Slashdot Mirror


Elon Musk Hates 405 Freeway Traffic, Pays Money To Speed Construction

S810 writes "Elon Musk, one of the main people behind PayPal, Space Exploration Technologies and Tesla Motors, has paid $50,000 to help Los Angeles speed up construction of the 405 Freeway, making it better and says that he will pay more if needed. From the article: 'Musk said he is open to pay the cost of adding workers to the widening project "as a contribution to the city and my own happiness. If it can actually make a difference, I would gladly contribute funds and ideas. I've super had it." — Musk quips that it's easier getting rockets into orbit than navigating his commute between home in Bel-Air and his Space Exploration Technologies factory in Hawthorne.' For those who aren't familiar with this issue, the 405 Freeway runs from the northern end of the San Fernando Valley all the way down to El Toro and runs by LAX. Residents are getting frustrated that this widening project is over budget and well over the anticipated time frame that it was supposed to completed by."

48 of 431 comments (clear)

  1. $50k enough? by jimmyhat3939 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Does $50k remotely make any dent there? Aren't these projects tens of millions of dollars?

    --
    Free Conference Call -- No Spam, High Quality
    1. Re:$50k enough? by ackthpt · · Score: 3, Informative

      Does $50k remotely make any dent there? Aren't these projects tens of millions of dollars?

      Probably pays the salary of 1 worker, without benefits, no overtime. A junior one at that.

      --

      A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    2. Re:$50k enough? by Trepidity · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This project was budgeted at $1 billion dollars, and is currently projected to cost $1.1 billion. So no, $50k is not significant. Also, he didn't even spend the $50k on construction: he paid it to a lobbying group, Angelinos Against Gridlock, whose goal is to speed construction. The group actually looks like one worth supporting (they have a vision that includes both roads and rail improvements and it seems reasonably thought out), so that $50k might be well spent. But it's spent on an advocacy organization, not on construction.

    3. Re:$50k enough? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      becasue the people who design this type of work, and mange it are really good.

      My head just exploded.

    4. Re:$50k enough? by Pseudonym+Authority · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You seem to have no idea the scale of work the goes into turning virgin terrain into a proper road. It involves hundreds of men working hard labor, dozens of machines that cost $10M each (or about $15K a month, if you want to rent) and are backordered for two years and burn 100 gallons of diesel a day, and hauling thousands of tons of rocks across large distances to poor on the ground. Then you take the amount of time to do all that and quadrupal it if you actually want to drive on it faster than 35MPH and not have your transmission fall out. None of that pays attention to the cost of surveying the land and planning out what angle is needed on the banks, determining just how much you can safely slope the road so both compact cars and big trucks can safely drive on it, to securing right-of-way from landowners,....

      But yeah, it's public money, so we can ignore all that and complain that they should work for free so no tax dollars are wasted while we still get roads that you don't need a horse to traverse.

    5. Re:$50k enough? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It gets worse. Until the 405 gets into the mountains, it's solid city on each side. Widening means buying property, expensive property. It's an elevated freeway, so it's hideously more expensive to build than on the ground.

      Sadly, it's not going to fix the problem. Twice as many lanes would still not be enough. There's a choke point where the 405 meets the 101 in the San Fernando Valley that backs at least 2 miles every workday, and has done so for at least 30 years.

      It may get better, but it's not going to be fixed.

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    6. Re:$50k enough? by rahvin112 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Don't think he's an exception, half the country thinks their experts on road design/construction, even when confronted by indisputable facts that run contrary to their initial thesis they will simply reformat their premise to reach the same conclusion.

      I always get a kick out of people that like the OP claim there is no basis for the cost but it's designed by registered professional engineers to standards dictated by the American Association of State and Highway Transportation Officials (AASHTO is a committee of experts in the field from state and federal government and private business). Those plans are then built by low bid contractors (often with 3+ bidders and prices that are frequently with 1-2%) operating under strict quality control guidelines with engineers supervising the installation, inspection, testing and quality assurance. And in the end the entire project is audited by both State and Federal auditors to ensure that no tax payer money was diverted or used contrary to law.

      Yet, according to the OP the whole thing is horseshit and you could build roads for half the cost. That is of course if you didn't care if they lasted more than a week, nor cared at all about safety such as whether the bridges will fall down in a strong wind. That's because the OP is an absolute expert in examining his rectum visually up close and personal.

      Yes roads cost a lot, and it's because they are designed to last anywhere from 20-40 years depending on pavement type. Considering the interstates were originally built in the 60's they've more than proved that the standards are adequate. But with truck weights more than 10 times larger than when the interstates were originally built it means complete reconstruction with much thicker pavements than the interstates used in the 60's. A typical interstate pavement section is over 3' thick with a foot of granular borrow, a foot of road base and a foot of concrete you aren't going to get any of that cheap.

    7. Re:$50k enough? by Archangel+Michael · · Score: 3, Insightful

      My questions is, why not have a 10 mile length of a double deck freeway that has no exits. That way, you get into the express deck, and you don't have to worry about asshats who swoop across 4 lanes of traffic to catch their off ramp at the last second.

      --
      Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
  2. SD Freeway isn't the problem by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    it's all the cars on it.

    if they built the sort of light rail which the region desperately needs it could cut down on the traffic hugely.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
    1. Re:SD Freeway isn't the problem by MrEricSir · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Do you really think a guy who runs a car company would want to see public transit improved?

      --
      There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
    2. Re:SD Freeway isn't the problem by MichaelSmith · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Its the only thing which will make life easier for drivers. Widening this road will just encourage more people to drive, increasing congestion everywhere.

    3. Re:SD Freeway isn't the problem by k6mfw · · Score: 4, Funny

      Imagine a super highway, six lanes wide, will never again be a traffic jam, and it will be beautiful!

      --
      mfwright@batnet.com
    4. Re:SD Freeway isn't the problem by sconeu · · Score: 5, Informative

      There's a reason nobody uses mass transit in LA. All mass transit in LA is based on a faulty assumption -- that everyone wants to go downtown.

      There's no real north/south transit: To get from the Valley to the Westside, you have to go downtown and then back to the Westside.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
  3. pays money to "study" speeding construction by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Informative

    He didn't pay money to speed construction. He spent $50,000 on a consulting organization that would look into how to speed up construction. They did not find a way to do so. But hey, he's learning how these things work: spending $50k to "study" something with no results is exactly how many real projects happen too. ;-)

    A better question might be why L.A. is spending $1.1 billion on widening a freeway, instead of improving its damn transit. Adding another lane is going to be a stop-gap solution at best, and it'll be congested to the hilt within another few years. Is the goal to have 30-lane freeways by 2030 or something?

    1. Re:pays money to "study" speeding construction by Trepidity · · Score: 3, Informative

      The 405 expansion is only moderately cheaper than the Red Line, even if you measure purely in terms of construction cost per capacity. For $1.1b, it's estimated to add capacity for another 50k passengers/day or so, making it cost about $22k per new passenger. The Red Line, for $4.5b, carries about 150k passengers/day, so it cost about $30k per passenger.

  4. Dear Elon by geekoid · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You aren't in traffic, you are traffic.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  5. Re:If he has the money and is willing to spend it. by SJHillman · · Score: 5, Informative

    I like living in the country, I'm not going to move into the inner city where my job is just because the commute sucks. However, if I can contribute a fairly small portion of my money to make my commute a bit easier, I will. A good place for a job can be a really shitty place for a home.

  6. Re:Idiot doesn't understand by ackthpt · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you want to throw money at the problem of highway construction, you offer a large payout contingent on how quickly it gets done while still within project specifications.

    The workers get paid by the hour and so do the contractor managers most of the time. So to give them money with the promise of "more if needed" will result in pleas of "hey! we need more!!!"

    These people seriously don't understand how it works when highways are constructed with public money -- the recipients never want the money to run out.

    You know nothing about these construction contracts, which are handled by private firms. There are incentives to get the work done fast. But there are somethings you just can't rush, like having that sandy soil properly settled so new roadbed doesn't continue to settle and end up with cracks and holes. Then there's the matter of having the equipment necessary at various stages there on time, much of it coming from other worksites. There's hundreds of miles of freeways alone in the LA area. I see the same thing where I live. It looks simple enough, until you are in charge of the logistics and find how much more expensive it can be to try rushing things. Maybe if Musk threw several million dollars at the contractors, so they had more equipment they could get some things done faster. Sometimes private industry isn't faster than a good ol' bloated public department with lots of taxpayer dollar funded extra equipment available.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  7. Commuting is the problem by TubeReceiver · · Score: 5, Insightful

    He lives in BelAir and commutes to Hawthorne ?? Give me a break... that was ridiculous 30 years ago and still is. One word, listen closely... MOVE. Everyone seems to think it's normal to drive these ridiculous long commutes and it's actually a symptom of a screwed up society in love with their crappy cars. Try living closer to work and walk there, or ride your golf cart or something.

  8. May I contribute $5 ? by Taco+Cowboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Since Elon Musk is so wealthy and he's only paying $50,000, may I contribute my $5 ?

    The $5 from me to me is worth much more (by ratio of my wealth) than the $50,000 to Mr. Musk, btw

    --
    Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
    1. Re:May I contribute $5 ? by sanman2 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Immorally gotten wealth? You mean anyone who earns more money than you has automatically done it immorally?

    2. Re:May I contribute $5 ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You don't earn that kind of wealth by working hard. You earn it by withholding it from the people who do the work. In the past even the rich would have blushed at the idea of being paid that much more than the people doing the actual work.

    3. Re:May I contribute $5 ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      This really isn't a bad idea. You could surely speed up construction on the most heavily trafficked roads.

      If you think that construction companies, union workers and prevailing wage workers are not already soaking this government project, then you have no idea how government contracts work in California. if it a State, County or Federal project ultimately makes no difference. By offering more money from another source, it just cues those involved that they can charge extra to do what have been contracted to do already. Be it $5.00 per person or $50,000.00 per person adding the thought of having private money contributed to do a job that the government supposedly gave to the lowest bidder, which has already missed its time target and is overbudget is insane.

    4. Re:May I contribute $5 ? by ChrisMaple · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You earn that kind of money by providing value that allows you to hire people, people who make more working for you than they would otherwise. Why else would they work for you?

      --
      Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
    5. Re:May I contribute $5 ? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you think that construction companies, union workers and prevailing wage workers are not already soaking this government project, then you have no idea how government contracts work in California.

      This is an American problem. In other countries it doesn't work this way. I lived in Japan and China for several years, and public construction projects in both of them are done amazingly fast.

      In the USA, the construction crew will show up, tear everything up, and put out lots of traffic cones, ... and then disappear. For months there is no activity. The machinery just sits there. Everyone now and then you see some guy in a hard-hat drinking some coffee, but nothing is getting done.

      In Japan and China it is completely different. A construction site is a beehive of activity from start to finish. They set up giant lights so they can work through the night. When I lived in Shanghai, they build the middle ring freeway past my house, and it was annoying to hear the din of construction all day and night. But in three months it was over because they were done.

      I really don't understand why America is so bad at managing these kinds of projects.

    6. Re: May I contribute $5 ? by murphtall · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It works like that in the Midwest. I live in WA state and construction is like you describe. Years ago driving multiple times to St. Louis and Dallas from Seattle you'd see projected going all night long even in the winter!!! I was constantly like WTF? Why can't they work like this in my state? Shit then i-5 may not suck so bad. Geez.

    7. Re:May I contribute $5 ? by Patch86 · · Score: 4, Funny

      If only we could establish some sort of formal, coordinated system for extracting money out of people, proportional to their earnings, to pay for local infrastructure projects. Think, boy, think!

    8. Re:May I contribute $5 ? by icebraining · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What's the exact number of millimeters that makes a person tall? The fact that there isn't a specific number does not mean the concept doesn't exist. See "sorites".

      (This doesn't mean I agree with GP, I'm just pointing out the fallacy)

    9. Re:May I contribute $5 ? by dargaud · · Score: 5, Interesting

      In the USA, the construction crew will show up, tear everything up, and put out lots of traffic cones, ... and then disappear.

      Yes, same technique in Italy. During a trip I counted something like 10 different areas with restricted lanes (or lane changing side) and traffic cones on the highway, some as long as 15km, and not a single worker to be seen. One such area has been like that for over 15 years.

      In France it depends. I like the technique they use on the Paris beltway: they shut it down at 10pm, move all the equipment at once under floodlights, work on only 10 to 50 meters, clean up everything and reopen by 6am. Repeat the next night on the next 10 to 50 meters. But it's expensive and the planning must be held tight no matter what otherwise the city can shut down the next day!

      --
      Non-Linux Penguins ?
    10. Re:May I contribute $5 ? by Hatta · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Anything you can earn through labor is moral. Anything you acquire through investment is immoral.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    11. Re:May I contribute $5 ? by NoImNotNineVolt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      By far the biggest misconception about the economy is that it is a zero sum game, and therefore if someone gets rich, it must be because others are getting poorer.

      No, I'd disagree. That's the second biggest misconception. As we can see from your post, though, it's evident that there's a lot of people out there that realize it's not a zero sum game and won't hesitate to point that out. If you haven't heard someone cry out "but the economy is not a zero sum game!", then you've been living under a rock.

      By far the biggest misconception about the economy is that it is infinite in size, and therefore if someone possesses wealth, it does not necessarily deprive someone else of wealth.

      At any point in time, whether it's now, in the past, or in the future, there is a finite amount of wealth. If person X has all of the wealth, then it is necessarily true that no other person has any wealth. It doesn't matter if the economy is a zero sum game or not. The zero sum game argument is a red herring and has no bearing on the fact that wealth is finite, period.

      And yes, the capitalist class earns their wealth by withholding it from the people who do the work, literally. That the people who do the work still benefit from this arrangement (because the economy is not a zero sum game) does nothing to refute this claim. The workers may not be getting poorer in absolute terms, but they clearly are in relative terms, because the real world does work like that. Most people don't get rich; those that do do so by creating opportunities that pull lots of other people up with them, and then exploiting the labor of those other people, literally. Sure, Microsoft made Bill Gates a billionaire but helped out all their other employees as well. However, Bill Gates' accumulation of a sizable personal fortune was not a requirement for this; I don't believe that it was the truckloads of cash that were pouring into Bill's personal bank account that made Microsoft a success. I'll even go so far as to say that if Bill had compensated himself as generously as he compensated his workforce, Microsoft's success would not have been jeopardized. And yes, every single dollar that he paid himself is one fewer dollar Microsoft had to pay other employees.

      If you're uncomfortable with some negative connotation of "withholding it", "relatively poorer", or "exploiting", then stop being an apologist for the capitalist class.

      --
      Chuuch. Preach. Tabernacle.
  9. Re:If he has the money and is willing to spend it. by lloydchristmas759 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Kind of true.The section of the 405 Elon Musk drives every day is the most congested of all, though. Have a look at traffic information on Google Maps. Right now (5:05pm local time), more than half of the distance between Hawthorne and Bel Air is red or black. The estimated time for that drive is 27 min, but 55 in the current traffic. And it is the same every day of the week.

    I still find the money would be better invested in expanding the rail/subway network. How many lanes can you add to a freeway before it becomes ridiculously dangerous? There are already 17 lanes on some sections of the I-5 over here...

    --
    I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous.
  10. Re:If he has the money and is willing to spend it. by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If I were Musk, I'd just ride in a limo and treat the backseat as my mobile office for the variable amount of time spent in traffic. I'm sure the guy spends most of his time in email or on the phone anyway. He's got the money to do all that and full high-def video-conferencing from his car if he wanted to.

    Sure, that doesn't help anyone else. But this article is about his personal frustration and what he's done in response.

    --
    When information is power, privacy is freedom.
  11. Move your company by asm2750 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sure, LA has a great talent pool of engineers, but I am sure it would have been cheaper to just have SpaceX in a region with better managed freeways, and less density. I'm sure the engineers wouldn't mind moving since LA is a hell hole these days when it comes to commuting.

  12. Re:Hamburger Analogy by Ichijo · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Air is a public good because it is "both non-excludable and non-rivalrous in that individuals cannot be effectively excluded from use and where use by one individual does not reduce availability to others." Freeways are not public goods because a vehicle taking up space on the road reduces availability of the road to others.

    --
    Any sufficiently unpopular but cohesive argument is indistinguishable from trolling.
  13. Re:Kill the Hippy Operated Vehicle lanes by Pseudonym+Authority · · Score: 5, Funny

    How about replying instead of trying to knock off my karma?

    You're an idiot. Happy?

  14. Re:If he has the money and is willing to spend it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    While I prefer the country myself (and just recently took a job in the country to get out of the city), working in the city and living in the country is irrational by almost any objective criteria. Here are some examples (all times are for the round trip):

    • A 45 minute commute makes you 40% more likely to get a divorce.
    • A 90 minute commute kills your Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index, even when you eventually do get home.
    • Every 10 minutes commuting decreases your number of social connections by 10%
    • Commuters have more neck & back problems (plus obesity), and for every minute they spend commuting there's "a 0.0257 minute exercise time reduction, a 0.0387 minute food preparation time reduction, and a 0.2205 minute sleep time reduction". BTW, that study controlled for time spent outside of the home by comparing people who worked 10 hours and commuted 2 hours with those who just worked 12 hours.
    • It takes a 40% higher salary to justify an extra hour of commuting. (Measured by some economists based on well-being.)

    Here is the article I pulled those stats from, it links to more definitive sources. Basically, it's absolutely not worth it to live further away from your job to have a bigger house. That said, raising a family might be better in the country, unless you're subjecting your kids to a long commute as well.

  15. Re:Hamburger Analogy by wisnoskij · · Score: 3, Insightful

    That is the stupidest thing I have ever heard.
    First off the road is not free. It already costs loads of money to maintain cars, insurance, and gas, and you pay for the road in your taxes. That is like saying the solution to house hold fires is to make people pay x thousand dollars before the firemen turn on the hoses. People do not want to commute in the first place, and they already shelled out the cash to buy those roads/firetrucks.

    Preventing people from travelling/taxing it beyond reason is only something you would want to do if you wanted to stifle the economy.

    There is not a infinite demand for roads. There are a finite number of people trying to go to a finite number of places. And all of them are either going somewhere to make money or to spend it. The only correct way to plan a cities transit system is to provide enough transit to accommodate all of these trips.

    --
    Troll is not a replacement for I disagree.
  16. Re:If he has the money and is willing to spend it. by ub3r+n3u7r4l1st · · Score: 3, Informative

    In America, suburban schools are usually better than inner city schools. Being that said, I am willing to take a slight pay cut for telecommunting privlege and indefinite tenure. Some dumb blonde CEO may disagree with your finding however.

  17. Re:Hamburger Analogy by diamondmagic · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why it matters is because public versus private goods is the entire point the cited passage. You started this by arguing that air somehow was a non-scarce good (i.e. can potentially be used up until there is "no more air left"). In doing so you provided an example of a free public good, which is neither scarce, nor rivalrous, nor excludable, as the passage requires. Do you have half a brain to be able to rationalize the fact that no matter how hard we breathe, we cannot "use up" the air like we use up hamburgers or freeways? Did that even cross your mind, yes or no?

  18. Re:If he has the money and is willing to spend it. by PrimaryConsult · · Score: 5, Interesting

    In America, suburban schools are usually better than inner city schools. Being that said, I am willing to take a slight pay cut for telecommunting privlege and indefinite tenure.

    While true, inner cities also have private schools which are better than suburban public schools (particularly since problem students can easily be expelled, thanks to the safety net of public schools). Take ~$6,000/yr for high school for example - if schools are the main reason for moving to the suburbs, determine if you are losing more than $6,000/yr in money or time by commuting - it may end up actually being cheaper.

  19. Re:Idiot doesn't understand by rahvin112 · · Score: 3

    Settlement is easy to deal with (at a cost, there was a project with projected settlement times of around 5 years that was completed in 60 days through available mitigation measures), the project delays are often driven by the uncontrollable externals that sink every project, those being, required federal environmental documents, utility relocation and ROW acquisition. You simply can't force the electric company to relocate a power line that serves the entire LA valley in the middle of the summer. Nor can you speed up a condemnation process when there are specific time frames required by law to condemn the property of an unwilling seller. Though you hope for a smooth process, in the real world the process is often anything but smooth with no end to headaches. It also doesn't help that construction workers in California have been issued bulletproof vests in the past due to "road rage incidents".

  20. Re:If he has the money and is willing to spend it. by bitingduck · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I just mapped it, and it comes up about 17-18, but you're still in the right ballpark.

    His best bet is to move- as soon as the 405 is built out, it will return to the same congestion as before (that happens to freeways everywhere). The next best thing (and better for LA) would be to fund a rail line that essentially parallels the 405. And maybe throw in a bikeway-- LA has 330 days/year that are good biking weather, but having to do a long commute on city streets can be a pain. There are a few bikeways along the various rivers and/or freeways (SGRT, LARIO) that can make a bike commute competitive with driving, even for very long distances. Shorter than about 10 miles it's faster to bike, and even at 15-20 miles, the combination of bike and train is faster than driving at rush hour.

  21. Re:Hamburger Analogy by tlhIngan · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Next those idiots that don't understand economics are going to give people free air to breathe. Obviously with a "free" resource like that everyone is just going to keep on breathing and breathing until there's no more air left.

    Well, if you ask someone living in Beijing, they might disagree. Given that it's not people "consuming" the air that's the problem, it's the people polluting it so people can't breathe it anymore.

    And in fact, we do charge for it through pollution taxes, carbon taxes, air quality standards, etc. Because if given a chance, people DO spoil it. Hell, LA used to have a huge smog problem until California introduced some of the most stringent air quality standards around.

    And that was people consuming air for "free". Now China's actually had to admit the air in Beijing is actually polluted.

  22. Re:405 by bogjobber · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Or maybe it's because there are 7 million more people in LA County than in Orange County?

    You can't move a population of 10+ million people around every day by automobile without traffic jams. It's an impossible task. You can eke out tiny improvements, but just as quickly they are overtaken by increased usage and then you're looking at an even larger, more expensive and time-consuming upgrade to keep traffic moving . The 405 is a perfect example of this.

    Auto travel does not scale efficiently and over the long term LA is going to have to significantly improve its mass transit (ie subway, light rail, street cars NOT buses) to have any chance of improving congestion. Thankfully the government understands this and is moving beyond 1950s urban planning policies.

    But it's LA, and no place on earth is more beholden to the notion that a car is freedom and taking public transit is for the unwashed masses. Even when it's obvious to everyone involved that upgrading the freeway system is a huge, inefficient pain in the ass and a waste of public money you still get people like yourself clamoring that they should do *more* of it. It's absurd.

  23. Re: If he has the money and is willing to spend it by murphtall · · Score: 3, Interesting

    *sources needed* 25 years ? 40 years?

  24. Re:technically by MachineShedFred · · Score: 5, Informative

    The Interstate numbering standards are not random, nor are they some secret. Here's how they work:

    1- or 2-digit freeway = primary route
    even last digit = east / west route
    odd last digit = north / south route
    3-digit freeway = loop or spur route from 1- or 2-digit primary route
    3-digit freeway, even first digit = loop route
    3-digit freeway, odd first digit = spur route
    1- or 2-digit freeway numbers are numbered ascending, starting west to east for odd numbered routes, and south to north for even numbered routes. Thus, I-5 on the west coast and I-95 on the east coast; and I-10 across the southern US and I-90 across the northern US.
    3-digit freeway numbers are unique per state. Thus, California, Oregon, and Washington all having a 405 loop route that connects twice with I-5. Interstate 105 in Oregon is a spur route that goes from I-5 to a downtown terminus in Eugene.

    There are a few oddities in the system due to an early convention that allowed a "directional prefix" in a name if a freeway split, this has been abandoned causing abnormalities in numbering. Example: I-84 used to be I-80N before being re-signed, and now I-84 is actually south of I-82 in Eastern Oregon / Washington. There are other oddities too, but they are few in comparison to the rest of the system.

    Hope that clears it up.

    --
    Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
  25. Re:I found a solution by tehcyder · · Score: 3, Funny
    Amphibious tank? James Bond style Lotus Esprit/submarine? Nuclear-powered jetpack?

    Better still, why doesn't he use the infinite energy of his ego to power a Star Trek transporter system between his house and office?

    --
    To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it