around Miami
>> =A0 =A0north, but it's -A- line pretty much ... you'd have hell
>> =A0 =A0taking a train from Miami to, say, Chattanooga or Nashville
>> =A0 =A0or Little Rock. If a few million people suddenly want do do
>> =A0 =A0that, well, no cars, no passenger-friendly infrastructure.
>> =A0 =A0Maybe a million folks could do the 'Boxcar Willie' thing ?
>>
>> >Having bought a second car solely for this, I'm pretty committed to
>> >it, but I'm about to give up. =A0Wednesday and Thursday the train was
>> >late enough so I wound up driving, Friday I worked from home, so I
>> >wound up having to make extra trips to the station to shuffle cars
>> >around avoiding parking time limits - and I'm pissed because I checked
>> >the web site before I went to the station, and it lied. =A0So I've paid
>> >for the pass, and pay for gas and wear-and-tear too, bug doesn't have
>> >the NVH of the big Chrysler, and I've wasted time on trains that don't
>> >come, and stress in the morning "will I make it?" =A0Crap.
>>
>> =A0 =A0With fuel prices on an ever-upwards spiral, distance has
>> =A0 =A0become the enemy. Depending, you may find it necessary to
>> =A0 =A0move a LOT closer to where you work. The days of the long-
>> =A0 =A0distance monday-friday commuter are coming to a nasty end.
>
>I've said since I've moved here, I'd move only if it were at least a
>sideways move. An equivalent house (and everything else, like
>neighborhood, schools and so on) near where I work would be somewhere
>north of $2M, without the acreage. I could come up with the down
>payment, but I don't think anyone would pay me enough to make the
>payments.
Hey .... now THERE'S an idea ...... !
If millions of people need to relocate much closer to their
places of employment so fuel bills won't kill 'em ... some
mechanism for coordinating so-called "sideways moves" would
make it a LOT easier. A web-based service, possibly managed,
possibly just more of a posting/matching engine.
Provide a description of YOUR property, neighborhood,
improvements and a property-tax number so the value can
be somewhat authenticated. Then search for the closest
matches within x-miles of where you work. It could be
as simple as ten questions - rating homes, surroundings
and such from "1" to "5", providing square-footage and
a just value.
The idea is to SWAP properties of essentially equal overall
value, not for anyone to really profit from deal - except
in terms of their future commuting costs. A smaller house,
but with a better view or better nearby schools, would
rank the same as a larger house in a slightly lesser
environment.
Anyhow, such a service lets you KNOW about potential even-swap
deals where YOU need to move.
>
>>
>> =A0 =A0A more "local" mindset will come to prevail, by necessity.
>> =A0 =A0Housing, business and commerce will rearrange themselves to
>> =A0 =A0fit the new paradigm. Alas, it will be a decade or more before
>> =A0 =A0everything really falls into place and the new system is
>> =A0 =A0running smoothly. Meanwhile ... it's gonna be a PAIN !
>
>It will take far longer. San Diego was going after infill
>development, but with the crash, will take years to recover.
If fuel prices stay where they are or get even higher,
the whole "commuting" idea HAS to be trashed. Not just
commuting to work, but having to make long circuits for
ones daily business - shopping, kids 2/from school, rec,
food and such. The emphasis HAS to be on a lot more stuff
BEING near and COMING from nearby.
Of course not EVERYTHING can be supplied from a
mile down the road, but the more the better. Every
mile saved is a lot of MONEY saved - plus it will
decrease our national energy dependence and CO2
output figures too.
I advocate the re-establishment of smaller neighborhood
stores and entertainment centers. Less fuel is consumed
by a truck delivering to a string of ten small stores
serving 1000 people daily than by 1000 people all driving
an average of ten miles each way to a "superstore" way
out on the edge of town. Yea, the choices are a bit nicer
at the superstore, but there's an associated cost for it
both personal and national. Priorities will have to be
ordered.
FOOD ... except in the most polar climes, a perfectly good
and acceptable variety of foods can be grown on LOCAL farms
instead of trucked in from distant locations. Might revive
the idea of genuinely "local cusine" too. "Farmers markets"
can suppliment, or even replace, many "supermarkets". With
less fuel involved in transportation and refrigeration, the
food will be cheaper (and fresher too). Won't have to buy
those picked-hard-and-green-two-weeks-ago tomatoes anymore ...
In short, the new theme has to be "Closer". The OPTION for
travel or acquiring distant goods will remain of course, but
Joe Average is gonna need to count his deflated pennies from
now on. Fuel costs alone use up a LOT of those pennies unless
Joe starts taking geography into consideration.
Re: Commute Times are DOWN in LA
"B1ackwater" <bw@barrk . net > wrote in message
news:482b00f0.15812328@news.east.earthlink . net ...
> ...
> Hey .... now THERE'S an idea ...... !
>
> If millions of people need to relocate much closer to their
> places of employment so fuel bills won't kill 'em ... some
> mechanism for coordinating so-called "sideways moves" would
> make it a LOT easier. A web-based service, possibly managed,
> possibly just more of a posting/matching engine.
>
> Provide a description of YOUR property, neighborhood,
> improvements and a property-tax number so the value can
> be somewhat authenticated. Then search for the closest
> matches within x-miles of where you work. It could be
> as simple as ten questions - rating homes, surroundings
> and such from "1" to "5", providing square-footage and
> a just value.
>
> The idea is to SWAP properties of essentially equal overall
> value, not for anyone to really profit from deal - except
> in terms of their future commuting costs. A smaller house,
> but with a better view or better nearby schools, would
> rank the same as a larger house in a slightly lesser
> environment.
>
> Anyhow, such a service lets you KNOW about potential even-swap
> deals where YOU need to move.
Too bad one can't carry one's property tax basis with them in the swap.
(Due to prop 13, some of us have a tax base that is less than 10% of current
market value.)
"B1ackwater" <bw@barrk . net > wrote in message
news:482b00f0.15812328@news.east.earthlink . net ...
> ...
> Hey .... now THERE'S an idea ...... !
>
> If millions of people need to relocate much closer to their
> places of employment so fuel bills won't kill 'em ... some
> mechanism for coordinating so-called "sideways moves" would
> make it a LOT easier. A web-based service, possibly managed,
> possibly just more of a posting/matching engine.
>
> Provide a description of YOUR property, neighborhood,
> improvements and a property-tax number so the value can
> be somewhat authenticated. Then search for the closest
> matches within x-miles of where you work. It could be
> as simple as ten questions - rating homes, surroundings
> and such from "1" to "5", providing square-footage and
> a just value.
>
> The idea is to SWAP properties of essentially equal overall
> value, not for anyone to really profit from deal - except
> in terms of their future commuting costs. A smaller house,
> but with a better view or better nearby schools, would
> rank the same as a larger house in a slightly lesser
> environment.
>
> Anyhow, such a service lets you KNOW about potential even-swap
> deals where YOU need to move.
Too bad one can't carry one's property tax basis with them in the swap.
(Due to prop 13, some of us have a tax base that is less than 10% of current
market value.)
Re: Commute Times are DOWN in LA
B1ackwater wrote:
> <joel-garry@home . com > wrote:
> If millions of people need to relocate much closer to their
> places of employment so fuel bills won't kill 'em ... some
> mechanism for coordinating so-called "sideways moves" would
> make it a LOT easier. A web-based service, possibly managed,
> possibly just more of a posting/matching engine.
>
> Provide a description of YOUR property, neighborhood,
> improvements and a property-tax number so the value can
> be somewhat authenticated. Then search for the closest
> matches within x-miles of where you work. It could be
> as simple as ten questions - rating homes, surroundings
> and such from "1" to "5", providing square-footage and
> a just value.
>
> The idea is to SWAP properties of essentially equal overall
> value, not for anyone to really profit from deal - except
> in terms of their future commuting costs. A smaller house,
> but with a better view or better nearby schools, would
> rank the same as a larger house in a slightly lesser
> environment.
>
> Anyhow, such a service lets you KNOW about potential even-swap
> deals where YOU need to move.
One problem: unless you know something different, the swappers would
get their houses revalued for property tax purposes, which might mean a
bigger bite than the commuting costs would be.
--
Cheers,
Bev
<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
Some mornings it's just not worth chewing through the straps.
B1ackwater wrote:
> <joel-garry@home . com > wrote:
> If millions of people need to relocate much closer to their
> places of employment so fuel bills won't kill 'em ... some
> mechanism for coordinating so-called "sideways moves" would
> make it a LOT easier. A web-based service, possibly managed,
> possibly just more of a posting/matching engine.
>
> Provide a description of YOUR property, neighborhood,
> improvements and a property-tax number so the value can
> be somewhat authenticated. Then search for the closest
> matches within x-miles of where you work. It could be
> as simple as ten questions - rating homes, surroundings
> and such from "1" to "5", providing square-footage and
> a just value.
>
> The idea is to SWAP properties of essentially equal overall
> value, not for anyone to really profit from deal - except
> in terms of their future commuting costs. A smaller house,
> but with a better view or better nearby schools, would
> rank the same as a larger house in a slightly lesser
> environment.
>
> Anyhow, such a service lets you KNOW about potential even-swap
> deals where YOU need to move.
One problem: unless you know something different, the swappers would
get their houses revalued for property tax purposes, which might mean a
bigger bite than the commuting costs would be.
--
Cheers,
Bev
<> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <> <>
Some mornings it's just not worth chewing through the straps.
Re: Commute Times are DOWN in LA
B1ackwater wrote:
> On Mon, 12 May 2008 12:52:13 -0500, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are
> MURDERERS" <xeton2001@yahoo . com > wrote:
>
> >Scott in SoCal <scottenaztlan@yahoo . com > wrote in
> >news:delg24pj5oo4h3moolcn7sjv5l4e1ci5va@4ax . com :
> >
> >> Click on the link for the full article.
> >>
> >> * w w w .latimes . com /news/printedition/front/la-me-traffic12-2008may1
> >> 2,0,836023.story
> >>
> >> less-traveled?
> >> Gary Friedman / Los Angeles Times
> >>
> >> A sampling of residents, traffic reporters and technical data
> >> indicates that as gas prices climbed and the economy faltered, there
> >> were notable traffic decreases on some freeways.
> >> By Steve Hymon and Jia-Rui Chong, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
> >> May 12, 2008
> >>
> >> The Freeway Performance Measurement System, a computer database
> >> overseen by UC Berkeley and Caltrans, provides several examples.
> >>
> >> The morning commute from Simi Valley to Los Angeles averaged 61
> >> minutes in April 2007 when gas cost a little more than $3 a gallon but
> >> fell to 55.1 minutes last month. Also significant are numbers from the
> >> Inland Empire, where the morning drive from Riverside to Ontario fell
> >> nearly 13% -- from 41.5 minutes in April 2007 to 36.2 minutes this
> >> April.
> >>
> >> Also down in early May was the number of incidents reported to the
> >> California Highway Patrol in Los Angeles County -- the belly of the
> >> traffic beast. Accidents and breakdowns are thought to cause about 50%
> >> of all congestion.
> >>
> >> In most cases, the difference in commuting times is small and
> >> typically ranges from one to five minutes.
> >>
> >> But there is evidence of fewer cars on the road. In Orange County,
> >> Caltrans officials said that road sensors had shown a slight drop in
> >> the average number of vehicles each day on freeways such as the 91 and
> >> 405 and that toll road business was down about 6%.
> >>
> >> The region's ubiquitous traffic reporters are noticing a change.
> >> "Things have definitely become a lot thinner out there," said Meghan
> >> Reyes, an airborne reporter for KNX-AM 1070 Newsradio, who first
> >> noticed a shift in late March.
> >>
> >> On Thursday, for example, the usually busy 5 Freeway was moving
> >> smoothly through the Newhall Pass, and on the northbound 101, the
> >> afternoon traffic was backed up from the Cahuenga Pass only to Santa
> >> Monica Boulevard -- not all the way to downtown, she said.
> >>
> >> Caltrans in Los Angeles County could not provide data on Friday
> >> because, officials said, their computer had crashed.
> >>
> >> The latest numbers on gas sales, from January, show that consumption
> >> was down 4.5% compared with January 2007, according to the state Board
> >> of Equalization, and has been declining over the last two years.
> >>
> >> Meanwhile, ridership on mass transit has continued on an upswing.
> >> Metrolink commuter trains are averaging about 46,000 passengers each
> >> weekday, up from 44,000 a year ago. "Our riders aren't the
> >> transit-dependent," said spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell.
> >>
> >> "They have cars. Many of them were driving alone on the freeway."
> >
> >Just as i predicted. People are driving less and they're drivning slower
> >and that means fewer crashes and thus better flow of traffic. We can make
> >it even better by lowering speed limits and taking away the licenses of
> >speeders and drunk drivers.
>
>
> I'm just happy to see people leveraging the RAIL SYSTEM
leveraging? beat you dont miss a bite at gorge time! In the jungle.
>
> more nowdays. It was always the most efficient way to
> move volumes of people in and out of cities. It's ESPECIALLY
B1ackwater wrote:
> On Mon, 12 May 2008 12:52:13 -0500, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are
> MURDERERS" <xeton2001@yahoo . com > wrote:
>
> >Scott in SoCal <scottenaztlan@yahoo . com > wrote in
> >news:delg24pj5oo4h3moolcn7sjv5l4e1ci5va@4ax . com :
> >
> >> Click on the link for the full article.
> >>
> >> * w w w .latimes . com /news/printedition/front/la-me-traffic12-2008may1
> >> 2,0,836023.story
> >>
> >> less-traveled?
> >> Gary Friedman / Los Angeles Times
> >>
> >> A sampling of residents, traffic reporters and technical data
> >> indicates that as gas prices climbed and the economy faltered, there
> >> were notable traffic decreases on some freeways.
> >> By Steve Hymon and Jia-Rui Chong, Los Angeles Times Staff Writers
> >> May 12, 2008
> >>
> >> The Freeway Performance Measurement System, a computer database
> >> overseen by UC Berkeley and Caltrans, provides several examples.
> >>
> >> The morning commute from Simi Valley to Los Angeles averaged 61
> >> minutes in April 2007 when gas cost a little more than $3 a gallon but
> >> fell to 55.1 minutes last month. Also significant are numbers from the
> >> Inland Empire, where the morning drive from Riverside to Ontario fell
> >> nearly 13% -- from 41.5 minutes in April 2007 to 36.2 minutes this
> >> April.
> >>
> >> Also down in early May was the number of incidents reported to the
> >> California Highway Patrol in Los Angeles County -- the belly of the
> >> traffic beast. Accidents and breakdowns are thought to cause about 50%
> >> of all congestion.
> >>
> >> In most cases, the difference in commuting times is small and
> >> typically ranges from one to five minutes.
> >>
> >> But there is evidence of fewer cars on the road. In Orange County,
> >> Caltrans officials said that road sensors had shown a slight drop in
> >> the average number of vehicles each day on freeways such as the 91 and
> >> 405 and that toll road business was down about 6%.
> >>
> >> The region's ubiquitous traffic reporters are noticing a change.
> >> "Things have definitely become a lot thinner out there," said Meghan
> >> Reyes, an airborne reporter for KNX-AM 1070 Newsradio, who first
> >> noticed a shift in late March.
> >>
> >> On Thursday, for example, the usually busy 5 Freeway was moving
> >> smoothly through the Newhall Pass, and on the northbound 101, the
> >> afternoon traffic was backed up from the Cahuenga Pass only to Santa
> >> Monica Boulevard -- not all the way to downtown, she said.
> >>
> >> Caltrans in Los Angeles County could not provide data on Friday
> >> because, officials said, their computer had crashed.
> >>
> >> The latest numbers on gas sales, from January, show that consumption
> >> was down 4.5% compared with January 2007, according to the state Board
> >> of Equalization, and has been declining over the last two years.
> >>
> >> Meanwhile, ridership on mass transit has continued on an upswing.
> >> Metrolink commuter trains are averaging about 46,000 passengers each
> >> weekday, up from 44,000 a year ago. "Our riders aren't the
> >> transit-dependent," said spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell.
> >>
> >> "They have cars. Many of them were driving alone on the freeway."
> >
> >Just as i predicted. People are driving less and they're drivning slower
> >and that means fewer crashes and thus better flow of traffic. We can make
> >it even better by lowering speed limits and taking away the licenses of
> >speeders and drunk drivers.
>
>
> I'm just happy to see people leveraging the RAIL SYSTEM
leveraging? beat you dont miss a bite at gorge time! In the jungle.
>
> more nowdays. It was always the most efficient way to
> move volumes of people in and out of cities. It's ESPECIALLY
Re: Commute Times are DOWN in LA
Scott in SoCal <scottenaztlan@yahoo . com > writes:
>The latest numbers on gas sales, from January, show that consumption
>was down 4.5% compared with January 2007, according to the state Board
>of Equalization, and has been declining over the last two years.
That's okay. They'll raise the gas tax to match. Everything's on the table.
--
Cameron Kaiser * ckaiser@floodgap . com * posting with a Commodore 128
personal page: * w w w .cameronkaiser . com /
** Computer Workshops: games, productivity software and more for C64/128! **
** * w w w .armory . com /%7Espectre/cwi/ **
Scott in SoCal <scottenaztlan@yahoo . com > writes:
>The latest numbers on gas sales, from January, show that consumption
>was down 4.5% compared with January 2007, according to the state Board
>of Equalization, and has been declining over the last two years.
That's okay. They'll raise the gas tax to match. Everything's on the table.
--
Cameron Kaiser * ckaiser@floodgap . com * posting with a Commodore 128
personal page: * w w w .cameronkaiser . com /
** Computer Workshops: games, productivity software and more for C64/128! **
** * w w w .armory . com /%7Espectre/cwi/ **
