Los Angeles freeways outdated (bankrupt, best, building)

[proudmommy]

Originally Posted by chispito

The more viable transit alternatives are implemented

Such as?
Funded by?
Serving who?

[Curmudgeon]

California's freeways as a whole are outdated and relatively poorly maintained. It was embarrassing coming into California from Nevada or Oregon and almost immediately going from a smooth, well-maintained road to bumps, cracks and potholes. CalTrans does its best but the politicos keep diverting the state highway funds and federal finding is inadequate.

[415_s2k]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

California's freeways as a whole are outdated and relatively poorly maintained. It was embarrassing coming into California from Nevada or Oregon and almost immediately going from a smooth, well-maintained road to bumps, cracks and potholes. CalTrans does its best but the politicos keep diverting the state highway funds and federal finding is inadequate.

Part of the problem, too, is the amount of use the roads see. In '03, shortly before they elected to start doing road construction at night instead of during bankers' hours, they were redoing parallel stretches of 3rd St. and Beverly in Hancock Park (where the roads are always as smooth as glass), and it caused one of the most most maddening bottlenecks I've ever experienced. A few months later, they did the same thing on Lincoln Blvd. in Marina Del Rey, and I recall waiting a solid hour to get from Venice Blvd. down to Westchester... it took an hour to get past Jefferson. They took one of the most heavily-used arteries in the LA area, and they bottlenecked it to one lane in either direction during rush hour.

Doing a complete reconstruction of the roads, freeways, or public transit infrastructure in LA is the sort of program that would be projected to cost something in the many billions of dollars, and would end up running well over that. In the meantime, there's nowhere to divert the traffic to, and so it would exacerbate the traffic problem until it was finished.

[tygayolo415]

Originally Posted by Curmudgeon

California's freeways as a whole are outdated and relatively poorly maintained. It was embarrassing coming into California from Nevada or Oregon and almost immediately going from a smooth, well-maintained road to bumps, cracks and potholes. CalTrans does its best but the politicos keep diverting the state highway funds and federal finding is inadequate.

This. The freeway system dilapidation is just another symptom of Los Angeles' and California's dis-function. Poorly maintained/missing/misplaced/outdated/rusted/unlighted/patched over/razor wired signage, lack of night-time lighting, roadway debris, missing shoulders, unsafe ingresses/egresses, uncompleted sections, unfit roadway surfaces, ever-present graffiti, and more serve as an embarrassment to the region and the nation. All of this without freeze/thaw and weather cycles that most other cities in the country contend with. That said, it's not some third world system but in the U.S., it's the closest thing that looks and feels like one. Sadly and truly a testament to lower standards relative to other urban areas in the country.

For Christ's sake, even the newest freeway (105) in the system gets its Lincoln Blvd on-ramp at LAX closed every single time it rains because it was improperly engineered to safely handle traffic when wet.

[Palenaka]

Originally Posted by cim303

This. The freeway system dilapidation is just another symptom of Los Angeles' and California's dis-function. Poorly maintained/missing/misplaced/outdated/rusted/unlighted/patched over/razor wired signage, lack of night-time lighting, roadway debris, missing shoulders, unsafe ingresses/egresses, uncompleted sections, unfit roadway surfaces, ever-present graffiti, and more serve as an embarrassment to the region and the nation. All of this without freeze/thaw and weather cycles that most other cities in the country contend with. That said, it's not some third world system but in the U.S., it's the closest thing that looks and feels like one. Sadly and truly a testament to lower standards relative to other urban areas in the country.

For Christ's sake, even the newest freeway (105) in the system gets its Lincoln Blvd on-ramp at LAX closed every single time it rains because it was improperly engineered to safely handle traffic when wet.

So true! Welcome to LA

[DarkWolf]

Japan uses Double and Triple Decker Freeways in its Urban areas.....it can be done...they also have Double Decker Tunnels in Japan and Asia. After a Few Earthquakes Japan fixed the faults in there Highways in the Sky....so the can handle very strong Quakes. So i couldn't see why Cali couldn't do the same....but there standards are higher then the US.


Metropolitan expressway divergence (http://www.flickr.com/photos/ninnin2007/2548996051/ - broken link) by ninnin (http://www.flickr.com/people/ninnin2007/ - broken link), on Flickr


Elevated....like the older Tokyo Highways....


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yeCOEeDWgaU

Or a Tunneled Highway system...like the Newer Highways in Tokyo. They Built an Interchange in a building....lol


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sO6IMhFAPYM

[Charles]

Originally Posted by Nexis4Jersey

Japan uses Double and Triple Decker Freeways in its Urban areas.....it can be done...they also have Double Decker Tunnels in Japan and Asia. After a Few Earthquakes Japan fixed the faults in there Highways in the Sky....so the can handle very strong Quakes. So i couldn't see why Cali couldn't do the same....but there standards are higher then the US.

Like was written above, anything can be done - it's just really expensive. Japan may have had the money - perhaps those double decker freeways serve a lot more people - more tax base - I don't know.

Also, what's the footprint of those double decker freeways? Are we talking a few blocks, a mile or two, or twenty+ miles?

[bouncethelight]

If you were talking about one section of freeway in the middle of the city, then yeah, it could be done. Even if it was really expensive per mile, if it's just a few miles?

But LA is so large, and the traffic issues extend over a huge area. So one short section of super-expensive double-decker highway wouldn't help things much - you'd still have problems elsewhere. And the same money could be much better spent by spreading it across the county, and making minor improvements to the whole system.

Double-decker freeways and subways work great if the downtown area is compact, but LA is spread out - different problem, so different solutions!

[DarkWolf]

Well there system is privately built , all infastrature is private in Japan. They tend to build there Double Deckers over boulevards and wide streets to minimize the impact the surrounding area... The Tunnels go just about everywhere....there building a huge network under Tokyo....other cities use Double Decker Freeways....in Osaka they put buildings under the 2x3 Highways in the sky.... I think theres 20-40 miles of Double Decker Highways / Elevated in Tokyo....

[SOON2BNSURPRISE]

We have a "freeway" system. The problem with building new is that you never see a return on your money. I think it is admorable that our President in his State of the Union address wants to get us going in the USA by building new infrastructure, including new roadways. The problem with that is their is no return on your investment only cost to build it. We are in debt plenty as it is.

The option that others have suggested of building as they do in Japan. That would never happen here as the state is full of smarter people than us that want to protect everyone from well, ourselves. They don't want to improve our current system that allows me and you to drive the kind of cars and trucks that we like. What they want is to be able to tell you what you can drive and where and when you can drive it or park it. They seem to prefer mass transit solutions that only a few will ride in or on. How many of you are going to sit on a high speed train that takes you from LA to close to the Bay area? Besides that the money just isn't there. Then again at nearly every election we vote in some transportation issues that we pay for that I have yet to see a benefit from.

Much of that money that could go toward improving what we do have ends up in so called "beautification" projects that have one purpose but to hide our so called freeway system. Did you know in LA alone they pay at least and maybe more than 6 people over $200,000 a year in income to manage the Beautification projects. Did you know that most cities have similar positions at similar paychecks? The beautification projects litterally are a give away program to the cities and not one cent had gone to improve our freeway system, exits improvements, or any other thing to get traffic moving at a more faster rate of speed. The fact is that I don't think that they have done much to make things nicer looking. LOL This is just one example of waste of bond money that tax payers have voted on over the years that should have gone towards transportation improvements within the roadway system. You should go back and read the propositions that we the people of California vote on for one purpose and where a majority of the money ends up. We have voted these things in becasue many of us will not read the fine print. All we see is our roads need help and this new proposition will take care of all our problems. It has not helped yet and I doubt it will help in the future.

My thought is that polititions don't want to fix the problem. It is just too easy to write a new proposition regarding roads, fill it with pork, and get the people to vote on it. LOL With all the money we have spent on bond issues during my 45 years here we could have built a 5 story local freeway system. If the elected officials used the bond money to fix the problem they would not be able to push the pork thru that they can push thru each election year with another transportation proposition.