[billethkid]

Given the issues here in TV with proper use of roundabouts, how do you think one will work at the intersection of 301 and 472?

http://www.**************.com/propos...m_medium=email

A roundabout at that intersection will be more like one on the interstate than in TV!

I suspect some engineering firm presented a higher projected continuous flow rate of traffic VS a much needed traffic light.

A couple of things I forecast will happen:

>more folks like me will use 466 to use the traffic light to access 301 N or S.
>traffic on 472 will be reduced going toward the proposed traffic circle
>there will be some horrendous accidents in a traffic circle which will include 18 wheelers, buses, even more dump trucks, you name it.

Some of the kami kazee traffic circle drivers in TV will definitely wind up in a contest with very large vehicles.

If it were put to a vote I would vote against it due to the new level of danger that would be injected nearby.

[billethkid]

Apparently putting a link to the "OTHER" news source gets edited out.
My thread is still viable even with the arbitrary editing of my post.

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by billethkid

Apparently putting a link to the "OTHER" news source gets edited out.
My thread is still viable even with the arbitrary editing of my post.

I don't think the editing was arbitrary at all, it was specifically done the remove the reference to the "name not to be mentioned" site

A RB on 301----might as well just put in a demolition derby complete with grandstands (we all know those fans just go to see the crashes anyway). Would probably back up traffic 1/2 mile given the 18 wheelers. I suppose they could rely on the experience and driving skills of Villagers who are familiar with RBs

[Jima64]

A roundabout there is kind of hilarious. Can you imagine the thought process some genious traffic engineer used to make this sound viable.

[villagetinker]

Originally Posted by billethkid

Given the issues here in TV with proper use of roundabouts, how do you think one will work at the intersection of 301 and 472?

http://www.**************.com/propos...m_medium=email

A roundabout at that intersection will be more like one on the interstate than in TV!

I suspect some engineering firm presented a higher projected continuous flow rate of traffic VS a much needed traffic light.

A couple of things I forecast will happen:

>more folks like me will use 466 to use the traffic light to access 301 N or S.
>traffic on 472 will be reduced going toward the proposed traffic circle
>there will be some horrendous accidents in a traffic circle which will include 18 wheelers, buses, even more dump trucks, you name it.

Some of the kami kazee traffic circle drivers in TV will definitely wind up in a contest with very large vehicles.

If it were put to a vote I would vote against it due to the new level of danger that would be injected nearby.

I agree with you comments, also consider these:

There is a 55 MPH speed limit in this area (most people do 60, dump trucks 65 to 70 I have clocked them). Can you imagine SLOWING the traffic to say 35 MPH before the traffic circle!!
This road has lots of visitors, do you think they will have any idea how to navigate a traffic circle???
Let's see there will be signs "YEILD TO TRAFFIC IN CIRCLE", right, and these will be obeyed like YEILD, STOP, etc.
If they actually decide to do this, there will be at least one less car on 301, and I will need to find a suitable detour.
We have enough problems with the low speed traffic circles in TV, especially during snowbird season, I cannot imagine how this will work on 301.

I have seen some other articles where it was stated that there were locations where these worked very well and others where they were a disaster. I have seen both, and I am certain that this location will be a disaster.

[bagboy]

Very good points mentioned above. I just have to ask "why not a traffic light?"

[golfing eagles]

Originally Posted by villagetinker

I agree with you comments, also consider these:

There is a 55 MPH speed limit in this area (most people do 60, dump trucks 65 to 70 I have clocked them). Can you imagine SLOWING the traffic to say 35 MPH before the traffic circle!!
This road has lots of visitors, do you think they will have any idea how to navigate a traffic circle???
Let's see there will be signs "YEILD TO TRAFFIC IN CIRCLE", right, and these will be obeyed like YEILD, STOP, etc.
If they actually decide to do this, there will be at least one less car on 301, and I will need to find a suitable detour.
We have enough problems with the low speed traffic circles in TV, especially during snowbird season, I cannot imagine how this will work on 301.

I have seen some other articles where it was stated that there were locations where these worked very well and others where they were a disaster. I have seen both, and I am certain that this location will be a disaster.

I've only driven it once, but if you go from Boston to Cape Cod you encounter 1 or 2 on busy main highways. Maybe they're the reason I only drove it once!

[2BNTV]

Making a left turn onto 301 S is already dangerous. A traffic light is required to make this turn safer. A roundabout is not a viable solution. IMHO

Does several people have to be killed, before a traffic light is installed?

Hopefully, the people who are controlling this decision, come to their senses and do the right thing!

[tomwed]

Originally Posted by bagboy

Very good points mentioned above. I just have to ask "why not a traffic light?"

or a gate

[billethkid]

Considerations for traffic control always include some sort of throuh put per hour or per day and I would be willing to bet the assumptions show more traffic moved through a given area.

Which of course is what one would propose if they were a proponent of the traffic circle.

I for one will be one of the residents of TV writing to vote against introducing a hazard into our area.

The alternate to 301 is to go South on Morse Blvd or Buena Vista to one of the east west highways further south. The traffic light at 466 and 301 would be ruled out for me heading south and into the circle.

When safety is an issue it will not come to pass!

[Mleeja]

You can tell none of the posters are from central Indiana. The city of Carmel, Indiana is know for its roundabouts. They have roundabout for exits and entrances to major highways. It is actually two roundabouts connected together. The elevated roundabouts are located on the lesser of the "busy" streets with exit and entrance ramps off of the major artery. The system works quite well once one gets the hang of it. When we left Indianapolis to move to TV the cities of Indianapolis and Carmel were proposing building a roundabout for the highest traveled intersection in the entire state of Indiana.

I haven't seen the article in the other on-line news source. I tried looking for it before posting but did not see it. I agree if you have a roundabout like the current ones in TV, it could be a real mess. However, if one of the more advanced designs are used, you might just like the idea.

[outlaw]

Originally Posted by 2BNTV

Making a left turn onto 301 S is already dangerous. A traffic light is required to make this turn safer. A roundabout is not a viable solution. IMHO

Does several people have to be killed, before a traffic light is installed?

Hopefully, the people who are controlling this decision, come to their senses and do the right thing!

According to the "experts" on MMPs, yes.

[outlaw]

I prefer RABs to lights any day. This will keep traffic moving, and the vehicles entering will have to slow down. Just like in all RABs in major cities. No problem. Go to Europe. RABs are everywhere, 5 and 6 lanes. They work fine.

[Polar Bear]

I'm not sure if it's a good idea at this point, but roundabouts have been successfully used at much busier locations than this.

[billethkid]

My issue is not whether traffic circles work or not. We all have been to and through them. Even in Paris around the Arch de Triumph with a multiple lane circle it works.....once one figures it out.

It is more the fact, for me, that it is most likely not a good idea for the location intended.

Add into the equation high volumes of high speed traffic, high percentage of people new/visiting the area, even higher percentage of senior and senior plus drivers and a formula for disater is in the making.

I would like to see or hear the dialogue that concludes with the recommendation of a traffic circle in that location.