|
Volmarias posted:I noticed another issue. The AI will only wait so long in line on a road. If things take too long, they will pull a u-turn at the intersection, blocking people behind then as they wait to turn. There's a SimCity thread for this stuff.
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 01:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 12:33 |
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Yeah, Option B definitely looks like the correct one. But option B carries the risk of plowing into someone and having to argue your case with a cop.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 02:27
|
|
|
Chemmy posted:But option B carries the risk of plowing into someone and having to argue your case with a cop.  Edit: here's the intersection in Google Maps. DaveSauce posted:Is there a legal justification? I mean, I agree completely, but I just don't trust other drivers. Safe move is obviously to take the outside B route at all times and adjust later, but sometimes I forget that people do stupid things. I'm wondering if I would be covered should I take the inside lane on the B route and someone else takes the outside lane on the A route and collisions happen. That said, there's a reason why transit buses always take the outside turn lane unless making an immediate left turn. No room for dispute, you had the outside lane and an escape route. Varance fucked around with this message at 03:05 on Mar 13, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 02:32
|
|
|
Varance posted:Option B is correct. PittTheElder posted:Yeah, Option B definitely looks like the correct one. Is there a legal justification? I mean, I agree completely, but I just don't trust other drivers. Safe move is obviously to take the outside B route at all times and adjust later, but sometimes I forget that people do stupid things. I'm wondering if I would be covered should I take the inside lane on the B route and someone else takes the outside lane on the A route and collisions happen.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 02:33
|
|
|
DaveSauce posted:Is there a legal justification? I mean, I agree completely, but I just don't trust other drivers. Safe move is obviously to take the outside B route at all times and adjust later, but sometimes I forget that people do stupid things. I'm wondering if I would be covered should I take the inside lane on the B route and someone else takes the outside lane on the A route and collisions happen. I'm not sure what the Uniform Vehicle Code has to say on the matter (you have to be a member to view it), but the local statute where I learned to drive is that, from the leftmost lane, you turn into the leftmost receiving lane; I don't recall any specific cases where that receiving lane had to be a through lane (sometimes, there are no through lanes, and all lanes turn), but I wouldn't consider American driver's ed very effective. Confusion like this is a big part of why drivers tend to stagger going through double lefts. Even in straightforward cases, there's no guarantee the guy next to you is going to stay in his lane. There's a tremendous number of intersections in Connecticut with double turn lanes and no cat tracks. I do my part to fix it whenever I have a project in the area. For example, over the next three years or so, nearly every double turn at a major intersection in the state should get cat tracks through my pavement marking projects. I mostly come up with the lane alignments myself, but the local municipalities have a chance to comment on them, too. For my latest project, the town asked me to change the cat tracks here, shifting the eastbound cat tracks over by one lane so that off-ramp traffic isn't forced into a turn lane half a mile downstream. The effect might be minor, but a little bit of goodwill goes a long way when it comes to dealing with towns.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 02:54
|
|
|
Can you fathom the reasoning behind TxDOT restriping IH 10 thru Beaumont from 3 to 2 lanes. This is the approx extent of the backup created everyday from 2pm to 7pm. https://maps.google.com/maps?saddr=...sp=0&sz=12&z=12 Also TxDOT has posted the project alternatives for the 288/Texas Medical Center connectors. For those that know the Ardmore and Hermann alternatives are especially  https://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/hou/sh288_med_center/project.pdf VVVV With all the structural steel work sites around there I never noticed they were replacing that bridge. Finally. Ron Pauls Friend fucked around with this message at 03:42 on Mar 13, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 03:33
|
|
|
Ron Pauls Friend posted:Can you fathom the reasoning behind TxDOT restriping IH 10 thru Beaumont from 3 to 2 lanes. This is the approx extent of the backup created everyday from 2pm to 7pm. My best guess is structural problems on that bridge east of town. Reducing the number of lanes over it reduces the load, and it also lets them position traffic away from the weakest parts of the deck. Heck, it looks like they're building a new bridge next to it. Maybe staging will only allow 2 lanes.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 03:35
|
|
|
Ron Pauls Friend posted:Can you fathom the reasoning behind TxDOT restriping IH 10 thru Beaumont from 3 to 2 lanes. This is the approx extent of the backup created everyday from 2pm to 7pm. Varance fucked around with this message at 04:17 on Mar 13, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 03:50
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:I'm not sure what the Uniform Vehicle Code has to say on the matter (you have to be a member to view it), but the local statute where I learned to drive is that, from the leftmost lane, you turn into the leftmost receiving lane; I don't recall any specific cases where that receiving lane had to be a through lane (sometimes, there are no through lanes, and all lanes turn) That's kind of where I'm at...I know you're supposed to go to the leftmost lane, but I don't know if there's a distinction between a turn lane and a through lane. BTW, here's the intersection: http://goo.gl/maps/01IR8 It's right next to a freeway, and it's a mess of suburban hell, so that's probably why it sucks.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 03:58
|
|
|
Is that thing that looks like a go-kart race track for buses/park and ride?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 06:53
|
|
|
Terminal Entropy posted:Is that thing that looks like a go-kart race track for buses/park and ride? That said, if you want somnething that looks like a racetrack in Minnesota: https://maps.google.com/maps?q=Bren...+55343&t=h&z=15 It even has race track style curbs on the curbs. What a weird design. (It is also amazingly fun)
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 07:00
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:Even in straightforward cases, there's no guarantee the guy next to you is going to stay in his lane. Ain't that the truth. This intersection at SR18 and I-71 seems pretty straightforward, does it not?  Google Maps Even with cat tracks and a bonus lane, coming off 71S on to 18W if I'm in the outside lane for the corner there's still about a 50/50 shot that someone from the curb lane will try to take the middle or even the far lane mid-corner. edit: After posting this I notice that even the GMaps view shows someone ignoring the tracks. You can see where the intersection was previously badly striped and following the tracks on the inside lane was basically impossible for large vehicles as well as putting them right back in to the turn lanes to get on the northbound side. wolrah fucked around with this message at 17:08 on Mar 13, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 17:06
|
|
|
Chemmy posted:But option B carries the risk of plowing into someone and having to argue your case with a cop. Well that depends what lane you start in. If you're in the right hand lane to start, then option A presents the identical problem. From a logical standpoint, it seems really unlikely that people would want to turn into the must-turn-left lane on the road they just turned on to. Assuming there's no signage on the road they're leaving saying like "be in the left lane to immediately turn left again!" I think you have to assume they will want to continue straight. DaveSauce posted:Is there a legal justification? I mean, I agree completely, but I just don't trust other drivers. Safe move is obviously to take the outside B route at all times and adjust later, but sometimes I forget that people do stupid things. I'm wondering if I would be covered should I take the inside lane on the B route and someone else takes the outside lane on the A route and collisions happen. Well, I'm both Canadian and just a regular driver, so take my words with a hefty grain of salt, but I seem to remember from my driver education that you are always restricted on which lane you turn into. For instance, if you're on a one lane road, and you turn right on to a two lane road, you must complete your turn in the right-most lane that does not contain parked vehicles. Same applies for left turns then I'd think. Doing anything else would constitute changing lanes in an intersection which is already illegal I'm pretty sure. That said, and assuming that is in fact how it works, people ignore that poo poo constantly. Take for instance, a road on the way out of my community:  I'll be headed south on Prestwick Circle, they'll be headed north on Prestwick Circle. It's a two way road, one lane each way (plus parking on side). We're both signalling that we want to turn onto eastbound Prestwick Gate, which has a median and has two lanes each way, and you're not allowed to park on it. Now, I'd assume that we could both just harmoniously turn without my needing to yield; I'll turn left into the left lane of Prestwick Gate, they'll turn right into the right lane of Prestwick Gate, everybody goes home happy. This is the situation I've drawn. Of course, what actually happens is that they usually want to go North on 52nd Street, and so they try and turn right into the left lane, rather than making a separate turn and lane change. It's infuriating, and a great example of why even when there are (I think) rules to dictate proper behavior, that's no substitute for actually paying attention to what other drivers are doing. PittTheElder fucked around with this message at 18:18 on Mar 13, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 18:15
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
I hate turning left/right while other people in the opposing lane are doing the same because I'd say 25-30% of drivers immediately turn into the lane they want rather than follow the rules and turn into the lane they're supposed to and then change lanes. I'd be in the right, but I kind of don't want to get hit by all the idiots just turning directly into the 2nd or 3rd lane.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 18:43
|
|
|
Someone recently had asked how much it costs to convert abandoned rail lines to bike trails. I just reviewed one such project today: 1.5 miles for $2.5 million. If you want the parking lot and small ped bridge, too, that rises to $3.5
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 22:15
|
|
|
How come infrastructure costs always seem so mind-bogglingly high? Is there really so much red tape and over-engineering or is concrete, asphalt,and labour really so expensive?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 23:12
|
|
|
Why can't we just stick immigrants in huge casons like we did in the old days. E: Not trying to setup a straw man where I think you don't care about immigrants or something, I promise FISHMANPET fucked around with this message at 23:27 on Mar 13, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 23:21
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:How come infrastructure costs always seem so mind-bogglingly high? Is there really so much red tape and over-engineering or is concrete, asphalt,and labour really so expensive? I don't think there was a single item that was more than 10% of the overall cost, except for contingencies + incidentals. The most expensive bits were excavation and subgrade material. Hell, for the ped bridge, the bridge itself is only $120k, but it comes up to more than $500k when you're putting it in.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 23:47
|
|
|
Labor, materials, and equipment are all extremely expensive.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 23:47
|
|
|
Cichlidae or anyone else, do you have any ballpark figures on construction cost difference between diamond interchanges, "dogbone" roundabout interchanges, and SPUIs?
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2013 23:59
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:Someone recently had asked how much it costs to convert abandoned rail lines to bike trails. I just reviewed one such project today: 1.5 miles for $2.5 million. If you want the parking lot and small ped bridge, too, that rises to $3.5 Solution: Don't pave the trail. It is now a MOUNTAIN bike trail.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 00:44
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:I don't think there was a single item that was more than 10% of the overall cost, except for contingencies + incidentals. The most expensive bits were excavation and subgrade material. Hell, for the ped bridge, the bridge itself is only $120k, but it comes up to more than $500k when you're putting it in. I wonder how much this costs a developing country or China.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 01:03
|
|
|
Dominus Vobiscum posted:Cichlidae or anyone else, do you have any ballpark figures on construction cost difference between diamond interchanges, "dogbone" roundabout interchanges, and SPUIs? That... I'm really not even sure it's possible, because so much of it depends on the individual situation. For example, they all require different right-of-way, have different user costs that depend on volumes, have different advantages. Even getting just a construction cost like you want would be tricky, because they're rarely all considered for the same project. Not to mention we only have one SPUI and no dogbones in the entire state, so I can't just go off bid history. MrYenko posted:Solution: Don't pave the trail. It is now a MOUNTAIN bike trail. The trail is relatively flat and straight as is; it was a functional railroad track 20 years ago. The grade's gone down a bit due to settlement, so it sometimes floods (adjacent to a canal, of course), but other than that it's perfectly functional. Hell, they're getting the land for free, and it's still almost $2M/mile. Imagine if they had to buy it first! Mandalay posted:I wonder how much this costs a developing country or China. It has to be an order of magnitude less, maybe more, but you wouldn't get the same level of environmental protection and quality of labor and materials. Hell, if the contractor sees a single garter snake while building the bike path, he has to stop work, watch which way the snake is slithering, and gently move it out of the silt fence in that direction. In most countries, they'd probably just get run over or hit with a shovel, even though they're a species of environmental concern.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 03:35
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:That... I'm really not even sure it's possible, because so much of it depends on the individual situation. For example, they all require different right-of-way, have different user costs that depend on volumes, have different advantages. Even getting just a construction cost like you want would be tricky, because they're rarely all considered for the same project. Fair enough. Bid history was the best I was expecting. Guess I'll have to do some digging on my own. Wisconsin doesn't seem to like using them anywhere, and I'm not sure why. WisDOT loves roundabouts lately, and the ones I've driven through seem to work pretty well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 04:05
|
|
|
Dominus Vobiscum posted:Wisconsin doesn't seem to like using them anywhere, and I'm not sure why. I know of one SPUI in the state, finished in 2006. The interchange just south of it is a fun one in itself. https://maps.google.com/maps?q=5470...nsin+54701&z=17 A quick scan of the WisDOT site finds nothing else of use.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 04:27
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:It has to be an order of magnitude less, maybe more, but you wouldn't get the same level of environmental protection and quality of labor and materials. I respectfully disagree. In some cases we get far better prices because of the availability of equipment, materials, and labor. I've had discussions with a group from Burkina Faso about building roads for them, and they pay as much as $4M USD per lane mile for asphalt. They are a former colony of France, and have no equipment of their own, nor the plants to make asphalt, nor the skilled labor to operate the equipment or manipulate the materials. They get French contractors, French machines, French imported asphalt, French everything, and pay through the nose because they don't know how to take care of it on their own. That's why they were so excited at the idea of an American company coming over and not just building them a road, but teaching them how to build a road.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 05:49
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I hate turning left/right while other people in the opposing lane are doing the same because I'd say 25-30% of drivers immediately turn into the lane they want rather than follow the rules and turn into the lane they're supposed to and then change lanes. I'd be in the right, but I kind of don't want to get hit by all the idiots just turning directly into the 2nd or 3rd lane. In my town, there's a wal-mart. Their access road is three lane; left-turn, right-turn, and straight. It crosses with an 8-lane road, three straight, both ways dedicated right turns just past the intersection. When turning right, I normally have to wait for people yielding for the opposing traffic's left-turning green arrow, because it's COMPLETELY RANDOM what lane they'll choose, out of four. Note the interstate entrance is on the far south lane. There's an awful lot of room to figure out where you need to be, along with sufficient signage. There's a stop light with two dedicated turn lanes off frame to the east for the northbound interstate, too. In short, people are just idiots and fundamentally forget any rules of the road besides "I point machine where I want to go" after getting their license.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 12:25
|
|
|
People are such good drivers.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 13:59
|
|
|
Varance posted:This. The intersection is not appropriately striped. Here's the intersection of Florida SR60 and US41B near Port of Tampa, appropriately located next to an IKEA (sorry, it's concrete, had to draw them in to make them visible):
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 17:27
|
|
|
grover posted:Why is the cat track in the upper-right so badly drawn? Pinching the turn off like that just seems to be a recipe for accidents.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 17:38
|
|
|
grover posted:Why is the cat track in the upper-right so badly drawn? Pinching the turn off like that just seems to be a recipe for accidents. Frustrates me how many people will just bee-line it for the edge of the median, then realize at the last second they can't make it and stand on the brakes. When they could have carried much more speed through much more safely by driving the proper line. This locality obviously knows how to do it properly, because they did it right on the upper left. Mostly because the dude drew in cat tracks where they weren't...
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 17:46
|
|
|
Chaos Motor posted:Mostly because the dude drew in cat tracks where they weren't...  You don't need to redraw, I know what you meant; for some reason I didn't miss the obvious difference in brightness/contrast and thought those were actual road markings. You illustrated it perfectly well to show your point.Just a pet peeve of mine when people try to straight-line a left turn only to slam on the brakes when they pinch themselves off. grover fucked around with this message at 17:58 on Mar 14, 2013 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 17:50
|
|
|
babyeatingpsychopath posted:When turning right, I normally have to wait for people yielding for the opposing traffic's left-turning green arrow, because it's COMPLETELY RANDOM what lane they'll choose, out of four. I don't understand, don't you normally have to yield in this situation? You have a red, they have a left-turning green arrow.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 19:46
|
|
|
Right, but they are supposed to turn left into the left most lane, in theory making the right most lane clear for you to turn right into. But often people just turn left and end up in the lane they want rather than the lane they're supposed to, so they effectively block all lanes since you don't know what lane they're going to end up in.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 20:06
|
|
|
True, I'll make that RTOR in the real world, but is it legal? With or without markings, it seems like the opposing green left arrow has the right of way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 20:21
|
|
|
They have right of way, but they're supposed to turn into a specific lane. In theory if everyone drove by the rules people could turn left and right at the same time as they're going into different lanes and traffic would be happy. But in practise people turning left might turn into the left or right lane on a 4 lane street so you can't turn right. If you got hit I have no idea who would be at fault, I'm guessing the person turning left into the wrong lane. The same is true when I'm turning left and don't have an advance/protected left and I see a no one going straight, just some people turning right. I don't turn left because 25% of those cars are just turning right into the left lane.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 20:37
|
|
|
When right turn on red is otherwise legal, another side of the intersection having a protected left light doesn't change whether the RTOR is legal. At some intersections I've seen, they'll put up signs that only light up to say "no right on red" when there's a protected left that would conflict though!
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 20:42
|
|
|
Is that when they'd both be turning into the same lane though? Shouldn't if it's a 4 lane road everyone turning left turn into the left lane and everyone turning right turn into the right lane and everything be rad?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 20:44
|
|
|
Mandalay posted:True, I'll make that RTOR in the real world, but is it legal? With or without markings, it seems like the opposing green left arrow has the right of way. Guy I know made the RTOR there, and someone sideswiped him. He was not at fault, other driver got a "changing langes in an intersection" and "driving too fast for conditions." Some cops agree with us that people shouldn't drive like idiots. When I'm in my car, I'll turn into the rightmost lane, accelerate at a normal rate to the speed limit, turn on my blinker, and change over three lanes to the leftmost, with a pause in each lane. I can do this safely and still make it all the way left before the light. It's like this road was designed for proper driving!
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2013 22:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 12:33 |
|
|
Grundulum posted:I have a question about a local traffic oddity. As a fellow North Carolinian I can answer this in two words: Triangle drivers  Also, you and those jerks in Charlotte need to quit sucking up all the road funds. Fayetteville may be terrible but we need I-295, dammit 
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2013 00:27
|
|
