TortosaGuy
Posts:681
 | | 02/14/2008 11:43 AM |
 Alert | wow they finally got it up and working....now lets see how long it takes for the first rear end collision because people arent paying attention and driving too fast =) | |
*formerly known as inyrfce2*
Senior Member
Posts: 797
Joined: Dec 2006 | |
|
|
beowulf
Posts:427
| | 02/14/2008 11:56 AM |
Alert | I would say today  I am usually in lala land by the time I get that far into my trip home good thing I have a big truck | | | |
|
|
|
M&M
Posts:84
| | 02/14/2008 3:34 PM |
Alert | | I will start a prayer now! I hope the PD and Fire Dept are ready for a call out! | | | |
|
|
|
Jason
Posts:3378
| | 02/14/2008 5:25 PM |
Alert | | Too fast...Try too slow. I went through today at 45 MPH because some truck decided to pace the right lane. On the whole, I didn't get above 65 except for 1/4 mile and most of the trip was spent at 55-60. I don't believe this "too fast" myth during rush hour anymore. | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
|
|
caveman
Posts:1020
| | 02/14/2008 5:45 PM |
Alert | | Jason "too fast" during rush hour is a myth. This light will only cause more accidents and hinder traffic. | | | |
|
|
|
GilaGuy
Posts:789
| | 02/14/2008 11:55 PM |
Alert | Posted By M&M on 02/14/2008 3:34 PM
I will start a prayer now! I hope the PD and Fire Dept are ready for a call out! Well, at least it'd be Gila River Fire and PD, not our guys. Our guys deserve a break every now and then.  | | | |
|
|
 |
Jason
Posts:3378
| | 02/15/2008 9:28 AM |
Alert | Posted By caveman on 02/14/2008 5:45 PM
Jason "too fast" during rush hour is a myth.
That's what I said.
| |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
|
|
geewiz
Posts:279
| | 02/15/2008 9:29 AM |
Alert | | It's about time makes waiting to turn left from Casa Blanca rd much easier, safer and faster. | | | |
|
|
|
Jason
Posts:3378
| | 02/15/2008 9:33 AM |
Alert | | What I don't understand is that if ADOT can figure out to only put in a left turn on arrow light there, why can't they do the same for intersections in the city where a left turn must be made blindly? | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
|
|
TortosaGuy
Posts:681
| | 02/15/2008 8:21 PM |
Alert | | now they need a light at maricopa rd and the 347....very dangerous there | |
*formerly known as inyrfce2*
Senior Member
Posts: 797
Joined: Dec 2006 | |
|
|
|
Jason
Posts:3378
| | 02/15/2008 8:38 PM |
Alert | Posted By TortosaGuy on 02/15/2008 8:21 PM
now they need a light at maricopa rd and the 347....very dangerous there
NO!!!!!! What they need is to eliminate the intersection. Lights tend to increase accidents.
| |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
|
|
TortosaGuy
Posts:681
| | 02/16/2008 2:17 PM |
Alert | | true lights increase accidents...but since they wont get rid of the intersection....a light would help with those who like to cut onto the 347 without sufficient time causing people to slam on their breaks....especially the right lane there...or they could add an acceleration lane....might be cheaper too | |
*formerly known as inyrfce2*
Senior Member
Posts: 797
Joined: Dec 2006 | |
|
|
|
Jason
Posts:3378
| | 02/16/2008 10:32 PM |
Alert | | They had originally planned an acceleration lane, as well as straightening out the lane from Maricopa Rd so it didn't even curve. They also planned to stop left turns onto Maricopa Rd. from 347. If they just implemented these changes, it would solve the problem. | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
|
|
TortosaGuy
Posts:681
| | 02/17/2008 8:43 AM |
Alert | | amen! | |
*formerly known as inyrfce2*
Senior Member
Posts: 797
Joined: Dec 2006 | |
|
|
|
GilaGuy
Posts:789
| | 02/17/2008 7:06 PM |
Alert | Posted By Jason on 02/15/2008 9:33 AM
What I don't understand is that if ADOT can figure out to only put in a left turn on arrow light there, why can't they do the same for intersections in the city where a left turn must be made blindly? Probably because prohibitive left turn arrows are a needless hassle. Most folks are adult enough to know when it is, and when it is not appropriate to turn left. Having that red arrow prohibit you from making your turn when there's nobody around for three miles in any direction is a ridiculous annoyance. | | | |
|
|
|
Jason
Posts:3378
| | 02/17/2008 7:11 PM |
Alert | Posted By GilaGuy on 02/17/2008 7:06 PM Posted By Jason on 02/15/2008 9:33 AM
What I don't understand is that if ADOT can figure out to only put in a left turn on arrow light there, why can't they do the same for intersections in the city where a left turn must be made blindly? Probably because prohibitive left turn arrows are a needless hassle. Most folks are adult enough to know when it is, and when it is not appropriate to turn left. Having that red arrow prohibit you from making your turn when there's nobody around for three miles in any direction is a ridiculous annoyance.
Then they could time it so that it switches to green arrow only time during rush hour. The fact is they did not design the intersection so that any adult (ridiculously lifted trucks excepted) can see during rush hour. It's impossible. Much like the entrance ramp metering systems that are only operational during specific hours they could time it for red/green arrow only during rush hour. It's the only safe solution that prevents the road rage that happens now. I will not enter the intersection because of the dozen or so times that, when the light goes red and I start my turn someone still blows through. I sit behind the line and I get angry gestures from the cars behind me. | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
|
|
GilaGuy
Posts:789
| | 02/17/2008 7:17 PM |
Alert | Posted By Jason on 02/17/2008 7:11 PM I will not enter the intersection because of the dozen or so times that, when the light goes red and I start my turn someone still blows through. I sit behind the line and I get angry gestures from the cars behind me. The heck with them. You are doing what you need to do to prevent an accident, which would result in even further delays for those people giving you the gestures. There is a vast gulf of difference between "protective" left turn signals and "prohibitive" left turn signals. The former make far more sense than the latter, because they allow motorists to turn left when the roadway is clear, while also allowing them a special time to do so when all other traffic has been halted. Prohibitive signals do not afford that, they offer only a tiny window of time during each cycle wherein a driver is allowed to complete the turn. Meanwhile, they prevent the driver from making one while there is potentially no traffic in either direction. It's a mindless overcontrol of traffic flow that does little more than waste gasoline. | | | |
|
|
|
geewiz
Posts:279
| | 02/17/2008 8:13 PM |
Alert | | They need to get rid of one of lanes headed south bound from Queen creek and I 10 so the traffic from Maricopa road can just keep going and not have to stop and there is were the second south bound lane should start. | | | |
|
|
|
Jason
Posts:3378
| | 02/18/2008 2:44 PM |
Alert | The heck with them. You are doing what you need to do to prevent an accident, which would result in even further delays for those people giving you the gestures.
Easier said than done, after one has come up and pounded on your window for delaying them.
I still wait, but I always wonder if I'm pissing off the wrong person.
It's a mindless overcontrol of traffic flow that does little more than waste gasoline.
Normally, I'd agree with you. However during rush hour there is no way to make the turn safely. So that's why I'm thinking lights that switch to left-on-green-arrow-only during rush hour are a good solution, short of offsetting the turn lanes. | |
Joined: Jul 2005 | |
|
|
|
movinonup
Posts:120
| | 02/18/2008 2:54 PM |
Alert | Posted By Jason on 02/16/2008 10:32 PM
They had originally planned an acceleration lane, as well as straightening out the lane from Maricopa Rd so it didn't even curve. They also planned to stop left turns onto Maricopa Rd. from 347. If they just implemented these changes, it would solve the problem.
Do you have proof of these plans? I think they're just rumors... I feel someone will have to die on that road that is famous enough to get the attention it needs.
| | | |
|
|
|