What do you consider to be "bad traffic"

[jakeroot]

Speed limit or higher at rush hour means that the road is overbuilt. If you assume rush hour is 4 hours per day (I know, every market is different...do your own math if you please), that's 20 hours out of 168 for the week. In any line of business, that's way over capacity. Traffic congestion is a signal for people to "consume" the highway at "cheaper" times.

If you have a dollar left before you cash your next paycheck, you're overpaid
If you are not waking up from hunger, you're overfed...

Highways take money to build and money to maintain, we all know that. You want to build the minimum highway size needed to be sufficient (not perfect), because that money could be used elsewhere for other stuff.

There's basically two schools of thought with highway expansion:

The Texas method: [attempt to] maintain far more freeway lane miles than "necessary" to stay ahead of traffic congestion; or
The Seattle method: accept the fact that there's nothing that can be done to improve congestion, so focus efforts on improving HOV and transit connections across the freeway system.

Generally speaking, one method is chosen over the other due to land prices. Seattle-area land prices are outrageous, so WSDOT can't do much to expand the freeways because it's too expensive. Texas, on the other hand, has far more affordable land prices, so freeway expansion is slightly (if not, remarkably) less expensive.

[Buffaboy]

Heh, I'm used to New York City traffic, so my threshold is pretty high. On an expressway, I need to be moving less than 10 mph. Even up in Albany (where I have lived most of my life), moving is considered to be a good sign. Surface roads, it's a backup of several blocks (as in stopped or barely-moving traffic).

Compare that to people from Buffalo, who think moving under the speed limit on an expressway is "bad traffic".

I was going to say the same about Buffalo.

Being on I-270 Sunday in Maryland was interesting though, every lane was clogged past Germantown, and I-495 after the Potomac wasn't much better.

[Takumi]

I-95 in Northern Virginia!

Pretty much this.

[kalvado]

Speed limit or higher at rush hour means that the road is overbuilt. If you assume rush hour is 4 hours per day (I know, every market is different...do your own math if you please), that's 20 hours out of 168 for the week. In any line of business, that's way over capacity. Traffic congestion is a signal for people to "consume" the highway at "cheaper" times.

If you have a dollar left before you cash your next paycheck, you're overpaid
If you are not waking up from hunger, you're overfed...

Highways take money to build and money to maintain, we all know that. You want to build the minimum highway size needed to be sufficient (not perfect), because that money could be used elsewhere for other stuff.

Honestly speaking, cost of delays quickly builds up. If you have an average of 10 minute delay on 60k/day highway, and assume $10/hour wage, that is $100k/day or $30M/year of lost productivity idling on a pavement. So building roads is actually cheaper than not building them. Problem is, some officials think US is rich enough to buy cheap crap...

[kkt]

The hick definition of bad traffic:

Freeway: Continually having to pass people.

Local road: Having to wait at a stop sign.

NW Territories:  Lots of bison standing around on the road.

[SD Mapman]

The hick definition of bad traffic:

Freeway: Continually having to pass people.

Local road: Having to wait at a stop sign.

NW Territories:  Lots of bison standing around on the road.

Yup! Seen that too (and then you sit very very still in your car with the windows down...)

[Plutonic Panda]

Speed limit or higher at rush hour means that the road is overbuilt.

That is a ridiculous statement.

[jakeroot]

Speed limit or higher at rush hour means that the road is overbuilt.

Could also mean that the road was built for traffic that no longer exists. Seems to me that much of Detroit's road system is "overbuilt" due to a dwindling population.

No matter how you look at it though, let's be real: it's better for a road to be over-built than under-built. Unless you just don't like cars, which is a reasonable argument.

[stwoodbury]

Rural Belgium: a line of ten cars stuck behind a tractor on a single lane road where passing is not an option, having to wait for a herd of cows to cross the road while transiting from their pasture  to their barn, or some sort of an unannounced Flanders wide cycling event that has all the roads in the region all tied up for the entire day.

Freeways (Autosnelweg):  AutoE40/E19 and the Brussels R0 Ring road Near the E40'and E19'junctions is  always a solid three lanes of brake lights moving at  a crawl when you're running late to the airport.

I expect there to be congestion in urban areas or major highways, especially where I live now (Arlington, VA), and often enduring stop and go traffic on an interstate is still faster than trying to find an alternate route. Only occasionally is it so bad that abandoning a trip or seriously trying to find an alternate is more viable. A few weeks ago we were on our way back from the blue ridge mountains to Arlington and 81 was a solid line of trucks that were not moving very fast due to some accident. I was tempted to just do roll with the traffic, but we ended up taking 11 to I-66 and made reasonably good time doing that. Maybe we made the right decision, but the fact that 11 was almost empty probably meant that the congestion on 81 was not bad enough to warrant a mass exodus to other  routes.

[Henry]

Well, in terms of my commute, "bad traffic" is "there aren't any seats left on the MARTA train, so I have to stand". 

But on a serious note, when I am driving (which is much more enjoyable when I only do it when I want to instead of having to):

Freeway: being in Atlanta, the threshold for "bad traffic" is pretty high. It's not really bad traffic unless you have to come to a complete stop at some point.

Local roads: if I have to sit through multiple light cycles, that's bad. If I have to stay stopped at a green light due to a backup from the next light, that's also bad.

Change that to Los Angeles, and that's the same thing I had to go through once upon a time!

[Bickendan]

Portland. In fact, I'm about to slog it out from US 26 at I-205 to Hillsboro in a few minutes. Woe is me.

[thenetwork]

To me, bad traffic is created when simple solutions are not executed to improve the traffic flow, and thus not-as-safe traffic occurs:

-  Speed Limits set too low for the roadway.
-  Traffic lights not synchronized, or are programmed to go against the existing natural traffic flows.
-  Intersections where 4-way stop signs are not needed or where Yield signs can be substituted for Stop signs due to lack of sufficient traffic.
-  Unusually long construction zones -- blocking off lanes where/when there is no work going on, yet the closed lane(s) can be driven on safely -- and keeping work zone speeds in effect when no work is going on.

These are a few things, (IMHO) that jurisdictions can easily adjust to allow for better traffic flows, and reduce driver fatigue/frustration due to bad traffic.

[ColossalBlocks]

Anything that happens on Interstate 55 from Festus, Missouri to St Louis.

[Plutonic Panda]

If traffic on the freeway is moving I'm cool. I think a lot of what fucks it up is drivers rushing to get on the cars ass in front of them and then hitting the brakes causing a chain reaction.
I think traffic could flow better in rush hour in many scenarios as long as drivers kept a better distance and more sustainable speed. Of course that can't be expected in every case.

[jakeroot]

If traffic on the freeway is moving I'm cool. I think a lot of what fucks it up is drivers rushing to get on the cars ass in front of them and then hitting the brakes causing a chain reaction.
I think traffic could flow better in rush hour in many scenarios as long as drivers kept a better distance and more sustainable speed. Of course that can't be expected in every case.

It's one of those things that I know I should do, but I just can't bring myself to actually do. Leaving a large distance, in theory, reduces the amount of braking that has to be done, which in turn decreases the likelihood of a chain-reaction "brake", which tends to fuck up traffic. The problem is, I hate myself for letting too many cars in, mostly because of the people behind me who are likely very irate with my decision to let a thousand cars in. Never mind how much farther back I am, compared to where I would have been, had I not kept letting cars in.

[Plutonic Panda]

I agree with that. I can't say I do as I say in this case. As you said, most people view that space you leave as an invite to get in front of you which you would keep having to create more space and seems counterproductive.

I don't know that even in a perfect world if that would work in LA simply because the freeways lack enough lanes to properly move traffic it in a city like OKC that has enough lanes for the most part seems to get congested because of things like this. I'm also convinced that there are those that believe the freeway abruptly ends around the slightest corner or curve causing them to slam their brakes.

[bzakharin]

I live in SW NJ, but have a non-traditional commute. I travel 60 miles SE within the state to get to work, and can count on my hands the number of times I had to go to Philly, so I'll break it down by road, and sometimes even parts of road. In general my definition of bad traffic is traffic that makes me find an alternate route, though that may not always be possible

Freeways:
I-295 (exit 34 to 26) and NJ 42 freeway: Traffic comes to a complete stop more than three times or for more than a few seconds
Atlantic City Expressway / most of NJ 55: Maximum possible speed drops below 75 MPH for several minutes at a time
NJ 55 northern terminus: Backup of 2 miles or more
Garden State Parkway (exit 38 to 36): Speed below 30 MPH

Non-freeways:
NJ 73 Berlin and southbound: Speed below 50 MPH between traffic lights
NJ 70 / NJ 73 north of Berlin: Having to stop at the same traffic light for more than one cycle

That last one is my definition for most local roads as well. In cases where there are no traffic lights, wait times at stop signs of more than a minute or so.

If I'm rating my commute as a whole, bad traffic is when it takes more than 65 minutes.

[sparker]

Bad traffic (example close to home):  US 101, NB, from CA 129 north to I-880, 5:45 a.m to 9:15 a.m. M-F.  The reverse of this, 2:45 p.m. to 7:15 p.m., likewise.  Ostensible cause of this:  closely placed interchanges in Gilroy, Morgan Hill, and the east side of San Jose (from CA 85 north).  Also, underpowered 101/880 interchange and the fact that about 25-30% of NB 101 traffic exits onto 880 north via slip lane and 1-lane ramp.  NB, you'll average about 20-25 from 129 to Morgan Hill, get up to maybe 35 through Coyote (5 miles, 1 set of ramps to virtually nowhere), but drop to 5-10 until I-280/680 junction.  The first-timer will get a break for the next 2 miles (maybe up to 25!), but drop to near-zero as much of the traffic jockeys for position to get over to the NB 880 ramp.  Going the other way in the afternoon, it's not too bad (20 average) from 880 to 280/680, primarily because a lot of SB 880 traffic doesn't want to risk a wreck on the SB 880>101 loop, so they go all the way down to 280 or even 85 before cutting back over.  From 280/680 all the way out to the SB 85 merge, it maxes out at 10-15 mph, with 20-25 average after the 85 folks merge into place.  Once in Morgan Hill, everything depends upon whether there's any incidents; without, figure remaining between 20 and 25, with -- all bets are off; you're better off heading over to the old road (Monterey Hwy).  Gilroy slows down the process (lotsa commuters get off there -- and some of the exits need expanding).  What's left generally disperses like this: 35-40% get off at CA 25 toward Hollister, another 15-20% use CA 129 toward Watsonville (now functioning as an exurb), while the remaining generally is through traffic (there's no significant Salinas commute traffic, but there is a little heading toward Seaside & Monterey via 156). 

From I-880 and Montague Expressway ("employment central" these days) to a Gilroy residence takes about 1.8 hours for 35 miles, or an average of between 19 & 20 mph on a mostly 3+3 or 4+4 freeway.  Now that's what I call bad traffic.  I've heard (repeatedly) that 580/205 between Dublin/680 and Tracy is much worse -- but I haven't been masochistic enough to find out for myself.   
     

[sbeaver44]

I consider bad traffic to be anything where the current estimated travel time is 150% or more than the usual estimated travel time.  So, for something that usually takes 20 minutes, bad traffic would be 30+

Nexus 6P

[jakeroot]

I consider bad traffic to be anything where the current estimated travel time is 150% or more than the usual estimated travel time.  So, for something that usually takes 20 minutes, bad traffic would be 30+

So a two minute drive taking three minutes = bad traffic?

I get your point though.

[slorydn1]

Considering that I grew up and learned to drive in the Chicagoland area I really haven't seen bad traffic in the 25+ years since I left, lol.

Actually, in my area I consider it as bad traffic if the light turns green and I can't go. It really doesn't happen like that very often (usually it takes a wreck, or construction on another road that everyone is avoiding by being in my way).

On freeways, as long as its moving and I don't have to keep jamming on the brakes, I don't consider it as being bad, per se. I might turn to my wife and say "Wow, traffic is really heavy today", but I wouldn't say it was bad.

My commutes to work are at either 0530 or 1730 depending if I am working days or nights, and I only go 9 miles. Coming home it would either be 1800 or 0600 depending. Going to work on dayshift or home from work on night shift takes about 11-12 minutes on average. Going to work on nights, or home from work on days takes about 14-15 minutes on average. If I start creeping into 14-15 minutes in the first scenario or 17-18 minutes in the second scenario I start to feel like I am being held up. If it goes over 20 minutes I'm about ready to write my congressman, lol.


Thinking back to my Chicago days, I can often remember hearing travel times of 55 minutes from the Tri-State to the Post Office on the Ike from traffic reporters and just cringing. From what I hear from people now, it seems they would be begging for it to be only 55 minutes now.