HO-HO-HO! This is gonna be FUN-FUN-FUN! (I-405 closure in CA)

[hm insulators]

Well, I was just looking at the thread about the I-710 with the link to metro.net, and I'm surprised that Bigmikelakers, etc. didn't mention this, as man, oh, man, this is gonna mess up everything in LA next weekend: The big closure of the 405 to knock down half the Mulholland Drive bridge!

And I'm going to be in southern California that very weekend, and even needing to drive from Orange County to the San Fernando Valley on the 16th for a friend's kid's birthday party. Believe-you-me, I'm staying far away from that 405! That Saturday, the 605 will be my target, or maybe even the 57 to the 210.

And all it will take will be one stall, minor fender-bender, mattress or ladder on the 101, the 10 or the 5 to gum everything up even further.  


Modified thread title --roadfro

[agentsteel53]

I will not be going anywhere near a motor vehicle that weekend - and I live in San Diego.

I am just hoping they are done by the following weekend.

[Brian556]

TMZ has been talking about his for a few weeks now- they've dubbed it "Carmegeddon".

[Chris]

Caltrans even has a countdown clock somewhere on their site.

[myosh_tino]

I'm glad I don't have to deal with *that* traffic nightmare.  Apparently the closure of 405 is so significant that even Northern California news media are reporting on this.

[Chris]

Even VMS's in the San Jose area show the I-405 closure.

[myosh_tino]

Even VMS's in the San Jose area show the I-405 closure.

That's pretty impressive.  From the photo, that looks like it's near Great America in Santa Clara, over 300 miles away!

The practice of using the VMS to indicate road closures hundreds of miles away isn't new.  When the Bay Bridge was closed over a Labor Day weekend a few years ago, VMSs state-wide were lit up warning motorists of the impending closure and I think the LA-area signs were included.

[Revive 755]

[extreme sarcasm] The closure shouldn't be a problem, since the road is just generating more traffic[/extreme sarcasm]

[rschen7754]

LA traffic is bad enough already, and just about every time I've taken 405 through there it's jammed...

[rschen7754]

And I wouldn't be surprised if fines were issued should the closure last longer than planned.

[Chris]

And I wouldn't be surprised if fines were issued should the closure last longer than planned.

$ 6,000 per 10 minutes.

[Sykotyk]

I-5 and CA-99 have VMS updates advising to, I believe, "EXPECT EXTREME DELAYS" as far north as Sacramento/Stockton.

This is big. And if you live in the area and don't need to drive, it's recommended you don't.

[Bickendan]

Watch as this sets off the world's largest traffic jam, extending all the way up onto the Oak Street Bridge in Vancouver...

[agentsteel53]

Watch as this sets off the world's largest traffic jam, extending all the way up onto the Oak Street Bridge in Vancouver...

why stop there?  I'm guessing the secret Soviet moon base will feel this one too.

[Chris]

It would be a lot of fun when everyone's so scared off they all stay home and the freeways are empty.

This happened a while ago in the Netherlands, when they warned for a snow storm. Everyone left work early or stayed at home, and it turned out to be the least busy rush hour of the entire year.

[Zmapper]

What construction shows us is that many lanes or even whole roads are unnecessary. Now the 405 is necessary considering its location and the nearest major roads but perhaps the widening or the number of lanes isn't.

Google Earth shows the 405 to have 10 lanes; 5 in each direction. What if 6 lanes were set aside for cars, and 4 lanes for HOV and improved bus service. WAIT, you say, that would spell disaster for everyone! We would only have 6 lanes when we had 10 before!

The doomsday traffic congestion would only happen for about a month or two, as people get used to carpooling and new bus service. The end result might be that the general traffic lanes flow smoother than they did before.

The cost there would be striping modifications, new signs, and say, 100 new buses. The cost there is about 45 million for the buses (assuming no bulk discount) and whatever it costs to stripe and change signs. Savings of about a BILLION (1,000,000,000.00) dollars that can be used elsewhere.

Air pollution reduced. Traffic reduced. Commutes improved for most people. One BILLION dollars saved.

[vdeane]

Some of us like the freedom and privacy that comes with using our own car.  And I don't want the anti-car people to tell us otherwise!

[Zmapper]

Who said I was anti car? Besides, you still have 60% of the road space.

[NE2]

While some won't be happy until they have their own planet.

[Brandon]

It would be a lot of fun when everyone's so scared off they all stay home and the freeways are empty.

This happened a while ago in the Netherlands, when they warned for a snow storm. Everyone left work early or stayed at home, and it turned out to be the least busy rush hour of the entire year.

Warnings for snow storm...Chicago...scared...nah.  Then you get the northbound lanes of LSD on February 1st.

[Alps]

Who said I was anti car? Besides, you still have 60% of the road space.

(Quoting the shorter post) Except historical precedent in EVERY other case proves that you'll get less throughput out of the four special lanes than you do with the four general lanes.

[Zmapper]

Do you happen to have any citations or resources to back that up Steve? I find that very intriguing.

[Scott5114]

Steve, aren't you a certified PE now?

[vdeane]

Who said I was anti car? Besides, you still have 60% of the road space.

Well, most people who advocate transit and carpooling tend to be.

[Alps]

Do you happen to have any citations or resources to back that up Steve? I find that very intriguing.

I'll take that statement back. In general, managed lanes have less throughput, simply to keep traffic flowing. Now, yes, you CAN have more people per hour in a bus lane than in a regular lane. Case in point: Lincoln Tunnel bus lane can cram at least 400 buses per hour through the tunnel. At even 40 passengers per bus, that's 16,000 people in an hour. The actual peak numbers are probably up closer to 25,000. A regular lane can throughput about 1/10 of that (with minimal carpooling).

However, let's look at the case we have here. First, pull out the buses from the general lanes and stick them in the express lanes - let's assume 400 an hour for L.A. Next, pull out the existing carpoolers - let's assume there aren't any (not too unreasonable, really). You can fit maybe 800 cars into the spaces left by the 400 buses. That leaves about 2,800 cars in the existing left lanes that have nowhere to go. If you can add 100 buses with 30 passengers on each, you've pretty much covered the capacity you lost. Think L.A. will be able to get that many people to ride the bus? I'm gonna doubt it.