Unpopular Anything Road-Related Opinions

[Ned Weasel]

actually we might be talking about two different things.  I'm thinking of people making left turns on the green ball that either don't pull out.  if you're talking about people going straight and you can't cross because it's backed up I'm 100% with you.

Oh yeah.  I know what you mean about that issue, and I do get annoyed with people who refuse to pull into the intersection on a permissive left turn when there's no reason not to.

There's also the occasional phenomenon of people treating a protected-only left turn as a permissive left turn!  Oops?  I once rode with someone who did that.  Me: "You have a red light."  Driver: "No, the light is green" (doesn't pay attention to the red light on the left turn signal and proceeds to turn left).  I wonder if upgrading to red left arrows will help in these cases.  Actually, I think there are a lot of intersections with protected-only left turns that could be made protected/permissive.

[SeriesE]

SUVs need to be banned for on road use

Adding on this: non-commercial use of pickup trucks should be limited. They're designed to be work vehicles, not pure people haulers.

Bumper height standards need to apply to all vehicles including trucks and SUVs for the safety of all cars. This needs to be enforced after sale too so no excessive lifts.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I like the US route shield more than the interstate shield.

At this point the US route system has outlived its usefulness and routes that are not at least expressway quality should be downgraded to state routes.

[hotdogPi]

• US routes should remain on parallel routes.
• Control states are fine.
• Exit signs should be able to list more than two destinations.
• If you successfully fight a speed trap in court, you receive a bonus $400. Speed or red light camera, $1000.
• There should be very few dead ends; they should not exist at all unless there's an obstacle.
• When reaching an international border, you should have the option to turn around without going through customs.
• KY 79 and IN 135 should be part of US 79.
• Car insurance should be cheaper but should not apply if you're entirely at fault and it's not a road geometry issue or a mechanical issue with the car.
• Busses is not a legitimate spelling of buses.
• After the day ends for public transit vehicles, if you want to go from where it ends normally to where they keep them overnight, you can take that trip (for the standard fare).
• Amtrak should be expanded.
• AHTD should never have renamed themselves.
• Street names that are the name of an adjacent city/town, where the road goes to that location, are perfectly fine and not unimaginative.
• If it takes more than 1/2 second to see what is wrong with a sign, and it's not misleading or incorrect, it does not belong in Worst of Road Signs.
• There is nothing wrong with I-73's number.
• Municipality names that are an actual word (including those that aren't English) should always be pronounced the way you would expect them to be. Looking at you, Chili, NY, Rio Grande, OH, Hurricane, UT, and various places named Buena Vista, Versailles, and Milan.
• DOTs should ignore NIMBYs. It's called a vocal minority for a reason.
• Breakdown lane use during peak hours should be implemented in more places.
• All sidewalks should be 15 feet underground.

[SkyPesos]

• There should be very few dead ends; they should not exist at all unless there's an obstacle.

Agree with this one. I wonder who the genius that normalized cul-de-sacs in American suburbs was.

• When reaching an international border, you should have the option to turn around without going through customs.

There is an option to turn around. It's at the 'Last exit before border' ramps. It's marked that for a reason.

• Street names that are the name of an adjacent city/town, where the road goes to that location, are perfectly fine and not unimaginative.

There's people that thinks it's unimaginative? That's new to me, as I'm used to it (like Hamilton Ave, Reading Rd, Montgomery Rd in the Cincinnati area).

[I-55]

• When reaching an international border, you should have the option to turn around without going through customs.

There is an option to turn around. It's at the 'Last exit before border' ramps. It's marked that for a reason.

As someone who had to turn around before the DFW airport tolls because construction signage was confusing I'd say having turnarounds wouldn't be a bad thing.

[oscar]

• When reaching an international border, you should have the option to turn around without going through customs.

There is an option to turn around. It's at the 'Last exit before border' ramps. It's marked that for a reason.

Yes, and similar provisions for non-freeway routes.

However, if you actually cross the border and then turn around, you'll usually have to clear customs at least on the side of the border you came from. Typically, once across the border you're also prohibited from turning around before the other country's customs checkpoint, unless the checkpoint is set back far from the border (such as with the Alaska Highway crossing, where the Canadian checkpoint is about 17 miles from the border). People sometimes spend a lot of jail time for crossing the border with stuff illegal on the other side of the border (such as guns), so in such cases it's important not to miss the marked last exit or U-turn before the border.

[SEWIGuy]

• There should be very few dead ends; they should not exist at all unless there's an obstacle.

Agree with this one. I wonder who the genius that normalized cul-de-sacs in American suburbs was.

Property developers.  You can cut more lots out of a development with cul-de-sacs and charge more for them.  I live on one and its great.  I don't have to deal with a lot of traffic at all.

[1995hoo]

• There should be very few dead ends; they should not exist at all unless there's an obstacle.

Agree with this one. I wonder who the genius that normalized cul-de-sacs in American suburbs was.

Property developers.  You can cut more lots out of a development with cul-de-sacs and charge more for them.  I live on one and its great.  I don't have to deal with a lot of traffic at all.

Also, there are plenty of people who, as you note, like living either on a cul-de-sac or a street system that has only one outlet. There are various reasons–lack of through traffic using the neighborhood as a bypass (which usually goes along with those same people driving far too fast for a residential area), less noise, safer for kids to play in the street, etc.

We don't live on a cul-de-sac, but there's only one way out of our neighborhood. While it can sometimes be a mild nuisance, on the whole the benefit of reduced traffic outweighs that. The street leading in and out has a 25-mph speed limit, but I routinely see people doing 40+ and going fast enough that they can't seem to stay on their own side of the double yellow line on the curves. If the street connected through at the other end, I firmly believe people would be going through here at 50+, given that on the nearby thru street that parallels our neighborhood people routinely do 60 mph in a 35-mph zone.

[HighwayStar]

• There should be very few dead ends; they should not exist at all unless there's an obstacle.

Agree with this one. I wonder who the genius that normalized cul-de-sacs in American suburbs was.

Property developers.  You can cut more lots out of a development with cul-de-sacs and charge more for them.  I live on one and its great.  I don't have to deal with a lot of traffic at all.

By and large I will agree with this. They have numerous benefits, and the only serious downside to the layout is the lack of back alleys for services.

[formulanone]

• There should be very few dead ends; they should not exist at all unless there's an obstacle.

Agree with this one. I wonder who the genius that normalized cul-de-sacs in American suburbs was.

Property developers.  You can cut more lots out of a development with cul-de-sacs and charge more for them.  I live on one and its great.  I don't have to deal with a lot of traffic at all.

By and large I will agree with this. They have numerous benefits, and the only serious downside to the layout is the lack of back alleys for services.

They're also good for letting kids play in the street without having to look for traffic from multiple sides.

[kphoger]

Interesting.  I could get behind upgrading them with Jesery barriers and a passing lane every 10 miles or less.  Still, I think it's unrealistic to expect major upgrades of most two-lane highways.  FWIW, two-lane, undivided highways go up to 75 MPH in Texas: https://goo.gl/maps/xC6HcTGaVHTfon4R9

Is Texas trying to get people killed??? A 150 mph speed differential between adjacent lanes is not safe at all.

If accidents aren't actually happening in large numbers, then it is not unsafe.

SUVs need to be banned for on road use

  How do you get them to wherever you think they should be used?

Not really an issue, once you make them illegal for road use they will cease to be manufactured in quantity as road vehicles. I suppose you can grandfather the existing stock in in the interim.

What vehicle do you expect my family of five to use when driving on the rocky desert roads of Mexico, then?

Adding on this: non-commercial use of pickup trucks should be limited. They're designed to be work vehicles, not pure people haulers.

So, what are contractors supposed to use to get between their house and the grocery store?  What are farmers supposed to drive to go to church?  How is a person with a large lawn and garden supposed to haul landscaping materials from Lowe's to his property?

Bumper height standards need to apply to all vehicles including trucks and SUVs for the safety of all cars.

Agreed.

[HighwayStar]

So, what are contractors supposed to use to get between their house and the grocery store?  What are farmers supposed to drive to go to church?  How is a person with a large lawn and garden supposed to haul landscaping materials from Lowe's to his property?

Contractors can use their cars, and keep their trucks at the job-site. Farmers can drive their cars as well, have you ever actually seen a farm? They usually have more vehicles than people. The person with he large lawn can haul them in a station wagon, just like everyone in the 70's did.

[JayhawkCO]

So, what are contractors supposed to use to get between their house and the grocery store?  What are farmers supposed to drive to go to church?  How is a person with a large lawn and garden supposed to haul landscaping materials from Lowe's to his property?

Contractors can use their cars, and keep their trucks at the job-site. Farmers can drive their cars as well, have you ever actually seen a farm? They usually have more vehicles than people. The person with he large lawn can haul them in a station wagon, just like everyone in the 70's did.

Everyone apparently needs to buy multiple cars per person in your world, eh?

Chris

[HighwayStar]

So, what are contractors supposed to use to get between their house and the grocery store?  What are farmers supposed to drive to go to church?  How is a person with a large lawn and garden supposed to haul landscaping materials from Lowe's to his property?

Contractors can use their cars, and keep their trucks at the job-site. Farmers can drive their cars as well, have you ever actually seen a farm? They usually have more vehicles than people. The person with he large lawn can haul them in a station wagon, just like everyone in the 70's did.

Everyone apparently needs to buy multiple cars per person in your world, eh?

Chris

No, everyone can use a single car for all passenger transport if they choose. You are simply prohibited from using a heavy vehicle made for commercial purposes as a passenger vehicle. The only people that would buy those vehicles are either A) people engaged in a business activity, in which case the cost of ownership is simply part of doing business or B) people buying them for off road recreational purposes, which is their choice. Most people would never need bother themselves with it any more than they concern themselves today with not being able to take a semi-truck to Lowes on a class D license.

[oscar]

To add to kphoger's comment, I also drive bad unpaved roads, usually a few time zones away from home, and in places ranging from southern California to Alaska and northern Canada. Some of them are bad enough to chew up and spit out the Prius I use for local travel. I used to drive them in a gas-hog full-size pickup truck. I replaced that with a smaller, more fuel-efficient compact SUV.

The person with he large lawn can haul them in a station wagon, just like everyone in the 70's did.

Which basically no longer exist, having been replaced by minivans, SUVs, and pickup trucks. I'm not sure the minivan would fare better in your world than the SUV or the pickup truck.

[JayhawkCO]

So, what are contractors supposed to use to get between their house and the grocery store?  What are farmers supposed to drive to go to church?  How is a person with a large lawn and garden supposed to haul landscaping materials from Lowe's to his property?

Contractors can use their cars, and keep their trucks at the job-site. Farmers can drive their cars as well, have you ever actually seen a farm? They usually have more vehicles than people. The person with he large lawn can haul them in a station wagon, just like everyone in the 70's did.

Everyone apparently needs to buy multiple cars per person in your world, eh?

Chris

No, everyone can use a single car for all passenger transport if they choose. You are simply prohibited from using a heavy vehicle made for commercial purposes as a passenger vehicle. The only people that would buy those vehicles are either A) people engaged in a business activity, in which case the cost of ownership is simply part of doing business or B) people buying them for off road recreational purposes, which is their choice. Most people would never need bother themselves with it any more than they concern themselves today with not being able to take a semi-truck to Lowes on a class D license.

But again, I live in the suburbs of Denver and I drive a Wrangler.  I like to take it to the mountains to access inaccessible trailheads for a normal car.  How would I get said Jeep to the mountains? I could get a second vehicle to be able to tow my Jeep, but that would require either a truck or an SUV, so that defeats the purpose.  Or do I have to leave my Jeep at home at all times unless going directly to the mountains (and I'm assuming I'll need some kind of proof of that, maybe get the government involved). 

So now they only people who can go four-wheeling are necessarily wealthy to be able to afford two vehicles?   

Also, what are your views of the new electric Hummer coming out?  Does that pass muster? And I'm assuming if I buy a McLaren that gets way worse gas mileage than my Jeep, that's OK because it's not an SUV?

Chris

[HighwayStar]

So, what are contractors supposed to use to get between their house and the grocery store?  What are farmers supposed to drive to go to church?  How is a person with a large lawn and garden supposed to haul landscaping materials from Lowe's to his property?

Contractors can use their cars, and keep their trucks at the job-site. Farmers can drive their cars as well, have you ever actually seen a farm? They usually have more vehicles than people. The person with he large lawn can haul them in a station wagon, just like everyone in the 70's did.

Everyone apparently needs to buy multiple cars per person in your world, eh?

Chris

No, everyone can use a single car for all passenger transport if they choose. You are simply prohibited from using a heavy vehicle made for commercial purposes as a passenger vehicle. The only people that would buy those vehicles are either A) people engaged in a business activity, in which case the cost of ownership is simply part of doing business or B) people buying them for off road recreational purposes, which is their choice. Most people would never need bother themselves with it any more than they concern themselves today with not being able to take a semi-truck to Lowes on a class D license.

But again, I live in the suburbs of Denver and I drive a Wrangler.  I like to take it to the mountains to access inaccessible trailheads for a normal car.  How would I get said car to the mountains? Or do I have to leave my Jeep at home at all times unless going directly to the mountains (and I'm assuming I'll need some kind of proof of that, maybe get the government involved).  So now they only people who can go four-wheeling are necessarily wealthy to be able to afford two vehicles?  Also, what are your views of the new electric Hummer coming out?  Does that pass muster?

Chris

Eh, there are a number of ways that could work. Even now non-road legal vehicles have to be towed to their off road point of use, that is fine by me. I don't like the "I'm on my way to x" approach, that would not fly with a dragster, etc. now and is obviously difficult to enforce. So the requirement would just be to tow your off road vehicle to the point you want to use it.
Frankly, I am fine with truncating roads that are inaccessible by a normal passenger car and making the rest non-motorized. It would reclaim a lot of our public lands for nature and make it more wild. If people want to enjoy that they can get out and hike.

[JayhawkCO]

Frankly, I am fine with truncating roads that are inaccessible by a normal passenger car and making the rest non-motorized. It would reclaim a lot of our public lands for nature and make it more wild. If people want to enjoy that they can get out and hike.

How do you "truncate" this?


Chris

[HighwayStar]

Frankly, I am fine with truncating roads that are inaccessible by a normal passenger car and making the rest non-motorized. It would reclaim a lot of our public lands for nature and make it more wild. If people want to enjoy that they can get out and hike.

How do you "truncate" this?


Chris

Like any other road the forest service, BLM, etc. closes? With a gate? Seriously this is not rocket science, just gate saying this is as far as you go, feel free to get off your duff and walk if you want to enjoy nature past this point.

[kphoger]

So, what are contractors supposed to use to get between their house and the grocery store?  What are farmers supposed to drive to go to church?  How is a person with a large lawn and garden supposed to haul landscaping materials from Lowe's to his property?

Contractors can use their cars, and keep their trucks at the job-site. Farmers can drive their cars as well, have you ever actually seen a farm? They usually have more vehicles than people. The person with he large lawn can haul them in a station wagon, just like everyone in the 70's did.

I work for a company that only hires contractors.  The great majority of them do not own two vehicles.  Their work truck is the same vehicle they use for everything else.

Also, I also grew up in farm country, 29 miles from the nearest stoplight.  In a place where heavy rain would render the dirt roads impassible for anything but a weighted-down pickup.  When we first moved out there, back when I was in fourth grade, I distinctly remember driving home from my dad's first church service (he was a pastor) out in the country.  Our Toyota Corolla was slipping and sliding all over the road.  Congregants patiently followed behind us in their pickups, ready to pull us out of the ditch.

Everyone apparently needs to buy multiple cars per person in your world, eh?

No, everyone can use a single car for all passenger transport if they choose. You are simply prohibited from using a heavy vehicle made for commercial purposes as a passenger vehicle. The only people that would buy those vehicles are either A) people engaged in a business activity, in which case the cost of ownership is simply part of doing business or B) people buying them for off road recreational purposes, which is their choice. Most people would never need bother themselves with it any more than they concern themselves today with not being able to take a semi-truck to Lowes on a class D license.

Again, if someone has a pickup for business purposes, then you're requiring that person to own two vehicles.  When a person goes into a business that requires a truck, they take that cost into account–but part of that accounting might be to trade in their other car.  A lot of my company's contractors are 22-year-old single guys who have zero reason to own a second vehicle in addition to their work truck.



Besides which, you didn't answer my question.  What would you have my family of five drive when we're in Mexico, leading a religious mission trip, on roads that are impassible in passenger cars?  It's not commercial activity.  It's not recreation.  It's just getting from A to B.  (Those pictures I posted earlier were taken on just such a trip.)

[JayhawkCO]

Like any other road the forest service, BLM, etc. closes? With a gate? Seriously this is not rocket science, just gate saying this is as far as you go, feel free to get off your duff and walk if you want to enjoy nature past this point.

I do get off my duff plenty (I've climbed 20 of the 14,000 foot peak mountains in Colorado).  Maybe I should just walk from home instead so I get a "real adventure".

Chris

[HighwayStar]

So, what are contractors supposed to use to get between their house and the grocery store?  What are farmers supposed to drive to go to church?  How is a person with a large lawn and garden supposed to haul landscaping materials from Lowe's to his property?

Contractors can use their cars, and keep their trucks at the job-site. Farmers can drive their cars as well, have you ever actually seen a farm? They usually have more vehicles than people. The person with he large lawn can haul them in a station wagon, just like everyone in the 70's did.

I work for a company that only hires contractors.  The great majority of them do not own two vehicles.  Their work truck is the same vehicle they use for everything else.

Also, I also grew up in farm country, 29 miles from the nearest stoplight.  In a place where heavy rain would render the dirt roads impassible for anything but a weighted-down pickup.  When we first moved out there, back when I was in fourth grade, I distinctly remember driving home from my dad's first church service (he was a pastor) out in the country.  Our Toyota Corolla was slipping and sliding all over the road.  Congregants patiently followed behind us in their pickups, ready to pull us out of the ditch.

Everyone apparently needs to buy multiple cars per person in your world, eh?

No, everyone can use a single car for all passenger transport if they choose. You are simply prohibited from using a heavy vehicle made for commercial purposes as a passenger vehicle. The only people that would buy those vehicles are either A) people engaged in a business activity, in which case the cost of ownership is simply part of doing business or B) people buying them for off road recreational purposes, which is their choice. Most people would never need bother themselves with it any more than they concern themselves today with not being able to take a semi-truck to Lowes on a class D license.

Again, if someone has a pickup for business purposes, then you're requiring that person to own two vehicles.  When a person goes into a business that requires a truck, they take that cost into account–but part of that accounting might be to trade in their other car.  A lot of my company's contractors are 22-year-old single guys who have zero reason to own a second vehicle in addition to their work truck.



Besides which, you didn't answer my question.  What would you have my family of five drive when we're in Mexico, leading a religious mission trip, on roads that are impassible in passenger cars?  It's not commercial activity.  It's not recreation.  It's just getting from A to B.  (Those pictures I posted earlier were taken on just such a trip.)

Their accounting would have to change, which happens all the time in light of new regulations, that is just how it goes. If that changes the cost structure that much then don't be a contractor, simple as that.
As to the Corolla, I driven one all over the country and never had an issue, sounds more like the driver was at fault than the car. Keep in mind that people drove sedans all over this country until 30 years ago, its not rocket science.

What you drive in Mexico has nothing to do with US regulation. Our laws apply here, and if you want to drive here you have to abide by them. Driving in other countries is not our problem and is not an appropriate way to make policy.

[HighwayStar]

Like any other road the forest service, BLM, etc. closes? With a gate? Seriously this is not rocket science, just gate saying this is as far as you go, feel free to get off your duff and walk if you want to enjoy nature past this point.

I do get off my duff plenty (I've climbed 20 of the 14,000 foot peak mountains in Colorado).  Maybe I should just walk from home instead so I get a "real adventure".

Chris

That's up to you, or you could drive a passenger vehicle to whatever the new trailhead is and live with that. But no amount of peak bagging is an excuse for needing to be able to drive that far into the wilderness. 

[JayhawkCO]

That's up to you, or you could drive a passenger vehicle to whatever the new trailhead is and live with that. But no amount of peak bagging is an excuse for needing to be able to drive that far into the wilderness. 

I think I'm out of food for this feeding. 

Chris

[kphoger]

Their accounting would have to change, which happens all the time in light of new regulations, that is just how it goes. If that changes the cost structure that much then don't be a contractor, simple as that.

Their work is barely profitable as it is, and hardly anyone stays anymore.  You just set up another impediment for no good reason.

As to the Corolla, I driven one all over the country and never had an issue, sounds more like the driver was at fault than the car. Keep in mind that people drove sedans all over this country until 30 years ago, its not rocket science.

So have I, bub.  By the way, that was more than 30 years ago.  No, it wasn't the driver's fault.  I've slipped and slid in a Corolla on those roads after a rain, myself.  Almost gotten stuck once or twice.  Don't pretend that a sedan is just as good as a truck when it comes to bad roads.  It isn't.

What you drive in Mexico has nothing to do with US regulation. Our laws apply here, and if you want to drive here you have to abide by them. Driving in other countries is not our problem and is not an appropriate way to make policy.

But how do you expect me to get there from here?

It's 700 miles from here to the border, then another 350 after that.  We can only afford to own one vehicle, and it's the evil SUV.  We traded in our minivan several years ago because we needed the off-road capability and high ground clearance.  Other members of the teams we lead ride in the vehicle with us.  A year ago, there were seven of us (our family plus two others) and we all did it in my family's SUV.