What are the alternatives to smart corridors?

Smart corridors seeks to move traffic on surrounding arterials when a crash backs up traffic on 101. Other arterials are presently encroached on but not systematically because people are afraid of getting lost. By providing directional signage CCAG hopes to use the entire network to move traffic. Similarly surrounding neighborhood streets are encroached on from these arterials by drivers looking for alternatives (more below). Adding more traffic to the arterials exponentially increases the traffic on surrounding streets spreading toxicity and danger.

One alternative to smart corridors would be regulate the causes of crashes in the first place. Speed, aggressive driving, male drivers under 25, distraction, inattention, and alcohol make up 90% of causes on all roads.

The most effective way to manage speed and aggression is with monitors. However because we have bankrupted the state with Prop 13 and elimination of the vehicle license fee the CHP are unable to staff monitors. The state is working on distraction- for example texting becomes illegal tomorrow; and alcohol needs additional tools like breath activated ignition locks. Keeping bad drivers of the road would help! However speed, young drivers, and inattention have been addressed a long time ago in regions as remote as Singapore and as recent as London and Stockholm.

Enter the same technology that CCAG wants to use for smart information. The freeways around London are congestion priced so that all the lanes remain operable at a certain speed which looked like 50 mph. The congestion pricing varies dynamically and is displayed so drivers know the cost of using lanes. The monitor program controls both volume and speed and its all done with video cameras. Caltrans should invite TfL (Transport for London) to learn how to implement these systems. TfL is instructing systems from Seoul to Copenhagen.

Traffic Management through Pricing is on everyone's vocabulary today including Poizner. VTA is in the process of implementing High Occupancy Toll Lanes and CCAG is studying them. For the cost of paint CCAG could generate a revenue stream to make Caltrain and buses viable so that commuters have a viable choice to 101. At a minimum CCAG could manage, with an increased maintenance budget, the existing roadway under its jurisdiction so that surrounding neighborhoods are not turned into traffic sewers for the rat race. Pricing, as the recent run up in gas prices shows, clearly works.

50 mph not only saves gas (i.e the balance of trade and national security), it saves lives from the energy impact in crashes and the reduced pollution because of the efficiencies realized by today's car engine designs. Today's freeways operate at an average speed of 14mph during the peak period. Getting them 20 mph or 35 mph would be huge public benefit and improve safety.

Moving traffic is a problem. Congestion management saw an environmental benefit from moving traffic at a congested node. However the entire network then becomes a pollution matrix. By Braes Paradox the nodes spread to other locations quickly bankrupting the ability of jurisdictions to fund "improvements." Braes Paradox says that additional roads, or network redundancy, add anarchy into a network. The result is increased congestion. Physicists Hyejin Youn and Hawoong Jeong, along with computer scientist Micheal Gastner, looked at the price of anarchy caused by self-interested drivers and showed that closing off roads (options?) improves throughput.

Taking lanes away from Single Occupant Drivers for HOT applications with speed monitoring will improve the overall network under CCAG jurisdiction. For the cost of paint we can replace the $10M neighborhood congestion program known as smart corridors.

Finally provide real alternatives for commuters to choose from. The trains and buses are running empty with low gas prices. And bike lanes don't connect frequently ending at the worst location in major traffic points. If Seattle and San Francisco and Davis can figure this out why can't we?