|
Baronjutter posted:So far nearly every project I've seen him post about personally working on is some highway overpass or pedestrian-loving intersection so I'd say he handles it by pretty much exclusively working on lovely car-focused right-wing car-first identity politics projects Dont like it? Thank Robert Moses.
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 22:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 09:53 |
|
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:Ahem, but back to the traffic engineer: NIMBYism by rich people and right-wing car-first identity politics seem to be pretty powerful forces in local planning. Cichlidae, do you see a lot of this? How do you handle it? Since I'm a few layers deep in the bureaucracy, I don't have to experience it directly much. I just design the projects that come down to me, and put in suggestions when I can. Occasionally projects will get shelved or restructured due to NIMBY or unpopularity among a minority, but that has nothing to do with me. When I interact with the public, it's usually about small things, like "won't this realignment bring more traffic onto my road?" or "why can't we put a ferry dock here to relieve congestion?" In the rare cases where it's a more controversial issue (Flower Street closure, for example,) we usually just agree to disagree then have the politicians duke it out. I can't make any policy decisions myself; I'd get in a lot of trouble if I did. On the other hand, politicians often delegate things down to me. Two recent examples: several state reps were very upset about the accident problem on I-91 NB approaching the Charter Oak Bridge, so we agreed to 1) install a sign ASAP, 2) put flashers on the sign and re-stripe the bridge in the next project in the area, and 3) look into eventual full redesigns of the interchange that would resolve the root of the problem. Another example is when another state rep told me to install a signal at an unwarranted intersection. This would send a lot more traffic down side streets and reduce the LOS and increase the accident rate for everyone, so we declined it with a bunch of reasons why. They can easily override anything I say or do, but at least I gave my engineering judgment. Baronjutter posted:So far nearly every project I've seen him post about personally working on is some highway overpass or pedestrian-loving intersection so I'd say he handles it by pretty much exclusively working on lovely car-focused right-wing car-first identity politics projects We put a TON of money into transit, probably about as much as we put into roads, and most of the road money goes to maintenance, not new construction. Most of my time in the past four years has been spent on Busway-related stuff, with a good chunk of bridge rehab and road striping (including widening shoulders for bikes, by the way) thrown into the mix. That stuff is really boring, though, so I don't talk about it much here. The interesting stuff is interchange concepts which I do on the side / as special projects for managers, complex work like roundabout design, and funny inspection photos. I'd love to talk more about the Busway, but the whole thing is just so depressing. And the New Haven Route 34 job was just soul-crushing; I think you know how displeased I was with the final design they came up with. I haven't worked on many rail jobs yet, but I'm going to spend the better part of the next year analyzing grade-crossings for the New Haven - Springfield HSR line. I've also designed a half-dozen pedestrian/sidewalk and mixed-use path jobs. I built these sidewalks along US 1 in Old Saybrook. I designed this bike trail in Meriden. I worked on this turbo roundabout in Salem, which had no pedestrian accessibility to speak of beforehand.
|
|
#
?
Jun 4, 2013 23:21
|
|
|
.
sincx fucked around with this message at 06:32 on Mar 23, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 08:08
|
|
|
In my view as a mostly driving person I'd love to see bike lanes in NYC because: 1. more bikes means fewer cars 2. parking takes a hell of a lot less space 3. it means the police can (and probably will, knowing the NYPD) ticket jerkoff bicyclists who wander around in the road going slow and don't stay in their drat lane Cyclists and pedestrians in NYC are like ornery livestock. I had more pedestrians mean-mug me after walking out in front of me without even checking to see if I could stop in time in the first week I worked down there than I had in my entire life previous. I swear most people in that city would walk on someone's face for a cheeseburger. Drivers aren't much better... and then there are the cabbies and delivery trucks that just go "welp, no space to park, guess I'll just stop here in the middle of this travel lane and load/unload! Have fun getting around me!"  (I'm really glad I got out of that city)
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 17:32
|
|
|
Looks like CT is an etymological battleground.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 20:35
|
|
|
Mandalay posted:Looks like CT is an etymological battleground. So what about the areas with no coloring at all?
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 21:06
|
|
|
Terminal Entropy posted:So what about the areas with no coloring at all? There aren't any, there's just places where two faint colors are mixed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 21:32
|
|
|
Here's the raw data for CT:quote:84. What do you call a traffic situation in which several roads meet in a circle and you have to get off at a certain point? Massachusetts is rotary (88.45%). NJ is circle (47.56%) or traffic circle (38.44%). Makes wonder if anyone has reversed this to use your guesses to tell where you originally are from.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 22:15
|
|
|
My response: F: A terrible loving idea.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 22:16
|
|
|
Mandalay posted:Looks like CT is an etymological battleground. There's a nice little couplet around Kansas City. Looks exactly like a tornado on a radar velocity map. Tornado winds are rotary, right? 
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 23:27
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:My response: There was a pain in the rear end 4 way stop near me and they replaced it with a roundabout and it's 1000x faster to get through because there are no more mexican standoffs every time you go through. http://goo.gl/maps/m45Rv Here as a matter of fact.
|
|
#
?
Jun 5, 2013 23:36
|
|
|
Peanut President posted:There was a pain in the rear end 4 way stop near me and they replaced it with a roundabout and it's 1000x faster to get through because there are no more mexican standoffs every time you go through. I think it's a locality thing. The majority of locals in South Florida think roundabouts entrances and exits are stop signs. Two plus lane roundabouts are mostly for trading paint and raising my blood pressure. People don't understand that if you don't get over RIGHT loving NOW, you can just, you know, go around for another try in ten or fifteen seconds.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 00:10
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:I think it's a locality thing. The majority of locals in South Florida think roundabouts entrances and exits are stop signs. Two plus lane roundabouts are mostly for trading paint and raising my blood pressure. People don't understand that if you don't get over RIGHT loving NOW, you can just, you know, go around for another try in ten or fifteen seconds. Yeah, we have a two-laner in our neighbourhood, and whenever pedestrians cross at the entrances, everybody inside stops and waits for them. A couple weeks ago I had that epiphany: why wouldn't I just keep going around the circle? Of course, now even if I do it, nobody else will, and nothing improves.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 00:37
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
MrYenko posted:I think it's a locality thing. The majority of locals in South Florida think roundabouts entrances and exits are stop signs. Two plus lane roundabouts are mostly for trading paint and raising my blood pressure. People don't understand that if you don't get over RIGHT loving NOW, you can just, you know, go around for another try in ten or fifteen seconds. Wait...don't get over it...go around for another try...what? I don't think you're using roundabouts right.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 01:06
|
|
|
I have heard them referred to and myself refer to them as both traffic circles and roundabouts. Was unaware 'rotary' was a thing, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 02:57
|
|
|
A "rotary" is meant to be taken at speed, while a roundabout is not. A technical difference that nobody understands. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 03:24
|
|
|
Jonnty posted:Wait...don't get over it...go around for another try...what? I don't think you're using roundabouts right. I mean that someone that has gotten into the non-outside (left) lane, and suddenly realizes that they want to exit. In a sane world, they'll signal, and move to the outside lane to take the turnoff, perhaps going around the circle if they can't get over right away. Not here. Here, they'll either slam through traffic, oblivious to hazards, cutting off whoever happens to be there, or they'll slam the brakes on, slow to a crawl, or even stop (I've personally seen that at least once,) and wait for someone to let them get through, all while traffic is zipping past them on the right. I'm speaking particularly of this one, in Miami Springs. The biggest roundabout I've personally used in South Florida.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 03:26
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:I mean that someone that has gotten into the non-outside (left) lane, and suddenly realizes that they want to exit. In a sane world, they'll signal, and move to the outside lane to take the turnoff, perhaps going around the circle if they can't get over right away. Not here. Here, they'll either slam through traffic, oblivious to hazards, cutting off whoever happens to be there, or they'll slam the brakes on, slow to a crawl, or even stop (I've personally seen that at least once,) and wait for someone to let them get through, all while traffic is zipping past them on the right. I'm speaking particularly of this one, in Miami Springs. The biggest roundabout I've personally used in South Florida. Or just be in the correct lane to begin with? e: wait what the poo poo is that? why is there a random solid white line? aaagh why can't america do roundabouts properly Jonnty fucked around with this message at 03:49 on Jun 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 03:46
|
|
|
Jonnty posted:Or just be in the correct lane to begin with? This one in Hollywood, FL, has traffic lights at each entrance/exit! 
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 04:06
|
|
|
My biggest complaint t about cyclists is I'm never certain how to define them. Are they considered another vehicle that have to obey the rules of the road or are they considered a pedestrian? Some cyclists act like vehicles, using hand signals to turn or getting in line for the left turn arrow. Others ride on the sidewalk or on the shoulder and behave like pedestrians, waiting for cross walk signals, etc. And then there's the type of cyclist that I hate that behaves like a vehicle and a pedestrian, switching whenever it helps them get through an intersection quicker. In Germany at least bikes seem to be defined as vehicles and must obey the rules of the road, which I could tolerate, at least I knew when I was going to make a left turn at an intersection that the bike in the road stopping with oncoming traffic wasn't going to switch to pedestrian mode and cross in front of my direction of travel mid turn. Meat Mitts fucked around with this message at 04:24 on Jun 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 04:22
|
|
|
kefkafloyd posted:A "rotary" is meant to be taken at speed, while a roundabout is not. A technical difference that nobody understands. Traffic circles are also meant to be taken at speed.  Jonnty posted:Or just be in the correct lane to begin with? Is it really so hard to grasp the concept of "accidentally got into the wrong lane"? The UK apparently has hundreds of "roundabouts" with multiple sets of traffic lights, so I rather think on the whole its you people who don't really get them right.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 04:31
|
|
|
Meat Mitts posted:My biggest complaint about cyclists is I'm never certain how to define them. Are they considered another vehicle that have to obey the rules of the road or are they considered a pedestrian? So these guys would be doing the right thing (especially signalling, not enough people use hand signals since they're terrified to take their hands off the bars): Meat Mitts posted:Some cyclists act like vehicles, using hand signals to turn or getting in line for the left turn arrow. But these guys are assholes and make things worse for the rest of us: Meat Mitts posted:Others ride on the sidewalk or on the shoulder and behave like pedestrians, waiting for cross walk signals, etc. And then there's the type of cyclist that I hate that behaves like a vehicle and a pedestrian, switching whenever it helps them get through an intersection quicker.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 04:50
|
|
|
I came across this article a few weeks ago about how cyclists should stop being assholes: http://www.theatlanticcities.com/commute/2013/05/bikers-dont-deserve-any-special-treatment/5565/ I think it got a fair amount of pushback from cycling advocates but really I can't disagree with the overall message, if cyclists are going to be mainstream they have to behave in a sane manner, and sometimes that means stopping at a stop light or stop sign. And I say that as someone who hardly drives and would much rather bike or take transit.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 05:05
|
|
|
Meat Mitts posted:My biggest complaint t about cyclists is I'm never certain how to define them. Are they considered another vehicle that have to obey the rules of the road or are they considered a pedestrian? Some cyclists act like vehicles, using hand signals to turn or getting in line for the left turn arrow. Others ride on the sidewalk or on the shoulder and behave like pedestrians, waiting for cross walk signals, etc. And then there's the type of cyclist that I hate that behaves like a vehicle and a pedestrian, switching whenever it helps them get through an intersection quicker. It might be state-by-state in the US, but at least in Oregon, they are to act as vehicles. As such, technically speaking, riding on sidewalks, unsignaled turns, and ignoring signals are verboten. To be treated as a pedestrian, you have to dismount and walk the bike. Now, obviously, there's some wiggle room there - a bicyclist's not going to get a citation for riding under the speed limit unless they are actively trying to disrupt the flow of traffic, for example, and there are paths that are obviously acceptable for bikes that are not acceptable for cars, motorcycles, etc. It's actually one of my biggest complaints about living in Portland, really. There are so many bicyclists here, and there are so many wonderful, law-abiding, completely perfect examples of bicyclists here. But that makes the bad ones stand out all the more. I've been sideswiped by a bicyclist riding on the sidewalk going the wrong way down a one-way street. Another time, one yelled "BICYCLIST" as he almost hit me as I was getting something out of my car (i.e. he had plenty of warning and time to adjust, it's not like I opened the door on him). I've seen a man cruising along with a baby strapped to his chest, and a woman flip off a vehicle for slowly pulling out of a driveway and blocking her path on the sidewalk. Now, I can remember all those incidents clear as day, but when thinking of good cycling behavior, I just get some general fuzzy memories of bicyclists obeying the light and signaling. People are always going to remember the negative over the positive, and that is always a disadvantage to the minority.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 05:37
|
|
|
Meat Mitts posted:My biggest complaint t about cyclists is I'm never certain how to define them. Are they considered another vehicle that have to obey the rules of the road or are they considered a pedestrian? Some cyclists act like vehicles, using hand signals to turn or getting in line for the left turn arrow. Others ride on the sidewalk or on the shoulder and behave like pedestrians, waiting for cross walk signals, etc. And then there's the type of cyclist that I hate that behaves like a vehicle and a pedestrian, switching whenever it helps them get through an intersection quicker. It's pretty much universal that cyclists are considered to be vehicles, with all the same rights and responsibilities as drivers, and also pretty much universal that they are banned from riding in most pedestrian areas (sidewalks, crosswalks). There are usually some additional laws outlining signals to use (which are also pretty much universally required, if not always universal in form), requirements for having lights after dark, etc. For example, here's the relevant section from the BC Motor Vehicle Act. I don't think I've heard of very many places that are exceptions to this, and cannot think of any off the top of my head. Interestingly, for a number of reasons, cyclists acting like pedestrians (riding very far to the side/on the sidewalk / in crosswalks) actually put themselves at a lot more risk than those riding as vehicles. That said, best cycling practices do sometimes advocate grey-area manoeuvres, like making a left turn "perimeter style" as an alternative to crossing multiple lanes of traffic to get to the turning lane (see "making a left turn" in this cycling guide for a diagram.) In that guide they urge you to dismount in the crosswalk (as required by law), but in practice cyclists required to dismount to get somewhere just don't. Anyway, there's some debate in the cycling advocacy/safety community about how stringently to follow "vehicular cycling". For instance, there really isn't much safer infrastructure than totally separated bike lanes, which don't require vehicular cycling at all. And to bring this all back to roundabouts, this is how the Dutch do them: separated pedestrian and cycle tracks in a second circle around the motorway circle, and pedestrians/cyclists have right of way. As that video shows, it works pretty well over there. I'm not sure the proportion of dangerous / self entitled drivers in North America would support it, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 06:02
|
|
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:That said, best cycling practices do sometimes advocate grey-area manoeuvres, like making a left turn "perimeter style" as an alternative to crossing multiple lanes of traffic to get to the turning lane (see "making a left turn" in this cycling guide for a diagram.) In that guide they urge you to dismount in the crosswalk (as required by law), but in practice cyclists required to dismount to get somewhere just don't. What the gently caress.  Those hand signals are wrong/make no sense/don't match up with the instruction you get in Denmark. (Trust us, we know about cycling.) Left and right turn, stick the left/right arm out in a clear fashion. That also forces you to check for traffic from behind, so you don't stick your arm into someone else. Stopping, raise your left hand (right hand in left-drive countries) shortly before you begin braking, and make sure you can stop somewhere you leave plenty of room for others to pass you. You raise the arm towards the side the rest of the traffic will be passing you, so it's the most visible to them. And taking a left turn at a signaled intersection practically always involves driving across on the right side, stopping at the corner, waiting for green in the other direction, then continuing. Exception would be if there's no other traffic in sight. Also, when in a car, if you are turning right, make sure to drive close enough to the curb that a cyclist can't pass you on the right. Force cyclists turning right to stay behind you, and those continuing straight, to pass you on the left.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 10:41
|
|
|
MrYenko posted:I'm speaking particularly of this one, in Miami Springs. No no no no no! No pedestrians in the center island! How are they going to cross four lanes of circulating traffic without causing rear-ends and ped fatalities? How? Answer me, Florida! MrYenko posted:This one in Hollywood, FL, has traffic lights at each entrance/exit! PROWAG wants us to put ped signals at every multi-lane entrance and exit. I can't imagine how tough that's going to make the design. I understand that accessibility is a must, but this is going to discourage designers from making roundabouts where they could save lots of lives.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 12:32
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:No no no no no! No pedestrians in the center island! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u3LUZgtMPiM
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 13:51
|
|
|
nielsm posted:What the gently caress. If I (poorly) recall, these are the hand gestures to use if your vehicle lights are broken. I can't imagine why given how few people with perfectly functional lights can't signal anyway 
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 13:56
|
|
|
Mandalay posted:Looks like CT is an etymological battleground. At the engineering firm I work at we call ones with stop signs traffic circles, and ones with yield signs are roundabouts. Most people in WI just call them roundabouts though, so I don't think that many people make a distinction between the control method. FISHMANPET posted:I came across this article a few weeks ago about how cyclists should stop being assholes: I'm a cyclist myself and much of that is pretty spot on; there are a lot of entitled rear end in a top hat cyclists that don't pay attention to traffic laws, namely that they think they are immune to them or that they don't apply. Stop signs are all over in my portion of the state, and that many choose to just blow through them when there is considerable traffic on all other sides is frustrating and more than a little dangerous. WI state law considers them traffic/vehicle, so they are required to follow the laws as much as a car is - even speed limit laws. Although I think there is a provision for going through stop signs without stopping if there is no traffic.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 14:03
|
|
|
Sloober posted:Although I think there is a provision for going through stop signs without stopping if there is no traffic. I prefer to think of bicyclist as being the same as a motorcycle at stop signs. If there is no traffic, slow down to almost a walking pace, then continue through. Don't need to touch the ground with your feet, but you should reach at least <5mph speeds by the time you pass through the stop sign.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 15:23
|
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:Is it really so hard to grasp the concept of "accidentally got into the wrong lane"? Yes. Yes it is. As double lane roundabouts in Holland are usually designed as a so-called "Turbo roundabout".  The solid lines are usually actually small curbs. A turbo roundabout is designed so you can't really get in the wrong lane, and you can't go round more than once, because if you gently caress up you will be forced off at some point (often the last road before the one you came from). Each lane forms a sort of spiral. If people follow the arrows and signs from the start, they will end up where they need to be and they won't have to cross other traffic in the middle of the roundabout. America, learn to design proper roundabouts.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 15:53
|
|
|
nielsm posted:
Interestingly, in an earlier version of that manual, the "perimeter method" was called the "Copenhagen method". I guess this is why. Volmarias posted:If I (poorly) recall, these are the hand gestures to use if your vehicle lights are broken. I can't imagine why given how few people with perfectly functional lights can't signal anyway I think the right-turn-with-bent-left-arm signal is a Canadian oddity, not generally used in other places. I used to use it while riding here, but in the past year or two have switched to just using my straight arm in the direction I'm turning, since it's a lot less ambiguous. A lot of motorists still don't seem to understand what it means, though -- for example when I'm making a right turn and there's someone waiting to pull out of the side street I'm turning into, no amount of signalling will reassure them that it's safe to pull out until I've actually gone past. Mine GO BOOM posted:I prefer to think of bicyclist as being the same as a motorcycle at stop signs. If there is no traffic, slow down to almost a walking pace, then continue through. Don't need to touch the ground with your feet, but you should reach at least <5mph speeds by the time you pass through the stop sign. In Idaho, this is law (for cyclists). It's also a very popular idea among bicycle advocates. Cichlidae posted:PROWAG wants us to put ped signals at every multi-lane entrance and exit. I can't imagine how tough that's going to make the design. I understand that accessibility is a must, but this is going to discourage designers from making roundabouts where they could save lots of lives. I don't really know how it would be best to handle pedestrian safety in the USA. As I posted above, in the Netherlands, they do this by giving pedestrians (and cyclists) priority over cars. But in the Netherlands, motorists are aware of this, and act appropriately. They approach the traffic circle at a safe speed and keep a lookout at the crossings. While I reckon 50-75% of North American drivers could handle this, it only takes a few crazies to turn things very, very dangerous. One other thing about the Netherlands in terms of cyclist safety: if a motorist hits a cyclist, it's treated the same as if they hit a pedestrian, in that the motorist is presumed to be at fault unless they can provide compelling evidence otherwise. This is in contrast to most parts of North America, where the blame is apportioned equally by default. In the Netherlands, it almost certainly contributes to motorists being more careful. Also, in terms of saving lives, I don't know how it is in the States, but I'm sure I saw some recent figures from BC saying that pedestrian and cyclist deaths from car accidents are starting to exceed car occupant deaths. While I believe the literature has generally shown that traffic circles save motorist lives, it's also shown that they tend to increase pedestrian and cyclist fatalities. So I have a feeling the net safety benefit of traffic circles may not be all that much, or even a detriment, especially in high pedestrian (and cyclist) traffic areas.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 17:28
|
|
about cycling in Denmark
|
Well the netherlands have the additional advantage of having a lot mory cyclists. Thus more people who drive cars are also cyclists now and then in addition to being used to having more cyclists on the street.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 17:35
|
|
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:I think the right-turn-with-bent-left-arm signal is a Canadian oddity, not generally used in other places. I used to use it while riding here, but in the past year or two have switched to just using my straight arm in the direction I'm turning, since it's a lot less ambiguous. No, that's how it is in the states, too. That diagram posted is of the official signals here. Since if you're sitting in the driver's seat of a car you can't reach out of the passenger's window if you want to turn right.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 17:38
|
|
|
Now that Raymond James Stadium is paid off, Hillsborough County (Tampa, FL) is using the extra money from the stadium tax to spam pedestrian, cyclist and transit improvements across the county. If I remember right, they're going to be installing RRFBs at the entrances to some of our roundabouts in the next few years, specifically the ones on 40th St. Hit one, all directions will know there's a pedestrian crossing somewhere in the circle. It's been 3 years since these roundabouts were completed. The local residents have taken to them quite well, with traffic virtually free-flow all day long without a problem. Varance fucked around with this message at 17:58 on Jun 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 17:47
|
|
|
Lead out in cuffs posted:Interestingly, in an earlier version of that manual, the "perimeter method" was called the "Copenhagen method". I guess this is why. the right-turn-with-bent-left-arm and the left arm down for stopping are identical to car signals (since you very well can't stick your right arm out the passenger window. I was told to think of it as pointing over the vehicle to the right, and while a bicycle is a very thin vehicle, it still makes some sense-- especially since bicycles are considered vehicles.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 17:49
|
|
|
Carbon dioxide posted:The solid lines are usually actually small curbs. A turbo roundabout is designed so you can't really get in the wrong lane, and you can't go round more than once, because if you gently caress up you will be forced off at some point (often the last road before the one you came from). Each lane forms a sort of spiral. If people follow the arrows and signs from the start, they will end up where they need to be and they won't have to cross other traffic in the middle of the roundabout. There's a roundabout near me that requires me to exit onto the road I entered from in order to enter the highway in the direction I need.  http://goo.gl/maps/Zn5B8 Getting from A to B to get on the highway requires you to use the roundabout as a U-turn. Is there a design that forces an exit but still allows U-turns?
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 19:35
|
|
|
RadioPassive posted:Getting from A to B to get on the highway requires you to use the roundabout as a U-turn. Is there a design that forces an exit but still allows U-turns? Near as I can tell the turbo roundabout allows U-turns. You just can't go around more than once. Edit: 
nimper fucked around with this message at 19:45 on Jun 6, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 19:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 09:53 |
|
|
nielsm posted:What the gently caress. In my entire life I can't remember ever seeing anyone make any kind of arm gesture when they're about to stop. Just stick out your arm on the side you want to go when turning, that's pretty much it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 6, 2013 19:40
|
|
