watching hgtv right now.  A couple who lives in DT Chicago said their one parking spot that came with their condo cost an additional $27,000.  They said that was cheap!  That is one expensive parking spot. 

That averages to $74 a day.  Anyone seen $74 a day parking in Chicago?  I thought the typical was more like $40, and that's a daily rate.  I'd expect monthly and annual to be cheaper.

That's a purchase price, not a rental price. It comes out to $74 a day if they only use it for a year. (By way of comparison, valet parking in Manhattan's most expensive office tower is around $60/day.)

 

Still damn expensive, though... $27,000 is a down payment on a house in most other parts of the country.

State may put towing companies on the hook

Pending legislation would give the PUCO sole authority to regulate tow-truck drivers. Critics say the state couldn't keep up.

Monday,  November 2, 2009 3:05 AM

By Mark Ferenchik

THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

 

Every year, tens of thousands of cars are towed in cities across the state.

 

Most towing companies are just doing their jobs and comply with laws created to keep tabs on them and help consumers, including fee limits.

 

But there are bad apples, and some officials want more local control to keep these rogue drivers in check.

 

Read more at:

http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2009/11/02/copy/CITYTOW.ART_ART_11-02-09_A1_LIFHM0M.html?adsec=politics&sid=101

This article, in essence, says yes...

 

The Return of the Two-Way Street

 

Why the double-yellow stripe is making a comeback in downtowns.

 

By Alan Ehrenhalt | December 2009

 

Over the past couple of decades, Vancouver, Washington, has spent millions of dollars trying to revitalize its downtown, and especially the area around Main Street that used to be the primary commercial center. Just how much the city has spent isn’t easy to determine. But it’s been an ambitious program. Vancouver has totally refurbished a downtown park, subsidized condos and apartment buildings overlooking it and built a new downtown Hilton hotel.

 

Some of these investments have been successful, but they did next to nothing for Main Street itself. Through most of this decade, the street remained about as dreary as ever. Then, a year ago, the city council tried a new strategy. Rather than wait for the $14 million more in state and federal money it was planning to spend on projects on and around Main Street, it opted for something much simpler. It painted yellow lines in the middle of the road, took down some signs and put up others, and installed some new traffic lights. In other words, it took a one-way street and opened it up to two-way traffic.

 

Read more:

http://www.governing.com/column/return-two-way-street

 

 

 

 

Yes and no. It depends.

 

    One-way streets facilitate traffic movement both for automobiles and pedestrians and minimize accidents by minimizing conflicting movements. One-way streets are ideal in cities.

 

  Jane Jacobs was not in favor of two way streets. This is her only point that I do not understand.

 

   

I have worked on a few one-way conversions (turning one-way pairs back into two-way streets.) Usually they were in small or medium sized towns, and the one-way pair was hindering commercial activity in downtowns.

Cleveland has very few.  I really don't favor them in most instances.  They're great for passing through, not so great if you're trying to get around within an area.  They complicate navigation, they make for faster auto traffic and therefore less pedestrian friendly streets, they complicate transit routing.

I say yes and no also.  The ones in Cincinnati are so narrow that they don't seem that bad to me.  However, Akron and Columbus have too many one ways that are not needed.  I like Carnegie Ave in Cleveland that swiitches directions during rush hour and is 2 way during the day.  Generally, the smaller the city, I think the less they are needed.  The worst places I have seen are Austin TX and Springfield IL.  Austin has great lively streets that seem weird as one way traffic sewers, like 6th street.  Springfield IL is one of the most surprising ugly little cities I have ever seen that had all horrible one-ways and no life at all.  I was expecting a state capitol like Madison WI, or even Lansing MI.  It is neither, and a depressing capitol for one of the wealthiest states.  I think because all the streets were one-way sewers that led straight out of town.

 

 

 

This would fall under the "no other option but one-way" category. There are times when the street is too narrow and traffic load too heavy to have two-way traffic, but this isn't the case with most Ohio streets. Christ, in Downtown Columbus, you could have four-way streets!

 

There are a lot of factors. Like others mentioned, one-way streets are great for fast, unimpeded traffic (accessibility) but two-way streets are better for connectivity (access points/intersections that force people to explore other parts of downtown when getting to their destination). Short blocks on one-ways (generally) mitigate the high speed that comes with one-ways by having so many close intersections. This is definitely true in Cincinnati. Traffic is more calmed on 2-way streets so it seems to me that it makes more sense on longer blocks that tend to cause speeding though I'm sure there's arguments against that. If it's one-way, the lane width might need to be reduced for traffic calming. I think it's more important that 2-ways have parked cars on both sides acting as a buffer for pedestrians.  You also have to look at development patterns and connectivity to highway interchanges. For instance, there's a hell of a lot more traffic and activity on High St. than a street like Grant so if High were one-way, it would be causing some unnecessary congestion on other nearby streets that may or may not be able to handle it. Too much congestion can lead to a hostile environment for cyclist, pedestrians and drivers. Not to mention it's just annoying to do unnecessary driving and lack of access points furiates people more than unimpeded traffic makes them happy. High works well as a 2-way though because of the "one-way pair" that is 3rd and 4th. In general though, I think downtowns can handle one-way streets much easier than other parts of town because the grid geometry is so excellent for both connectivity and accessibility.

Dayton is in the process of converting, including parts of Monument, Patterson, Jefferson, First, Second, and Fourth.

I love that Cleveland doesn't really have much in terms of one-way streets.  In St. Louis, almost every street is one-way, yet they're generally at least four lanes each.  I had totally forgotten how much I wasn't a fan of one-ways........

I love that Cleveland doesn't really have much in terms of one-way streets. In St. Louis, almost every street is one-way, yet they're generally at least four lanes each. I had totally forgotten how much I wasn't a fan of one-ways........

 

Same here. I wish Columbus had less one-ways downtown. It's sucks.

 

Something else worth noting and I think it was part of a quote I had in my sig... Have you ever noticed that when you're on a one-way street, you barely notice what's around you? You're going too fast and your brain is on auto-pilot. I remember driving to Univ. of Cincinnati from the WH-Taft exit one day and I finally realized - wait a second, what exists on Taft, between Reading Rd. and Jefferson Ave.? Obviously something because there are buildings all around but as many times as I've taken this route, I've never had a reason to even think about it. I've never had an excuse to park and walk around to explore that stretch. That is the consequence of unimpeded flow of traffic. You miss out on a lot of things between point A and B. Yet for some reason we're obsessed with making traffic go faster. Our street grids are like a CPU that is perpetually overclocked.

I like Carnegie Ave in Cleveland that swiitches directions during rush hour and is 2 way during the day.

 

Carnegie has been "normalized".  3 ways in each direction, it used to be 4 and 2 depending on rush hour... I can't tell you how many cars I saw driving head on into oncoming traffic over the years because they didn't understand how it worked...

I like Carnegie Ave in Cleveland that swiitches directions during rush hour and is 2 way during the day.

 

Carnegie has been "normalized". 3 ways in each direction, it used to be 4 and 2 depending on rush hour... I can't tell you how many cars I saw driving head on into oncoming traffic over the years because they didn't understand how it worked...

 

Yes, Carnegie has been two-way now for about 5 years.  It went from being 2/4 morning, 6/0 afternoon, 3/3 other (6 total lanes) to 2/2/turning lane (5 total lanes) all day.  It was a terror when it switched as people always tried to go westbound when it was 6/0 eastbound in the afternoon (strangely it was never 6 lanes one-way westbound, only 4/2).  It was also completely unnecessary.  Now that it has gone from 6 lanes to 2, traffic still flows pretty well even at rush hour as the lights are timed well for traffic to move between 30-35 MPH.

 

As for one-way streets, I couldn't be happier that Cleveland hardly has any of them (save for alleys).

Here's a perspective from DaytonMostMetro.com: http://www.daytonmostmetro.com/?p=3112

 

  Note that Taft between Reading and Jefferson was widened from the original, and modified to carry high speed traffic. Calhoun and McMicken were not.

 

  Building height, setbacks, sidewalk width, lighting, parking, and amount of traffic are all factors that determine how a street functions. That section of Taft, along with the adjacent Kroger shopping center, was designed in typical suburban fashion, and it does not function very well. If it were two-way, it still wouldn't function very well.

 

  Note that Taft between Reading and Jefferson was widened from the original, and modified to carry high speed traffic. Calhoun and McMicken were not.

 

  Building height, setbacks, sidewalk width, lighting, parking, and amount of traffic are all factors that determine how a street functions. That section of Taft, along with the adjacent Kroger shopping center, was designed in typical suburban fashion, and it does not function very well. If it were two-way, it still wouldn't function very well.

 

Even driving slower would cause it to make a bigger impression on your memory. That portion of Taft is designed almost strictly to get people off the exit and to UC.

 

I agree that there are other factors; you bring up a good point.

 

I'm just saying that with the street widening, lack of intersections, high speed traffic, along with only going one-way between those two points- it's helped make that area in-between meaningless. You fly past there so quickly.

In Columbus, Clintonville would greatly benefit from more of them, especially around the new Indianola K-8. Morning drop-off is a big game of chicken on the surrounding side streets. As for the wider North-South avenues, such as Summit and Fourth, a conversion from one way to two way is desperately needed. Downtown, East-West streets like Spring and Long would benefit to a two-way conversion, much like Gay did.

How about this idea: turn a two way street into a one way street so that one traffic lane can be closed to create two bicycle lanes? 

^Dayton is actually doing that with Jefferson downtown (well, one bike lane, but still).

In Columbus, Clintonville would greatly benefit from more of them, especially around the new Indianola K-8. Morning drop-off is a big game of chicken on the surrounding side streets. As for the wider North-South avenues, such as Summit and Fourth, a conversion from one way to two way is desperately needed. Downtown, East-West streets like Spring and Long would benefit to a two-way conversion, much like Gay did.

 

 

I can't remember the logic but from what I read a long time ago somewhere, apparently when you have a 2-way arterial street like High, it's good to have a "1-way couple" (3rd/Summit and 4th) running parallel to it. I don't know what's so great about it, the only thing I can think of is that High works great for pedestrians and bus routes connecting northern neighborhoods to downtown, while 3rd and 4th might be percieved better as an express route for commuters to and from those areas. Pick your poison I guess? It is pretty amazing how fast you can get downtown by taking Summit. Lot of greenlight. The city seems to favor 2-way streets in more pedestrian-friendly environments. Gay has all those little boutiques, restaurants, print shops, etc. Very permeable with lots of pedestrians. Contrast that with like..Marconi which is desolate, fast-moving and 1-way. I wonder if they did that because the geographic constraints were there anyway.

 

How about this idea: turn a two way street into a one way street so that one traffic lane can be closed to create two bicycle lanes?

 

You can have two way streets with bike lanes on each side. I see that in Columbus.

 

I don't think there's any clear-cut answer. If you look this stuff up, it seems like there are a million pros and cons to every arrangement. Cities are always trying new things.

 

 

Springfield, Mansfield, and Lima should definitely go back to two-way traffic.

Especially Springfield.

Springfield, Mansfield, and Lima should definitely go back to two-way traffic.

Agreed. I think Mansfield has been planning on converting the one-ways to two-ways, but I am not sure how close they are to actually accomplishing that.

Downtown Cincinnati could use more two-way streets, but it's not as bad now as it could be.  Most of the streets are still barely 40' wide, and with street parking it's fairly calm with the short blocks and mid-block pedestrian signals.  That said, the way street parking is "turned off" at rush hour doesn't help.  It's also annoying that 3rd and 4th Streets are both westbound.  5th Street is a pretty wide behemoth next to P&G where it feeds onto Columbia Parkway and I-71/471.  The way so many ramps plug into the streets on the east and west side of downtown, it'd be interesting to see which of those east-west streets can effectively be converted to two-way operation.  4th, 7th, and 9th are probably good candidates, but I doubt 5th and 6th could be retooled. 

 

I don't think there's a single north-south street that couldn't be converted back to two-way.  None of the streets in Over-the-Rhine need to be one-way.  If nothing else, I think the effort to make Vine Street two-way in Over-the-Rhine should be extended all the way to the riverfront.  That would be a perfect place for the streetcar line, making Vine Street kind of a transit mall.  Not transit/pedestrian only per se, but at least car hostile.  Splitting the route so that northbound and southbound tracks run on different streets is just asinine, and having better two-way streets to choose from would help simplify the plan and make it more convenient and cost effective.

 

I'm not sure how I feel about turning Taft/Calhoun and McMillan back into two-way streets.  As a cyclist, I actually find them great to ride on as one-way streets.  They are both 40' wide (give or take), so there's always a minimum of two through lanes.  I can just take a lane and not have to worry about cars backing up behind me since they have at least one other lane to pass in.  If these streets are made two-way with street parking on both sides, it leaves just one through lane each way.  With such a narrow right-of-way, it doesn't leave enough room to ride without blocking traffic or riding dangerously close to parked cars.  Making them three lane roads with a center turn lane and wide outside lanes would work, but that eliminates all street parking, and the neighborhoods won't stand for it.  Two wide lanes plus parking on one side might work though, and it could still allow for a left turn pocket at some intersections. 

At least Downtown Cincinnati is predictable. The blocks are short and all the same length. The direction almost always alternates with every street. You know what you need to do to get where you're going. Cincinnati's downtown is really nice in general. It's hard to hate on Downtown Cincinnati. I'd much rather walk through Downtown Cincy than drive, any day.

 

I'm not sure how I feel about turning Taft/Calhoun and McMillan back into two-way streets.  As a cyclist, I actually find them great to ride on as one-way streets. 

 

That's because you don't plan to turn anywhere until you get near UC! Like I said, that space between Reading and Jefferson is irrelevant to most people! It's sad. It could have been planned so much better.

 

 

McMillan isn't so bad. McMillan has so much congestion, it could never have a speeding problem.  The main problem is Calhoun. People drive way too d@mn fast on that street.

 

Planners should have made Clifton Ave. extend all the way downtown. Perhaps it wasn't feasible or maybe Clifton Ave. was widened later; I don't know. But that configuration would alleviate a lot of the strain it puts on McMillan.

They are late for class.

Yeah and they would park on my old street right in front of my house and in front of the fire hydrant. D#mn commuters.

It's also annoying that 3rd and 4th Streets are both westbound.

 

It's been thrown around that 4th Street could be converted to two-way.

 

None of the streets in Over-the-Rhine need to be one-way.

 

It would be nice to see Elm and Race converted to two-way north of Central Parkway.

 

If nothing else, I think the effort to make Vine Street two-way in Over-the-Rhine should be extended all the way to the riverfront.  That would be a perfect place for the streetcar line, making Vine Street kind of a transit mall.  Not transit/pedestrian only per se, but at least car hostile.  Splitting the route so that northbound and southbound tracks run on different streets is just asinine, and having better two-way streets to choose from would help simplify the plan and make it more convenient and cost effective.

 

Converting Vine to two-way in downtown may be problematic since both Race and Walnut are one-way southbound.

 

Also, running the streetcar on parallel one-way streets is not that big of an issue (doesn't add too much confusion or walking distance), and increases the amount of developable land along the route.  Running the streetcar on one-way streets is usually preferable because it allows cars to pass while streetcars are stopped.  On two-way streets with two parking lanes and one lane of traffic in each direction, there is no way for cars to pass the streetcar, hindering traffic flow.

Also, running the streetcar on parallel one-way streets is not that big of an issue (doesn't add too much confusion or walking distance), and increases the amount of developable land along the route.  Running the streetcar on one-way streets is usually preferable because it allows cars to pass while streetcars are stopped.  On two-way streets with two parking lanes and one lane of traffic in each direction, there is no way for cars to pass the streetcar, hindering traffic flow.

 

It may not be a big issue, but it IS an issue.  Aside from the many reasons I've written about here it's also true that one-way streets and their requisite split transit routes have lower ridership than two-way streets.  This was seen in New York City in the 1950s and 60s when streets were converted to one-way and bus ridership on those routes dropped immediately. 

 

Standard operating procedure for the past 80 years has been about improving automobile traffic flow to the detriment of everything else.  We need to stop this mentality that goobers up potentially valuable public transportation systems because they might interfere with cars, especially in an area with so many alternative driving routes.  The situation should be the reverse of what we're making it. 

Back in 2007 before the Gay St. conversion began we have here the 05/2007 Downtown Development Resource Center newsletter that states:

 

The eventual goal is to convert most one-way streets to two-way, with the exception of Third and Fourth Streets and portions of Long and Spring Streets.

 

After the conversion more businesses have moved in or are in the process of doing so and it's also because of this that the large-scale residential development is taking place. Why we are now only seeing Civic Center Dr. and one stretch of Front receiving is a mystery to me; shouldn't it be painfully obvious that as many as possible should be fixed now? I'd argue that a stretch of 3rd and 4th should each be included too.

 

Instead, the city is spending this money on adding lanes to Hilliard-Rome, Hard Rd, and other streets outside of the urban core, as if those areas need more sprawling development to be encouraged. It seems like they are content with doing the least amount possible and stopping there.

 

^Hard road near Sawmill is a traffic nightmare at all hours. I hate that part of town with the intensity of a thousands suns, but nothing will change the mindset of the people who live out there; widening is inevitable.

 

Instead, the city is spending this money on adding lanes to Hilliard-Rome,

 

The portion below i-70? I hate driving through there; that stupid train is at-grade and passes through all the time.

Planners should have made Clifton Ave. extend all the way downtown. Perhaps it wasn't feasible or maybe Clifton Ave. was widened later; I don't know. But that configuration would alleviate a lot of the strain it puts on McMillan.

 

I think the topography would have made that impossible -- unless Clifton coming up from downtown was continued straight north (through where UC is now). That's one thing I like about Cincinnati, the topography makes the street grid here much more interesting, some would say frustrating :) But that's actually good for slowing down traffic, I bet.

It's been awhile since I've been in downtown Toledo, but when I spent a lot of time there in the late 90s, there wasn't enough traffic to warrant one ways then and I can't imagine things have gotten better since (other than during sporting events).

Planners should have made Clifton Ave. extend all the way downtown. Perhaps it wasn't feasible or maybe Clifton Ave. was widened later; I don't know. But that configuration would alleviate a lot of the strain it puts on McMillan.

 

 

I think the topography would have made that impossible -- unless Clifton coming up from downtown was continued straight north (through where UC is now). That's one thing I like about Cincinnati, the topography makes the street grid here much more interesting, some would say frustrating :) But that's actually good for slowing down traffic, I bet.

 

I don't understand this.  Clifton does connect to downtown via Vine Street, and Main Street to a lesser extent.  Also, how does Clifton, a north-south street, put strain on McMillan, an east-west street?  Are you just talking about the little one block long cluster f*** where Clifton doesn't quite connect with itself at Calhoun and McMillan? 

Two-way streets and nose-in parking too:

 

More pics like this and of historic Dayton on DaytonMostMetro [link here].

Southern states do a U-turn on toll roads

By Larry Copeland, USA TODAY, December 21, 2009

 

ATLANTA — When the Florida Department of Transportation decided to add congestion-easing express toll lanes to Interstate 95 last year between Miami and Fort Lauderdale, public resistance was muted, partly because south Floridians are used to tolls.

 

That's not the case in the Deep South, a region that has long resisted tolls as a "Yankee plague," as South Carolina state Sen. Dave Thomas, a Greenville Republican, colorfully describes them.

Southern states do a U-turn on toll roads

By Larry Copeland, USA TODAY, December 21, 2009

 

ATLANTA — When the Florida Department of Transportation decided to add congestion-easing express toll lanes to Interstate 95 last year between Miami and Fort Lauderdale, public resistance was muted, partly because south Floridians are used to tolls.

 

That's not the case in the Deep South, a region that has long resisted tolls as a "Yankee plague," as South Carolina state Sen. Dave Thomas, a Greenville Republican, colorfully describes them.

 

I-95 is a hot mess!

I often see or hear comments that Ohio doesn't have traffic congestion like other areas of the nation.  Check out this list just published of the 75 worst commutes in the United States.... Ohio has five cities on the list.  I have excerpted the "Ohio Five" from the story.

 

America's 75 Worst Commutes

by The Daily Beast

http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-01-19/americas-75-worst-commutes/full/

 

They are the highways to hell in the country’s most gridlocked cities. The Daily Beast crunches the numbers to determine your ultimate morning nightmares. How did your commute rank?

 

Bumper-to-bumper traffic is America’s collective nightmare, and like the movie Groundhog Day it repeats on a daily basis.

 

Congestion consumes billions of gallons of fuel, wastes hundreds of billions of dollars in productivity and causes billions of stress headaches. Yet over 100 million automobile commuters each day feel like they have little option. “We put so much of our national wealth and our identity into the whole motoring thing,” says James Howard Kunstler, author of Geography of Nowhere, “that we can’t imagine doing something different.”

Full story at link above:

 

 

Excerpts from the list:

36, I-75, Cincinnati

Weekly hours of bottleneck congestion: 86

Worst bottleneck: Southbound, Ronald Reagan Cross County Hwy/Exit 10

Length of worst bottleneck: .46 mi

Weekly hours of congestion on worst bottleneck: 16

Speed of worst bottleneck when congested: 21.6 mph

 

Commuter Buzz: "The main gist is widening, adding more lanes for traffic to flow easier," Ohio Department of Transportation spokesperson Liz Lyons told The Cincinnati Enquirer Nov. 2, 2009, about new construction on I-75.

 

42, I-90, Cleveland

Weekly hours of bottleneck congestion: 59

Worst bottleneck: Westbound, Chester Ave/Exit 173

Length of worst bottleneck: .24 mi

Weekly hours of congestion on worst bottleneck: 15

Speed of worst bottleneck when congested: 15.7 mph

 

Commuter Buzz: Add a dash of rain, and the road can act like "a section of ice," Brian Beal told The Cleveland Plain Dealer, describing the hazardous pavement sealant that was applied to parts of Interstate 90 last winter.

 

52, North Freeway, Columbus OH

Weekly hours of bottleneck congestion: 14

Worst bottleneck: Northbound, I-670/Exit 109

Length of worst bottleneck: .73 mi

Weekly hours of congestion on worst bottleneck: 7

Speed of worst bottleneck when congested: 22.7 mph

 

Commuter Buzz: “Ironically, this morning on my way in, I was behind a gentleman who was driving extremely slow and I was thinking to myself he’s more of a hazard than someone who is going reasonably slow,“ driver Lisa Hartong told NBC4i of 2010’s first weather-induced morning traffic jam.

 

67, I-271, Akron, OH

Weekly hours of bottleneck congestion: 4

Worst bottleneck: Northbound, I-480/Cuyahoga-Summit County Line

Length of worst bottleneck: 2.51 mi

Weekly hours of congestion on worst bottleneck: 4

Speed of worst bottleneck when congested: 28.1 mph

 

Commuter Buzz: "The traffic mess has not been as bad as I thought it would be," Bob Zarle told the Akron Beacon Journal in November 2008 during a construction period. "You see progress constantly, and you see people working everywhere. It's like an ant's nest."

 

69, I-75, Dayton, OH

Weekly hours of bottleneck congestion: 46

Worst bottleneck: Northbound, Highway 48/Grand Ave/Exit 54

Length of worst bottleneck: .67 mi

Weekly hours of congestion on worst bottleneck: 12

Speed of worst bottleneck when congested: 17.4 mph

 

Commuter Buzz: After an accident caused by icy roads, commuter Gwen Hymen offered some sage advice for WHIO TV viewers. “I know a lot of people that get in their cars and go, and that messes up your car. I warm mine up an hour before I go.”

 

Commuter Buzz: "The main gist is widening, adding more lanes for traffic to flow easier," Ohio Department of Transportation spokesperson Liz Lyons told The Cincinnati Enquirer Nov. 2, 2009, about new construction on I-75.

Way to go ODOT, wider highways!

So Akron's worst bottleneck isn't in Akron (or even close) and Cleveland's is one exit ramp? I suppose that's a good thing, especially since my bus takes that exit every morning and doesn't seem to have a problem with it.

 

 

Wow, I never thought I-75 in Cincinnati was bad compared to any other city I've visited and had the misfortune of driving though during rush hour.

I think I've been stuck in traffic on at least half the highways on that list.

So Akron's worst bottleneck isn't in Akron (or even close) and Cleveland's is one exit ramp? I suppose that's a good thing, especially since my bus takes that exit every morning and doesn't seem to have a problem with it.

 

 

 

I can't believe I-270 in St. Louis is below I-90 in Cleveland!!!!  I-270 is SIX lanes wide and the traffic is backed up for at least 4-5 miles every single day in multiple segments of 4-5 miles.  I don't agree with this list!

^ Like trying to cure obesity by buying bigger pants.

Why are the length of the backup's so short? I mean i been in backup's 5+ miles or so on I 75 consistantly.

"Commuter Buzz: Add a dash of rain, and the road can act like "a section of ice," Brian Beal told The Cleveland Plain Dealer, describing the hazardous pavement sealant that was applied to parts of Interstate 90 last winter."

 

That was one localized section way out in the eastern 'burbs and ODOT has since ground down the sealant - the problem was they laid it down too wide which reduced traction. If you're in Cleveland and you think traffic bottlenecks are bad here, you need to get out and see the world.

 

I can attest to #2 on the list (Honolulu's H1) This shot is about 8 miles west of the CBD of Waikiki - that outbound clusterf#ck of traffic on the left wasn't moving and went on forever - it also has a counterpart east of the CBD. As beautiful as Honolulu is, I couldn't imagine dealing with this day in, day out: