Caltrans Has a Solution for Culver Off-Ramp Madness

Dear Street Smart:

Every workday evening at the peak hours, the southbound Culver Drive exit off the San Diego Freeway backs up, even onto the freeway at times. Caltrans added an exit lane from the freeway recently so now there are two, but the problem remains unchanged at the intersection.

Here’s the scenario: Two lanes exit the freeway. The left lane is for eastbound traffic onto Culver. A few hundred feet from the intersection the left lane splits into two lanes. This is not adequate at all. The right lane from the freeway remains unchanged for westbound traffic at the intersection.

I do not know when the last traffic count was done. I would guess as much as 70%-80% of the existing traffic proceeds east onto Culver.

At peak hours, the left lane is backed up to the freeway. The right lane remains unrestricted all the way to the Culver intersection except for the cars that cut into the left lane a few hundred feet from the intersection to go east. If you are patient and remain in the left lane, you will wait through four to six signal cycle changes before going through the intersection.

The solution is so simple and reasonable I can’t believe it hasn’t been done already. Caltrans only needs to re-stripe a portion of the exit. No additional right-of-way or widening is required, just paint. The two lanes exiting the freeway should both be for eastbound Culver traffic. The transition to three lanes should be re-striped so that one would exit the right lane to enter an optional third lane for westbound Culver traffic.

Another solution, though more expensive, would be to widen a portion of the west side of the off-ramp (there is more than enough right-of-way) to allow for a longer westbound lane.

Rick Grandy Irvine

A recent investigation and traffic count on the southbound San Diego Freeway off-ramp to Culver Drive found that traffic was backing up close to the freeway during evening rush hours, said Harry Brown, associate transportation engineer for the state Department of Transportation. The traffic count revealed that about 65% of the motorists were turning left or eastbound on Culver, he said.

Caltrans plans to convert the middle lane from an option lane into a left-turn-only lane, Brown said. This will provide two lanes to eastbound Culver and one lane to westbound Culver.

Caltrans will also install signs well before the three-lane segment advising motorists of the various lane assignments, Brown said. Caltrans anticipates that the changes will alleviate the problem, he said.

Several readers responded to W. Lee Truman’s June 21 letter about requiring proof of automobile insurance. Many agreed that a motorist who can’t afford insurance may very well not be able to afford the costs of operating a vehicle. Here are some representative letters.

Dear Street Smart:

Regarding your column in the June 21 issue of The Times, I don’t believe it would be at all complicated to make sure that every car owner had valid insurance.

We would move to a cash basis. Each car owner would be required to pay for one full year of minimum insurance. The insurance companies would be required to issue no refunds or cancellations. Thus, the insurance would automatically be kept in force for the full year.

Proof of one full year of paid-up insurance would be required in order to renew the registration. If the car owner borrows money from the insurance company or some other lender and then defaults on the payments, the insurance company would still have to keep the car insured for the one-year term. There would be strong incentive for insurance companies to urge people to save and pay for the insurance up front.

The cost of insurance should be considered an integral part of the total cost of owning and maintaining a car.

Glenn A. Marsh Fullerton

Dear Street Smart:

In your June 21 column, the issue of how to incorporate proof of insurance coverage at the time of auto registration was discussed. The solution is relatively simple.

Insurance companies would issue a verification of insurance and enclose a sticker, validating coverage. The sticker would be placed on the license plate on the opposite side of the year tag, with month and year prominently indicated. Any car not having a current sticker affixed would be issued a citation and, unless compliance is verified within 10 days, the car would either be impounded and/or the driver’s license suspended. A fine could also be imposed.

The “pay at the pump” “no fault” concept has great merit. It eliminates the premium obligations and ensures everyone who drives would be covered with basic insurance. Those drivers who want additional protection can obtain it through their insurance companies, which would be more than eager to collect the additional premiums.

The “California Fair Plan,” initiated I believe in 1977, allowed high-risk property owners to obtain conventional insurance from a consortium of insurance companies licensed to do business in California. Requests for this coverage were funneled to the Department of Insurance, and placed in an insurance pool. Each insurance company had to pick applicants from this pool and issue conventional policies to them. The companies screamed and hollered that they would be put out of business if this method of forcing them to provide insurance was implemented. In the years that followed, the insurance companies not only didn’t depart from the state, but their profits also soared.

Dan Levine Mission Viejo

PacTel Cellular Samaritan Week--a road safety awareness program in Orange County in which PacTel cellular phone-toting motorists can report a variety of roadway ills--kicks off today and runs through Sunday. Each day this week, the program focuses on an individual theme, including traffic and road safety, graffiti abatement, smog pollution control, ride sharing and drunk-driving prevention. For information on this program, call (714) 966-0200.