Description
Drivers do not merge when traveling east on Whalley Avenue, where it becomes one lane. Furthermore, they keep driving side-by-side up until around Davis Street, when it then becomes apparent that they'll have to merge or run into the parked cars on the side of the road. Something must be done or some irate residents who are tired of being passed in this one gigantic lane are going to put up road cones or something, and force drivers to form ONE LANE.
15 Comments
Leslie (Guest)
Anonymous (Guest)
j (Guest)
Josh (Guest)
j (Guest)
jackie (Guest)
i appreciate the desire for one lane but the traffic would be backed up on the NW and N sides of the intersection at rush hour even if it doesn't make sense at other points of the day.
besides, there are two lights up at the E Ramsdell intersection, which leads drivers to create two lanes (because there are two lanes with two lights.)
i would rather see markers for two lanes than squeeze everyone into one. but there's probab;y not enough legal room to do so, hence your situation.
E (Registered User)
jackie (Guest)
Fine. But "thus" usually follows the presentation of actual evidence. Yet you merely restate an opinion. What is the evidence upon which you rely that "its [sic] the law."
I maintain that the sign is clear enough, but the two lights send a mixed signal. I wonder if "the law" has anything to state about the placement of traffic lights, too?
E (Guest)
The two lights - which can be seen all over CT regardless of dual or single lanes - are for breakdowns. If one light blows out, theres another there to help. This common-sense-rule doesnt change just because a road may appear to be big enough for two cars side-by-side. If theres no makrings on the road indicating two lanes, its a single lane. Again, common sense and law.
Until they have successfully completed the design, it remains a single lane by law regardless of what the-general-public wants it to be, thinks it should be, or tries to make it. Follow the law and there should be no problem. If you get hit because someone else cant follow the law then the legalities are in your favor and have nothing to worry about.
The reason we have such traffic issues in CT is because people cant follow the rules of the road and make it all about themselves. THIS is why accidents happen in many many cases.
J (Guest)
Until they have successfully completed the design, it remains a single lane by law regardless of what the-general-public wants it to be, thinks it should be, or tries to make it.
E, point me to an actual legal explanation for your notion that the two lights "are for breakdowns" (i.e., in a legal book that can be referenced) and I will (personally) be satisfied and illuminated.
I understand and am completely sympathetic with the notion that the law should trump personal opinion / "what the-general-public wants [the law] to be." But I have to tell you, that is a lack of clarity can ALSO be a liability for the state. Granted, here we have a merge sign, but this is not so in all such locations, e.g., further down Fountain St. toward Westville village).
Just point me to the place in the traffic code and I'll be thrilled. Because, in other places--much better attuned to traffic safety, etc., and more sensible places than CT--the counterintuitive "two lights = one lane" arrangement that you describe would not pass muster.
E (Registered User)
Anonymous (Guest)
E (Registered User)
D (Guest)
The city should use road paint to delineate a shoulder and a driving lane.
The city needs to take steps to change the driving culture in New Haven. Everyone seems to be a fireman rushing to a fire or an obstetrician going to deliver a baby!
Κλειστό Chris Heitmann (Registered User)