What is the process to have an illegal STOP sign removed?

Arif Khokar:

I thought "rotary" and "roundabout" described the same element.

Arif Khokar:

I thought "rotary" and "roundabout" defined the same element.

Liam,

> There is absolutely no way a traffic study could possibly
> warrant those multi-way stop signs. Even the traffic engineer
> nominally agreed with me, in my personal conversation with him,
> over the phone.
>
> So that's the least of my worries.

Geez turn down the enthusiasm. The traffic engineer, who had not done a
traffic study, agreed with you? How could a traffic engineer decide that
without any data? Without the opinions of interested parties? Et c.

Good luck,
Dave M.

In article >,
> wrote:

> I thought "rotary" and "roundabout" described the same element.

they are the same. different regions use different names.

On Sun, 9 Mar 2014 16:38:50 -0400, David L. Martel wrote:

> The traffic engineer, who had not done a
> traffic study, agreed with you? How could a traffic engineer decide that
> without any data? Without the opinions of interested parties? Et c.

To be more precise, he didn't disagree with me that the
road wouldn't meet today's processes.

He said that they didn't go through the "normal" process.
He told me to put my arguments in writing, and submit it
to him for processing.

He did say that I gave him too much data, so, I will need
to simplify my approach.

On 03/09/2014 02:57 PM, sms wrote:

> A lot of stop signs could conceivably be replaced by a flashing
> yellow/flashing red traffic light that only changes to solid red when a
> pedestrian pushes a button to cross.

A lot of stop signs could just as well be replaced by yield signs.

> But you're talking tens of
> thousands of dollars versus maybe $1000 for four stop signs and some paint.

Two yield signs for the designated minor road would even be cheaper.

On 03/09/2014 08:30 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article >,
> > wrote:
>
>> I thought "rotary" and "roundabout" described the same element.
>
> they are the same. different regions use different names.

No, that's not correct. A modern roundabout is different from a
rotary/traffic circle. The former has a lower design speed and
deflected entry points. The design of entry points of the latter isn't
standardized and the right-of-way rules aren't consistent either.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_circle vs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundabout

In article >, Arif Khokar >
wrote:

> >> I thought "rotary" and "roundabout" described the same element.
> >
> > they are the same. different regions use different names.
>
> No, that's not correct. A modern roundabout is different from a
> rotary/traffic circle. The former has a lower design speed and
> deflected entry points. The design of entry points of the latter isn't
> standardized and the right-of-way rules aren't consistent either.
>
> See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_circle vs
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundabout

your link to roundabout is called a rotary in the eastern part of the
usa, mostly the northeast.

i've never seen the term rotary refer to what your link describes as a
traffic circle anywhere in the usa.

On 03/10/2014 09:02 PM, nospam wrote:
> In article >, Arif Khokar >
> wrote:
>
>>>> I thought "rotary" and "roundabout" described the same element.
>>>
>>> they are the same. different regions use different names.
>>
>> No, that's not correct. A modern roundabout is different from a
>> rotary/traffic circle. The former has a lower design speed and
>> deflected entry points. The design of entry points of the latter isn't
>> standardized and the right-of-way rules aren't consistent either.
>>
>> See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_circle vs
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundabout
>
> your link to roundabout is called a rotary in the eastern part of the
> usa, mostly the northeast.

In the terminology section
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundabout#Terminology), they state that
the USDOT (FHWA) has distinct terminology for roundabouts vs traffic
circle/rotary. Massachusetts uses the term rotary for the older
circular intersections.

> i've never seen the term rotary refer to what your link describes as a
> traffic circle anywhere in the usa.

I've never lived in that area of the US, so I don't know how people
colloquially refer to them in the northeast/New England region. As far
as I know, older intersections are typically referred to as traffic
circles or rotaries and the newer intersections with modern design
features are referred to as (modern) roundabouts.

In article >, Arif Khokar >
wrote:

> >>>> I thought "rotary" and "roundabout" described the same element.
> >>>
> >>> they are the same. different regions use different names.
> >>
> >> No, that's not correct. A modern roundabout is different from a
> >> rotary/traffic circle. The former has a lower design speed and
> >> deflected entry points. The design of entry points of the latter isn't
> >> standardized and the right-of-way rules aren't consistent either.
> >>
> >> See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_circle vs
> >> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundabout
> >
> > your link to roundabout is called a rotary in the eastern part of the
> > usa, mostly the northeast.
>
> In the terminology section
> (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundabout#Terminology), they state that
> the USDOT (FHWA) has distinct terminology for roundabouts vs traffic
> circle/rotary. Massachusetts uses the term rotary for the older
> circular intersections.

it's not just massachusetts. most of new england calls it that.