From: gpsman on 31 Mar 2010 20:57 On Mar 31, 12:09 pm, Brent <tetraethylleadREMOVET...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > To find the gaps in traffic or determine the flow the light needs to be > tied into a sensor further back. You state the next intersection is > uncontrolled so there's nothing pre-existing to tie into. Non sequitur. A controlled intersection is not required for a traffic sensor. > Almost all of the left-turn-on-arrow-only lights in the chicago area are > of the dumb variety. <cough> > Left turn on arrow only lights just need to go away in the VAST majority > of cases. I suspect you have encountered fewer than 1% of all signals with arrow control. > Just another dumbing down measure that makes things worse. <cough> ----- - gpsman
From: Brian on 4 Apr 2010 15:21 On 4/4/10 13:29, Andrew M. Saucci, Jr. wrote: > I actually don't mind a red arrow most of the time. It takes the > pressure off me to do something stupid because a line of cars is behind me > waiting to make a turn. At 2 AM, though, waiting for such an arrow can be > frustrating, but the intersection has to be designed for safety in peak > traffic. Hopefully more jurisdictions will embrace the flashing yellow arrow display and will regard its adaptability (protected-only mode in peak situations as mentioned above; protected-permissive or possibly even permissive-only mode in off-peak situations).
From: CO on 5 Apr 2010 00:30 Since the USA is a lawsuit-happy society, I doubt if protected left turn arrows will ever go away completely. The threat of someone getting into a crash, then suing the city or jurisdiction is enough. Other than the city of Tucson AZ, I can't think of any other jurisdiction that avoids protected left arrows if they can.
From: CO on 5 Apr 2010 00:32 During peak hours of traffic, I believe it's better to have protected left turns than not. In the middle of the night, not so much.
|
Pages: 1 Prev: Boxes on poles Next: Operation Distance Chart: It Doesn't Suck, It's 'Art'! |