Dear Street Smart:They can’t expect people to...

Dear Street Smart:

They can’t expect people to car-pool unless we are encouraged.

Why doesn’t Caltrans put car-pool lanes on the Ventura and San Diego freeways?

Traffic could not be much worse with one fewer lane for the single passenger, and we car-poolers would become more numerous because we would be rewarded with our own lanes.

Howard Naness, Chatsworth

Dear Reader:

We have some good news and some bad news.

First, the good news: Construction is expected to start this summer on car-pool lanes for a 10-mile stretch of the San Diego Freeway between the Ventura and Golden State freeways.

Caltrans spokesman Russ Snyder said the $18-million project will take just more than two years to complete. No existing traffic lanes will be consumed by the project, which will entail re-striping lanes and using parts of the freeway shoulder and median.

Snyder said work will be done at night to avoid traffic tie-ups.

At the same time, studies are under way to determine the feasibility of re-striping parts of the Antelope Valley Freeway to create car-pool lanes for the long-haul commuters of Lancaster and Palmdale.

Now, the bad news (or the good news for those who hate car-pool lanes): It is unlikely that the Ventura Freeway will ever play host to car-pool lanes. You can thank a handful of community members for the decision.

Snyder explained that when Caltrans was preparing to widen the freeway a few years ago, local residents resisted the idea of car-pool lanes because they feared it would not do enough to speed traffic. So Caltrans added a fifth so-called “mixed-flow” lane to the freeway and abandoned the car-pool lanes.

*

Dear Street Smart:

I’m a student at Cal State Northridge, and I have a problem with the parking.

After the earthquake, green “Temporary Parking” signs were posted on surrounding city streets. Some of them were posted under existing red signs that said “No Parking” or that listed limited parking hours.

Recently I parked on Vincennes Street, where there were both red and green signs, and was cited. When I called to contest the citation, they said that the “No Parking” sign took precedence over any other sign. How am I supposed to know that? I think it very confusing and extremely unfair.

Richard Michael Cohen, Northridge

Dear Reader:

First of all, there should be no more complaints and confusion like yours anymore from the CSUN area: Last week all temporary parking on city streets surrounding CSUN was rescinded, because the university has recovered the number of spaces it had before the quake. In fact, there are several hundred more spaces than before, officials say.

But your question is still germane in light of the temporary parking signs that remain posted on a few side streets off Ventura Boulevard in Sherman Oaks and around Warner Center in Woodland Hills. Both areas lost parking spaces because of damaged parking structures after the temblor.

According to Jack Reynolds of the city Department of Transportation, a green temporary parking sign should overrule red signs that declare no parking or limit parking hours.

But here’s the rub: You are not exempted from other rules, such as those that forbid parking by a red curb, next to a fire hydrant or during weekly street-cleaning periods. Reynolds says many motorists who challenged citations discovered that the violation wasn’t for parking in a previously off-limits zone but for breaking other regulations that still apply.