|
Koesj posted:Dun dun dun http://centrumpp.nl/Images/Tracebesluit_tcm318-306148.pdf (from page 57 onwards)  Quite an interesting read, thanks for that.
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 14:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 00:21 |
|
|
Cichlidae posted:There are two methods for making on-ramps: taper, and parallel. Here's a handy diagram from the FHWA showing the difference. Are there reasons why certain areas choose one or the other? I have never seen a parallel design on-ramp in So. Calif., but I am currently on vacation in TX and LA and have seen many parallel ones, especially in some newly renovated freeway areas.
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 14:49
|
|
|
Wiggly posted:I have never seen a parallel design on-ramp in So. Calif.  http://g.co/maps/d9ctc
|
|
#
?
Nov 23, 2011 21:48
|
|
|
Those are some of the worst suburban road layouts I've seen.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2011 00:35
|
|
|
Wiggly posted:Are there reasons why certain areas choose one or the other? I have never seen a parallel design on-ramp in So. Calif., but I am currently on vacation in TX and LA and have seen many parallel ones, especially in some newly renovated freeway areas. Neither one is particularly encouraged or frowned upon, and there's no clear guidance. Therefore, I'll just chalk it up to whichever design is in favor with the chief engineer. Here in CT, parallel on-ramps have been in favor for a long time. Off-ramps are mixed between parallel and tapered.
|
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2011 00:39
|
|
|
Wiggly posted:Are there reasons why certain areas choose one or the other? I have never seen a parallel design on-ramp in So. Calif., but I am currently on vacation in TX and LA and have seen many parallel ones, especially in some newly renovated freeway areas. Ontario uses parallel design exclusively on freeways. In 90% of cases, the last half of the taper will have dashed lines that are thicker than the beginning, in order to indicate "please get the gently caress over now". Alternatively, the lane may start out from the gore with thicker dashes and then after 100m will turn into normal dashes, indicating that this lane does not end or slip into the next exit. Joe 30330 fucked around with this message at 01:12 on Nov 24, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 24, 2011 01:09
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:Neither one is particularly encouraged or frowned upon, and there's no clear guidance. Therefore, I'll just chalk it up to whichever design is in favor with the chief engineer. Here in CT, parallel on-ramps have been in favor for a long time. Off-ramps are mixed between parallel and tapered. I can say as a driver, I much prefer the parallel design. The tapered design makes me feel claustrophobic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2011 19:59
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Those are some of the worst suburban road layouts I've seen. Would you elaborate? Irvine regularly makes Top Suburban Suburbias in America lists (e.g. http://finance.yahoo.com/real-estate/article/113529/americas-best-cities-2011-businessweek).
|
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2011 21:29
|
|
|
Just the lack of any pedestrian/cycling connections, the whole place just has 1 route in or out, if you want to walk to your friend's house just a block over you have to walk in a huge ridiculous C shape rather than a straight line. Maybe I just haven't been exposed to enough horrible suburbs but even the worst I've seen always have some way to walk between the dead-ends. So cars are stuck on a ridiculous linear route but people can walk in more of a grid, if that makes sense what I'm describing? Also re-looking at that link it doesn't look at all how I remember, in fact nothing. I think I was looking at some other suburb... that one IS pretty bad though still but not at all among the worst. Baronjutter fucked around with this message at 22:53 on Nov 25, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 25, 2011 22:45
|
|
|
Mandalay posted:Would you elaborate? Irvine regularly makes Top Suburban Suburbias in America lists (e.g. http://finance.yahoo.com/real-estate/article/113529/americas-best-cities-2011-businessweek). Those lists are always bullshit when they start including suburbs. First, it only looks at stuff like schools and education of citizens and incomes, and ignores transportation (which is ridiculous, because you're probably going into the city to make that income of yours, and the commute would be horrendous). Now find me a list of the top New Urbanist suburbs, and then we can talk.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2011 03:49
|
|
|
I love reading this thread. Every page has something interesting on it and I can just flick around at random (I obviously haven't managed to read all of it yet). Do you ever actually get good feedback and suggestions from the local people/businesses? I keep seeing how Grandma McGee or a local politician seem to be a driving influence in a lot of really dumb changes. Even if they don't actively cause changes, how many good plans die from opposition to change? I'm thinking of one road in particular when I ask this question: Highway 278 from I-95 to Hilton Head Island. This is the only mainland link for the island and is extremely heavily traveled during the summer and fall tourist seasons (when in excess of 200k people can go onto and off of the island during the weekend) and it is also the main hurricane evacuation route for the island and neighboring communities. However the county has allowed the road to get very built up, with many shopping centers and associated stoplights being added over the years. The SC-DOT has tried to remove median crossings has been met with legal opposition. Even though they commonly lose I imagine that such moves has a chilling effect of implementing any traffic changes. Is that true? Are there areas of road that are simply lost causes until the people who oppose everything die out?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2011 20:53
|
|
|
I see you're a fan of the Olneyville clusterfuck. Not sure what's worse, Olneyville square or the freeways through there. I lived off Westminster just east of 6 for a while, and I'm pretty sure Olneyville square is a worst non-freway junction I've ever seen. My question is... coming down Valley Street and wanting to turn left on Westminster, how bad should I feel for turning right at Broadway then taking a U-turn/left at Westminster? There is a no U-turn sign - does that technically refer to taking a U-turn and staying on Broadway? If so this only occurred to me just now - I always thought I was putting myself at risk for a ticket doing that. Still, I never thought it was that bad of a move. It doesn't significantly back up the lane and isn't a particularly difficult turn. Not to mention that Google recommends it:  Is there a good reason that I'm missing that I shouldn't do this? Not that I'll be in that situation too often in the future, but I do find the intersection interesting. I was surprised this post in Greater City: Providence wasn't mentioned earlier in the thread. If it was, I missed it. Is there a similar blog that covers the Hartford area (now that I've moved here)? Anyway, check out their proposal for Olneyville Square:  Thoughts? I think making the square pedestrian-only would be fantastic. Edit: Given the traffic through the square currently, the congestion would be pretty bad I think with this redesign. I would make some of the roads one-way. Either Harris and Troy/Valley or the whole San Souci/Dike loop. SurgicalOntologist fucked around with this message at 04:44 on Nov 28, 2011 |
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2011 04:02
|
|
|
Sagacity posted:Ah! It's good to know my commute will be fixed in 9 years' time http://www.rws.nl/wegen/plannen_en_projecten/a_wegen/a2/den_bosch_eindhoven/ 2012/2013
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2011 16:34
|
|
|
Koesj posted:http://www.rws.nl/wegen/plannen_en_projecten/a_wegen/a2/den_bosch_eindhoven/ They have exactly one month to "start work in 2011" then
|
|
#
?
Nov 28, 2011 16:44
|
|
|
CaptBubba posted:I love reading this thread. Every page has something interesting on it and I can just flick around at random (I obviously haven't managed to read all of it yet). At least half of them. People prefer the lovely situation they know to a new situation, and that's just the way the human brain thinks. Only once something actually gets built do they re-evaluate. Roundabouts are an excellent example: public opinion tends to be heavily biased against them before construction, even at heavily congested intersections. For the roundabouts in Vail, CO:  The trick is getting it done in the first place. Should we force construction for the public good? There are certainly different opinions on the matter. People like Robert Moses would say, "gently caress yes!" Those who disagree, well, they don't tend to get roads named after them. CaptBubba posted:Even though they commonly lose I imagine that such moves has a chilling effect of implementing any traffic changes. Is that true? Are there areas of road that are simply lost causes until the people who oppose everything die out? Absolutely, and absolutely. I believe it was a single person blocking the construction of one of our recent freeways (72 or 9, I'm not sure which). We just waited for her to die, then bought the property from her heirs. It's ok, though. The longer we wait, the more pressure on the locals to upgrade. In a way, the situation takes care of itself. theDoubleH posted:My question is... coming down Valley Street and wanting to turn left on Westminster, how bad should I feel for turning right at Broadway then taking a U-turn/left at Westminster? There is a no U-turn sign - does that technically refer to taking a U-turn and staying on Broadway? If so this only occurred to me just now - I always thought I was putting myself at risk for a ticket doing that. As long as you do it safely and don't hold up traffic, I see no reason to complain. Do the cops even go to Olneyville? The last field tech we sent into the area was carrying a Glock with a 30-round magazine and had people shouting at him from the street corners, "Don't take a car into the projects!" theDoubleH posted:I was surprised this post in Greater City: Providence wasn't mentioned earlier in the thread. If it was, I missed it. Is there a similar blog that covers the Hartford area (now that I've moved here)? https://www.kurumi.com used to be great for the entire state, but he hasn't updated in some time... theDoubleH posted:Thoughts? I think making the square pedestrian-only would be fantastic. Well, there are some good things, and some bad. Good: Getting rid of the old Blue Coal complex, which is an eyesore. Could run into contaminated soil, though. Normalizing the interchange somewhat is a great start. An air rights park over the rail and freeway would help to unify the neighborhoods that have been split for... as long as the railroad's been there. Bad: Turning Route 10 into a surface street. It's a major bypass for I-95. The turning radii and travelpaths on Route 6 aren't significantly improved. Making a pedestrian-only area is great, if you can attract pedestrian traffic. If people are afraid to walk there, though, it could choke the businesses out. It'd be super expensive. Overall, very ambitious, and it has some good bits, but I prefer RIDOT's plan for the interchange.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2011 04:48
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:Well, there are some good things, and some bad. It seems that the surface level portion of 10 is bypassed by through traffic traveling to or from 6 (except for the 10N > 6W connection that doesn't exist). It looks like the original freeway is preserved and the surface level lanes are merely added to the mix. Whether there is space for that, however, is another question. And there would definitely be enough pedestrian traffic, with most of the residents of the area being carless the square is usually full of pedestrians during the day. Besides Thayer, and maybe Atwells and some other places on weekend nights, nowhere in the city gets as much foot traffic. Otherwise, your assessment seems spot on. What's RIDOT's plan? I searched but couldn't find a proposal.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2011 05:10
|
|
|
theDoubleH posted:It seems that the surface level portion of 10 is bypassed by through traffic traveling to or from 6 (except for the 10N > 6W connection that doesn't exist). It looks like the original freeway is preserved and the surface level lanes are merely added to the mix. Whether there is space for that, however, is another question. And there would definitely be enough pedestrian traffic, with most of the residents of the area being carless the square is usually full of pedestrians during the day. Besides Thayer, and maybe Atwells and some other places on weekend nights, nowhere in the city gets as much foot traffic. Otherwise, your assessment seems spot on. I can't find it on their website anymore, but BostonRoads has this to say: The RIDOT is developing long-range plans to rebuild this interchange. Under the state's "reconstruction alternative" (Alternative 4), a fully directional "T-interchange" would be built on the site. New ramps and service roads would be built to connect Union Avenue, Westminster Street, and Broadway to the Huntington Expressway. The RIDOT selected this alternative in its final record of decision presented in 2006, but is likely to delay the start of work until major completion of the I-95 / I-195 interchange in 2010.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2011 13:35
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:Absolutely, and absolutely. I believe it was a single person blocking the construction of one of our recent freeways (72 or 9, I'm not sure which). We just waited for her to die, then bought the property from her heirs. It's ok, though. The longer we wait, the more pressure on the locals to upgrade. In a way, the situation takes care of itself. Can't you use eminent domain to force the issue? God knows that at this point you can't actually block it no matter whether the reason makes sense or is just out and out graft, so it seems like it would be a non-issue.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2011 13:46
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:Can't you use eminent domain to force the issue? God knows that at this point you can't actually block it no matter whether the reason makes sense or is just out and out graft, so it seems like it would be a non-issue. Try to do that, and instead of one old lady blocking you, you end up with 50 new people blocking you because of the philosophical offense of seizing private property. Eminent Domain without a public request due to blight only works if you don't give a poo poo about community cooperation ever again.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2011 16:02
|
|
|
http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/editorials/hc-ed-hov-lane-cheaters-20111130,0,2697316.story Any thoughts on this? I guess it's a good way to generate revenue, but not very well thought out. The fact that you aren't supposed to cross the divider to get out of the lane kind of sucks if you get stuck behind a slow vehicle. If more people were to start using the HOV lanes, there actually might be more of a chance of congestion in those lanes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2011 08:33
|
|
|
porkfriedrice posted:http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/editorials/hc-ed-hov-lane-cheaters-20111130,0,2697316.story The key is not to do as they say, selling flat rate passes. You charge based on volume. When there's no one on the road it can be a few cents or even free. When there's a traffic jam, it becomes $10. Minneapolis does this on 694 and it works pretty well. It has to get expensive enough during peak times to make only those who really really can't wait take the option.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2011 10:00
|
|
|
Woo, another privilege for rich people. Got stacks of cash? Enjoy congestion free motoring while you laugh at the little people stuck on the poor people's highway.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2011 11:11
|
|
|
porkfriedrice posted:http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/editorials/hc-ed-hov-lane-cheaters-20111130,0,2697316.story Speaking of which, I've heard a number of people comment that higher speed limits would only encourage people to drive faster. Yet, while these HOV lanes are 65mph, people seem to drive the exact same speed on them (~65mph) that they do in the 55mph main highway in similar conditions. I've noticed the same thing where speed limits arbitrarily rise/drop on secondaries, that people will maintain 45mph or whatever even when the limit drops to 35 or 30. Is it a misnomer than raising the speed limit would encourage speeding? Do people really just drive at the speed they feel comfortable with, regardless of the posted speed limit?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2011 11:51
|
|
|
grover posted:Speaking of which, I've heard a number of people comment that higher speed limits would only encourage people to drive faster. Yet, while these HOV lanes are 65mph, people seem to drive the exact same speed on them (~65mph) that they do in the 55mph main highway in similar conditions. I've noticed the same thing where speed limits arbitrarily rise/drop on secondaries, that people will maintain 45mph or whatever even when the limit drops to 35 or 30. Is it a misnomer than raising the speed limit would encourage speeding? Do people really just drive at the speed they feel comfortable with, regardless of the posted speed limit? I think you're right about people generally going the speed they're comfortable with rather than obeying the speed limit. I definitely used to do that (and still do on my bike), but I've more or less retrained myself to drive the speed limit for better gas mileage and a less stressful commute. Based on my observations, about 75% or more of people just drive whatever speed they'd like, mostly 10-15kph above the speed limit, overtaking if necessary to maintain that speed. A small percentage will do the same, but will slow down and just match the speed of traffic ahead if it's somewhat close to the speed limit. It's anecdotal evidence, of course. Another example is that all Danish motorways used to have a 110kph speed limit. Average speed if you remove governed trucks etc. from the equation was somewhere around 130kph. Since 2004, a number of motorway stretches have been 'upgraded' to a 130kph limit. The result was that the average speed on 110kph parts dropped to 120kph, while it stayed at 130kph on the 130kph parts. I'm not sure if raising the speed limit everywhere is going to help, or even why it helps everywhere to raise the limits in a few selected parts. But some wide and mostly completely straight roads could benefit from a slightly higher limit and perhaps slow down traffic a bit on other roads.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2011 15:22
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:Woo, another privilege for rich people. Got stacks of cash? Enjoy congestion free motoring while you laugh at the little people stuck on the poor people's highway. Or you have people who carpool either pay a reduced toll or none at all. Heck, even if they don't give explicit carpool incentives, if you do carpool you can split the toll/cost anyway.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2011 16:56
|
|
|
KozmoNaut posted:Woo, another privilege for rich people. Got stacks of cash? Enjoy congestion free motoring while you laugh at the little people stuck on the poor people's highway. The idea of congestion charges and access fees is to limit access to resources to those who gain the most utility from it. In healthcare, we have doctors to limit access to healthcare resources and in education, we have entrance exams that limit access to universities to those who will benefit the most from an education. Theoretically, levying a fee would be more efficient than either of those, since, you're generally willing to pay more for something you feel is useful to you. Because of income inequality, access fees aren't really a ethically acceptable way to regulate access to healthcare or education. But can we do it for roads? We already employ access fees in public transport to limit demand to a reasonable level. Tickets for the express train cost more than a bus ticket. People are perfectly fine with that. Offering express lanes for a premium is not really much different. If it means that we get rid of all tailgating assholes and manage to collect revenue while doing it, so much the better. In theory. Implementing these kind of schemes is a bit different here in Finland, (9th lowest GINI index) than in the US (74th lowest GINI index). It's not that access pricing schemes are a fundamentally bad idea, it's that they require a reasonably flat distribution of income to be allocatively efficient i.e. to reflect perceived needs between people rather than just differences in purchasing power. Public transport sort of addresses the issue by offering discounts to children and the elderly, but that completely ignores the unemployed and the working poor. The fundamental question is whether the drawbacks of a more progressive tax code would outweigh the benefits a flatter distribution of income would offer.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2011 17:19
|
|
|
Jasper Tin Neck posted:Theoretically, levying a fee would be more efficient than either of those, since, you're generally willing to pay more for something you feel is useful to you. Because of income inequality, access fees aren't really a ethically acceptable way to regulate access to healthcare or education. But can we do it for roads? That's exactly the question, and if the decision is up to me, I wouldn't implement congestion pricing. I'd rather pump up mass transit so everyone benefits. Letting single drivers pay to use the HOV lane will make its level of service worse for carpoolers and transit. In other news, our state banned weathering steel guiderail today. Would you like to see some photos that explain why?
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2011 23:28
|
|
|
I don't even know what that is!
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2011 23:39
|
|
|
Sure. Would I be right in guessing that it just doesn't stop "weathering" in some circumstances?KozmoNaut posted:Based on my observations, about 75% or more of people just drive whatever speed they'd like, mostly 10-15kph above the speed limit, overtaking if necessary to maintain that speed. A small percentage will do the same, but will slow down and just match the speed of traffic ahead if it's somewhat close to the speed limit. It's anecdotal evidence, of course. Counterpoint: Germany. I would say that 90% of cars drive around 120-140 on the Autobahn, and the remaining 10% put the pedal to the floor and leave it there. It's a weird feeling to be passed by someone doing 120kph more than you when you're already over what feels like the natural motorway speed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2011 23:43
|
|
|
Wolfsbane posted:Counterpoint: Germany. I would say that 90% of cars drive around 120-140 on the Autobahn, and the remaining 10% put the pedal to the floor and leave it there. It's a weird feeling to be passed by someone doing 120kph more than you when you're already over what feels like the natural motorway speed. That's because the German people are awesome and can be trusted to follow a system.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2011 23:55
|
|
|
Mandalay posted:That's because the German people are awesome and can be trusted to follow a system. Also, it is difficult to get a drivers license and very easy to lose it, as opposed to the US where a drivers license is almost a birthright and our roads must be designed for Cletus the 8th Grade Dropout.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2011 23:58
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:That's exactly the question, and if the decision is up to me, I wouldn't implement congestion pricing. I'd rather pump up mass transit so everyone benefits. Letting single drivers pay to use the HOV lane will make its level of service worse for carpoolers and transit. Don't just give the carrot, throw the stick in there. Congestion charge the gently caress out of everything, because there are real economic costs to congestion. More transit is the carrot, making it harder/more expensive to drive is the stick. And with those HOV lanes, unless the fines become insane (thousands of dollars) people will decide their time is worthwhile enough to take the HOV lanes and eat the ticket sometimes. I took a class from a guy that worked on 394 here in Minneapolis (it's 394 that has the HOV lane, not 694) and he said that before they installed MNPass there was a laywer who would take the HOV lane by himself every day and get quite a few tickets, but he did't care, because his time was worth enough that he still came out ahead.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 00:34
|
|
|
The US really needs fines like some countries in europe, where it's not a set amount but a % of your yearly income. Rich piece of poo poo drives in HOV lane or speeds dangerously not caring about a ticket? He will care when that ticket is $200,000. Poor person late for work speeds and gets a ticket? Can still afford to eat afterwards.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 00:40
|
|
|
Weathering steel is steel that rusts superficially to blend in better with a wooded environment.Wolfsbane posted:Would I be right in guessing that it just doesn't stop "weathering" in some circumstances? Yes, and try all circumstances! Guide rail is supposed to last 30-50 years. After 10 years, 71% of weathering steel rails fail at the joints, and 25% fail at mid-span. Have a look:   Not exactly crashworthy. We're expecting a massive backlash from communities, unfortunately, since they much prefer the weathering steel. I've never really liked it... imagine if you're on a bike or motorcycle and rub up against all that rust! FISHMANPET posted:Don't just give the carrot, throw the stick in there. Congestion charge the gently caress out of everything, because there are real economic costs to congestion. More transit is the carrot, making it harder/more expensive to drive is the stick. I can imagine the kind of reaction that'd get with the public. Unfortunately, it's not engineers who implement that, but politicians, and they all want to get re-elected. Baronjutter posted:The US really needs fines like some countries in europe, where it's not a set amount but a % of your yearly income. Rich piece of poo poo drives in HOV lane or speeds dangerously not caring about a ticket? He will care when that ticket is $200,000. Poor person late for work speeds and gets a ticket? Can still afford to eat afterwards. Yes, I absolutely love that system! Some millionaire in Scandinavia got a 180,000 Euro speeding ticket a couple years back from going moderately over the limit. I know it would certainly slow me down.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 01:58
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:
I worked in Basel this past spring, and the German executives complained about this a lot. Of course, they also drove the speed limit (at least on the Swiss side of the border).
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 03:01
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:The US really needs fines like some countries in europe, where it's not a set amount but a % of your yearly income. Rich piece of poo poo drives in HOV lane or speeds dangerously not caring about a ticket? He will care when that ticket is $200,000. Poor person late for work speeds and gets a ticket? Can still afford to eat afterwards. Hahahaha good luck getting that idea to fly in the US. Even taxing the rich at normal levels is decried as socialism.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 05:51
|
|
|
I always wondered why some guardrails were rust colored. I think the median on the divided portion of Route 66 in Portland is this color. To me it didn't really look any better than the normal ones, they just looked like rusty guardrails.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 09:51
|
|
|
porkfriedrice posted:I always wondered why some guardrails were rust colored. I think the median on the divided portion of Route 66 in Portland is this color. To me it didn't really look any better than the normal ones, they just looked like rusty guardrails. It's possible to keep them in decent condition by putting sacrificial zinc plates at each joint. Of course, they need to be replaced after a decade or so, and they increase the cost as well. Don't expect to see any new weathering steel on state roads. Also, speaking of Portland, the semi-final inspection for the streetscape project is today. I'll be down there this morning to make sure everything's done correctly.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 13:24
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:That's exactly the question, and if the decision is up to me, I wouldn't implement congestion pricing. I'd rather pump up mass transit so everyone benefits. Letting single drivers pay to use the HOV lane will make its level of service worse for carpoolers and transit.
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 13:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 00:21 |
|
|
How busted must the roads be before they get patched? Street in front of my house is busted as hell with quite a few potholes and recently it was patched but only one section of the road. Do people have to complain like hell to the city to get it fixed? Also they always do a lovely job that they all get busted up again in a few months
|
|
#
?
Dec 1, 2011 14:19
|
|
