(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcommuteorlando.com%2Fwordpress%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F03%2FSlide18.jpg&hash=005f778a74da67c3c4689cf0bb5942e1c9f8161b)
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2013/03/31/i-am-traffic-even-on-the-path/
is that a NO MOTOR VEHICLES on the opposite side of each intersection?
It's a bike path, dummy :bigass:
Poor stop signs. The cyclists probably ignore them anyway.
Quote from: kj3400 on April 01, 2013, 02:41:02 PM
Poor stop signs. The cyclists probably ignore them anyway.
Yep.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcommuteorlando.com%2Fwordpress%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F03%2FSlide26.jpg&hash=69ae191f6ac489a17a12f4291be5a08efc9b3cb9)
I see the orange center posts now. those were some pretty low-resolution photos, you must admit.
How about this?
https://maps.google.com/maps?q=freeport,+IL&ll=42.283453,-89.651248&spn=0.002056,0.007961&oe=utf-8&client=firefox-a&hnear=Freeport,+Stephenson,+Illinois&gl=us&t=h&z=17&layer=c&cbll=42.283452,-89.651247&panoid=UxFr28LuP8n1XX5401UKXg&cbp=11,158.66,,0,20.01
needing special "path only" signs to tell the cars not to stop.
I don't think there's a problem with confused cars here.
Quote from: cwm1276 on April 01, 2013, 03:19:53 PM
needing special "path only" signs to tell the cars not to stop.
Unless you're talking about the Goog's self-driving cars (which probably don't parse that sign correctly), telling a car not to stop doesn't do anything.
There's a road here in Melbourne (W Hibiscus Blvd) that has stop signs on the sidewalk for every single driveway. Because they're so close to the road, they are all tagged "BIKES ONLY". It's dumb.
On the bike path pictured, they should be yield signs IMO.
EDIT: why stop at yield signs? Why not use full bicycle roundabouts? Or a fully controlled access diverging diamond interchange at those driveways?
Quote from: realjd on April 01, 2013, 07:52:03 PM
On the bike path pictured, they should be yield signs IMO.
The recommendation of the presentation author is as follows (at crossings of minor roads):
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcommuteorlando.com%2Fwordpress%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F03%2FSlide29.jpg&hash=b9f2356c2cc342053888f5adc4f06fca79aed7ce)
There's no reason a private driveway with a single-digit AADT should have right-of-way over a path.
I ponder the millions of barrels of oil wasted every year due to unnecessary stop signs. In many cases, a yield sign would suffice. Coming to a full stop over and over again wastes fuel, and pollutes the environment.
The same could be said for all the traffic control signals which could be timed for one direction of travel in the day and yellow/red blinking at night where feasible.
Quote from: NE2 on April 01, 2013, 02:30:17 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcommuteorlando.com%2Fwordpress%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F03%2FSlide18.jpg&hash=005f778a74da67c3c4689cf0bb5942e1c9f8161b)
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2013/03/31/i-am-traffic-even-on-the-path/
It's a little tough to tell, but those pictures that state 'Driveway' seem to be more of an access road to a development or ballfields that may see a fair amount of traffic, not exactly someone's personal driveway.
Guess these bicyclists, who have no problem with the overposting of Stop signs on regular roads, don't understand that they are in fact motorists themselves, subject to the same rules as cars and trucks. With that being the case, traffic control is needed.
I'm sure some bicyclist drove thru an intersection and got hit, claimed there wasn't a stop sign, and sued.
Quote from: NE2 on April 01, 2013, 02:30:17 PM
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2013/03/31/i-am-traffic-even-on-the-path/
Ha, I like Slide 24.
I wish somebody would compile a similar presentation to the 5 southeastern PA counties regarding overusing STOP signs. On many non-PennDOT roads, the majority of STOP signs are indeed erected for speed control purposes which is an MUTCD no-no.
Quote from: djsinco on April 02, 2013, 02:29:55 AM
I ponder the millions of barrels of oil wasted every year due to unnecessary stop signs. In many cases, a yield sign would suffice. Coming to a full stop over and over again wastes fuel, and pollutes the environment.
The same could be said for all the traffic control signals which could be timed for one direction of travel in the day and yellow/red blinking at night where feasible.
Personally, I think there are plenty of 4-way stop signs and even some traffic lights that could, and should, be replaced with roundabouts.
Quote from: realjd on April 01, 2013, 07:52:03 PM
There's a road here in Melbourne (W Hibiscus Blvd) that has stop signs on the sidewalk for every single driveway. Because they're so close to the road, they are all tagged "BIKES ONLY". It's dumb.
On the bike path pictured, they should be yield signs IMO.
EDIT: why stop at yield signs? Why not use full bicycle roundabouts? Or a fully controlled access diverging diamond interchange at those driveways?
It's a good thing pedestrians aren't required to stop first. I guess.....
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 02, 2013, 09:09:56 AM
I wish somebody would compile a similar presentation to the 5 southeastern PA counties regarding overusing STOP signs. On many non-PennDOT roads, the majority of STOP signs are indeed erected for speed control purposes which is an MUTCD no-no.
2009 MUTCD:
Section 2B.04 Right-of-Way at Intersections
05 YIELD or STOP signs
should not be used for speed control.
Meaning it is discouraged, but not prohibited as would be the case if "should" was changed to "shall"
Quote from: Big John on April 02, 2013, 04:06:09 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 02, 2013, 09:09:56 AM
I wish somebody would compile a similar presentation to the 5 southeastern PA counties regarding overusing STOP signs. On many non-PennDOT roads, the majority of STOP signs are indeed erected for speed control purposes which is an MUTCD no-no.
2009 MUTCD:
Section 2B.04 Right-of-Way at Intersections
05 YIELD or STOP signs should not be used for speed control.
Meaning it is discouraged, but not prohibited as would be the case if "should" was changed to "shall"
If they did change it to a "shall", there would probably be a major uprising from jurisdictions that use STOP signs as speed control just because they can.
On Purdue's campus there have been a number of failed bike paths/lanes put in over the years that just were not designed right at all. Some years back I recall one that ran parallel to State St. that had small nonstandard signs reading "STOP - WALK BIKE" at every crossing of the path with a side street or driveway. Those who did use the path ignored them, and those who didn't want to get in trouble simply rode on State Street itself. The powers that be just didn't get it that no one will use the path if they have to constantly get on and off their bike to cross a side street or driveway that may not have that much traffic itself.
There are also several instances of well-meaning bike paths that simply end due to changes over time to the surroundings; one used to cross a divided driveway that became a pedestrian mall/green space. The bike path simply arrives, stripes and all, at the pedestrian mall and just abruptly ends. Offset across the pedestrian walkways and grass is the continuation. Where exactly should the bikes go in the meantime? Reminds me of some of the other slides at that link.
Quote from: PurdueBill on April 02, 2013, 06:20:11 PM
If they did change it to a "shall", there would probably be a major uprising from jurisdictions that use STOP signs as speed control just because they can.
so?
it is the responsibility of the law to rein in poorly acting municipalities. see: New Rome, Ohio.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 02, 2013, 08:34:33 AM
Quote from: NE2 on April 01, 2013, 02:30:17 PM
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fcommuteorlando.com%2Fwordpress%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2013%2F03%2FSlide18.jpg&hash=005f778a74da67c3c4689cf0bb5942e1c9f8161b)
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2013/03/31/i-am-traffic-even-on-the-path/
It's a little tough to tell, but those pictures that state 'Driveway' seem to be more of an access road to a development or ballfields that may see a fair amount of traffic, not exactly someone's personal driveway.
Guess these bicyclists, who have no problem with the overposting of Stop signs on regular roads, don't understand that they are in fact motorists themselves, subject to the same rules as cars and trucks. With that being the case, traffic control is needed.
I'm sure some bicyclist drove thru an intersection and got hit, claimed there wasn't a stop sign, and sued.
Or they could put the stop signs on the minor road - the ball field access - and let the primary road - the bike path - flow properly. Just because cars go through doesn't automatically make them the primary movement through an intersection.
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 02, 2013, 09:09:56 AM
I wish somebody would compile a similar presentation to the 5 southeastern PA counties regarding overusing STOP signs. On many non-PennDOT roads, the majority of STOP signs are indeed erected for speed control purposes which is an MUTCD no-no.
Yes it is really bad here. There are 3-way and 4-way stops all over the place that are just completely unnecessary. If towns think that people are driving too fast, they should use the police to enforce speed limits. Instead, I have to wear out my brakes unnecessarily.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 02, 2013, 08:34:33 AM
Guess these bicyclists, who have no problem with the overposting of Stop signs on regular roads
Huh?
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2010/03/23/stop-signs-suck/
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2010/05/26/contempt-for-stop-signs/
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2012/06/21/endangered-species-spotted-thriving-in-local-neighborhood/
Quote from: PurdueBill on April 02, 2013, 06:20:11 PM
There are also several instances of well-meaning bike paths that simply end due to changes over time to the surroundings; one used to cross a divided driveway that became a pedestrian mall/green space. The bike path simply arrives, stripes and all, at the pedestrian mall and just abruptly ends. Offset across the pedestrian walkways and grass is the continuation. Where exactly should the bikes go in the meantime? Reminds me of some of the other slides at that link.
At least it connects to the sidewalks. Nothing beats this lack of connectivity in Lake Wales: http://goo.gl/maps/1DR4f
Quote from: NE2 on April 02, 2013, 08:36:17 PM
this lack of connectivity in Lake Wales: http://goo.gl/maps/1DR4f
That's what's called an "implied multiuse path apron".
Quote from: agentsteel53 on April 02, 2013, 07:11:24 PM
Quote from: PurdueBill on April 02, 2013, 06:20:11 PM
If they did change it to a "shall", there would probably be a major uprising from jurisdictions that use STOP signs as speed control just because they can.
so?
it is the responsibility of the law to rein in poorly acting municipalities. see: New Rome, Ohio.
Them and Linndale (although Linndale as a whole isn't out of business--just its Mayor's Court)...although I don't know if a state government would stand up to municipalities over improper stop signs used for speed control when they are so much more rampant.
At least also in West Lafayette there are still some YIELD signs (http://goo.gl/maps/bDfgx) in appropriate places instead of STOP signs. Not enough, but at least some. Around my area of Ohio, that would be unheard of. Near my house they are making several former 2-way stops at 4-way intersections into 4-way stops, apparently to calm traffic. Sigh.
Quote from: NE2 on April 02, 2013, 08:36:17 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 02, 2013, 08:34:33 AM
Guess these bicyclists, who have no problem with the overposting of Stop signs on regular roads
Huh?
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2010/03/23/stop-signs-suck/
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2010/05/26/contempt-for-stop-signs/
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2012/06/21/endangered-species-spotted-thriving-in-local-neighborhood/
Good to know. My apologies for not reading every story and posting for the past 3 years on the website.
Quote from: LPCJr on April 02, 2013, 08:33:27 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 02, 2013, 09:09:56 AM
I wish somebody would compile a similar presentation to the 5 southeastern PA counties regarding overusing STOP signs. On many non-PennDOT roads, the majority of STOP signs are indeed erected for speed control purposes which is an MUTCD no-no.
Yes it is really bad here. There are 3-way and 4-way stops all over the place that are just completely unnecessary. If towns think that people are driving too fast, they should use the police to enforce speed limits. Instead, I have to wear out my brakes unnecessarily.
From what I understand (and assuming you're from PA as well), the so-called argument against increased police enforcement is due to the fact that only the PA State Police can use radar for speed enforcement. Local police in PA are restricted to only using a VASCAR device for speed enforcement which typically requires a longish straight-away that has few obstructions. Additionally, VASCAR enforcement has a 10 mph threshold (meaning police can't pull one over unless they're clocked at 10 mph or higher over the posted limit) vs. a 6-7 mph threshold in radar enforcement.
While there have been pushes to lift the local police radar ban; most have not been successful due to the arguement that local police (as you know there are a lot of small boroughs in PA) would abuse the enforcement (as means of revenue enhancement).
My take on it is this; lift the radar ban
but eliminate all non-MUTCD-justified devices (including irrationally-placed STOP signs) and
rationalize the speed limits (15 mph on pavement even in a school zone is artificially too low) across the board.
Side bar: I had to replace my brakes within the first year I lived in Delaware County due my not being used to the excessive STOP signs.
PA would do good by eliminating the yearly inspections on all vehicles also, which will never happen because it's a gold mine for auto-repair shops.
Many of my co-workers are from PA, and it amazes me the "issues" their cars have at inspections, which of couse require instant repair at the shop, while NJ vehicles can go 5 years for new vehicles (and 2 years for subsequent inspections) and rarely have problems.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 03, 2013, 11:30:55 AM
PA would do good by eliminating the yearly inspections on all vehicles also, which will never happen because it's a gold mine for auto-repair shops.
Many of my co-workers are from PA, and it amazes me the "issues" their cars have at inspections, which of couse require instant repair at the shop, while NJ vehicles can go 5 years for new vehicles (and 2 years for subsequent inspections) and rarely have problems.
IMHO, that has more to do w/people waiting until it's inspection time to address
all their repairs rather than doing them (the repairs) during the course of the year. Seriously, I've seen people bring in cars for inspections in such conditions that IMHO have no business being brought in to be inspected. It might just be a Greater Philly thing/issue as opposed to statewide, I don't know; my only experiences have been in Delaware County.
Personally, if I know that one of my cars has known-inspection-related issue(s) (last year my '97 Crown Vic needed new brakes); I get it taken care of/repaired
first, then take it to get inspected.
One beef I have with PA inspections is that they're very expensive (one of the highest fees in the nation) and the fee can vary from garage to garage. In other states, the inspection is just a flat rate regardless of where one goes.
My other beefs relate to the emissions testing (which is only perfomed/mandated in the more populous counties) in that:
1. The test is done yearly rather than every 2 years (most states that mandate emissions testing follows the
every 2 year cycle).
2. The testing is
still required on cars as old as 1976 (most states only test vehicles for emissions up to 15 to 20 years old).
The annual safety inspection doesn't really bother me because I was used to that when I was residing in Massachusetts.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 03, 2013, 08:32:35 AM
Quote from: NE2 on April 02, 2013, 08:36:17 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 02, 2013, 08:34:33 AM
Guess these bicyclists, who have no problem with the overposting of Stop signs on regular roads
Huh?
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2010/03/23/stop-signs-suck/
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2010/05/26/contempt-for-stop-signs/
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2012/06/21/endangered-species-spotted-thriving-in-local-neighborhood/
Good to know. My apologies for not reading every story and posting for the past 3 years on the website.
You made the initial assertion, so why the sarcasm?
Quote from: kj3400 on April 01, 2013, 02:41:02 PM
Poor stop signs. The cyclists probably ignore them anyway.
I'm sure some do, but I don't. Whenever I take a ride on the Withlacoochee State Trail, or any other bike path, I always obey them. I know I'm no match for an old lady in her Toyota Avalon, or some redneck in an swamp buggy.
Quote from: PHLBOS on April 02, 2013, 09:09:56 AM
I wish somebody would compile a similar presentation to the 5 southeastern PA counties regarding overusing STOP signs. On many non-PennDOT roads, the majority of STOP signs are indeed erected for speed control purposes which is an MUTCD no-no.
Oh, that's big on Long Island, especially in the Town of Brookhaven.
Quote from: Steve on April 03, 2013, 09:27:06 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 03, 2013, 08:32:35 AM
Quote from: NE2 on April 02, 2013, 08:36:17 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on April 02, 2013, 08:34:33 AM
Guess these bicyclists, who have no problem with the overposting of Stop signs on regular roads
Huh?
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2010/03/23/stop-signs-suck/
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2010/05/26/contempt-for-stop-signs/
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2012/06/21/endangered-species-spotted-thriving-in-local-neighborhood/
Good to know. My apologies for not reading every story and posting for the past 3 years on the website.
You made the initial assertion, so why the sarcasm?
For the use of "Huh?". A simple sentence explaining the groups opinion on the overuse of stop signs for all modes of transportation, with the links, would've been better received.
It looks like whoever designed the trail was over-literal in applying the MUTCD guidance for shared-use paths. Most of these crossings probably could be uncontrolled, if there's little cross-traffic, or could have yield controls on the path.