|
Cichlidae posted:That's nuts! Do you have an aerial photo link so I can print it out and laugh about it with my coworkers on Monday? oh god Look at the ramp going southbound on I-35. It cuts through the double yellow (with hilarious "YIELD TO RAMP" signs, which are awful since it's hard to even see the ramp) and the truck stop is RIGHT THERE. 
ijustam fucked around with this message at 04:58 on Jul 27, 2010 |
#
?
Jul 27, 2010 04:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 14:38 |
|
|
davepsilon posted:I recently moved from the suburbs to a city. There is always a little traffic shock with that, but I happen to have to traverse the most inane intersection. Like most of the major roads around Boston, it was designed for much lower volumes than it's currently handling. Normally, a design like that works very well when all three incoming roadways are 2 lanes, since there's no merging. The one you posted, though, has merges all over the place, and the access road from the T station makes it even worse. Personally, I'd turn the whole thing into a large signalized intersection, but reserve the spare lane for an eventual interchange in the event that, at some point in the future, the city can afford it. ijustam posted:Look at the ramp going southbound on I-35. It cuts through the double yellow (with hilarious "YIELD TO RAMP" signs, which are awful since it's hard to even see the ramp) and the truck stop is RIGHT THERE. It's hard to tell from the terrible aerial photo quality, but do the yield-controlled approaches on the frontage road have stop bars?
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2010 12:36
|
|
|
 They have... something.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2010 12:57
|
|
|
I like how the yield markers on the ground (I guess?) look like they could be one-way arrows pointing the wrong way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2010 13:58
|
|
|
 I guess it depends on where you are (this instance is in Kyle, TX). I've always liked them in the rural areas, I can exit early, and go down the "wrong" frontage road if I need to rather than drive in circles. The only downside is when people don't signal that they're leaving, or entering, the highway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2010 14:14
|
|
|
ijustam posted:
This is an interesting route for the road to take... http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&sou...2,0.003884&z=19 Google drivers 
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2010 20:35
|
|
|
Bumming Your Scene posted:This is an interesting route for the road to take...
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2010 20:42
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:Normally, a design like that works very well when all three incoming roadways are 2 lanes. ahh, it almost makes sense now, they just bastardized it. There are stop lines everywhere, but if someone ignores them, you can miss a whole light cycle.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 00:26
|
|
|
ijustam posted:
Those are yield markings, known to traffic engineers as Shark Teeth. That's what should be there. This, however... grnberet2b posted:...is a stop bar, and has no business near a yield sign.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 01:23
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:Those are yield markings, known to traffic engineers as Shark Teeth. That's what should be there. This, however... Speaking of stop bars, what's your opinion on intersections with stop signs but no stop bars? Where I live there's always a stop bar at a stop, so I've got this bad habit of looking for the bar first rather than the sign. This caused a couple of mistakes (fortunately accident-free...  ) when I drove through Santa Fe, where they don't bother to paint stop bars all the time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 01:42
|
|
|
Choadmaster posted:Speaking of stop bars, what's your opinion on intersections with stop signs but no stop bars? Where I live there's always a stop bar at a stop, so I've got this bad habit of looking for the bar first rather than the sign. This caused a couple of mistakes (fortunately accident-free... Technically, the stop bar is optional, but I'd never leave one out. I've noticed that, without the stop bar, it's much harder to gauge where I should stop. Usually I end up pulling too far forward. Reason is, the sign's location is variable, so it's not a good indication of where you stop. The stop bar is a much clearer indication.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 02:00
|
|
|
davepsilon posted:
Route 2 is way bigger than it should be because it was originally intended to connect up with I-695, but since I-695 was never built, Route 2 became an eight-lane highway to nowhere (that's actually why they ended up putting a T station there). I for one am glad they never built I-695, as it would have required destroying the house I lived in when I was little. So my proposed solution is, go back in time and cancel the plans to make Route 2 into the overbuilt monstrosity it is today. Because really, it seems like the main problem is that the three roads leading into the intersection are hopelessly lopsided: two four-lane parkway type of things, and one gigantic eight-lane limited-access freeway with access roads and way too many exits.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 02:27
|
|
|
Echo 3 posted:Route 2 is way bigger than it should be because it was originally intended to connect up with I-695, but since I-695 was never built, Route 2 became an eight-lane highway to nowhere (that's actually why they ended up putting a T station there). I for one am glad they never built I-695, as it would have required destroying the house I lived in when I was little. So my proposed solution is, go back in time and cancel the plans to make Route 2 into the overbuilt monstrosity it is today. We got part of Route 9 the same way. It was built with a 10-lane section to connect to I-291, which had already been canceled when the 10-lane stub was constructed. Oops! After a whole ton of public ridicule, it was finally extended to I-84 (on a 4-lane section) 20 years later.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 03:49
|
|
|
davepsilon posted:I recently moved from the suburbs to a city. There is always a little traffic shock with that, but I happen to have to traverse the most inane intersection. quote:Route 2 is way bigger than it should be because it was originally intended to connect up with I-695, but since I-695 was never built, Route 2 became an eight-lane highway to nowhere (that's actually why they ended up putting a T station there). I for one am glad they never built I-695, as it would have required destroying the house I lived in when I was little. So my proposed solution is, go back in time and cancel the plans to make Route 2 into the overbuilt monstrosity it is today. Route 2 was actually the first candidate to be I-90 way back in the day. It was going to be a freeway all the way from Albany to Boston via North Adams, Greenfield, etc. This was being proposed even after the turnpike was built, but the I-90 plans dried up when another Hoosac Tunnel-esque connection was too expensive to build through the Berkshires and there would have been no good place to route it around the mountains. Incidentally, all of the current exit numbers reflect this original plan, which is why they'er so high out here. I-695 would have made sense when it was originally planned, but nowadays the highways here are too screwed up for any sort of real inner belt highway to work.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 16:02
|
|
|
grnberet2b posted:
I bet slightly to the right of the camera car is one of these twisty on-ramps. Kick it in the nuts else you gonna die.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 16:35
|
|
|
kefkafloyd posted:Route 2 was actually the first candidate to be I-90 way back in the day. It was going to be a freeway all the way from Albany to Boston via North Adams, Greenfield, etc. This was being proposed even after the turnpike was built, but the I-90 plans dried up when another Hoosac Tunnel-esque connection was too expensive to build through the Berkshires and there would have been no good place to route it around the mountains.
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 18:23
|
|
|
grillster posted:I bet slightly to the right of the camera car is one of these twisty on-ramps. I love twisty/short on-ramps, because I take them as a personal challenge to get up to 65 mph in a couple hundred feet. ----- Field trip! So, what did I spend all day doing? Let's see if you can figure it out.  Hmm, maybe that's a bit too close. Let's back up a bit.  I'm sure some of you have it figured out! For those still wondering:  This is fresh epoxy resin, with a few layers of glass beads pressed into it. The beads serve to reflect light back in the direction from which it came, which is plainly visible when you look at your own shadow:  My project put in about $150,000 worth of these. How much epoxy is that? It's enough for stop bars, lane arrows, and crosswalks on about 50 miles of state routes. Not bad, but it's a lot to inspect! I also stopped at my East Haddam job. Remember the bridge that's being replaced?   Yep, it's mostly done! If you're familiar with bridge construction, you'll notice that it's precast, made of several custom-made elements that were shipped in and dropped on piles. You'll also notice that the concrete surface is very smooth. Why is that?  The whole bridge was blasted with lead shot. And, let me tell you, it tasted goooood. It was time to waterproof the bridge, but first we had to test the waterproofing mixture to make sure it was strong enough. We primed small patches of the deck and attached these metal studs:  Which were gripped by a special machine...   Pop! After about 200 psi, the studs ripped off, taking a decent chunk of concrete with them.  One more interesting part of this bridge: since it's pre-cast, and made of several independent pieces, if a truck hit the parapet, it could cause the outermost section to detach and collapse. We ordered the sections to come with holes, so we could strap some steel between the outermost and adjacent section and reinforce the structure.  Once I got back to the office, the day was pretty much over. Since I had my camera with me, I took a picture of the kind of stuff I'm constantly sketching in my free time. I'm such a... I don't know, what does this make me?  And hey, I know this isn't critterquest, but dragonflies are pretty darn awesome. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 28, 2010 23:08
|
|
|
cichlidae posted:My project put in about $150,000 worth of these. How much epoxy is that? It's enough for stop bars, lane arrows, and crosswalks on about 50 miles of state routes. Not bad, but it's a lot to inspect! Was Colchester included in this project? I was coming home from work in the early morning hours, and I was driving near the high school. Without warning there were cones in the middle of the road, in the crosswalk. I was thinking, "what the gently caress, who the hell put cones in the middle of the road?" Then further up at the middle school, I saw the flashing lights of the work trucks and realized what was going on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 11:03
|
|
|
What are the pros and cons of carpool lanes with an uncrossable barrier vs carpool lanes you can move into and out of freely? Could carpool lanes with barrier be improved by adding periodic passing lanes? How would you fix LA's freeways? Specifically the 405? As it is right now it tends to be bumper to bumper sub-10 mph during rush hour. Could traffic flow be improved by removing exits? The 405 was designed as a bypass around downtown LA, but population centers sprang up along it so it quickly became more congested than the 101 and the 5 that it bypasses.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 11:42
|
|
|
porkfriedrice posted:Was Colchester included in this project? I was coming home from work in the early morning hours, and I was driving near the high school. Without warning there were cones in the middle of the road, in the crosswalk. I was thinking, "what the gently caress, who the hell put cones in the middle of the road?" Then further up at the middle school, I saw the flashing lights of the work trucks and realized what was going on. That's exactly it. At one of Colchester's schools, east of downtown on 16, the old crosswalk was abandoned because someone got run over and a new one was installed down the road. The town didn't let us know, so when the work crew saw the old, scratched out crosswalk, they tried to replace it. They finished half before a fireman came by (early in the morning, like you said) and explained that it shouldn't be repainted. The crew obliterated the part they painted, as well as the rest of the old crosswalk, which I'm sure you've noticed as you've driven through. Socket Ryanist posted:What are the pros and cons of carpool lanes with an uncrossable barrier vs carpool lanes you can move into and out of freely? A barrier allows them to be used for counter-flow operations, since it removes the risk of a head-on accident. Other than that, though, it's just a big pain since it complicates law enforcement, makes it harder to pull over if someone breaks down, slows down traffic on both sides, and takes away options for construction staging. quote:Could carpool lanes with barrier be improved by adding periodic passing lanes? I certainly think so. It'd be especially nice to have two lanes throughout, but that's not always feasible. This starts to become tricky around entrances and exits, though, since they're frequently on the left and could lead to unpredictable driving and weaving. quote:How would you fix LA's freeways? Specifically the 405? As it is right now it tends to be bumper to bumper sub-10 mph during rush hour. Could traffic flow be improved by removing exits? The 405 was designed as a bypass around downtown LA, but population centers sprang up along it so it quickly became more congested than the 101 and the 5 that it bypasses. You can only improve capacity so much. What would help LA the most is much denser development, like New York City, fitting the same population into a significantly smaller area. That cuts down on the distance and frequency of trips, significantly reducing demand on the freeway network. It also opens the door to effective mass transit, which could take off a lot of the demand. Bypass routes like 405 should be primarily for high speed, point-to-point travel, and interchanges should be sparse. One every two miles is plenty. Encouraging development around a route like that, just like letting people stick driveways every 50 feet on an arterial, just slows traffic, increases accidents, and reduces capacity.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 12:38
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:A barrier allows them to be used for counter-flow operations, since it removes the risk of a head-on accident. Other than that, though, it's just a big pain since it complicates law enforcement, makes it harder to pull over if someone breaks down, slows down traffic on both sides, and takes away options for construction staging. Cichlidae posted:Bypass routes like 405 should be primarily for high speed, point-to-point travel, and interchanges should be sparse. One every two miles is plenty. Encouraging development around a route like that, just like letting people stick driveways every 50 feet on an arterial, just slows traffic, increases accidents, and reduces capacity.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 13:04
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:I have a question about crosswalks done like this. Did anybody test them in the rain? Because when that marking gets wet, it is crazy slippery. I have good balance, but at the ones near my house, it's like walking down a slip'n'slide. Did they get installed wrong, or is this just something we have to live with?
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 15:58
|
|
|
Large Hardon Collider posted:Do you (or anyone) know of a good book on the history of boston-area development? There's two good books about building the turnpike and route 128, but most of the information can be found on the internet for free on sites like Steve Anderson's BostonRoads.com. I know Steve personally and he's a good guy, all of his stuff is well sourced.
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 16:27
|
|
|
Socket Ryanist posted:I don't mean an actual barrier, I mean pavement striping that is illegal to cross (NY uses a little slashed out strip, california uses a double white or sometimes double yellow line) Having a barrier that can't be crossed discourages the carpool lane being used as just another travel lane, and reduces conflicts. Unfortunately, by limiting the number of entrances and exits, it also reduces usage. As to development, that is a very tricky thing, since each town has its own interests in mind. It's the state's job to limit access control near interchanges, but there's only so much we can do. EoRaptor posted:I have a question about crosswalks done like this. Did anybody test them in the rain? Because when that marking gets wet, it is crazy slippery. I have good balance, but at the ones near my house, it's like walking down a slip'n'slide. Did they get installed wrong, or is this just something we have to live with? The beads are supposed to help with traction, but they get stripped off by traffic over time, and the epoxy/paint gets worn down to a smooth, slippery surface. What's funny is that we make those bars even wider in front of churches, senior homes, schools, etc., which is where people have the shortest paces and the most trouble avoiding them!
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 17:01
|
|
|
I just want you to know that I would totally be your IRL friend if I lived in the Northeast because everything you post about is continually fascinating. Thanks for keeping this thread alive 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 19:10
|
|
|
Stew Man Chew posted:I just want you to know that I would totally be your IRL friend if I lived in the Northeast because everything you post about is continually fascinating. Thanks for keeping this thread alive I live in CT and I wish I was his IRL friend :P
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 21:06
|
|
|
Stew Man Chew posted:I just want you to know that I would totally be your IRL friend if I lived in the Northeast because everything you post about is continually fascinating. Thanks for keeping this thread alive Fizzle posted:I live in CT and I wish I was his IRL friend :P D'aww, you guys are awesome, too. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 29, 2010 21:45
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:The beads are supposed to help with traction, but they get stripped off by traffic over time, and the epoxy/paint gets worn down to a smooth, slippery surface. What's funny is that we make those bars even wider in front of churches, senior homes, schools, etc., which is where people have the shortest paces and the most trouble avoiding them! The ones in particular that prompted me to ask are brand new, and right outside my house. When it's wet, I could 'push off' and simply slide down the length of one of them. It's pretty terrible. There is ordinary (if also new) pavement to either side of the crosswalk, so you could simply go around, but it's still odd that they made it out onto the street without someone noticing the problem. I'm probably being a bit paranoid, maybe they will settle in after a month or two, but considering the possible road conditions around here (toronto, canada) I'm not looking forward to how these behave in winter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 21:06
|
|
|
EoRaptor posted:The ones in particular that prompted me to ask are brand new, and right outside my house. When it's wet, I could 'push off' and simply slide down the length of one of them. It's pretty terrible. There is ordinary (if also new) pavement to either side of the crosswalk, so you could simply go around, but it's still odd that they made it out onto the street without someone noticing the problem. Can you check how many beads they used? If there aren't enough (or any), that could be one reason. If they used too many, it's important to sweep the excess off and vacuum them up or else you're basically walking on marbles.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2010 21:55
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:Can you check how many beads they used? If there aren't enough (or any), that could be one reason. If they used too many, it's important to sweep the excess off and vacuum them up or else you're basically walking on marbles. I can try, but I don't have a camera available to me to take any sort of close up pictures. I'll check them out closer tomorrow.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2010 04:30
|
|
|
EoRaptor posted:I have a question about crosswalks done like this. Did anybody test them in the rain? Because when that marking gets wet, it is crazy slippery. I have good balance, but at the ones near my house, it's like walking down a slip'n'slide. Did they get installed wrong, or is this just something we have to live with? My dad hit a fresh layer of the beads while taking a turn on his bicycle a few years back. He got some pretty impressive road rash from the subsequent slide-out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2010 05:03
|
|
|
Wondering what you think of this interchange that they're going to be building soon. It seems weird and confusing in my eyes looking at it from above.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2010 08:08
|
|
|
less than three posted:Wondering what you think of this interchange that they're going to be building soon. Yeah, they tend to be a lot more confusing when you're seeing the whole thing at once. But when you're on the ground, you only have one path to look out for, and with adequate signage, you should have no trouble finding it. The interchange itself is basically a diamond, with some heavy-duty roundabouts instead of signals. It looks like most of the movements are to/from Canora Road, and they're given two lanes for that reason. The only part of the design I disagree with is having a two-lane on-ramp that merges and then dumps into an accel lane that's perhaps only 100m long. If the volumes are high enough to merit two lanes on the ramp, I'd put a much longer accel lane. I'm sure the engineers have done their work, though. There's probably not enough right-of-way downstream.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2010 16:09
|
|
|
http://www.norwichbulletin.com/carousel/x84677387/Norwich-transit-hub-s-start-a-triumph Any thoughts on this project in Norwich? Is the ridership on SEAT enough to warrant this? The current terminal is just the parking lot near the old railroad station, I think. I guess it would be nice to have place inside to wait for your bus. Also, they mention water taxis and passenger rail. Can't see either of these happening anytime soon. You mentioned mass transit in your OP, so hopefully this post is okay. porkfriedrice fucked around with this message at 06:11 on Aug 1, 2010 |
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 02:04
|
|
|
porkfriedrice posted:http://www.norwichbulletin.com/carousel/x84677387/Norwich-transit-hub-s-start-a-triumph I haven't worked enough on the project to make any sound judgment, but getting rail service down the shore has long been a goal of the casinos. They've pushed around ferries (more or less blocked by Electric Boat)and monorail ($$$), but a train is probably the most realistic. I doubt there will be any train service for a while, but if there is, it would definitely help Norwich, as Mohegan Sun visitors from central Mass and central CT could park in Norwich and take the train down along the river. As to bus ridership, keep in mind that our buses are heavily subsidized and don't even come close to a profit. The point of buses is to help move around low income groups who can't afford cars, and to get more cars off the road. Even a small improvement in Norwich could be very helpful, so long as it's done right. About the only place in the state I'd be reluctant to add more transit is the estuary region, where ridership is so low that the buses end up creating more traffic than they remove.
|
|
#
?
Aug 1, 2010 14:29
|
|
|
Related question, what is an optimal way of making a highway to PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION center, just getting land, building a huge cheap/free lot and an exit?
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 02:50
|
|
|
God your roads look like they're in horrendous condition.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 11:54
|
|
|
Ryand-Smith posted:Related question, what is an optimal way of making a highway to PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION center, just getting land, building a huge cheap/free lot and an exit? That's a great way to do it, and adding access to surface streets is also important since pedestrians and bicyclists will want to use transit, but can't get on the freeway. The problems are finding somewhere where you can fit in an extra exit without hampering highway operations and getting the cash to get started. For the former, you'll want your transit hub in a relatively developed place, and developed areas don't tend to have much free land. For the latter, even if you're just building ramps and a parking lot, you still need to worry about paving, striping, plowing, security, and landscaping. thehustler posted:God your roads look like they're in horrendous condition. It's pretty typical of roads in southern New England and New York.  (from http://www.ct.gov/dot/lib/dot/documents/dpublications/ctdot_on_the_move_performance_measures_report_011409.pdf ) It doesn't help that a significant proportion of the public sees road paving as a waste of money and would rather drive over potholes than raise the gas tax by a couple cents per gallon.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 12:35
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:It doesn't help that a significant proportion of the public sees road paving as a waste of money and would rather drive over potholes than raise the gas tax by a couple cents per gallon. And it's much easier finacially/politcally to get federal money for new roads, rather than maintenance. New freeways are sexy, filling in potholes is not.
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 15:29
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 14:38 |
|
|
Cichlidae posted:
|
|
#
?
Aug 2, 2010 20:20
|
|
