|
Carbon dioxide posted:There's no concept of 4-way stops here at all. Stop signs are used to mean "you have to yield here and also cross traffic is gonna be blasting through and you won't be able to see the intersection well so you better stop and very carefully look if the road is clear or you're gonna die". Having many stop signs here would just give me stop sign fatigue. What's the point if you rarely actually need to stop? I'd probably end up ignoring them and treat them as yield signs.
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2019 00:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 08:57 |
|
|
MomJeans420 posted:When a light is fully out in my area, not just blinking red, you wouldn't believe how many people I've seen just go through it without stopping. This even includes freeway offramp lights (happened this month to me), so 911 is 100% valid in my opinion. Yeah, it is crazy. We've had a lot of power outages here recently (and not in PGE land, we just had trees fall). Caltrans currently has the digital signs up reminding people that a dead stop light is a stop sign. I saw like 2-3 near misses at one intersection on Saturday
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2019 01:01
|
|
|
Tiny Tubesteak Tom posted:I've called the non-emergency line for dead traffic lights before. Most recently I got a very frustrated sigh from the operator and a "yup, we know, we have someone out there right now" despite that they did not, in fact, have someone out there. The efficacy of calling is unknown but probably a good idea to just do it anyway imo In my experience, it varies widely based on jurisdiction. Some 311 call centers are great, others seem to hate to be bothered.
|
|
#
?
Oct 30, 2019 01:11
|
|
|
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/nov/01/new-york-city-bike-lanes-car-culture Congrats, Newyorkians, this sounds like a big step.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 07:49
|
|
|
How would y'all stop this? https://twitter.com/islutsky/status/1189915061076279296
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 18:54
|
|
|
In New York, second-degree reckless endangerment is a class A misdemeanor punishable by up to 1 year in jail. I suspect that after a few drivers are sentenced to serve three to six months in jail, the number of people committing such an action would decrease significantly. e: I don't know what the legal situation is in other states or countries, so I'm not sure what course of action would be best there. In general, though, severe enforcement for vehicular crimes would be a great way to reverse the culture of impunity around driving, though it must be paired with systems to prevent the burden of this strategy from falling exclusively on poor or minority communities. nrook fucked around with this message at 19:01 on Nov 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 18:58
|
|
|
Enforcement sounds good when you say it, but unfortunately that doesn't look like the kind of neighbourhood where these drivers are likely to run into a random squad car and get pulled over. If someone calls it in, sure, someone might knock on their door, but even with that video there would be insufficient evidence for a conviction in most (sane) jurisdictions, because you can't identify the driver. Sorry I don't have anything better to offer, I guess as a traffic engineer one might consider planting trees or lampposts (or bollards) along the sidewalk to prevent driving on it? If it's a low-speed street that shouldn't affect safety too much.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 20:26
|
|
|
What is up with that street, specifically, that is causing people to jump the curb? Is it a symptom of something else being hosed, or just a really wide driveway? Granted we're judging from a 25 second twooter video, but it looks like the car in front of the filming car is stopped over on the right, and the filming car is out in the middle for some reason? There is context we don't have here. Is the street too narrow for two cars at once, and if so why? Javid fucked around with this message at 21:57 on Nov 1, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 21:53
|
|
|
Javid posted:What is up with that street, specifically, that is causing people to jump the curb? Is it a symptom of something else being hosed, or just a really wide driveway? Wealthy people picking their kids up at school. The school is probably still a few blocks away.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 22:25
|
|
|
oh ok. then I'm with this guynrook posted:In New York, second-degree reckless endangerment is a class A misdemeanor punishable by up to 1 year in jail. I suspect that after a few drivers are sentenced to serve three to six months in jail, the number of people committing such an action would decrease significantly. except also cube their cars
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 22:30
|
|
|
Why does that guy think kids are going to get killed by traffic that is going less than 10 miles an hour? You can do whatever tf you want at that speed, nobody is going to get hurt.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 23:05
|
|
|
Corla Plankun posted:Why does that guy think kids are going to get killed by traffic that is going less than 10 miles an hour? You can do whatever tf you want at that speed, nobody is going to get hurt. Because a 2-ton car can smash a 50-pound kid flat even at 10 miles an hour? Little kids run around without looking all the time. They can be taught to stay out of the street, but they should be safe on the sidewalk. If it was my neighborhood, I'd put a lemonade stand on the sidewalk. No actual lemonade, just a stand.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 23:11
|
|
|
EoRaptor posted:Wealthy people picking their kids up at school. The school is probably still a few blocks away.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 23:13
|
|
|
And we're back to "symptom of other problems"
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 23:16
|
|
|
Corla Plankun posted:Why does that guy think kids are going to get killed by traffic that is going less than 10 miles an hour? You can do whatever tf you want at that speed, nobody is going to get hurt. Did you realize the car was driving directly on the sidewalk, against the normal flow of traffic? The sidewalk where cars are not ever allowed, and even adult pedestrians might not think to look out for vehicles before stepping out onto?
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 23:19
|
|
|
As with most angry about traffic youtube videos, everyone in it is wrong.
|
|
#
?
Nov 1, 2019 23:43
|
|
|
Chris Knight posted:How would y'all stop this? make the curb 2 feet high
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 12:34
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:If it was my neighborhood, I'd put a lemonade stand on the sidewalk. No actual lemonade, just a stand. Correction, a lemonade stand covering up bollards.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 12:40
|
|
|
e: double post somehow??
vanity slug fucked around with this message at 13:06 on Nov 2, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 12:55
|
|
|
wolrah posted:Yeah from a look at the thread it's a combination of a school during pickup/dropoff times and a local transit project causing main road traffic to divert through residential areas. The assholes trying to cut through the neighborhood are getting held up by the assholes lining up to ensure their child doesn't have to ride the bus and this is the result. So yeah, in that case whatever a traffic engineer could do to this would just be trying to paint over a hole in the wall. If this is indeed temporary due to construction, the city could either divert traffic cops there for however long it takes, or temporarily institute a "bus only" policy for kids at that school, or make the school start classes staggered so not all kids have to show up at once, or something. Not much to do with how that street is designed. Nothing for an engineer to do here.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 13:25
|
|
|
Increasing curb height would be a relatively easy solution during design phase. Obviously it wouldn't be a solution after the street is built though. For that I'd suggest getting the city to declare the street a one-way, or closing an intersection so that it is no longer a throughfare.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 14:30
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Increasing curb height would be a relatively easy solution during design phase. Obviously it wouldn't be a solution after the street is built though. For that I'd suggest getting the city to declare the street a one-way, or closing an intersection so that it is no longer a throughfare. Increased curb height means you can't open doors when there's parking, and it's a tripping hazard if you're not raising all the sidewalks too Put up temporary concrete traffic barrier, gently caress that rich-people neighborhood
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 14:53
|
|
|
Devor posted:Increased curb height means you can't open doors when there's parking, and it's a tripping hazard if you're not raising all the sidewalks too Increasing the curb height so that drivers can't just use the sidewalk as a third lane is a totally normal design and doesn't make it impossible to walk or park.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 15:10
|
|
|
Widen the sidewalk, put in trees.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 15:15
|
|
|
Hippie Hedgehog posted:Enforcement sounds good when you say it, but unfortunately that doesn't look like the kind of neighbourhood where these drivers are likely to run into a random squad car and get pulled over. Red light cameras have established the precedent that if you own the car you are responsible. Don't let people who will drive on sidewalks use your car, and make sure you call the cops if it gets stolen.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 21:11
|
|
|
The contractor doing the roadworks causing the detour should be mitigating this, and if they aren't then the city should be forcing them to. There should also looks to be double parking going on, there should be some short term parking facilities provided in the school grounds and/or directly outside the school, and someone with some authority moving people along. In some places (non-police) officers employed by the city may be able to issue parking infringements: it doesn't have to be the police. The reality is that that road will probably be heavily congested for a while, especially around school times.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 22:19
|
|
|
Have a cop just walk along the line of cars stopped in the loving road handing out tickets. Deal with the shithead parents congesting it, and the people detouring through there temporarily stops being such a huge hazard.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 22:24
|
|
|
I'm loving the idea of cops just walking along the street handing out citations for vehicular loitering like they were lowly pedestrians.
|
|
#
?
Nov 2, 2019 22:33
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Increasing the curb height so that drivers can't just use the sidewalk as a third lane is a totally normal design and doesn't make it impossible to walk or park. A curb tall enough to prevent a stock hatchback's doors from opening wouldn't even be a second thought for a pickup truck or SUV built on a truck chassis. Even most of the jacked up station wagons could do it. Javid posted:Have a cop just walk along the line of cars stopped in the loving road handing out tickets. Deal with the shithead parents congesting it, and the people detouring through there temporarily stops being such a huge hazard. If there's one person doing something wrong then that's a lovely person, but if it's a recurring issue with different people then there's a larger problem that those actions are a symptom of.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2019 17:31
|
|
|
RFC2324 posted:Red light cameras have established the precedent that if you own the car you are responsible. Don't let people who will drive on sidewalks use your car, and make sure you call the cops if it gets stolen. OK, so whatever jurisdiction you're in is not one of the sane ones, then. Speed trap cameras here have to catch your face, or you can get your ticket overturned by saying it was someone else driving. There are no red light cameras, probably because for some drat reason no one seems to run red lights in Sweden. Hippie Hedgehog fucked around with this message at 19:36 on Nov 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2019 19:34
|
|
|
Hippie Hedgehog posted:OK, so whatever jurisdiction you're in is not one of the sane ones, then. To be honest that seems like standard insane car culture to me. What's the point of a license plate if you can just pretend that you aren't affiliated at any point? It's like letting masked bank robbers go because you can't identify who specifically took the cash. What about parking meters or toll violations? It seems like they'd have the exact same reliance on license plates. Holding the owner of the car responsible for misuse of the vehicle seems perfectly acceptable unless they are alleging that it was stolen. On a more positive note for Sweden, their speed-camera lottery experiment was brilliant and I hope that they eventually pick it back up. In short, traffic cameras would record drivers passing by at a legal speed and add them to a lottery to get a piece of the fines being paid by speeders. A little bit of gamification meant that traffic calmed quite a bit during the campaign. https://www.npr.org/2011/03/27/134866003/gamifying-the-system-to-create-better-behavior Kaal fucked around with this message at 20:45 on Nov 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2019 19:49
|
|
|
Kaal posted:To be honest that seems like standard insane car culture to me. What's the point of a license plate if you can just pretend that you aren't affiliated at any point? It's like letting masked bank robbers go because you can't identify who specifically took the cash. What about parking meters or toll violations? It seems like they'd have the exact same reliance on license plates. Holding the owner of the car responsible for misuse of the vehicle seems perfectly acceptable unless they are alleging that it was stolen. No, in a sane legal system, the state has to prove that you actually broke the law before punishing you for having broken the law. The law forbids running red lights, not being the owner of a car that runs red lights.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2019 22:08
|
|
|
The idea that people aren't responsible for things they own is total legal nonsense that isn't supported in any other avenue of the law. As is the idea that a person cannot be reasonably identified without a clear photo of their face. I get that some drivers love the idea of being able to get away with speeding thanks to "one weird trick in the legal system", but it's totally insane to have a loophole that celebrated. There's a good reason that Sweden is fairly unique in their legal take on traffic cameras. In most areas of the world, traffic camera tickets are treated exactly the same as a parking ticket. A series of photos are taken that identify the violating car, the intersection, and the traffic signal, all in the same frame. In the United States, a Notice of Liability is then issued against the owner of the vehicle, which levies a fine but does not impact the driver's license or insurance. Kaal fucked around with this message at 22:35 on Nov 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2019 22:23
|
|
|
And yet our system manages to function even without punishing people for things they did not do and were not present for. Funny.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2019 22:37
|
|
|
Apparently Swedish traffic engineers largely adapted by investing in higher powered traffic cameras with better magnification. And they're also investing in a massive deployment of the things, fueled by widespread public support for them. But I also understand that Javid is a particularly pro-car poster so I'd understand that defeating any inconvenience for a driver would be seen as a victory, even if it's in the form of creating ridiculous loopholes in the laws.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2019 22:46
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Apparently Swedish traffic engineers largely adapted by investing in higher powered traffic cameras with better magnification. And they're also investing in a massive deployment of the things, fueled by widespread public support for them. But I also understand that Javid is a particularly pro-car poster so I'd understand that defeating any inconvenience for a driver would be seen as a victory, even if it's in the form of creating ridiculous loopholes in the laws. It's not a loophole. It's the law itself. A moving violation is the responsibility of the driver, regardless who owns the car. With a parked car there is no driver thus responsibility defaults to the owner. This isn't that complicated. Making everything the owner's problem creates a whole slew of complications, like rented or stolen vehicles.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2019 22:47
|
|
|
But there is also responsibility in who you let drive your car, and that you should be reporting a theft if someone you don't approve of takes the car.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2019 22:55
|
|
|
Well whether you like traffic cameras or not, they're getting deployed in ever greater numbers. And they're getting more perceptive by the year. So the era of being able to get out of a ticket by lying to a Swedish judge that you don't know who was driving your vehicle on your daily commute is rapidly coming to a close. Enjoy it while it lasts, I guess. Broadening the discussion, in the rest of the world, where this sort of thing isn't an issue because they discovered the license plate technology, there are similar problems with drivers occluding their licenses. It's particularly an issue with toll roads, with truck drivers sometimes going to extensive lengths to mask their identities and avoid paying. But as camera networks expand it will become easier to detect and prosecute this sort of thing. https://youtu.be/mBHhdd9uaAc Kaal fucked around with this message at 23:05 on Nov 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2019 22:57
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:It's not a loophole. It's the law itself. A moving violation is the responsibility of the driver, regardless who owns the car. Don't rent your car out to people who's name and address you don't know. Problem with renting solved.
|
|
#
?
Nov 3, 2019 23:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 08:57 |
|
|
Lobsterpillar posted:The contractor doing the roadworks causing the detour should be mitigating this, and if they aren't then the city should be forcing them to. There should also looks to be double parking going on, there should be some short term parking facilities provided in the school grounds and/or directly outside the school, and someone with some authority moving people along. In some places (non-police) officers employed by the city may be able to issue parking infringements: it doesn't have to be the police. When a jurisdiction is doing work on a road, it's typically the responsibility of the roadway's owner to ensure that they're mitigating traffic correctly - say, that closing the right lane for 8 months isn't going to make delays blow up during the morning rush. It's not the contractor's responsibility to do traffic analysis and know whether everything is going to hell when he implements the Maintenance of Traffic plans that was designed. That work should happen during design, being done by someone under the oversight of the roadway owner, so that impacts can be avoided or mitigated in some other way. But let's say it does slip through the cracks - the local Transit Authority is building new bus stops, and the ongoing lane closure makes everyone in a 2-mile radius drive on sidewalks. The roadway owner (county or state) would tell the contractor to pull the lane closure and re-open to traffic, which he would have to do - and then the contractor would have a delay claim against the Transit Authority while they figure out what to do. Then when they say it all has to be nightwork - he gets to claim extra money to pay for the lights and higher costs for running crews at night. If you had advertised the job as a design-build project (typically larger projects, from $10M to billion-dollar mega projects) it's possible that the contractor would be responsible for maintaining certain levels of service during construction. But more typically, the contractor would have certain limits set (you can do a single-lane closure between X AM and Y PM, you can do double-lane closures on weekends) - and if those restrictions make traffic too bad, the owner would either use the contract as an excuse to ignore the problem and let folks find new ways to get to work, or negotiate the change with the contractor.
|
|
#
?
Nov 4, 2019 00:02
|
|