|
Do state and local departments of transportation have any authority to direct traffic enforcement? Like if there are particular behavioral issues that are impacting safety or throughput on a particular piece of road, and a solution like reconfiguring the roads is cost prohibitive, can traffic enforcement be used to incentivize drivers to make better choices?
|
#
¿
Aug 7, 2018 00:09
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 23, 2024 18:12 |
|
|
The point of the article is that focusing only on automotive level of service is a narrow view. It assumes that the underlying traffic is immutable and has to be engineered around. But what if the same resources used to expand a road to a particular LOS can be used more efficiently to lower or maintain the current LOS by encouraging off-peak commuting or deliveries, or offering better non-automotive infrastructure? That's probably out of the scope of what a traffic engineer can change, but it's a legitimate point for policy makers or department of transportation leadership to consider.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 15, 2018 22:25
|
|
|
Loucks posted:Not even “gently caress over,” just inconvenience by not building car-exclusive roads fast enough to keep them from having to experience inconvenience. Or at least appropriately price out building all those roads. If they want to eschew density and build roads at the expense of any other transportation infrastructure, policy makers need to make sure that the tax incidence of the increased infrastructure and healthcare spending, not to mention the impact of all the extra pollution, isn't subsidized by communities who are willing to make less destructive decisions.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 18, 2018 06:06
|
|
|
Kaal posted:I don't think there's any doubt that a flat toll would negatively affect the poor, but you could say the same thing about any tax. That's why you make them progressive. Abandoning reform to discourage single occupant vehicles and reduce environmental damage due to vehicular transport isn't exactly doing any favors to the poor either. At the end of the day, subsidizing roads and cars at the cost of more efficient and sustainable alternatives is a losing proposition for society as a whole and the poor specifically. The US tends to be a mess of jurisdictions which makes it harder, but other taxes can also be adjusted to ensure the "appropriate" progressivity of overall tax incidence while still promoting/discouraging behavior with tolls and other road-related taxes/fees.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2018 02:41
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:There's a whole series of little residential streets that turn into dead-ends at a highway that have zero signage and often nothing but a couple posts or a strip of grass and a pedestrian path separating them from the highway. With a little maneuvering and a break in traffic you could probably get onto the highway from them, and I'm sure it's been done both on purpose and accidentally. That picture looks like it needs to be in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desire_path
|
|
#
¿
Mar 14, 2019 01:53
|
|
|
kefkafloyd posted:Massachusetts used to mount BGSes on overpasses, but the practice has gone away. Why?
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2019 18:56
|
|
|
Why are all (that I have seen) freeway speeding cameras set up to capture a car's speed at a point in time? Wouldn't it be less disruptive to traffic, and more comprehensive in general, to tag license plates at on-ramps and off-ramps, and calculate the average speed in between?
|
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2019 23:47
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:Your instantaneous speed matters, though. The speed limit is not an average speed through the zone, it's the maximum at any point within it. Your maximum speed can be higher than the limit while your average is lower, but your maximum speed can't be lower than the limit if the average is higher. There's definitely a risk of not tagging some speeders, but everyone ticketed was definitely speeding. Bodrick posted:These are pretty common in the UK (in my experience most often found in roadwork areas on motorways), we call them average speed cameras. You get them on joining and leaving the motorway, and every couple of miles as well. PittTheElder posted:I'm pretty sure there's roads in the Netherlands that do this. I suspect the reason it isn't done is that it would be expensive and effective, and people would be pissed off despite it being the better idea. Interesting to see that there are implementations. It certainly seems like a "fair" solution.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2019 00:48
|
|
|
Entropist posted:I'm in the Netherlands, and our automatic red light cameras are quite uncontroversial because they only activate if you cross the stop bar while the light is red, pretty much. It is measured with two detection points (one just after the stop bar, and one a bit further on) and only if you cross both detection points while the light is red, you get an automatic ticket. With the two points they can also measure speed. Our yellow times are sufficient I guess, though I'm not sure if there is any law mandating a minimum. It also seems like turning right at red lights is a uniquely north american thing.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 23, 2019 21:07
|
|
|
RFC2324 posted:gently caress parsing this at speed ...you have to stop either way.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2019 12:03
|
|
|
RFC2324 posted:I "made mistakes only an experienced driver would make"(pulling up to an intersection so I could see instead of stopping 10ft back where the stop sign was placed).. This is how you hit pedestrians.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 25, 2019 13:14
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
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
|
|
|
Widen the sidewalk, put in trees.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 2, 2019 15:15
|
|
|
Kaal posted:It really sounds like Sweden seems to be suffering an epidemic of strangers hijacking cars in order to drive 10 percent faster than the speed limit on their normal commuting route before returning it. They should probably do something about that. I mean clearly the cases are clogging up their court system. Does Sweden distinguish between civil and criminal matters? Speaking broadly, in the US you couldn't charge someone with a crime based on a camera shot of their license plate (without other corroborating evidence), but you can issue them a ticket/fine.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2019 11:59
|
|
|
Peanut President posted:this is incredibly stupid Why? Actually enforce the speed limit and set it to an appropriate level is a perfectly reasonable way to approach traffic speed.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 4, 2019 19:15
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:I don't get this. I don't understand how driving faster would make traffic worse. When you are in heavy traffic, the speed limit doesn't really matter, so I am very confused here. Traffic backups are exacerbated by the chain reactions to starts and stops and lane changes. Accelerating faster only to get on the brakes when hitting the next clump of cars feels like you're getting somewhere faster, but the actual time gains are nominal over most travel distances and there is the potential to cause more slowdown behind you. If everyone was calmly accelerating and coasting down to meet traffic speeds, overall speeds and throughput could be higher.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2019 13:50
|
|
|
Kaal posted:For the American audience, I'd point out that environmental speed limits are not purely a European idea either. States as varied as Texas and Oregon have limited highway speeds specifically to limit environmental damage. Dropping freeway speeds down to 65 mph, where gasoline engines typically have their best efficiency levels, is absolutely reasonable and residents quickly adjust to the new limits. Most trips in urban areas probably wouldn't see an appreciable difference between between 65 and 75 mph, but say, Santa Fe to Flagstaff is 4.5 hours at the usual 85 mph+ flow of traffic, 5.1 hours at the current 75 mph speed limit, and 5.9 hours at a theoretical enforced 65 mph. Dallas to El Paso - not even leaving the state - is 8.5 hours at the current 75 limit for most of that trip, that goes up to 9.8 hours at 65 mph. AreWeDrunkYet fucked around with this message at 19:13 on Nov 13, 2019 |
|
#
¿
Nov 13, 2019 19:10
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:? I'm confused here. A car turning right will easily clip a bicyclist stopped to their right in a bike lane if they're not aware anyone is there. Turning right on red, the driver is probably only looking to their left. It is definitely a problem during green lights also, but drivers seem to have more overall awareness of their surroundings while moving.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2020 18:54
|
|
|
PittTheElder posted:Sounds like it's time to get rid of a car lane. Most cities would probably be better off if every other road was closed off to cars. 1st, 3rd, 5th, and 7th streets can handle cars, 2nd, 4th, 6th, and 8th are for public transport, pedestrians, and bikes.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2021 02:13
|
|
|
Lobsterpillar posted:I'm curious, do any traffic engineers in the thread have any experience with their cities attempts to address street racers and the like? The best bet is deploying The Rock, but you have to be careful because he might join up with the street racers if their cause is just.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 27, 2021 22:47
|
|
|
wolrah posted:This is wonderful and should be the standard response by any reasonable court. If it's applied consistently, how is it "cheating" anyone? If anything, putting in average speed cameras on all roads (or installing them in the cars themselves if that becomes feasible) so the default expectation for drivers is that violating speed limits results in a fine would work better than any traffic calming measure. But at the same time, speed limits should make sense. A road that's built in a way that allows 45mph traffic can still be set to 15mph during certain hours if it goes by a school. And a freeway that can handle 100mph traffic shouldn't be limited to 55mph in the middle of the night. Overengineer the roads, but set speed limit to safe levels and enforce them consistently. And as an aside the fines should be a percentage of income/wealth though to keep things equitable.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2021 03:10
|
|
|
Is there a downside to incrementally closing more roads to cars to encourage other forms of traffic like New York and Oakland have been trying? It seems like a remarkably simple idea to deal with excess vehicular traffic, and a lot cheaper than engineering roads for traffic calming measures. And as a bonus if it results in more traffic on the remaining streets that allow cars, that's just more incentive for people to use alternative transportation.
AreWeDrunkYet fucked around with this message at 23:34 on May 1, 2021 |
|
#
¿
May 1, 2021 23:24
|
|
|
Haifisch posted:Related: The people who get pissy at the idea of having on-street parking instead of huge parking lots that stay 80% empty most of the time. They don't care whether or not it's actually better for businesses, they just think it feels more crowded/worse. Sort of related question, but how do traffic engineers look at parking garages? Those seem to be the best of both worlds - no need for massive parking lot footprints, and none of the "clutter" of street parking or additional traffic from people circling for spots.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2021 21:36
|
|
|
dublish posted:Not sure about how traffic engineers look at them, but structural engineers look at them as expensive. Even accounting for public costs/benefits? The structure may be expensive to build, but if they allow for more density that also means more tax revenue and more efficient public services. To be fair that's out of scope for a structural engineer. Most transport infrastructure is run at a loss, but we do it anyway because it enables the rest of the economy/society.
|
|
#
¿
May 6, 2021 21:49
|
|
|
Hippie Hedgehog posted:Architects hate garages unless they're underground (with something else on top). Because they create dead plots of land, like parking lots, only smaller. And aesthetically because they are hard to make into anything remotely pretty. So do architects prefer parking lots? Those are far worse aesthetically by any measure. Of course in an ideal world cities would cut back on the number of parking spots, but I mean as an alternative to the parking lot vs street parking discussion above. Parking garages are not a replacement for public transport, just a way to put as many spots as possible in the smallest footprint. The safety thing is an interesting point, but again it's not like parking lots, especially large ones, are particularly safe. A lot of them have emergency call stations because of that danger. I'd also wonder about break-in stats considering garages can be more effectively blanketed with cameras and have limited entrance/exit points. And why wouldn't a traffic engineer have an opinion? Parking options have an impact on traffic flow and patterns. Parking lots mean longer travel distances between locations, and street parking means fewer traffic lanes (or artificially wide streets) and additional traffic from people circling for parking. Communist Zombie posted:I remember hearing that parking garages have a lifespan 10-20 year lifespan, lower if theres significant winter, from being exposed to the elements and having to hold heavy loads. A parking lot also has a lifespan of about 20 years. Google suggests 30+ years for garages. Honestly surprised about all the parking garage hate here considering the available alternatives for parking. AreWeDrunkYet fucked around with this message at 23:48 on May 6, 2021 |
|
#
¿
May 6, 2021 23:44
|
|
|
silence_kit posted:Maybe bicycling is more practical in other countries with nicer climates, but in most areas of the US which are not on the West Coast, there are large parts of the year where bicycle commuting would be a totally miserable experience. It isn’t really a great mode of transit. Outside of the occasional northeast/great lakes snowstorm that's just laughable. There are many millions of people who commute daily on bicycles from southeast Asia to north China, the climates of which are comparable to (and in a lot of cases more extreme) to Florida up to the northeast. Atlanta or Orlando are fairly comparable to Phnom Phen, and New York isn't that far off from Beijing. The Texas triangle is a couple degrees hotter in the summer, but nothing that prevents bike use and it has the bonus of being relatively dry and having warmer winters. Rain doesn't prevent bike use, but the prevalence of biking in the Pacific northwest and north/central Europe should make that obvious enough anyway, The climate in Chicago isn't that different from Oslo. And that's basically everywhere people live in the United States. The common difference between those cities in other countries where people bike and cities in the US where people don't is infrastructure, not climate. AreWeDrunkYet fucked around with this message at 13:09 on May 7, 2021 |
|
#
¿
May 7, 2021 13:06
|
|
|
Javid posted:It's not even necessarily straight cost/benefit. For example, I have a medium sized dog, who is totally chill, but completely impractical to cart around in a carrier of any kind. I can't take him on the bus without a carrier here. We kinda have to go to the vet every so often, and emergencies happen, so I can't bank on borrowing a car or getting a ride to cover vet visits. Before considering any other factor, I already know I can't rely on the bus for one of the most important trips I repeatedly make. It costing more than the car on average just moves it from a decision to a literal joke. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 16, 2022 05:30
|
|
|
Lobsterpillar posted:In my experience the idea that parked cars calm traffic is unknown to the general public and not really understood. Also they'd much rather keep those parking spaces free for themselves and or their visitors, that's much more important to them Could you get the same calming effect while keeping parking by placing concrete bollards/planters to mark separate banks of parking spots? And adding a few feet of bike lane on the outside of the parking would narrow things down further, which should lower speeds? To mspaint! black = curb green = bike lane blue = parked cars purple = bollards orange = pedestrian crossing 
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2022 14:37
|
|
|
Could anyone point me towards research/examples of eliminating transit fares? It's always seemed backwards to create barriers to systems that are more efficient at capacity, and fares recoup a fraction of costs at best. Is it just a political question, or are there reasons traffic engineers would recommend implementing fares for transit since that seems to be the default state in most places.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 24, 2022 04:13
|
|
|
Jasper Tin Neck posted:This only applies to low quality systems (which encompasses most American systems, to be fair). Several Asian systems are even profitable by farebox revenue alone. "does not include capital costs" is going a lot of work in that image. e: Here's WMATA (Washington DC) for example. 3-4% seems more accurate than 62%. 
AreWeDrunkYet fucked around with this message at 19:40 on Sep 25, 2022 |
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2022 19:36
|
|
|
Carbon dioxide posted:Ireland. Speed limits aren't intended to be a suggested speed, right?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 23, 2023 03:08
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 23, 2024 18:12 |
|
|
Devor posted:A separated bike lane without cars is a Shared Use Path Even when they're originally designed for cars? More cities should implement stuff like this, but permanently. It's way better for everyone on the road except for drivers. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2020-04-17/how-oakland-made-pedestrian-friendly-slow-streets
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2023 03:48
|
|