Speeding won't solve L.A.'s traffic woes

[one...two...tree 2,762]

In Southern California, drivers think the fast lane means they can speed.

By Ralph Vartabedian, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer

Imagine if everybody on the road would just get out of your way, there wouldn't be any congestion -- at least not for you.

I have received a long stream of e-mails over the years from motorists stuck in the clogged arteries of Southern California's highway system, who complain their biggest problem is with people blocking the passing lane.

In their view, if all those drivers using the No. 1 (far left) lane of the freeway would just get out of the way, they would be able to go much faster.

The underlying assumption is that the No. 1 lane is intended only for passing and mainly for those going faster than the posted speed limit.

The first time I received such a letter, I just ignored it. But after a recent column on rude traffic behavior, I was inundated with more letters from people who expressed basically the same idea.

"Each lane to the left is for traffic faster than to the right," said one motorist. "The far left lane is for passing."

Another reader put it this way: "Failure to drive with the flow of traffic and keep to the right when not passing are examples of two fundamental wrongs typically occurring on the freeways that often lead to tailgating and other rude behaviors."

And here's another one: "These left-lane bandits feel righteous in their belief that as long as they are doing the speed limit or even slightly faster, that no one else has a right to go any faster than them."

I don't want to belabor this, but here's a final comment: "It's not only discourteous but illegal to prevent a car from passing on the left because you believe you are driving 'fast enough.' In all forms of traffic, air, surface, water or whatever, the overtaking vehicle has the right of way over the overtaken. You'll see the logic as well as the legal and orderliness of it."

These comments are far off the mark, according to judges, attorneys and traffic officers. Although intentionally blocking cars that want to pass may be rude, it is unavoidable in many cases and not illegal.

"The point here is that people are complaining that they don't have the opportunity to break the law and they want other people to move over, so they can break the law," said Leslie MacAfee, an attorney and a Superior Court judge pro tem. "There is no right or excuse to drive in excess of the speed limit, absent exigent circumstances."

(Just about the only really good exigent circumstance for speeding is that your wife is having a baby in the back seat and you're headed to the hospital.)

"I just can't imagine the police writing a ticket to somebody driving the speed limit," said Eric Blum, another Superior Court judge pro tem.

The most common defense used by speeders in court is that they were going with the flow of traffic. Oops, that's a losing excuse.

"When people tell me they were just going with the flow of traffic, they have just admitted to breaking the law," Blum said.

Indeed, as I travel around the country on reporting assignments, I am struck that drivers in many other cities -- Pittsburgh, Phoenix and Washington, D.C., to name a few -- are far more compliant with posted speed limits than here in Southern California. Speeding has become the norm.

The California Motor Vehicle Code does have a section (21654) on slow-moving vehicles that says a vehicle going "at a speed less than the normal speed . . . shall be driven in the right hand lane. . . ." But this section hardly makes it illegal or improper to drive the speed limit in the No. 1 lane of a freeway, said Miguel Luevano, a California Highway Patrol officer.

"The question is what is normal. When you read the entire vehicle code, normal refers to the speed limit," Luevano said.

One of the biggest misconceptions motorists have is that left lanes are legally designated as passing lanes and that highway engineers designed them that way.

U.S. highway designs are based on a manual issued by the American Assn. of State Highway and Transportation Officials and nothing in that manual dictates that left lanes are intended only for passing. "As volumes grow, all the lanes have to be used accordingly," said Ken Kobetsy, the association's program director for engineering.

The current reality is that freeways are clogged much of the time. At 6 a.m. Sunday, you can find plenty of room on almost every freeway in the system. And perhaps a driver going the speed limit is begging for trouble if he or she is trying to stop somebody from speeding.

But at 6 p.m. Monday through Friday, every lane on the freeway is going to be at or near capacity.

"It is hard to implement a rule that the left lane is for passing here, because people are using every lane of traffic," Luevano said.

Even when traffic is moving, if you took all the traffic in the No. 1 lane and dumped it into the other three or four lanes, what would happen? The other three lanes would slow down. As people would seek to pass in the No. 1 lane, it would quickly clog, as well.

http://www.latimes.com/classified/automoti...0,6458507.story

[Ban Hammer 13,346]

in texas, the left lane is for passing, not camping.

[PlatyPius 5]

The best way to deal with California (horrible traffic, flakey people, etc) is for a very large earthquake to come along and turn Nevada into ocean-front property.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

in texas, the left lane is for passing, not camping.

I agree. The author of this article's argument is weak. I drive almost 120 miles on the So. Cal. freeways during the week and the biggest causes of traffic congestion I've seen are accidents, rubbernecking when there's an accident, cars driving slow in the left lane, and people who brake often for no apparent reason. When I pass someone who's brake lights go on and off like Christmas tree lights, I often see someone talking on the friggin cell phone. Traffic engineers have talked about designating high speed lanes as one way to reduce traffic congestion. Our carpool lanes out here demonstrate that idea perfectly.

[no name 1]

in texas, the left lane is for passing, not camping.

I agree. The author of this article's argument is weak. I drive almost 120 miles on the So. Cal. freeways during the week and the biggest causes of traffic congestion I've seen are accidents, rubbernecking when there's an accident, cars driving slow in the left lane, and people who brake often for no apparent reason. When I pass someone who's brake lights go on and off like Christmas tree lights, I often see someone talking on the friggin cell phone. Traffic engineers have talked about designating high speed lanes as one way to reduce traffic congestion. Our carpool lanes out here demonstrate that idea perfectly.

I'm sooooo glad I don't take the highway very often. Freeway drivers are much worse than surface street traffic.

Edited February 15, 2008 by illumine

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

The best way to deal with California (horrible traffic, flakey people, etc) is for a very large earthquake to come along and turn Nevada into ocean-front property.

Naw - flyover states would be lost without California to bash? Who would they blame for America's problems without "Hollywood" and "San Francisco"? They would also miss our tax dollars more.

[sereia 0]

As much as I dislike Orange County... at least the traffic isn't nearly as bad as up in LA! I used to pull my hair out driving in that traffic everyday! Oy!

[Ban Hammer 13,346]

The best way to deal with California (horrible traffic, flakey people, etc) is for a very large earthquake to come along and turn Nevada into ocean-front property.

Naw - flyover states would be lost without California to bash? Who would they blame for America's problems without "Hollywood" and "San Francisco"? They would also miss our tax dollars more.

actually, the only drawback is the porn industry would disappear too

[Kazan' Tiger 1]

I'm with y'all 100%!

Simple common courtesy has always been get over for faster moving traffic. Whether it be walking on a wooded trail, bicycling down a converted old railroad track, or driving on the highway. Yield!!!

in texas, the left lane is for passing, not camping.

I agree. The author of this article's argument is weak. I drive almost 120 miles on the So. Cal. freeways during the week and the biggest causes of traffic congestion I've seen are accidents, rubbernecking when there's an accident, cars driving slow in the left lane, and people who brake often for no apparent reason. When I pass someone who's brake lights go on and off like Christmas tree lights, I often see someone talking on the friggin cell phone. Traffic engineers have talked about designating high speed lanes as one way to reduce traffic congestion. Our carpool lanes out here demonstrate that idea perfectly.

[no name 1]

The best way to deal with California (horrible traffic, flakey people, etc) is for a very large earthquake to come along and turn Nevada into ocean-front property.

Naw - flyover states would be lost without California to bash? Who would they blame for America's problems without "Hollywood" and "San Francisco"? They would also miss our tax dollars more.

actually, the only drawback is the porn industry would disappear too

What have those flyover states contributed to lately? Corn? Wheat? Certainly not much. And they're certainly nothing to look at.

Edited February 15, 2008 by illumine

[mawilson 2,133]

I drive almost 120 miles on the So. Cal. freeways during the week

Does your car go that fast? A lot of cars these days are electronically limited to 120mph.

[Alex+R 0]

The best way to deal with California (horrible traffic, flakey people, etc) is for a very large earthquake to come along and turn Nevada into ocean-front property.

Naw - flyover states would be lost without California to bash? Who would they blame for America's problems without "Hollywood" and "San Francisco"? They would also miss our tax dollars more.

actually, the only drawback is the porn industry would disappear too

What have those flyover states contributed to lately? Corn? Wheat? Certainly not much. And they're certainly nothing to look at.

I like California a lot but hey, we from the flyovers contribute things! And....I will get back to you when I think of them....

[no name 1]

The best way to deal with California (horrible traffic, flakey people, etc) is for a very large earthquake to come along and turn Nevada into ocean-front property.

Naw - flyover states would be lost without California to bash? Who would they blame for America's problems without "Hollywood" and "San Francisco"? They would also miss our tax dollars more.

actually, the only drawback is the porn industry would disappear too

What have those flyover states contributed to lately? Corn? Wheat? Certainly not much. And they're certainly nothing to look at.

I like California a lot but hey, we from the flyovers contribute things! And....I will get back to you when I think of them....

[Sheriff Uling 3]

in texas, the left lane is for passing, not camping.

True, but Texans also carry shotguns in the car. Hell, I'd get out the way too... Hehehehe!!! Don't mess with Texas...

Edited February 15, 2008 by Sheriff Uling

[Amby 490]

I don't miss that traffic one bit!