Ramp Traffic Lights And Variable Speed Limits On 465…

[DoggyDaddy]

And they miss the point. So we go from congested 465, to semi-congested 465 with traffic snarls at the on ramp intersections. Imagine wanting to turn left to enter 465, but you cant because the ramp is backed up.

That Emerson/465 interchange is a major Charlie Foxtrot as it is.

 

[Ingomike]

Do bicycles have to acknowledge the lights? Asking for a friend.

Speaking of that topic, I recently saw a street sign at a stop light that said

Stop Line

Except for bicycles

 

[wtburnette]

Variable speed limits? There are already 2 speeds on 465, go like he** is trying to catch you or turtle. It's already variable!
Metered on ramps? How do you meter the I have to get there now mentality? Gates?
Minneapolis/St Paul has traffic lights some of their on ramps now, not impressed with how they work. If you have seen that in action it can cause many more problems than it solves!
Common courtesy and common sense work much better, now if we could just find either in the current stock of drivers (seems to have gone the way of 154 genders).

The Twin Cities must have put them back, because they had removed them back in 2005 or so. I moved to Minnesota in 1998 and they had them everywhere in the Twin Cities area. They don't work. They are a horrid idea. I celebrated my butt off when they removed them and I can honestly say that traffic got much better after they were removed. Since Minnesota has gone even more insane Left than previously, I'm not surprised they put them back.

 

[Cameramonkey]

Just more proof they love control. “You will wait for my permission to enter the freeway, peasant”

 

[xwing]

Another bad idea to make traffic even worse. How about instead they simply build roads to last (very possible with available alternate materials) so that they aren't under construction all the time? Instead, the government spends all their money on union labor for road crews to turn expressways into parking lots by closing lanes.

 

[Chewie]

The Twin Cities must have put them back, because they had removed them back in 2005 or so. I moved to Minnesota in 1998 and they had them everywhere in the Twin Cities area. They don't work. They are a horrid idea. I celebrated my butt off when they removed them and I can honestly say that traffic got much better after they were removed. Since Minnesota has gone even more insane Left than previously, I'm not surprised they put them back.

I left MN around 98 and didn't know they took them out. Taking them out was the smart move, so I would guess they probably have put them back since politicians are all knowing (in their own minds).

 

[jkaetz]

And they miss the point. So we go from congested 465, to semi-congested 465 with traffic snarls at the on ramp intersections. Imagine wanting to turn left to enter 465, but you cant because the ramp is backed up.

Yes I'd love to see the traffic light logic. If the queue line is full does it stop metering to try and clear the surface road intersection? What happens when the interstate is a parking lot and cars still want to merge?


Variable speed limits have never made sense to me. Speed limits are naturally reduced when traffic is heavy because no one can go faster. The posted speed limit could be 80 but you're still only going to be driving 35 when the traffic is backed up at rush hour. Attempting to reduce it in advance isn't going to solve a supply & demand based problem.

 

[two70]

What could possibly go wrong with bunching traffic trying to enter 465 up even more than normal and ensuring that they'll likely have a speed deficit when they are finally blessed with a chance to merge?

Also, it makes perfect sense that such a brilliant and foolproof plan to reduce traffic backups and jams would be first implemented in the quadrant of 465 that has the lightest traffic load.

 

[Leadeye]

Whole system sounds expensive and stylish.

Always follow the money

 

[Tactically Fat]

These systems are used successfully in other metropolitan areas. There is no reason to think they cannot also be used successfully here.

These aren't new things. Not new ideas. New to here yes. But not new.

Lots of INGOers are apparently fully aboard the "new = bad" train. Gonna start yelling at clouds next? Sheesh.

Most of y'all would complain about being hanged with new rope.

 

[Ingomike]

These systems are used successfully in other metropolitan areas. There is no reason to think they cannot also be used successfully here.

These aren't new things. Not new ideas. New to here yes. But not new.

Lots of INGOers are apparently fully aboard the "new = bad" train. Gonna start yelling at clouds next? Sheesh.

Most of y'all would complain about being hanged with new rope.

I believe the fact is most of us support fixing the problem rather than wasting money on temporary solutions at best…

 

[Tactically Fat]

I believe the fact is most of us support fixing the problem rather than wasting money on temporary solutions at best…

This *is* an attempt to fix the problem.

No one here is a traffic engineer of any sort. Let the actual experts deal with their subject area of expertise.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

This *is* an attempt to fix the problem.

No one here is a traffic engineer of any sort. Let the actual experts deal with their subject area of expertise.

Well, after seeing them make a total mess out of their previous efforts, why would we? These are the same people that thought "collector feeder" ramps were a good idea. Having traffic that is gaining speed merge with traffic that is losing speed... yeah, what could go wrong?

 

[wtburnette]

These systems are used successfully in other metropolitan areas. There is no reason to think they cannot also be used successfully here.

These aren't new things. Not new ideas. New to here yes. But not new.

Lots of INGOers are apparently fully aboard the "new = bad" train. Gonna start yelling at clouds next? Sheesh.

Most of y'all would complain about being hanged with new rope.

I lived and commuted in an area that had these for years and I can honestly say these are crap. The biggest thing I can remember from my time in Minnesota is when these were removed and traffic improved dramatically.

 

[Tactically Fat]

Well, after seeing them make a total mess out of their previous efforts, why would we? These are the same people that thought "collector feeder" ramps were a good idea. Having traffic that is gaining speed merge with traffic that is losing speed... yeah, what could go wrong?

Again - collector / feeders are literally used all over the country. They work. Just like the diverging diamond intersections. They work.

The problem is people. Can't change their ingrained poor habits.

465 could be 12 lanes wide each direction and there would STILL be issues because people don't plan ahead and jam over all the way from the inside to the outside to exit.

Again - these things aren't new ideas. They actually literally do work. They're not experimental. People just have to be open to a little change and not hold on to 50 year old ideas of how they *think* transportation should work.

Just because something's always been done one way doesn't mean that it has to continue.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Again - collector / feeders are literally used all over the country. They work. Just like the diverging diamond intersections. They work.

No. They don't.

The problem is people. Can't change their ingrained poor habits.

Which is why they don't, and never will work.

465 could be 12 lanes wide each direction and there would STILL be issues because people don't plan ahead and jam over all the way from the inside to the outside to exit.

People are idiots, but encouraging them to be idiots is still a bad idea. Look at the I-74/Southeastern Ave. interchange on 465. People lose their freaking minds.

Again - these things aren't new ideas. They actually literally do work. They're not experimental. People just have to be open to a little change and not hold on to 50 year old ideas of how they *think* transportation should work.

No, traffic engineers need to change their thinking to how things actually work from how they think they should work.

Just because something's always been done one way doesn't mean that it has to continue.

But they (traffic engineers) still insist on making bad decisions and living in the should be world instead of the actually are world.

 

[Ingomike]

This *is* an attempt to fix the problem.

No one here is a traffic engineer of any sort. Let the actual experts deal with their subject area of expertise.

No, delaying traffic because the state will not build adequate roads for users is not a “fix”, it is a bandaid…