Submitted by SpyCats t3_11uwgpr in CambridgeMA
Comments
asswipesayswha t1_jcralcb wrote
Other options include speed bumps
CJYP t1_jcrd5za wrote
Why not both?
SparkDBowles t1_jcte7o3 wrote
No. Because ambulances and other first responder vehicles.
asswipesayswha t1_jcvrb17 wrote
I guess yeah it is kind of a main artery
eray71 t1_jcswe17 wrote
Please not speed bumps those of us with low cars and/or work trucks can’t get over them easily and have to cross at an angle, which is not ideal
terminal_prognosis t1_jcu1s07 wrote
Never seen a low-slung work truck? What sort of work trucks have lower ground clearance than a car?
As for cars, if you lower your car and now it can't get around, I think that's on you. They put violent speed bumps in Somerville and while people whine about them all the time, the only people I've ever seen scraping their cars were going way too fast. Ironically, weirdly often in Priuses, though friends who driver Priuses say they have zero problems because they slow down for the bumps.
eray71 t1_jcujmie wrote
For the work truck it’s not the height, it’s that my Tools get flung around and slam into each other! You’ll notice most folks, such as myself, drive really slowly in our tool trucks cuz large potholes and other road bumps can not only make a mess, but break tools! Speed bumps are brutal for the tools slamming into each other and ladders sliding around. It’s not like they will fall off, it’s just loud, unpleasant, and expensive. And i don’t mean to sound like they shouldn’t change intersections where people are getting hurt, I just think removing vision obscuring items should happen way before speed bumps!
And the other car is a bone stock 996 that can’t make it over them
tamirabeth t1_jcu40d4 wrote
I have a low to the ground car and only have issues when I'm going too fast. I recommend slowing down.
eray71 t1_jcuj8nl wrote
It’s not the speed, it’s the splitter. It’s a bone stock 996 that can’t make it over the ones in Sommerville unless I go diagonally.
that_dogs_wilin t1_jd2vl5n wrote
Another good option when available is a mini roundabout, basically a raised circle in the middle, so it's impossible to go straight through.
tamirabeth t1_jd34ma8 wrote
College Ave at Davis has these, they're great
that_dogs_wilin t1_jd43cnp wrote
hmm I'm curious, where? I'm assuming you don't mean powderhouse sq
tamirabeth t1_jd4dzr6 wrote
There's one down the street towards Davis
terminal_prognosis t1_jcu25ta wrote
Ugh, no, traffic calming should not be by creating endless stop-and-start, creating extra noise and pollution. Other forms of traffic calming are superior to adding yet more of the most idiotic traffic control layout known to man (that almost the entire rest of the world rightly shuns).
tamirabeth t1_jcu4a0k wrote
The rest of the world shuns stop signs?
terminal_prognosis t1_jcu4ozr wrote
In most countries stop signs are quite rare - like you can go days without seeing one, so kind of, yes.
But I was talking about all-way stops, which are only in N. America, Liberia, and S. Africa, because they are inefficient and unhelpful.
tamirabeth t1_jcu5lrk wrote
I mean...
> for use at low traffic-volume locations, the arrangement is common in the United States, Canada, Mexico, South Africa, and Liberia, as well as in a number of, usually rural, locations in Australia where visibility on the junction approaches is particularly poor.
is pretty dead on for Cambridge.
And I noticed you missed a couple of countries....
We also don't have many roundabouts, and never will have as many as other countries where they're more common. This doesn't seem like a fair comparison when the roads are completely different in other countries.
terminal_prognosis t1_jcu5x87 wrote
If we're going to quote, how about the disadvantages:
> the Handbook of Road Safety Measures recommends that four-way stops are best used between minor roads away from urbanized areas
and
> Some of the disadvantages associated with all-way stops are: > > * Increased emissions of hydrocarbons.[9]: 431–433 > * Increased average delay.[9]: 430 > * Increased wear on vehicle brakes > * Discouraging bicycling.[10]
tamirabeth t1_jcu6ixj wrote
Wow. So many major disadvantages to prioritizing safety. /s--clearly
CJYP t1_jd0f7hi wrote
I bet the handbook would recommend a traffic signal for this purpose. Might work a bit better than a stop sign.
sckuzzle t1_jcqo83d wrote
> and the blind turns are nerve-wracking.
Perhaps first we should fix these turns so that there are no blind turns...?
tamirabeth t1_jcqognc wrote
You'd have to level the entire city.
sckuzzle t1_jcqt4gj wrote
Marking (and enforcing) 10 yards of "no parking" before / after every intersection would work wonders. It's mostly the cars that block vision.
tamirabeth t1_jcqtntt wrote
It's the enforcing that seems to be the issue.
CJYP t1_jcrdbuw wrote
You could enforce it by widening the sidewalk on those turns so that it's physically impossible to park there. That seems to be the preferred solution for intersections, anyway. It does cost money though. May not be practical immediately.
[deleted] t1_jcqgs8l wrote
[deleted]
negroni2 t1_jcqcyl2 wrote
You say that, but you don't actually want that.
tamirabeth t1_jcqdh2g wrote
No, I do. Especially since I treat most as 4 ways anyway. There are too many chances in those dense neighborhoods, and people need forced to change.
blackdynomitesnewbag t1_jctzwen wrote
Giving up the right of way by treating a two way stop as a four-way stop can be confusing to other drivers and it’s not recommended. One of the best things you can do as a driver is be predictable.
negroni2 t1_jcqlotc wrote
No, you don't. If you drive at all in Cambridge, you drive through dozens of intersections on streets with only two stop signs for the right and left sides every day. What you're saying is dishonest and quite frankly wrong. You don't optimize a city by arbitrarily putting 4 way stops at every single intersection.
tamirabeth t1_jcqojb9 wrote
Please continue to tell me what I think and do. I LOVE that.
Edit to add:
What are you talking about with optimizing a city? Optimizing for who? I drive daily and hate it, wishing we could all go car-less. Pedestrians and others on the road (like other drivers!) shouldn't be put in danger because you want to save 0.4 seconds on your commute.
It seems to me that an "optimized city" would prefer to prioritize public safety over your desire to save that 0.4 seconds.
ftmthrow t1_jcre4en wrote
I lived a block away for 9.5 years and heard screeching brakes and honking all day every day, plus several T-bone accidents. Some were so bad that they’d have to close the street. The city has known about that intersection and never acted — I wrote on the SeeClickFix site about it numerous times and they responded that they “moved the stop sign further up,” which I don’t think they ever did. Glad they’re finally doing something about it, but man, it took a fucking long time.
CriticalTransit t1_jcs5g3w wrote
Am I the only one questioning why they have to advertise it to pedestrians?
becausefrog t1_jcs9663 wrote
Because we're the ones who get hit.
Drivers on Franklin have their view obstructed by the Cosmic Moose and they don't stop until they clear it if at all, which is far too often too late for the pedestrians they didn't see. They are so busy looking past the fence to see oncoming traffic beyond it that they completely ignore the crosswalk.
People in the neighborhood both drive and walk. Where else should they put the sign?
IntelligentCicada363 t1_jctbyza wrote
More stop signs that the drivers here will ignore, hurray!
cptninc t1_jd826sn wrote
Great. More stop signs for police to completely ignore.
tamirabeth t1_jcqckof wrote
Most, if not all, intersections on residential streets need to be 4 way stops. People blow through streets going way too fast, and the blind turns are nerve-wracking.