Jump to content

Commute times go up under Safe Clear


Recommended Posts

Sigh.

What an utterly idiotic story.

Of course commute times are going to increase over four years time. Houston has added tens of thousands of vehicles in that time period. Did the News Defenders (WTF does that mean???) get before and after traffic counts to compare?

(--crickets--)

The real question is: what would the average commute time be today without the program. Until the News Defenders figure that out, they're going to have to trust nationally respected experts like Lomax.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was funny. Are these people idiots? First off, how could removing disabled cars faster increase travel times? This just in, it now cost more money to drive on the commute since Safe Clear was started.

After the break, we will expose the "Global Warming myth" If it is getting warmer, how come the last two weeks have been cooler than the avg 2 months ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd have to agree with the traffic engineer quoted in the story. Volume is up and travel times would even be worse w/o safe clear.

You have it dead on, the traffic would have been much worse, not to mention we would be seeing more news items about people getting hurt or killed on the side of the road.

Sigh.

What an utterly idiotic story.

Of course commute times are going to increase over four years time. Houston has added tens of thousands of vehicles in that time period. Did the News Defenders (WTF does that mean???) get before and after traffic counts to compare?

(--crickets--)

The real question is: what would the average commute time be today without the program. Until the News Defenders figure that out, they're going to have to trust nationally respected experts like Lomax.

It seems as if the "non-story" seems to be in style at the moment, I hope this is a fad that passes soon. I think this one is up there with Wayne's Metro "expose'"

That was funny. Are these people idiots? First off, how could removing disabled cars faster increase travel times? This just in, it now cost more money to drive on the commute since Safe Clear was started.

Think about that statement of yours through before you post it and try again. You might answer your own question if you come up with the right logic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It appears that the assessment and compliments given to Channel 11 in this thread were WAY premature. I may enjoy emasculating Channel 2 for their imbecilic presentation of the news, but this "anlysis" is over the top.

And, Adie Wiseman endorsed it?

"I spend a lot of time on the freeways" said City Council member Addie Wiseman.

"It's costing us money and it isn't working," Wiseman said,

So Addie spends a lot of time on the freeway and concludes because of that safe clear is not working? I have to say I'm not real impressed with her thought process.

Edited by west20th
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There have been many engineering studies supporting the quick removal of disabled vehicles as a means to lessen "friction" between cars and improve overall traffic flow. The way SafeClear was implemented might have been controversial, but the theory behind it is sensible.

This piece of "journalism" by 11 News - comparing traffic congestion in 2003 to traffic congestion in 2006 and suggesting that the resulting increase can be blamed on SafeClear, rather than on the continued growth of jobs, houses and automobiles in the region, is beyond ridiculous.

I might have taken the report halfway seriously if it had suggested reasons why SafeClear had increased congestion. More tow trucks on the freeways? Delays caused by tow trucks pulling into traffic with disable vehicles? But, of course, this report didn't do so.

I thought Dolcefino's "OMG! METRO employees can ride buses for FREE!" report a few weeks ago hit a new low in what passes for local television reporting these days. But this "report" takes the cake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

comparing traffic congestion in 2003 to traffic congestion in 2006 and suggesting that the resulting increase can be blamed on SafeClear, rather than on the continued growth of jobs, houses and automobiles in the region, is beyond ridiculous.

While I think the News Defenders' wording is sloppy enough to imply such, I don't think that was quite their meaning.

I think they mean that since congestion has increased, the SafeClear program obviously doesn't help and that it isn't worth the money.

Still pretty silly, but not as bad as your statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought Dolcefino's "OMG! METRO employees can ride buses for FREE!" report a few weeks ago hit a new low in what passes for local television reporting these days. But this "report" takes the cake.

That fat bastard needs to throw in the towel! I can't remember how many times I saw him at Pig & Whistle looking like a shiny Gummy Bear. Ugh.

Don't forget his wind blown hurricane drama.

Dan Rather he is not. Or maybe he is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...