|
Sorry to hear it and I wish you the best. From what I hear, extremely well-paying opportunities are still available in the Middle East for Project Engineers and Project Managers. If I was single and not tied down with a house mortgage I would jump on it. If you are interested, I can get some info from my Kuwaiti colleagues in the office. Engineers here in Wisconsin are being pinched but surprisingly Milwaukee is still floating with opportunities. I have it relatively stable and barring a larger economic disaster will still be here for many years. Neutrino fucked around with this message at 14:32 on Jul 15, 2011 |
#
¿
Jul 15, 2011 14:29
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 18:10 |
|
|
Haifisch posted:Aw, that sucks. Traffic stuff is my guilty nerd pleasure, so I've been enjoying this thread for quite a while. I'm in Construction and not in Traffic and haven't heard of those. We have some new pedestrian flashers by City Hall but they don't have a voice. Unfortunately, the number of accidents that they have had with students at Marquette not paying attention to walk signals and zooming cars must have required something more drastic!
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2011 20:56
|
|
(they wouldn't be so bad if their signage didn't make them look like a "press the button to summon the pedestrian phase" thing. Damned out of towners and new students annoying everyone by pressing them & causing a barrage of WAIT. WAIT. WAIT. WALK SIGN IS ON. all the time. Maybe Cichlidae can come here and fix that. 
)
|
Knockknees posted:Why in English? I mean, I get that it might be hard to fit "Arretez-vous" in the same space but...? I believe it is newer rules for uniformity throughout the EU.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 21, 2011 19:10
|
|
|
grover posted:I don't think this thread is really an appropriate place to discuss the social-political merits of pedestrian vs car culture (or the specific incident mentioned in Vanagoon's articles- check out the gassed GBS thread for that), but it is an interesting point about engineering roads to accommodate cars, bicycles and pedestrians. For any construction project there are mobilization costs involved. Sometimes that is a separate bid item, other times that is included in existing bid items. Once the contractor is mobilized with equipment, workers, traffic control, erosion control, etc, then it is cheaper to add sidewalk than do it under a separate contract. In general you want to separate the public walk from the roadway instead of adding it to the back of the curb. Where we can we add a several foot grass area where trees, signs, streetlights, hydrants and the like are located. In a more urban environment we place a full walk to the back of curb but still need to make it wide enough to accommodate the appurtenances without interfering with pedestrians. The incident in Georgia highlights the need for a pedestrian crossing at the intersection adjacent to the accident scene. At a minimum, it would require zebra striping and advanced warning signs which is inexpensive and could be done for about $1,000. Flashing signals could be added to improve visibility but in her case those probably would not have helped against a drunk driver. If, by protected you mean a traffic signal, it may not be warranted even with that one incident. You generally need a history of incidents to require a traffic signal although politics can play a part in getting a signal placed when there is no major need. Nevertheless, when an incident like that happens, the city is opened up to all sorts of liability. Even with her conviction she could sue the city for failure to provide a safe crossing and probably win a very good settlement. Neutrino fucked around with this message at 14:14 on Jul 26, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Jul 26, 2011 14:09
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:WHY DOES THAT EXIST??? I think it is related to the school crossing sign and may be a school bus loading area. Typically the signs are placed before the crossing here in the US but maybe Canada is different in that respect??
|
|
#
¿
Jul 29, 2011 20:05
|
|
|
This website does a great job explaining the history of the GLT and really tells the Why's. The French have really been at the forefront of technology. In Milwaukee, we researched the possibility of using them and benefits included flawless automated docking at stops for immediate handicapped access. Current buses must stop and lift out a hydraulic ramp which takes several minutes and eats into the schedule. GLT's can easily be tied into a signal pre-emption system probably more easily than a standard bus because it is physically tied into an ITS.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 9, 2011 14:37
|
|
|
Quiet Pavement (obviously funded by the Asphalt Pavement Alliance but it is true.)
|
|
#
¿
Oct 17, 2011 23:59
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:
I'm guessing those aren't trash cans but planters minus the pots which have probably been removed for the winter. Here's a pathetic case of blogger trying to play traffic engineer from urbanmilwaukee.com. I don't know where to start critiquing him... quote:Last week, the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (WisDOT) gave a presentation regarding the possibility of adding a bike trail on the Hoan Bridge. The DOT laid out five potential alternatives, that covered a wide range of costs, and potential impacts such as traffic congestion. Neutrino fucked around with this message at 16:36 on Dec 2, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2011 16:29
|
|
|
GWBBQ posted:They're definitely trash cans, Stamford has them all over downtown. Here's one with trash visible in it http://g.co/maps/76q8f The dead giveaway is the platform without a trash hole, the height and the fact that there are three adjacent units. It would be a major screw-up to have three trash cans placed like that even outside of a stadium exit. Metal Planters
|
|
#
¿
Dec 2, 2011 17:44
|
|
|
Chaos Motor posted:1. Who's going to enforce it? Sorry to dig this up from a few days ago but back in the day, both the triple-A and insurance companies used to fund many more driver education and enforcement programs. Enforcement is always the more expensive option than education. The ideal method is to have intense minimum education as a requirement for licensure nationwide. It wouldn't hurt to have requirements for retesting either after certain number of accidents or after certain number of years. The results would be very noticeable.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 18, 2011 19:39
|
|
|
That is a clusterfuck. I wonder how some of that land between the on-ramp and the expressways was ever sold. The state should have bought it when it was building the interstate and held onto it before anything was ever built there.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 20, 2012 15:27
|
|
|
If anyone is going to be at the Midwestern ITE conference later this week in Milwaukee, let me know. I will be attending many of the presentations to get the rest of my pdh's.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 24, 2013 13:45
|
|
|
anivasion posted:Seems like the best place for this but maybe it depends on the state. The designers did the best they could to clarify where cars should go but as usual, dumb drivers will do whatever the hell they like. Typically cars will attempt to make a straight line out of that nice curve even when it means they have to take a sudden jerk of the steering wheel at the the PT to avoid nosing into the car next to them. If you are that car next to them, even if you are doing things right you may want to assume that they are going to do the stupid thing and learn to give them extra room so they don't hit you. Either get ahead of them or stay half a length behind them. A dashed line always means lane changing is allowed although a smart driver would signal and wouldn't do it on a tight curve. I don't believe there is any law in any state that prevents that unless the line is solid. On tight curves on an interstate highway, the lane lines will turn solid to indicate that changing lanes there is prohibited because it is a stupid and dangerous idea.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2014 19:44
|
|
|
Devor posted:When this is done, the purpose is usually to discourage use of that road by non-local traffic. Particularly if it's a residential area. Unfortunately if a driver is not expecting it, it will turn into a dangerous situation. It is a crappy way to solve the problem of non-local traffic. It is always important to maintain consistency in traffic direction. We have a bunch of downtown streets that had been one-way since the 50's. The city has been in the process of conversion but there are some sections that remain one-way because (politics) or because buildings were constructed to adapt to the one-way design. People from out of town notoriously get confused and people who haven't been here since the change end up driving the wrong way on the wrong side. Granted, streets that have been one-way forever and remain that way will have drivers making left turns from the right-hand lane thinking it is two-way and end up cutting off the car in the left-hand lane. Commuters generally use the same routes as before the conversion so those roads in turn become more congested. It is always preferable to have consistent thoroughfares that handle the majority of the traffic during rush hours and one-ways do that more effectively in a normal sized ROW.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 15, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:If Agenda 21 was real and a UN dictatorship took over north america they'd have a hard time fixing our cities. It would require decades and a lot of upheaval and rebuilding. Without a UN dictatorship? I think what we'll see more and more are a few US cities that "get it" building on that success and becoming more and more desirable with higher and higher prices while other cities continue to sprawl and suffer the consequences. The US's car dependency will further widen the gap between rich and poor, have and have not cities and regions. We'll see more Detroits and Atlanta's where the poor can't afford to drive but no other options exist to get around, but also more Seattles and San Fransisco's. Walkable transit friendly cities will become more and more attractive, attracting the high income jobs and workers, further boosting the city's budgets to grow on that success. Meanwhile car-dependent cities will see their tax bases continue to be stretched thin while infrastructure costs grow and grow. Either way it's going to be increasingly lovely for the working poor. Live in a walkable transit friendly area? You'll get gentrified further and further out. Live in a car-centric hellhole? Hope you can afford your car payments, insurance, and gas on your part time minimum wage job. Most cities have a CBD that remains intact from the 19th & early 20th century when they relied on mass transit or pedestrian traffic. These would not be hard to reconfigure back to the way they were. Outlying suburban areas are another story but the first act of a dictatorship would be to level these areas and send those conservative inhabitants to the gulag. Following the Soviet path in the 1950s, those dead-end subdivisions would be replaced with large apartment blocks with high density.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:EDIT: Just got back from the bicycle conference, and it was cool. I learned a lot. For example, do you know how much it's going to cost to build a 37-mile bike trail in 100% state right-of-way alongside the Merritt Parkway? Is that paving with gold or silver? What is the big ticket bid item for that type of project? I assume bridges because they still need to be rated for maintenance vehicles.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2015 20:44
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Stories please, I love public feedback stories. God drat the public is amazing. I got a call last year about a paving project where the resident was complaining, "All they are doing is moving rocks around." That had me thinking for awhile on how to respond in a way that didn't sound too condescending.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
Here's a better picture of the massive shear wall.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2016 14:42
|
|
|
Platystemon posted:
Arriving first has nothing to do with it. A stop sign means to stop until the intersection is clear to make a movement. It means "to yield" but with the additional command of "come to a complete stop." Whatever movement the stopped car makes they still have to yield the right of way to other vehicles that have the right of way. Unless the other left turning vehicle has to stop prior to making the left turn in which case the green car would have the right of way. The only circumstance where the green car would have the right of way is if it is already making the left turn when the pink car is approaching.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2018 21:14
|
|
|
Carbon dioxide posted:Note that a stop sign as a yield sign + extra condition seems to be a mostly European thing. In Europe, if you see a stop sign you know the other road has full priority and you have to wait until there's no more cars approaching on it. On the other hand, America has these four-way stop sign intersections where no specific road has priority and everyone has to stop, and the vehicle that arrived first gets to go first. The stop sign actually has a subtly different meaning in different parts of the world. I'm speaking from an American perspective so can't say what the rules are in the EU. This is what I learned in Driver's Ed back in the day - maybe it's different for you younger kids? A four way stop is a little different but that isn't the case here. Even with a four way stop, the first person out of the gate, so to speak, is the one that has the right of way.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 22, 2018 22:15
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 18:10 |
|
|
Alkydere posted:Their population means they can throw an absolutely absurd amount of workers at a project. It likely helped that all the rail beds were already there so they could basically take the old stuff up/plop the new stuff down with minimal hassle. I think it would be an interesting challenge to be a Project Manager on any of their projects. Resources don't seem to be as big of an issue as in the West. Quality control is another story.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 26, 2018 15:40
|
|