The case for almost never turning left while driving

[jeffandnicole]

If I never made a left, the first 1/2 mile of my commute to work would become a 3 1/2 mile loop, and I would wind up 1/4 mile away from my house.

The other 41 miles of my commute amazingly would not change!

Going home: If I made a left out of my parking garage, it'll add a few miles at the beginning of my commute home, and about 2 miles at the end of my commute.  The middle 40 miles are all highway driving.

[roadfro]

Some more details & info regarding the proposed changes to the upcoming I-95 (MA 128)/MA 9 interchange project; based on the write-up, I'm not the only one concerned that replacing the 2 cloverleaf on-ramps to I-95 w/signalized left turns would create a worse traffic situation than what's presently there.  There's even a petition to the Governor (Patrick) included.

What's the alternative?  Regardless if you personally agree with it, DOT's are converting full cloverleaf interchanges to reduce weaving.  What type of interchange would you rather see constructed (assuming the DOT is dead set against keeping it a full cloverleaf)?

For obvious reasons, directional fly-overs are out. 

At best, a suitable compromise (since MassDOT is not eliminating every full cloverleaf interchange out there, contrary to popular belief (Highland Ave./Exit 19A-B, one exit south of MA 9, is staying as a full cloverleaf when it gets revamped)) would be to widen the MA 9 overpass enough to provide a parallel collector-distributor roads for the interchange ramps.  Such will keep the through-MA 9 traffic away from the entrance/exit ramps themselves and reduce (but not eliminate) weaving.

Truth be told, much of MA 9 (which is a 4-laner) in that area needs to be widened to at least 6-lanes as far out to the Pike interchange; but I don't see that happening anytime soon and that's another story for another thread.

I took a deeper look into the signal timing plan in the link that you provided.  According to the plans, the traffic signal for the SB I-95 on-ramp is going to stop both directions on Route 9.  This isn't necessarily bad for progression assuming that both directions on Route 9 are controlled independently from each other (IE. two traffic signals servicing each direction independently).  Unfortunately, the plan calls for one traffic signal to control both directions of traffic on Route 9, which means progression will suffer.  They are picking an interchange design which is capable of providing very nice signal progression along Route 9, yet they cheap out on the signal design so that the advantages of the interchange design aren't realized.

Not sure that you could run the two directions independently with one signal controller, at least not without some modification to a standard NEMA phasing scheme.

[KEK Inc.]

On major arterial roads where left turns cause back-ups since there's no left turn bay, a left turn shouldn't be permitted between 5 AM and 7 PM.  You can easily loop around the block, and often it takes much less time and doesn't compromise mainline traffic.  In heavy traffic scenarios, it's not really safe to lane change to the right lane. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@47.664944,-122.318139,3a,75y,242.91h,81.44t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sFtGxC1Fqm5qBQ9_S4H4FqQ!2e0

Above is a perfect example of a road that should restrict left turns at certain times.  Pan 180º and you'll see 4 more lights (albeit two are one way) with the same signal scenario.   Driving around here feels like a game and a gamble since you have to jet between the two lanes from people turning left or turning right, and people often try to do this at 45 MPH (because U District).

Seattle also has protected phasing:

https://www.google.com/maps/place/Seattle,+WA/@47.662142,-122.349732,3a,50.1y,272.04h,90.43t/data=!3m4!1e1!3m2!1sdTOYzkgbvkqpjx0Xgmv-iw!2e0!4m2!3m1!1s0x5490102c93e83355:0x102565466944d59a

This left turn will always be protected, even at the middle of the night.  In my opinion, it isn't a bad idea, but it does involve an extra phasing.  What bothers me is that it technically permits a U-turn, so there's no protected right on the perpendicular street opposite of the green.

[jeffandnicole]

Btw, if anyone's against a jersey jughandle but for making three rights, the result is the same: You go thru the same light twice.