[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by photo1902

flaunting the hp of your car to get you out of trouble. Very mature.

No, using the HP of the vehicle to avoid an accident, when appropriate. You assume too much

[photo1902]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

No, using the HP of the vehicle to avoid an accident, when appropriate. You assume too much

Meet kettle. We will agree to disagree.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by photo1902

Meet kettle. We will agree to disagree.

No disagreement at all. Everyone should drive safe and be completely aware of their surroundings at all times. If you do this, making a left turn across 44 or 466A is NOT a problem. We don't need more red arrows and traffic lights to foul up traffic any further. Again, consider the turn if there was no light there, like many on 44 and 301. You wait for a safe opening, and then make your turn. Driving 101. The red arrow is just on a timer--it cannot evaluate if traffic is there or not, and cannot exercise judgment

[Polar Bear]

Originally Posted by villagetinker

I had suggested before that the LEFT turn lanes for 466 and 466a be moved to the LEFT, take out some or all of the flowers, and put the left turn lane where it should be. Take a look at he NEW left turn lane on 441 to 466a, it is a full lane width to the left, there is a cross hatched lane to the right. Great visibility.

I think moving the left turn lanes is the ultimate and correct solution. While I agree that RED arrows will help, they will not help the person that entered the intersection...

[photo1902]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

No disagreement at all. Everyone should drive safe and be completely aware of their surroundings at all times. If you do this, making a left turn across 44 or 466A is NOT a problem. We don't need more red arrows and traffic lights to foul up traffic any further. Again, consider the turn if there was no light there, like many on 44 and 301. You wait for a safe opening, and then make your turn. Driving 101. The red arrow is just on a timer--it cannot evaluate if traffic is there or not, and cannot exercise judgment

Not all intersections are the same. When vehicles are in the turn lanes of 466A, you cannot adequately see traffic coming straight through. Certainly not enough to risk saving you apparently precious minutes in your commute by making the left turn. Entering the intersection just to wait for the light to change so you can make the turn is absurd. But I'm not going to change your mind, so there's no use discussing it. Turn arrows won't foul up traffic to the point of congestion. It's a preposterous statement in this area. My opinion is that in certain intersections, turn arrows need to be implemented.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by photo1902

Not all intersections are the same. When vehicles are in the turn lanes of 466A, you cannot adequately see traffic coming straight through. Certainly not enough to risk saving you apparently precious minutes in your commute by making the left turn. Entering the intersection just to wait for the light to change so you can make the turn is absurd. But I'm not going to change your mind, so there's no use discussing it. Turn arrows won't foul up traffic to the point of congestion. It's a preposterous statement in this area. My opinion is that in certain intersections, turn arrows need to be implemented.

OK, let's dance.
"Not all intersections are the same"---quite obvious. When an intersection is busy enough it earns a traffic light. Some earn turn arrows.

"When vehicles are in the turn lanes of 466A, you cannot adequately see traffic coming straight through."---Disagree, and I drive it frequently--do you? But I agree with Village Thinker, moving the left turn lane over would improve visibility for everyone, since some people seem to have a problem with it.

"Entering the intersection just to wait for the light to change so you can make the turn is absurd."----Don't remember saying THAT. But if I am the first car in line to make a left, I will pull up to the center line of the cross road, since I will turn on yellow if needed. Do you stay back at the end of the turn lane? If so, and since you state you cannot see what is coming, you then sit there as the light turns red? That is essentially a self imposed red turn arrow, except that you are imposing it on everyone behind you as well.

"But I'm not going to change your mind, so there's no use discussing it."--actually, if you make a logical argument, you might. So far, it's an epic fail.

"Turn arrows won't foul up traffic to the point of congestion. It's a preposterous statement in this area."---Really? People constantly are complaining about traffic, especially this time of year. So you think making a line of cars stop and wait 3 minutes when they might very well have been on their way does not add to congestion? Please rethink that one.

"My opinion is that in certain intersections, turn arrows need to be implemented"---best statement in your post, since you are entitled to your opinion. But overall, I'll give you a 3 on a scale of 10. Maybe we should waltz instead of tango

[photo1902]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

OK, let's dance.
"Not all intersections are the same"---quite obvious. When an intersection is busy enough it earns a traffic light. Some earn turn arrows.

"When vehicles are in the turn lanes of 466A, you cannot adequately see traffic coming straight through."---Disagree, and I drive it frequently--do you? But I agree with Village Thinker, moving the left turn lane over would improve visibility for everyone, since some people seem to have a problem with it.

"Entering the intersection just to wait for the light to change so you can make the turn is absurd."----Don't remember saying THAT. But if I am the first car in line to make a left, I will pull up to the center line of the cross road, since I will turn on yellow if needed. Do you stay back at the end of the turn lane? If so, and since you state you cannot see what is coming, you then sit there as the light turns red? That is essentially a self imposed red turn arrow, except that you are imposing it on everyone behind you as well.

"But I'm not going to change your mind, so there's no use discussing it."--actually, if you make a logical argument, you might. So far, it's an epic fail.

"Turn arrows won't foul up traffic to the point of congestion. It's a preposterous statement in this area."---Really? People constantly are complaining about traffic, especially this time of year. So you think making a line of cars stop and wait 3 minutes when they might very well have been on their way does not add to congestion? Please rethink that one.

"My opinion is that in certain intersections, turn arrows need to be implemented"---best statement in your post, since you are entitled to your opinion. But overall, I'll give you a 3 on a scale of 10. Maybe we should waltz instead of tango

You've got some serious issues. But hey, do what you need to do to save that extra 3 minutes of your time.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by photo1902

You've got some serious issues. But hey, do what you need to do to save that extra 3 minutes of your time.

I have serious issues??? Now that's funny I made a cogent argument, refuting your post point by point, and THAT'S your response??? It is reminiscent of those that lose a political argument, then just like the first graders that they are, call the winner names.

Back on topic, again, you posted
"Turn arrows won't foul up traffic to the point of congestion. It's a preposterous statement in this area."---Do you live in a vacuum??? It should be 100% obvious that whenever you plant vehicles on a road that are doing nothing, it increases congestion. What do you think is happening in the turn lane behind you as you sit at a red arrow? Easy answer---it backs up further and further until the last cars have their rear ends hanging out stopped in the left lane of the highway. How safe do you thin THAT is? You must have implicit trust that the cars approaching at 45+ mph are paying attention! And don't tell me it doesn't happen, because it just happened to me last week on 466 waiting to turn south on Morse. Even with my flashers on, I had a reasonable degree of concern that some bozo would be texting or daydreaming and run right into me. There is no red arrow at that intersection, and yet there were about 25 cars overflowing the left turn lane. Add a red arrow and now you have how many???? And how many more intersections will now experience this problem? Or do you still think that contention is "preposterous"??? How would you deal with the new widespread turn lane back ups---increase the green arrow time? That of course just backs up the traffic going straight even further. You see, cause and effect is a relatively simple principle. And don't tell me this paragraph is just "my opinion", because it is EXACTLY what would happen, it is inevitable just on the logistics alone.
So if the mature, logical, coherent presentation above doesn't at least make you reconsider, at least do me 2 favors.
1) refrain from calling other posters names when you lose an argument
2) Please do not get ahead of me in a left hand turn lane

[photo1902]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

I have serious issues??? Now that's funny I made a cogent argument, refuting your post point by point, and THAT'S your response??? It is reminiscent of those that lose a political argument, then just like the first graders that they are, call the winner names.

Back on topic, again, you posted
"Turn arrows won't foul up traffic to the point of congestion. It's a preposterous statement in this area."---Do you live in a vacuum??? It should be 100% obvious that whenever you plant vehicles on a road that are doing nothing, it increases congestion. What do you think is happening in the turn lane behind you as you sit at a red arrow? Easy answer---it backs up further and further until the last cars have their rear ends hanging out stopped in the left lane of the highway. How safe do you thin THAT is? You must have implicit trust that the cars approaching at 45+ mph are paying attention! And don't tell me it doesn't happen, because it just happened to me last week on 466 waiting to turn south on Morse. Even with my flashers on, I had a reasonable degree of concern that some bozo would be texting or daydreaming and run right into me. There is no red arrow at that intersection, and yet there were about 25 cars overflowing the left turn lane. Add a red arrow and now you have how many???? And how many more intersections will now experience this problem? Or do you still think that contention is "preposterous"??? How would you deal with the new widespread turn lane back ups---increase the green arrow time? That of course just backs up the traffic going straight even further. You see, cause and effect is a relatively simple principle. And don't tell me this paragraph is just "my opinion", because it is EXACTLY what would happen, it is inevitable just on the logistics alone.
So if the mature, logical, coherent presentation above doesn't at least make you reconsider, at least do me 2 favors.
1) refrain from calling other posters names when you lose an argument
2) Please do not get ahead of me in a left hand turn lane

Proved my point. Case closed. Have a great day!

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by photo1902

Proved my point. Case closed. Have a great day!

Actually, you just proved my point. If you are able to make a logical counterargument, I'm all ears. Otherwise, just concede graciously and have a great day as well.

[Challenger]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

OK, let's dance.
"Not all intersections are the same"---quite obvious. When an intersection is busy enough it earns a traffic light. Some earn turn arrows.

"When vehicles are in the turn lanes of 466A, you cannot adequately see traffic coming straight through."---Disagree, and I drive it frequently--do you? But I agree with Village Thinker, moving the left turn lane over would improve visibility for everyone, since some people seem to have a problem with it.

"Entering the intersection just to wait for the light to change so you can make the turn is absurd."----Don't remember saying THAT. But if I am the first car in line to make a left, I will pull up to the center line of the cross road, since I will turn on yellow if needed. Do you stay back at the end of the turn lane? If so, and since you state you cannot see what is coming, you then sit there as the light turns red? That is essentially a self imposed red turn arrow, except that you are imposing it on everyone behind you as well.

"But I'm not going to change your mind, so there's no use discussing it."--actually, if you make a logical argument, you might. So far, it's an epic fail.

"Turn arrows won't foul up traffic to the point of congestion. It's a preposterous statement in this area."---Really? People constantly are complaining about traffic, especially this time of year. So you think making a line of cars stop and wait 3 minutes when they might very well have been on their way does not add to congestion? Please rethink that one.

"My opinion is that in certain intersections, turn arrows need to be implemented"---best statement in your post, since you are entitled to your opinion. But overall, I'll give you a 3 on a scale of 10. Maybe we should waltz instead of tango

Written by someone who knows how to drive. I would concur!!!

[photo1902]

Originally Posted by golfing eagles

Actually, you just proved my point. If you are able to make a logical counterargument, I'm all ears. Otherwise, just concede graciously and have a great day as well.

I don't need to justify my opinion to you. I feel certain intersections need to be controlled by traffic arrows. My opinion, yours is different. Big deal.

[outlaw]

Originally Posted by Bogie Shooter

I think what they did was a big improvement over the way it was. Their conclusion was to put in a roundabout in the future. Now that would be crazy................

It's pretty bad. Crossing 301 at 472, especially at night, one could easily enter the 301 turn lane. There are no "do not enter" signs at these turn lanes. And I don't recall any "right turn only" signs on 472. The turn lanes are perfectly lined up with 472, appearing to be a staging area to cross 301. Worst design I have ever encountered imho.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by photo1902

I don't need to justify my opinion to you. I feel certain intersections need to be controlled by traffic arrows. My opinion, yours is different. Big deal.

No big deal at all. My point was simply that adding those "controls' may have unintended consequences, and that by making the turn safer, you may make the end of the turn line less safe. I think you may have misunderstood my original point, and perhaps I worded it poorly. I believe you took my post to advocate unsafe turns to save a few minutes. Far from it. Each time you approach these turns is a bit different, and the driver needs to exercise judgment and an awareness of his surroundings.
Let me use turning left on BV from heading west on 466A as an example:
I can see the light from over a mile away--this gives me a gestalt on whether the light will turn when or shortly after I arrive. If it is obvious that it is going to turn red, I even slow down a bit , let it change and wait for the arrow. As I approach the turn lane, even before entering it, I am observing and evaluating the traffic flow in the other direction. I know in advance if this is going to be an easy turn or near impossible, again , in the latter case, I stop short of the intersection and wait for the arrow. If the traffic in the other direction is light, I will pull up to the center line of the intersection, since I will be able to turn, and only rarely do I have to turn on yellow since I know what is coming in the other direction. Also, never turn your wheels left until you start to turn, otherwise you run the risk that a distracted driver will rear end you and push your car into the path of oncoming traffic. Even as I'm driving along 466A, I avoid riding side by side with another car--they are too unpredictable and there is very little reaction time if they do something stupid. I've been driving for 45 years and have never been in an accident BECAUSE I am aware of my surroundings, despite driving in NYC and Long Island most of those years.

[Walter123]

[QUOTE=golfing eagles;1188555]O
"Entering the intersection just to wait for the light to change so you can make the turn is absurd."----Don't remember saying THAT. But if I am the first car in line to make a left, I will pull up to the center line of the cross road, since I will turn on yellow if needed. Do you stay back at the end of the turn lane? If so, and since you state you cannot see what is coming, you then sit there as the light turns red? That is essentially a self imposed red turn arrow, except that you are imposing it on everyone behind you as well.

GE, I agree with most of what you say except that I think that it's against the law to wait in the middle of the intersection to make a left turn. I think the law states you cannot block the intersection. Please correct me if I am wrong.