Despite local opposition, FDOT ready to put roundabout at busy U.S. 301 intersection

[billethkid]

The news from the other source this morning.

I have written to the editor and asked if they would do a little more than just report that it is coming against the local wishes. But to provide more information of criteria the state powers to be used to compare a traffic light installation to the traffic circle. MAYBE if we understood why they chose one over the other some of us might change our minds.

I personally think a traffic circle in that location is going to prove to be a mistake. Many vehicles driven by seniors, some of which should not be behind the wheel, some with physical impairments, some who refuse to obey the rules of the road or stay in their lane....in competetion with 18 wheelers for the same space.

Throw in a high percentage of travelers who have never been in a traffic circle.

Creating an area of concentration of potential for accidents.....in my opinion.

[l2ridehd]

In my opinion it is a good decision. Accidents that happen at traffic lights cause death. Accidents that happen in a traffic circle cause fender benders. And circles move traffic much better then traffic lights. A traffic circle is nothing more then a traffic light replacement. Lane choices are common sense exactly like a traffic light. I wish every light would be replaced by a traffic circle.

[goodtimesintv]

Re:

I personally think a traffic circle in that location is going to prove to be a mistake. Many vehicles driven by seniors, some of which should not be behind the wheel, some with physical impairments, some who refuse to obey the rules of the road or stay in their lane....in competetion with 18 wheelers for the same space.

Throw in a high percentage of travelers who have never been in a traffic circle.

Creating an area of concentration of potential for accidents.....in my opinion.

I think that if the highway roundabout at that intersection is single-lane, and NOT double lane like here in TV, it is evident as to what a driver is supposed to do in a single-lane roundabout:

Either stay in the circle, or get out on the right.

No dual lanes to wallow and wander in and out of like people do here in TV with the dual ones and they just can't get it that they need to stay in the same lane.

The article quoted someone saying the semi trucks would roll/topple in them. Well not if it's built for a big enough circumference! And not if it is single lane.

If it is single lane, at least there won't be another vehicle beside them to roll onto and crush.

[newguyintv]

The news from the other source this morning.

I have written to the editor and asked if they would do a little more than just report that it is coming against the local wishes. But to provide more information of criteria the state powers to be used to compare a traffic light installation to the traffic circle. MAYBE if we understood why they chose one over the other some of us might change our minds.

I personally think a traffic circle in that location is going to prove to be a mistake. Many vehicles driven by seniors, some of which should not be behind the wheel, some with physical impairments, some who refuse to obey the rules of the road or stay in their lane....in competetion with 18 wheelers for the same space.

Throw in a high percentage of travelers who have never been in a traffic circle.

Creating an area of concentration of potential for accidents.....in my opinion.

A roundabut on a 55 MPH highway is insane. Many Villagers can't handle the one's in the Villages at 20 MPH. Sounds like a death trap to me.

[Walter123]

A roundabut on a 55 MPH highway is insane. Many Villagers can't handle the one's in the Villages at 20 MPH. Sounds like a death trap to me.

Do you think the speed limit around the circle is gonna stay at 55?? I don't. The traffic will probably be made to gradually slow down 1/2 mile away. 55-45-35-20, something like that.

[newguyintv]

Do you think the speed limit around the circle is gonna stay at 55?? I don't. The traffic will probably be made to gradually slow down 1/2 mile away. 55-45-35-20, something like that.

And just how many people do you think slow down to 20 MPH to enter the traffic circles in TV. Has to be worse if you are starting at 55 instead of 35.

[virgind]

Stupid is as stupid does

[tomwed]

Stupid is as stupid does
I miss the Andy Griffith show too.

[Matzy]

Yes, for some people it might be a challenge to think aug a round-about at 301. But, it makes sense having this circles to slow down the traffic flow. I understand that some drivers are not familiar with a round-about, but it is high time to learn how does it work. Returning from Europe one week ago I learned very fast the positive side of this decision. Counting 79 roundabouts when driving out of Paris showed me the result, not any single accident. Of course, everybody has to pay full attention to the traffic.

[justjim]

Let it happen. FDOT Engineers are trained and paid to conclude if this roundabout will work for the best at the 301 intersection. Who are we to say if this will work--Are we Traffic engineers?

[ScottRAB]

Modern roundabouts are the safest form of intersection in the world (much more so than comparable signals). Visit Highway safety topics (http://tinyurl.com/iihsRAB) for modern roundabout FAQs and safety facts. Modern roundabouts, and the pedestrian refuge islands approaching them, are two of nine proven safety measures identified by the FHWA, Proven Safety Countermeasures - Safety | Federal Highway Administration (http://tinyurl.com/7qvsaem)
The FHWA has a video about modern roundabouts on Youtube, or check out the IIHS video (iihs dot org).

http://priceonomics.com/the-case-for-more-traffic-roundabouts/

Here’s a quote:
“By 2025, a quarter of all drivers in the United States will be over the age of 65. Intersections are the single most dangerous traffic environment for drivers of any age with left-hand turns being the single most dangerous traffic maneuver that any of us can make. Forty percent of all crashes that involve drivers over the age of 65 occur at intersections. This is nearly twice the rate of experienced younger drivers. AARP would like to see more roundabouts constructed because of the many safety benefits that they present for drivers of all ages.” - Jana Lynott, AARP Public Policy Institute

[Jimturner]

LOL I trust that the Florida DOT has the best interest of the local citizens in mind and for sure, are better qualified to make these changes than any complaining Blog poster. I'm sure there not perfect, but are closer to it than we TOTV posters when it comes to traffic
Safty. Again, LOL

[Bogie Shooter]

Take a drive by the intersection and see the safe, simple solution.

[debow]

Roundabouts are safer for several reasons but primarily due to reduced speeds of generally 15-20 mph. Now how well that will work on 301 remains to be seen.

[Bogie Shooter]

Roundabouts are safer for several reasons but primarily due to reduced speeds of generally 15-20 mph. Now how well that will work on 301 remains to be seen.

No longer a need for a roundabout or a traffic signal.........................

[Jima64]

Just can't wait to see a youtube video of the slowdowns on a major road like 301 and people trying to compare it to a roundabout in a lesser travelled street.

[debow]

Agree, but the roundabout keeps traffic moving.

[Bogie Shooter]

Please not another pro & con roundabout thread.........................

:popcorn::popcorn::wine:

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

The news from the other source this morning.

I have written to the editor and asked if they would do a little more than just report that it is coming against the local wishes. But to provide more information of criteria the state powers to be used to compare a traffic light installation to the traffic circle. MAYBE if we understood why they chose one over the other some of us might change our minds.

I personally think a traffic circle in that location is going to prove to be a mistake. Many vehicles driven by seniors, some of which should not be behind the wheel, some with physical impairments, some who refuse to obey the rules of the road or stay in their lane....in competetion with 18 wheelers for the same space.

Throw in a high percentage of travelers who have never been in a traffic circle.

Creating an area of concentration of potential for accidents.....in my opinion.

How do you know that it's against local wishes? Have you seen a scientific poll whose results show conclusively that a majority of the residents in the surrounding area are against it?

I understand that you personally think that it would be a mistake, but do you have any evidence that a majority of people also think that it would be a mistake? Even if such a poll or vote were conducted how many people would be knowledgeable about such a matter? How many would have seen, read and understood various studies that have been done?

Why would a responsible newspaper report something that is not factual?

I personally don't see any problem with it. If there are drivers that shouldn't be behind the wheel or drivers that don't obey the rules of the road, the solution should be to get them off the road, not make engineering decisions based on them.

[villagetinker]

still waiting to see the final design. The sketch in the paper showed the North/South lanes almost inline with the roundabout. This would allow traffic to enter the roundabout AT SPEED. I contacted FDOT about my concerns, the reply was the intermediate solution that you see now, but no details on the specific design of the roundabout. I am going to reserve any other comments, until I see FDOTs design, but I do have concerns about preliminary design.
Guess we will have to wait and see.

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

And just how many people do you think slow down to 20 MPH to enter the traffic circles in TV. Has to be worse if you are starting at 55 instead of 35.

I think the vast majority do. Have you tried to go around these tiny round about faster than 20 mph? You might be able to do 25 tops. any faster than that and you're going to be on two wheels.

Obviously a round about on a road such as this will be much larger than the ones on Morse and Buena Vista. I have lived in places where there are round abouts and they are much bigger than these. It's almost impossible to speed in these round abouts.

The Quezon City Circle in The Philippines is almost a half mile in diameter. Rotaries, as we call them in New England are much larger then the little circles we have in TV.
I would think that the FDOT knows a bit about building a round about on a 55mph road.

[Bogie Shooter]

Take a drive by the intersection and see the safe, simple solution.

The whole purpose of my post was to let posters know that the interchange had been changed and eliminated the need for a roundabout or a traffic light.
NOT TO RESTART a debate ( which never ends) on the pros and cons of ROUNDABOUTS!

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

Modern roundabouts are the safest form of intersection in the world (much more so than comparable signals). Visit Highway safety topics (http://tinyurl.com/iihsRAB) for modern roundabout FAQs and safety facts. Modern roundabouts, and the pedestrian refuge islands approaching them, are two of nine proven safety measures identified by the FHWA, Proven Safety Countermeasures - Safety | Federal Highway Administration (http://tinyurl.com/7qvsaem)
The FHWA has a video about modern roundabouts on Youtube, or check out the IIHS video (iihs dot org).

The Case for More Traffic Roundabouts (http://priceonomics.com/the-case-for-more-traffic-roundabouts/)

Here’s a quote:
“By 2025, a quarter of all drivers in the United States will be over the age of 65. Intersections are the single most dangerous traffic environment for drivers of any age with left-hand turns being the single most dangerous traffic maneuver that any of us can make. Forty percent of all crashes that involve drivers over the age of 65 occur at intersections. This is nearly twice the rate of experienced younger drivers. AARP would like to see more roundabouts constructed because of the many safety benefits that they present for drivers of all ages.” - Jana Lynott, AARP Public Policy Institute

I'm not at all surprised by this. When you look at the accidents that we have in The Villages they all seem to be at the intersections of Morse and 466, Morse and Buena Vista, Morse and 466a and Buena Vista and 466a. Very seldom do we read about accidents in the round abouts.

I saw one yesterday and I think it might have been the first one I've seen in my 44 plus months here. Some one tried to exit the round about through another car. Is that the fault of the round about? I don't understand how a driver can make a right hand turn with a car on his right side. Bad drivers will cause accidents whether in a round about or a straight road.

[Jimigolf]

The news from the other source this morning.

I have written to the editor and asked if they would do a little more than just report that it is coming against the local wishes. But to provide more information of criteria the state powers to be used to compare a traffic light installation to the traffic circle. MAYBE if we understood why they chose one over the other some of us might change our minds.

I personally think a traffic circle in that location is going to prove to be a mistake. Many vehicles driven by seniors, some of which should not be behind the wheel, some with physical impairments, some who refuse to obey the rules of the road or stay in their lane....in competetion with 18 wheelers for the same space.

Throw in a high percentage of travelers who have never been in a traffic circle.

Creating an area of concentration of potential for accidents.....in my opinion.

Please explain, just what is it that constitutes "local wishes"?

[Polar Bear]

Please explain, just what is it that constitutes "local wishes"?
That's my question also.

[JoMar]

And just how many people do you think slow down to 20 MPH to enter the traffic circles in TV. Has to be worse if you are starting at 55 instead of 35.

That's what happens on Buena Vista.......55 to 20 or somewhere in between. The Villages helps perpetuate the senior driver issues that the comedians like. We can't drive, we can't see, we don't know how to use turn signals and we can't handle change. That and more is alive and well on TOTV

[rubicon]

Take a drive by the intersection and see the safe, simple solution.

Picked my daughter up at OIA on Friday use CR472 to take Rt 301. I agree with your assessment

Personal Best Regards:

[Taltarzac725]

US-301 roundabout proposal has some residents worried | www.wftv.com (http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/us-301-roundabout-proposal-has-some-residents-worr/nmdLZ/)

It is US 301 and CR472 that they are talking about on this thread. https://www.google.com/maps/@28.9084366,-82.0344155,16z

[Dr Winston O Boogie jr]

US-301 roundabout proposal has some residents worried | www.wftv.com (http://www.wftv.com/news/news/local/us-301-roundabout-proposal-has-some-residents-worr/nmdLZ/)

It is US 301 and CR472 that they are talking about on this thread. https://www.google.com/maps/@28.9084366,-82.0344155,16z

This article quotes two residents. We've had a discussion going on this board on the subject and it seems that at least as many are in favor of the round about than are against it. Some on this thread are of the opinion that most of us are not experts or civil engineers and maybe those that are know better.

If I'm not mistaken, there has been at least one other thread on this subject and the opinions are about the same.

Just because a television station comes up and interviews a few people it does not mean that the majority of the residents are against the idea. Even there were a majority against, they are not civil engineers or city planners. The professionals in most cases know what they are doing.

[Taltarzac725]

This article quotes two residents. We've had a discussion going on this board on the subject and it seems that at least as many are in favor of the round about than are against it. Some on this thread are of the opinion that most of us are not experts or civil engineers and maybe those that are know better.

If I'm not mistaken, there has been at least one other thread on this subject and the opinions are about the same.

Just because a television station comes up and interviews a few people it does not mean that the majority of the residents are against the idea. Even there were a majority against, they are not civil engineers or city planners. The professionals in most cases know what they are doing.

I would have to see what they had planned and I tend to value the input of the people who use these roads than the engineers that know physics, calculus, and the other aspects of building a road. That's unless these civil engineers and city planners actually use the roads.

[bagboy]

Please explain, just what is it that constitutes "local wishes"?

I think I remember the mayor of Wildwood and maybe more than one Wildwood official come out publicly against the roundabout. Maybe that's the local wishes against the project.
I haven't seen alot one way or another from residents. I think many are wondering just how a roundabout will work on 301. Anything to slow traffic at a dangerous intersection can't be all bad.

[Taltarzac725]

I think I remember the mayor of Wildwood and maybe more than one Wildwood official come out publicly against the roundabout. Maybe that's the local wishes against the project.
I haven't seen alot one way or another from residents. I think many are wondering just how a roundabout will work on 301. Anything to slow traffic at a dangerous intersection can't be all bad.

It does need something there, I agree. Have been at the intersection whenever we would go down to the Tampa Bay area and would be taking a route that involved Wildwood.

[Bogie Shooter]

It does need something there, I agree. Have been at the intersection whenever we would go down to the Tampa Bay area and would be taking a route that involved Wildwood.

There is something new there. Go look. Quit speculating..........................