From: crystal@glia.biostr.washington.edu (Crystal)
Subject: Re: Hi.
Organization: University of Washington
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 03:25:28 GMT

In <1992Nov10.165201.14716@fnx.uucp> del@fnx.uucp (Dag Erik Lindberg) writes:

>In <crystal.721177759@glia> crystal@glia.biostr.washington.edu (Crystal) writes:
>>In <1992Nov1.090336.1489@u.washington.edu> tzs@stein.u.washington.edu (Tim Smith) writes:

>>I just couldn't let this go without comment - especially after driving in
>>Los Angeles for several days a week or so ago..


>I spent six months in LA, East Hollywood, and Burbank two years ago.  I was
>*working* there at the time, so I had the privilege of commuting to and
>from the job 6 days a week.  My impressions of the experience are quite
>different from yours, Crystal.

A lot can change in two years . :>


>Yes, it's true that there are cars on the road nearly 24 hours a day.
>Yes, it's true that there are *more* cars on the road.  However, the
>degree of 'traffic jam' there is not far beyond what we experience here.
>I found the drivers there efficient and cooperative:  if we tried to
>move that many cars on a roadway *here* we would have total gridlock and
>and shut down the city.

ah... but we DON'T have that many cars to move.  AND I have an article that
says Seattle is using bus transportation MORE than any other city.  It even
won some kind of award for that!  So with more people riding buses, well,
it will take a while for the roads to fill.

>>While I was in L.A., I was told by one of my passengers that I was too polite
>>to be driving there!  So if you see me on a Seattle freeway, wave - and I'll
>>let you cut in... ;>

>Crystal, I think your passenger was right... your brand of 'politeness'
>doesn't fly in LA.  Apparently you require someone to wave first, then you
>will let them 'cut in'.  If I don't wave first, then I  become one of the
>"Folks cutting people off".

You apparently didn't catch the joke in the sentence...how many people on the
net here are going to recognize me out on the freeway and wave to me?  About
3, is my guess.  It was a *joke*.  Just show me your turn signal, and I'll
let you in.  I have no other "requirements" except common courtesy rules of
the road, which is basically, using one's turn signals or hand signals to
let some one know oof their intent to change lanes, or whatever.  You've
never had the opportunity to see me drive. :>

(Notice the smiley at the end of the original sentence?)

>My experience of driving in Seattle is that if I change lanes or pull
>out into traffic, I am likely to get honked at or yelled at.  I hardly
>call that polite.  It never happened to me in LA.


Well, it sure happened to me!  Fortunately I'm not much of a lane changer
and I *always* signal well in advance of my attempt.  I was literally forced
into an exit only lane because no one would let me get out of it!  My
passengers all said "Go for it!" and bully my way in.  Nope... I took the exit
and drove in circles to get back to the on ramp.  I'd rather face inconvenience
than impoliteness.  (This is Cal I'm talking about)

>Only a couple of times in LA did I ever have someone speed up to prevent
>me from changing lanes in front of them - a daily occurrance here in
>Seattle.  Is that polite?

Nope, not polite at all.  In fact, it is ILLEGAL!  Once a turn signal goes
on you are REQUIRED to let that person into the lane in this state.  But
nobody seems to know the law. :<

>>Which leads me to another observation:

>>Seattle freeways have FORESTS along the edges!  Even the S-curves of Renton

>Not usually.  Usually it is a belt of 20 feet or so of trees bordering the
>freeway so that you *think* there is forest there.  They do that to help
>mollify the environmentalists.  At least half the time, I'm sure more,
>if you pull over and start walking through the 'woods' you will either
>come to a housing development, or a logging clearcut.

True, but it's a darn sight better than the eyesore they are hiding!  They are
also there for sound attenuation.  Cut down the trees and the freeway noise
will be *very* noticeable.

>>have nature's wonders to enjoy while you sit and contemplate the accident
>>up ahead.  I've seen red-tailed hawks on the street lamps along 509.  A few
>>buildings, and a few 5-10 mile stretches of concrete, but definitely much
>>more greenery than L.A. could EVER hope to replant.  520 has Lake Washington
>                                            ???????

They'd have to pull up some concrete if they want to deaden the freeway
noises with trees, or to beautify the area.  Had they carefully built the
freeways around existing trees, it would have been nicer. (Although palm
trees are hardly leafy enough to deaden any sound at all...

>Sorry, Crystal, but you are comparing apples and oranges.  The LA area
>is not far from desert.  To make a valid comparison you would have to
>compare with a freeway in a similar landscape.  It would be more like
>Spokane, not exactly my idea of scenic.  It's not a matter of replanting
>in LA - it wasn't ever there to begin with.

It's there.  Next time you go down there take note of the native shrubbery.


>>Forgive me, KBO members, but I'm just not a selfish person...and when you 
>>love something, it's hard not to share that love with others.

>It becomes less difficult as you start to see features you have cherished
>since childhood destroyed to make way for a burgeoning population, much
>of it transplants from other areas.  I don't mind much when it is people
>with friends or family in the area, people that came here through some
>'normal' migration process.  What I object to is the people that I meet
>who have moved here because:

>- it's the most livable US city
>- they heard on the radio (or wherever) that we don't have a recession here
>- we have better (read: easier to get) welfare here
>- they read that cost of living is low here (not any more!)
>- they heard someone like Crystal talking about what a great place it is.

  ;>

>Go ahead, brand me an Emmet Watson type.  I don't hate outsiders.  I
>just think that a little negative publicity is a good thing.  We don't
>need the population here to be increasing due to artificial influences.
>We *certainly* don't need to be encouraging 'outsiders' to move here.
>Especially given the problem we seem to have here figuring out things
>like driving, roads, and mass transit!

I used to be an Emmett Watson type...but since my best friends are all out
of state these days, I would love to have them here with me.  And if I
used all the old EW phrases, I would likely never see any of them even on 
a *visit*.   Circumstances alter cases.

>If Tracy doesn't have a contact here to help her integrate with life
>in Seattle - let her have it with both barrels.  If she wants to live
>here badly enough to get past the animosity, we'll move over and let
>her 'be one of us'.  If she wants to whine 'Eewww, you guys are
>unfriendly!'...


*sigh*       

>-- 
>del AKA Erik Lindberg                             uunet!pilchuck!fnx!del
>                          Who is John Galt?

Crystal
  ;>