Unpopular Anything Road-Related Opinions

[HighwayStar]

Another reason for a re-evaluation for many of these zones is if the majority of the kids would walk home from school years/decades ago that are now mostly bussed or picked up by parents.  Do the zones need to be the same today as 20-30 years ago?

Some school zones are more prone to stopped/slow traffic than others, but there's no guarantee that one school which has more parked or waiting cars than its drop-off lot can handle is the same trouble at another school.

But yes, the number of students actually crossing the road is much more limited in suburban areas as the years go on.

I would agree with that. On the same note, I've seen various districts or 3rd parties trying to encourage children to walk to school which makes little sense if we are going to pay for busses to take them.

[LilianaUwU]

One of my pet peeves is on 6 or more lane freeways, where trucks will just sit in the middle lane without passing any trucks. If a trucker from behind wishes to pass, they must jump into the further left lane, now blocking the entire highway. Stay right completely unless you're actively passing!

As someone who had some experience with trucking (though not a lot): I noticed it's usually safer for a truck to be in the middle lane, as not only is there less trouble with merging traffic, but faster traffic can still pass to the left. Of course, if another trucker decides to pass the middle lane trucker, then that's their problem if they want to take too long to pass.

[TheRoadGuy72]

I think Open Road Tolling, or Electronic Tolling, or whatever people call it, is a total and complete scam. I think it's only done so that way states can jack up the prices of tolls by making people think they're saving money by buying those transponders yet they're still paying more than when they did when there was booths. I also do not like the privacy issues with it since they can pretty much track you to where you live whether it's through those transponders or when they send you a bill to your house if you don't have one. Finally I hate how it gets rid of jobs and gets rid of the more personal involvement when you're paying a toll at an old booth. Now I know for the most part you usually only talk to this person for 2 seconds but it's still nice to have that more personal aspect regarding paying.

I also despise the Double-diverting intersection design for interchanges. I think it is a very inefficient design as there is no reason why anyone should all of a sudden drive on the other side of the road in this country, it throws people off. I also think it is only used because a lot of people nowadays can't be trusted to come to a complete stop, look both ways, and only proceed when the intersection is free of traffic.

[kphoger]

I also despise the Double-diverting intersection design for interchanges.

Diverging Diamond Interchange?

I think it is a very inefficient design as there is no reason why anyone should all of a sudden drive on the other side of the road in this country, it throws people off.

I've never seen a driver who appeared to be thrown off to the point of not being able to navigate it correctly.  Surprised, sure.  But nowhere near as "thrown off" as people encountering a roundabout for the first time.

As for efficiency, I'm sure we'd all agree that its efficiency is limited.  This is especially true when you consider that almost no traffic on the crossroad will get both green lights.  But "very inefficient" is way overstated.

I also think it is only used because a lot of people nowadays can't be trusted to come to a complete stop, look both ways, and only proceed when the intersection is free of traffic.

No, that is not the reason.  Generally, it comes down to two benefits:  (1) cheaper to build than the alternatives, (2) two-phase stoplight timing.

[formulanone]

All-caps Clearview is not always terrible, though that's improper usage. The lighter weights are not completely hideous and sometimes seem to do a sneaky job of blending in.

[Quillz]

Clearview is perfectly fine when done right. I've said before that early on, it was often being mixed with the FHWA Series fonts. But I've seen plenty of all-Clearview signs with mixed use, proper spacing, and it looks fine. It's very over-hated.

[Rothman]

Clearview is perfectly fine when done right... But I've seen plenty of all-Clearview signs with mixed use, proper spacing, and it looks fine. It's very over-hated.

No, no and no.

[vdeane]

Clearview is perfectly fine when done right. I've said before that early on, it was often being mixed with the FHWA Series fonts. But I've seen plenty of all-Clearview signs with mixed use, proper spacing, and it looks fine. It's very over-hated.

Counter-point: while Clearview text can look fine if done right, Clearview numbers always look like yuck.

[Quillz]

Clearview is perfectly fine when done right... But I've seen plenty of all-Clearview signs with mixed use, proper spacing, and it looks fine. It's very over-hated.

No, no and no.

Yes, yes and yes.

[Max Rockatansky]

I feel as though there is an outsized focus on MUTCD compliance in the hobby in general.  Maybe it's me (as an non-engineer) just wanting to find interesting roads but I don't find focusing on things like external exit tabs, sequential exit numbering, mile markers or font types to be exciting.

[formulanone]

Clearview is perfectly fine when done right... But I've seen plenty of all-Clearview signs with mixed use, proper spacing, and it looks fine. It's very over-hated.

No, no and no.

Get out of the confession booth, narc 

[Quillz]

Clearview is perfectly fine when done right. I've said before that early on, it was often being mixed with the FHWA Series fonts. But I've seen plenty of all-Clearview signs with mixed use, proper spacing, and it looks fine. It's very over-hated.

Counter-point: while Clearview text can look fine if done right, Clearview numbers always look like yuck.

I used to feel this way, now I don't. It's similar to what I said above, when I first saw the numerals, they were often being used alongside FHWA Series fonts. But it was also a matter of time. They "looked" wrong at first because it wasn't what I was used to. But over time, seeing them was less jarring and now they're fine. I always suspected had things been the opposite, Clearview was the norm and the FHWA Series fonts showed up later, that the latter would be the ones I wouldn't have liked for a while.

My other issue is that Clearview numerals, aesthetically, seem to "fill out" space better. I've rarely found a good application of Series B, for example, because usually they're too narrow relative to the shield or sign they're being used on. But the equivalent (2-W or 2-B) generally looks better as far as width is concerned.

[kphoger]

1.  Lane lines are just suggestions.  Drive half on the shoulder to let someone pass you.  If you can see far enough ahead, then overtake on a solid yellow line.  Straddle the center line on narrow roads with no oncoming traffic.  It's just paint.

2.  Stop paying attention to the price of gas.  You're just going to buy it anyway.  Most days, if you ask me how much gas is around here, I don't know.

3.  People in Texas drive just fine.  Fast? yes.  Assertive? yes.  And that's perfectly acceptable.  So stop complaining about them, because I probably wish you drove more like them.

4.  No traffic laws should be enforceable by video camera.  Judging what was safe or unsafe should be left to human beings with real-world experience who can see and assess the broader situation surrounding the incident.  The same infraction in one scenario might deserve a ticket, while the same infraction in another scenario might not even deserve a traffic stop at all.

5.  All down-arrows on overhead signage should be replaced with up-arrows.

6.  We roadgeeks are missing out on something intangible but fundamental about the world by fixating on the minutiæ of roads.  We'd all do well to try and lift our eyes up from the pavement and the retroreflective sheeting and start seeing the forest for the trees.  Those around us probably have a better perspective on the world than we have, and we don't realize it.

[webny99]

1.  Lane lines are just suggestions.  Drive half on the shoulder to let someone pass you.  If you can see far enough ahead, then overtake on a solid yellow line.  Straddle the center line on narrow roads with no oncoming traffic.  It's just paint.

I agree 100% that single solid lines are just suggestions. Double solid lines, though, should be taken seriously; however, I do wish they were used more sparingly, especially on roads that lack proper shoulders. Ontario does a good job of this, where most rural county and local roads have a single yellow centerline. It's reflective of a wider range of circumstances where it's appropriate to cross that line.

6.  We roadgeeks are missing out on something intangible but fundamental about the world by fixating on the minutiæ of roads.  We'd all do well to try and lift our eyes up from the pavement and the retroreflective sheeting and start seeing the forest for the trees.  Those around us probably have a better perspective on the world than we have, and we don't realize it.

That really depends on perspective of what. I reckon folks on this forum have much better perspective on anything geography-related, for example, and on things like what different areas of the country look like (thanks to extensive street view browsing), where one state or city is in relation to another, and a sense of how long it might take to get from said state or city to the other without having to look it up.

[kphoger]

1.  Lane lines are just suggestions.  Drive half on the shoulder to let someone pass you.  If you can see far enough ahead, then overtake on a solid yellow line.  Straddle the center line on narrow roads with no oncoming traffic.  It's just paint.

I agree 100% that single solid lines are just suggestions. Double solid lines, though, should be taken seriously; however, I do wish they were used more sparingly, especially on roads that lack proper shoulders. Ontario does a good job of this, where most rural county and local roads have a single yellow centerline. It's reflective of a wider range of circumstances where it's appropriate to cross that line.

Meh.  I pass on a double yellow line at least once on pretty much every road trip our family takes.  Especially in rolling hills, when I've already gotten a good view of the road ahead from one or two hills back and it's totally free of oncoming traffic, I'll go ahead and pass—even on the uphill.  Or when the double yellow starts in advance of the road widening out for a passing lane, I see no need to wait till the actual passing lane begins before starting my pass.  Or if it's on a curve, but it's winter and so visibility has increased due to all the vegetation's having lost its leaves, I might pass on a double yellow because I can actually see far enough ahead.  Or if the slower vehicle is just really super slow, such that the maneuver will take less than ten seconds, I'll pass on a double yellow in a heartbeat.  Et cetera.

6.  We roadgeeks are missing out on something intangible but fundamental about the world by fixating on the minutiæ of roads.  We'd all do well to try and lift our eyes up from the pavement and the retroreflective sheeting and start seeing the forest for the trees.  Those around us probably have a better perspective on the world than we have, and we don't realize it.

That really depends on perspective of what. I reckon folks on this forum have much better perspective on anything geography-related, for example, and on things like what different areas of the country look like (thanks to extensive street view browsing), where one state or city is in relation to another, and a sense of how long it might take to get from said state or city to the other without having to look it up.

I still suspect that those benefits are outweighed by a perspective we lack on the world immediately around us.

[1995hoo]

...

2.  Stop paying attention to the price of gas.  You're just going to buy it anyway.  Most days, if you ask me how much gas is around here, I don't know.

...

A counterargument: Focusing on the relative price of gas at stations around where you live is a worthwhile and sensible thing to do because it can be easy to save a decent amount of money without going very far out of your way. Let me give an example. If I head from my neighborhood towards the Beltway, I can go left and hit five gas stations (two Shells, a Liberty, a BP, and an Amerigo) about three-quarters of a mile down the road, or I can go right and hit three gas stations (a Liberty, a Sunoco, and a Shell) about a quarter-mile down the road. Despite those stations' proximity, the three stations located to the right are typically 50¢ a gallon cheaper (sometimes more) than the five stations located to the left. The difference is even more stark if I head into the City of Alexandria—there's an Exxon station that's typically close to a dollar a gallon more. In those circumstances, I think it makes eminent sense to focus on which stations to use, even recognizing that I typically fill my gas tank once every two months or so such that saving $7.50 on a 15-gallon fillup doesn't necessarily add up to all that much over time (though I suppose if I fill up six times in one year, saving an average of $7.50 a fillup adds up to $45, which is close enough to another tank of gas).

In the paragraph above, I italicized the word "relative" to emphasize that my point is not to know the exact price of gas at any given moment. I couldn't tell you how much gas costs at any of those stations right now. But I can tell you with some reasonable confidence (based on living in this house for 22 years) that the three stations to the right will be significantly cheaper than the five stations to the left.

[kphoger]

A counterargument: Focusing on the relative price of gas at stations around where you live is a worthwhile and sensible thing to do because it can be easy to save a decent amount of money without going very far out of your way. Let me give an example. If I head from my neighborhood towards the Beltway, I can go left and hit five gas stations (two Shells, a Liberty, a BP, and an Amerigo) about three-quarters of a mile down the road, or I can go right and hit three gas stations (a Liberty, a Sunoco, and a Shell) about a quarter-mile down the road. Despite those stations' proximity, the three stations located to the right are typically 50¢ a gallon cheaper (sometimes more) than the five stations located to the left. The difference is even more stark if I head into the City of Alexandria—there's an Exxon station that's typically close to a dollar a gallon more. In those circumstances, I think it makes eminent sense to focus on which stations to use, even recognizing that I typically fill my gas tank once every two months or so such that saving $7.50 on a 15-gallon fillup doesn't necessarily add up to all that much over time (though I suppose if I fill up six times in one year, saving an average of $7.50 a fillup adds up to $45, which is close enough to another tank of gas).

In the paragraph above, I italicized the word "relative" to emphasize that my point is not to know the exact price of gas at any given moment. I couldn't tell you how much gas costs at any of those stations right now. But I can tell you with some reasonable confidence (based on living in this house for 22 years) that the three stations to the right will be significantly cheaper than the five stations to the left.

Very good point.  Stations around here don't tend to vary much between them, but I've lived in places where they do, and I agree that it was useful knowledge to have.

[J N Winkler]

I feel as though there is an outsized focus on MUTCD compliance in the hobby in general.  Maybe it's me (as an non-engineer) just wanting to find interesting roads but I don't find focusing on things like external exit tabs, sequential exit numbering, mile markers or font types to be exciting.

I like the clean appearance of the new freeway guide signs in California that have external tabs.  This said, since one of my big focus areas in this hobby is collecting pattern-accurate sign panel detail sheets, the use of placeholder fonts on the sheet itself bothers me more.

I tend to associate the focus on MUTCD compliance with the There's NO way that is MUTCD-Compliant group on Facebook.  I sense its membership is distributed bimodally, with a large share coming from the wider NUMTOT community and having an average age maybe 10 years younger than this forum, while a smaller but very active segment includes practitioners who are retired or in the later phases of their careers.  I think the younger members tend to be new to the wider road interest and thus tend to sweat MUTCD compliance much more than OGs like ourselves who are ready to say, "Hey, that's an interesting sign."

All down-arrows on overhead signage should be replaced with up-arrows.

The Germans have done this as part of the philosophy that underlies the Umklappregel, which says that if a sign is flipped forward about its bottom edge, the arrangement of legend and arrows on the panel should match the relative position and orientation of the real-world features to which they refer.

I personally don't think we are ready to tie all guide sign design to such a bold unifying principle--even within Europe, the French, British, Spanish, Swiss, Italians, Danes, and Poles continue to use downward-pointing arrows.



Unpopular opinion of my own:  even if you initially don't like a particular typeface or family thereof--Drogowskaz comes to mind, not just Clearview--it sort of grows on you when you see it consistently applied in the field or in engineering drawings.

[CtrlAltDel]

6.  We roadgeeks are missing out on something intangible but fundamental about the world by fixating on the minutiæ of roads.  We'd all do well to try and lift our eyes up from the pavement and the retroreflective sheeting and start seeing the forest for the trees.  Those around us probably have a better perspective on the world than we have, and we don't realize it.

Exacerbating the risk of looking into something best left alone, what do you have in mind here?

[vdeane]

Clearview is perfectly fine when done right. I've said before that early on, it was often being mixed with the FHWA Series fonts. But I've seen plenty of all-Clearview signs with mixed use, proper spacing, and it looks fine. It's very over-hated.

Counter-point: while Clearview text can look fine if done right, Clearview numbers always look like yuck.

I used to feel this way, now I don't. It's similar to what I said above, when I first saw the numerals, they were often being used alongside FHWA Series fonts. But it was also a matter of time. They "looked" wrong at first because it wasn't what I was used to. But over time, seeing them was less jarring and now they're fine. I always suspected had things been the opposite, Clearview was the norm and the FHWA Series fonts showed up later, that the latter would be the ones I wouldn't have liked for a while.

My other issue is that Clearview numerals, aesthetically, seem to "fill out" space better. I've rarely found a good application of Series B, for example, because usually they're too narrow relative to the shield or sign they're being used on. But the equivalent (2-W or 2-B) generally looks better as far as width is concerned.

What's weird is that I've been the reverse.  While I used to not mind the Clearview numbers on properly-proportioned signs like Vermont's, as the years have gone on I've gotten more annoyed with them.

2.  Stop paying attention to the price of gas.  You're just going to buy it anyway.  Most days, if you ask me how much gas is around here, I don't know.

Agreed.  So many people will go out of their way to get gas that is 10 cents a gallon cheaper or complain when it goes up by some small amount.  Even if I fill up when the tank is low enough for the E light to come on, a difference of 10 cents a gallon is only $1 difference to fill up.  Granted, I also don't live in an area with large price variances.  To get a difference of 50 cents or more either direction I'd have to drive a long way or go out of state.

I agree 100% that single solid lines are just suggestions. Double solid lines, though, should be taken seriously; however, I do wish they were used more sparingly, especially on roads that lack proper shoulders. Ontario does a good job of this, where most rural county and local roads have a single yellow centerline. It's reflective of a wider range of circumstances where it's appropriate to cross that line.

Fun fact: Ontario, Vermont, and Pennsylvania are the three jurisdictions that allow passing even when there's a double-yellow line (although the latter two and possibly Ontario as well disallow it if a regulatory sign says "do not pass").

[Scott5114]

Whenever I inquire "those around us" I usually find that it's not that they have a better perspective on the world than we have, it's that they don't have a perspective at all. Just never occurs to them to. Which is okay, I guess, because they probably have strong opinions about the minutiæ of, I dunno, college football that I couldn't pretend to care about if you paid me to.

Programmers have been arguing about minutiæ like the proper way to indent code and whether object-oriented or procedural programming style is better since the 1980s. I wouldn't expect most roadgeeks to have an opinion on those unless they're also programmers. Yet they really matter to those who have to live with the fallout from those decisions.

[Max Rockatansky]

6.  We roadgeeks are missing out on something intangible but fundamental about the world by fixating on the minutiæ of roads.  We'd all do well to try and lift our eyes up from the pavement and the retroreflective sheeting and start seeing the forest for the trees.  Those around us probably have a better perspective on the world than we have, and we don't realize it.

Exacerbating the risk of looking into something best left alone, what do you have in mind here?

I think that I hit on the same thing, just phrased differently in my last reply.  I like driving fun roads, I don't think that's what drives much of the hobby though but rather an obsession with general homogenization does.

[wriddle082]

Has anybody mentioned the following yet?:

1. New forum members who join, seemingly, for the sole purpose of bashing a major long-awaited road project using tired arguments, mainly environmental, which were debunked years ago.

2. Members from the DC metro area who seem to think the 95 corridor should be the only one that should get any of VDOT's money, completely ignoring the extreme bottleneck that is the 81 corridor.  Most of this country chooses to live way outside the DC area, and considerations should be afforded them as well.

3. The outright money grab that is PANYNJ's toll rates on their facilities, and the upcoming congestion pricing tolls for Manhattan.  Has traffic really been on the rise since the pandemic hastened the work-from-home trend?

4. Section 2E.24 of the MUTCD.  Because of the lack of clear signage for option lanes in advance, I often find myself moving over to the left as I'm exiting the main lanes to take the left side of a second split, when I could have been in that left lane all along.  Just revert that change!

[hotdogPi]

2. Members from the DC metro area who seem to think the 95 corridor should be the only one that should get any of VDOT's money, completely ignoring the extreme bottleneck that is the 81 corridor.  Most of this country chooses to live way outside the DC area, and considerations should be afforded them as well.

Same person, different account, already banned.

[kphoger]

6.  We roadgeeks are missing out on something intangible but fundamental about the world by fixating on the minutiæ of roads.  We'd all do well to try and lift our eyes up from the pavement and the retroreflective sheeting and start seeing the forest for the trees.  Those around us probably have a better perspective on the world than we have, and we don't realize it.

Exacerbating the risk of looking into something best left alone, what do you have in mind here?

Hey, I never said I knew what "it" was, nor how to grasp it for my own—just I think there's an "it" out there that we're missing.  I am part of that we.

Whenever I inquire "those around us" I usually find that it's not that they have a better perspective on the world than we have, it's that they don't have a perspective at all. Just never occurs to them to. Which is okay, I guess, because they probably have strong opinions about the minutiæ of, I dunno, college football that I couldn't pretend to care about if you paid me to.

Programmers have been arguing about minutiæ like the proper way to indent code and whether object-oriented or procedural programming style is better since the 1980s. I wouldn't expect most roadgeeks to have an opinion on those unless they're also programmers. Yet they really matter to those who have to live with the fallout from those decisions.

At least roads and signs are real-world objects.  And I've never understood the worldwide fascination with the sports statistics of complete strangers.

But at least sports are something that fits within the canon of socially engaging activities.  That is to say, it's something that either inherently or tangentially involves human interaction.  Maybe it's the human factor that I feel is missing in this niche interest of ours, and sometimes I wonder if part of why we're interested in it is that we lack some basic aptitude for engaging with the real-world people in our lives.  Or maybe I just need to go to bed...