Annoying local laws

[iron81]

Too many stop signs: I wish that people actually put some thought into which intersections need stopsigns: i.e. that there is actually enough traffic at a intersection to warrrant them. I mean, stop signs go up surrounding schools even though you only need them 1 hour a day for half the days a year and often there are crossing guards anyway.

Resident only parking: Guess what, just because you own a house doesn't mean you own the street in front of the house. That street belongs to the public and if its safe and appropriate for a resident to part there, its approprate for an out-of-towner.

Overly restrictive zoning: My hometown has an "appearance commission" where a city commission judges whether major changes to your home are appropriate and looks good. WTF does it matter to the city whether someone's porch is too big? Some people seriously need to mind their own business.

[PokrLikeItsProse]

[ QUOTE ]

Resident only parking: Guess what, just because you own a house doesn't mean you own the street in front of the house. That street belongs to the public and if its safe and appropriate for a resident to part there, its approprate for an out-of-towner.


[/ QUOTE ]

This one I don't mind. It makes sense in certain places such as near college campuses in areas with limited parking, where residents would otherwise have a very hard time finding a parking spot. It doesn't make sense in places where every house has a driveway (some neighborhoods have few or none) and apartment buildings have private lots.

I think that it is as reasonable as a two-hour limit on parking in certain high traffic areas.

[GMontag]

[ QUOTE ]
Too many stop signs: I wish that people actually put some thought into which intersections need stopsigns: i.e. that there is actually enough traffic at a intersection to warrrant them. I mean, stop signs go up surrounding schools even though you only need them 1 hour a day for half the days a year and often there are crossing guards anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

How would you have an intersection with no stop signs? Or do you mean one-way stop vs 4-way stop?

[iron81]

For intersections where there is hardly any traffic (most intersections), people are allowed to simply check if there is any traffic and drive through without stopping. Crazy, I know.

PLIP, if its annoying for a resident to park, its just as annoying for a shopper to park. You see, the reason resident only parking exists is because the residents have the voting power in that area: the alderman are responsible to them. The problem is, the alderman don't weigh the inconvenience to non-residents because they don't have to. Non-residents don't vote for the people making the decisions.

[MidGe]

Have you ever experienced roundabouts. They are a marvelous traffic flow improver if people know how to use them. They are very prevalent in Australia.

[GMontag]

[ QUOTE ]
For intersections where there is hardly any traffic (most intersections), people are allowed to simply check if there is any traffic and drive through without stopping. Crazy, I know.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see how that could possibly work. At the very least you need one of the streets to have a yield sign, so you can assign fault in the case of an accident. Also, it seems like a bad idea just in general, especially for intersections with hardly any traffic. Perhaps its different where you live, but around here the amount the average driver is speeding is inversely proportional to the amount of traffic on the streets. If you got rid of the stop signs at a disused intersection of two 35 mph streets, you'd start having 50-60 mph crashes.

[PokrLikeItsProse]

[ QUOTE ]
For intersections where there is hardly any traffic (most intersections), people are allowed to simply check if there is any traffic and drive through without stopping. Crazy, I know.


[/ QUOTE ]

So, you mean intersections with yield signs.

[ QUOTE ]

PLIP, if its annoying for a resident to park, its just as annoying for a shopper to park. You see, the reason resident only parking exists is because the residents have the voting power in that area: the alderman are responsible to them. The problem is, the alderman don't weigh the inconvenience to non-residents because they don't have to. Non-residents don't vote for the people making the decisions.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who says that they don't weigh the inconvenience of non-residents? For one, they have to consider shoppers because they have local merchants to consider.

Now, there are several schemes I have seen. One is to have some parking spots limited to residents and other parking spots open on a first-come-first-serve basis. Another is to have resident-only parking restrictions not in effect during regular daytime business hours.

Keep in mind also that residents pay local taxes and pay fees to park in resident-only spots, non-residents don't. So, it's not as if this is some complete freebie being handed out. It's also something that government just hands out to any area that wants it.

[John Kilduff]

[ QUOTE ]
Too many stop signs: I wish that people actually put some thought into which intersections need stopsigns: i.e. that there is actually enough traffic at a intersection to warrrant them. I mean, stop signs go up surrounding schools even though you only need them 1 hour a day for half the days a year and often there are crossing guards anyway.

Resident only parking: Guess what, just because you own a house doesn't mean you own the street in front of the house. That street belongs to the public and if its safe and appropriate for a resident to part there, its approprate for an out-of-towner.

Overly restrictive zoning: My hometown has an "appearance commission" where a city commission judges whether major changes to your home are appropriate and looks good. WTF does it matter to the city whether someone's porch is too big? Some people seriously need to mind their own business.

[/ QUOTE ]

It has long been said that "the U.S. is a nation of laws."

Today, I think it would be mete to say that "the U.S. is a nation of too many laws."

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
For intersections where there is hardly any traffic (most intersections), people are allowed to simply check if there is any traffic and drive through without stopping. Crazy, I know.

PLIP, if its annoying for a resident to park, its just as annoying for a shopper to park. You see, the reason resident only parking exists is because the residents have the voting power in that area: the alderman are responsible to them. The problem is, the alderman don't weigh the inconvenience to non-residents because they don't have to. Non-residents don't vote for the people making the decisions.

[/ QUOTE ]

I hate to sound like a wacky ac-ist here, but thats what the market is for. If the people pass too many restrictive laws against non-residents, it will hurt their economy, people will stop shopping and visiting there, and they will have to change the laws.

[matrix]

[ QUOTE ]
Have you ever experienced roundabouts. They are a marvelous traffic flow improver if people know how to use them. They are very prevalent in Australia.

[/ QUOTE ]

I take it you've never been to Swindon (UK) - home of the "magic roundabout" and possibly more roundabouts per mile of road than any other place in the UK.

I always thought roundabouts were a universal phenomenon - I guess I was wrong.