You Know What Really Grinds My Gears? Now with 3x more gears...

[calgarygeologist]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Noted so that all drivers don't complain about us rolling stop on bikes going forward (which we are in a much more superior position to do with our amazing visibility and situational awareness versus a vehicle).

Originally Posted by btimbit

I really stopped caring with bikes just because when I actually stopped to think about it, it takes so long for them to get going again that it really does make more sense for them to just slow down and treat it like a yield

There is impactful benefit for cars to not stop as well in terms of fuel consumption and emissions. Increased stops and starts is bad for the environment.

[getbak]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Maybe just a coincidence, but I've noticed a rise in the disregarded for road rules lately. Like some people seem to think that if they don't agree with a rule, they don't absolutely have to follow it.

The bridge that goes from the Zoo to Bridgeland has been under construction for the last year or so, and thus there is a no-turning sign onto Memorial. For most of the project, everyone followed along...but lately it seems like people have just decided that rule is too annoying, so no longer applies. I pass that bridge every day, and there is now a 50/50 chance that the person in front of me will turn illegally. I agree it's a bit of stupid rule there, but it's still against the law.

Same thing coming down the Edmonton Trail hill in the mornings, I see people making illegal turns into Bridgeland, despite it disrupting traffic and being potentially dangerous.

Same thing with turning into Crescent Heights during the afternoon rush hour from northbound Edmonton Trail. That road takes after its namesake.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Noted so that all drivers don't complain about us rolling stop on bikes going forward (which we are in a much more superior position to do with our amazing visibility and situational awareness versus a vehicle).

I think most drivers complain about bikes not even slowing down.

Originally Posted by Table 5

You've demonstrated exactly what I was talking about...people following the rules if/when they deem them worthy. I can see the argument for or against that sign (personally I think enough people turn there that it warrants waiting if need be), but it is still a No Left Turns sign, not a No-left-turns-unless-Pepsi-deems-it-cool sign.

I know I did. Though, it’s not what I deem “worthy” or “cool,” it’s literally whether the rule makes sense or not. Is the main point of a rule safety? or just compliance?

Just ask yourself the question: are you not making that turn because it isn’t safe and/or an inconvenience to others? or are you not making that turn because the sign tells you not to?

I think common sense and good driving supersedes some rules or customs. Sometimes it’s safer and more convenient for everyone to make that turn than to u-turn further along that route. I also completely understand why that sign exists and follow it under the conditions it was created for.

I take it you never ever go faster than the speed limit?

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Maybe just a coincidence, but I've noticed a rise in the disregarded for road rules lately. Like some people seem to think that if they don't agree with a rule, they don't absolutely have to follow it.

The bridge that goes from the Zoo to Bridgeland has been under construction for the last year or so, and thus there is a no-turning sign onto Memorial. For most of the project, everyone followed along...but lately it seems like people have just decided that rule is too annoying, so no longer applies. I pass that bridge every day, and there is now a 50/50 chance that the person in front of me will turn illegally. I agree it's a bit of stupid rule there, but it's still against the law.

Same thing coming down the Edmonton Trail hill in the mornings, I see people making illegal turns into Bridgeland, despite it disrupting traffic and being potentially dangerous.

If it’s clear to go I’m one of those people. No way am I going all the way around Bridgeland and back down Edmonton trail in rush traffic to get on Memorial because the city can’t figure out how to handle a small lane closure. I won’t block traffic to do it though.

[TrentCrimmIndependent]

People taking carts through clothing outlets.

Takes up the whole aisle width because it isnt wide to start with, and blocks foot traffic. And most times they have ~3 items in them, or nothing. They don't even need one. Limbs, that's what they're there for.

At the very least leave it at the end of the aisle and walk through. Make life a little easier for every one.

Seen too many moms blocking off men's sections aimlessly sifting through stuff, none of which they buy. Most of us guys already hate the experience. Let us swoop in, snatch up our socks or underwear and get out of there.

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by topfiverecords

If it’s clear to go I’m one of those people. No way am I going all the way around Bridgeland and back down Edmonton trail in rush traffic to get on Memorial because the city can’t figure out how to handle a small lane closure. I won’t block traffic to do it though.

The other issue is there is no indication that you cannot go WB Memorial until it is too late and you are at the no left turn sign. What they should do is have a sign showing the detour to WB Memorial and have people go through Bridgeland. Although I know most of the city pretty well, I didn't know you could go through Bridgeland to get there until I looked it up after the fact.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Table 5

Maybe just a coincidence, but I've noticed a rise in the disregarded for road rules lately. Like some people seem to think that if they don't agree with a rule, they don't absolutely have to follow it.

The bridge that goes from the Zoo to Bridgeland has been under construction for the last year or so, and thus there is a no-turning sign onto Memorial. For most of the project, everyone followed along...but lately it seems like people have just decided that rule is too annoying, so no longer applies. I pass that bridge every day, and there is now a 50/50 chance that the person in front of me will turn illegally. I agree it's a bit of stupid rule there, but it's still against the law.

Same thing coming down the Edmonton Trail hill in the mornings, I see people making illegal turns into Bridgeland, despite it disrupting traffic and being potentially dangerous.

I’m on team stupid laws are for stupid people.

The number of ridiculous red lights that should be flashing for 20/24 hrs means I will risk getting tickets by treating them like a stop sign.

[Fuzz]

I'm biking and need to cross 16th ave. There is a red light for me, and a large break in traffic both directions(6 lanes). Am I better to just go(breaking the law) or press the beg button, wait 2 minutes when traffic is coming from both ways, and stop a good 50-100 vehicles both directions? Or would you rather I just run the red? I experience this almost every morning due to light timing.

[btimbit]

I'll be honest, when I'm driving around at night, if there's nobody around every light is a 4 way stop

[Table 5]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

I know I did. Though, it’s not what I deem “worthy” or “cool,” it’s literally whether the rule makes sense or not. Is the main point of a rule safety? or just compliance?

Just ask yourself the question: are you not making that turn because it isn’t safe and/or an inconvenience to others? or are you not making that turn because the sign tells you not to?

I actually agree with you, I think there are a lot of stupid rules out there that don't really make sense...and if at some point if enough people break the rule, it probably means it's not a very good one.

This kind of stuff only really bothers me when the rule breaking effects others. Ie, a lot of times I am behind the people who want to take that turn AND are impeding traffic. Or the guys who turn illegally down Edmonton Trail, they often force people behind them to stop suddenly (which because of the grade, is on the dangerous side, especially in winter). Those guys get the horn.

I'm ok with breaking rules with the caveat that you gotta take responsibility for it if something goes wrong, and you don't impede others when doing so. Like people who can't jaywalk property. I'm all for jaywalking, but if you make cars slow down for you, then you're the ahole.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by btimbit

I'll be honest, when I'm driving around at night, if there's nobody around every light is a 4 way stop

I regularly treat one light in particular as a stop sign, because it’s entirely pointless. At another intersection, I jaywalk virtually every morning. I’m a rule follower for almost everything, but some of these lights and things are just pointless.

[timun]

What happened to City traffic management policies such that lights never switch to a night-time red and yellow flashing mode anymore? There used to be lots of them around where after midnight or whatever they'd switch to flashing yellows along the more 'major' direction of travel and flashing reds along the intersecting 'minor' roads. I don't know of a single one in the entire city that does that anymore.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by timun

What happened to City traffic management policies such that lights never switch to a night-time red and yellow flashing mode anymore? There used to be lots of them around where after midnight or whatever they'd switch to flashing yellows along the more 'major' direction of travel and flashing reds along the intersecting 'minor' roads. I don't know of a single one in the entire city that does that anymore.

I heard second hand that it was because of the ambiguity of what flashing red means. Is it a four way stop or a stop sign. This is determined by whether the cross traffic has flashing red or flashing yellow. So in one of the Manual updates they eliminated it as an option.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Oh we've got bigger problems with our level of driver education...

https://twitter.com/user/status/1646891578945069056

I think the better question is...why are there lights there at all?

That whole video there was not a single pedestrian, cyclist or crossing traffic that needed to be yielded to.

What is the point of putting lights there?

"We need to disrupt the primary flow of traffic on the off-chance that somebody needs to cross right at that particular intersection!"

[topfiverecords]

Originally Posted by GGG

I heard second hand that it was because of the ambiguity of what flashing red means. Is it a four way stop or a stop sign. This is determined by whether the cross traffic has flashing red or flashing yellow. So in one of the Manual updates they eliminated it as an option.

That video certainly proves that’s the right decision.

[Fuzz]

Or the video shows that if drivers encountered them more often, say when traffic is light and they avoid unnecessary stoppages, people might know how to handle them. If you only encounter them once every 5 years, then I'm not totally surprised some people don't treat them properly.

Same reason we need more traffic circles.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by Table 5

I actually agree with you, I think there are a lot of stupid rules out there that don't really make sense...and if at some point if enough people break the rule, it probably means it's not a very good one.

This kind of stuff only really bothers me when the rule breaking effects others. Ie, a lot of times I am behind the people who want to take that turn AND are impeding traffic. Or the guys who turn illegally down Edmonton Trail, they often force people behind them to stop suddenly (which because of the grade, is on the dangerous side, especially in winter). Those guys get the horn.

I'm ok with breaking rules with the caveat that you gotta take responsibility for it if something goes wrong, and you don't impede others when doing so. Like people who can't jaywalk property. I'm all for jaywalking, but if you make cars slow down for you, then you're the ahole.

100% we’re on the same page then. Totally valid gear grinder.

There is basically no excuse for people who break rules that then create dangerous situations or impede others/force others to adapt to them.

Every once in a while I catch people crossing memorial at the peace bridge, which is fine, whatever, but it drive me nuts when people then stop for them.

It would also drive me crazy to be stuck behind someone stopped waiting to turn at that zoo bridge turn even though I make that turn whenever I can.

[timun]

Originally Posted by GGG

I heard second hand that it was because of the ambiguity of what flashing red means. Is it a four way stop or a stop sign. This is determined by whether the cross traffic has flashing red or flashing yellow. So in one of the Manual updates they eliminated it as an option.

I'm kind of at a loss as to how that's an issue. Or, rather, what the issue is. If you face a flashing red, you treat it as a stop sign and come to a full stop, and don't proceed unless it's safe to do so. I guess what you're trying to say is people on the 'minor' road would be unclear whether the people on the 'major' road (with flashing yellows) had to also stop, so... people would get hit if they moved away from a flashing red on the assumption the cross traffic also had a flashing red?

I never found this an issue, as most signalized intersections are big enough that you can see and tell what colour the cross-traffic's signal is. That's gotta be half the reason we put our traffic signals on the opposite side of the intersection from the stop lines, whereas e.g. in the UK they put them right at the curb you're intended to stop at.

Or maybe you're thinking I meant these things?



There used to be a few in Sunalta; 12th Ave and 15th had one, I know, with 12th Ave's direction flashing yellow and 15th Street's flashing red. I really mean just regular three-colour signals, not those single-colour flashing beacons.

[calgarygeologist]

Received an email today from the CEO with the subject reading "Mental Health Day - April 21, 2023" and I got excited thinking we were getting a bonus day off/long weekend so that we can all recharge or look after our mental health and well being. Nope, we are just having some sort of meeting/presentation about mental health. It might make better sense to host this stuff on "World Mental Health Day" which apparently is October 10.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by timun

I'm kind of at a loss as to how that's an issue. Or, rather, what the issue is. If you face a flashing red, you treat it as a stop sign and come to a full stop, and don't proceed unless it's safe to do so. I guess what you're trying to say is people on the 'minor' road would be unclear whether the people on the 'major' road (with flashing yellows) had to also stop, so... people would get hit if they moved away from a flashing red on the assumption the cross traffic also had a flashing red?

I never found this an issue, as most signalized intersections are big enough that you can see and tell what colour the cross-traffic's signal is. That's gotta be half the reason we put our traffic signals on the opposite side of the intersection from the stop lines, whereas e.g. in the UK they put them right at the curb you're intended to stop at.

Or maybe you're thinking I meant these things?



There used to be a few in Sunalta; 12th Ave and 15th had one, I know, with 12th Ave's direction flashing yellow and 15th Street's flashing red. I really mean just regular three-colour signals, not those single-colour flashing beacons.

Correct, if people assume it was a four way stop they get smoked by the people on the major road. I don’t agree it’s a concern but I heard this from a guy who does traffic design for one of the larger consulting companies. Not sure of accuracy though.