Roundabouts instead of bridges (San Antonio, Olmos Park: dangerous, shop, bus)

[dpantle]

Originally Posted by TXEX06

Easy solution, don't move to areas of town with horrible traffic. It's only going to get worse out there.

Ahh, a member of the Planning and Development department speaks up!

[goodmanm]

Originally Posted by wdatabase

I live near Potranco and 1604. Traffic is a mess.

From what I understand TXDOT is going to build another gigantic bridge/traffic boondoggle there, just like there is already at Culebra and 1604.

Sure, there will be nonstop traffic flowing on 1604, but all the traffic on Potranco will have to stop at traffic lights 24 hours a day.

What will that bridge cost to build? $15 million+? What will it cost to maintain over the years - millions more? And how much gas will be wasted by those traveling on Potranco - stopped at traffic lights over the years? Yup - millions more!

TXDOT is stuck in the past using 1950's solutions to 21st century problems.

I urge all Texans to do a little research on modern roundabouts....

I am so frustrated feeling like I can do nothing to stop this huge mistake at Potranco and 1604.... it's going to affect residents in the area for decades to come! Roundabouts are MUCH more attractive than giant bridges everywhere, and the center areas can have gorgeous landscaping, and are probably even better for the environment considering there is less concrete reflecting the Texas sun.

There are so few roundabouts in San Antonio - and I think it's time for a change!

What about you?

Thanks!

Different class of roads, 1604 will always be the priority. I lived in England for seven years and roundabouts do work. However, I don't think the they would be suitable at that location because of the volume of traffic, the damn thing would look like a buzz saw.

Originally Posted by CyVaquero

What boggles my mind is that they've just spent a year expanding Military through Westcreek into 4 lanes (including a bridge expansion), because it's obviously needed <sarcasm>, while yesterday on my way back from Walmart, Potranco was backed up past Talley without the customary Sunday afternoon accident at 1604.

That may come off a little more mean spirited that I intend, I do like it out here, but I don't get the county's priorities on this one.

There's only one small section expanded to four lanes. But yes that bridge was a boondoggle of spending.

Originally Posted by CyVaquero

No first-hand knowledge, I'm a recent transplant. My wife is from here, but she didn't get out of the East Side much growing up and had only been been back to SA a couple times since graduating from Fox Tech and leaving for the Army in '96.

The traffic here can be a p.i.t.a. but it's really nothing compared to the snarls I've had to sit through in D.C., Pittsburgh, Philly, and NYC. I just don't understand the logic of expanding a section of road that has 1/10th of the traffic as Potranco especially with the cost of a bridge involved. Is there some throughway planned that will connect Grosenbacher to Wiseman/Brennan H.S. in the near future?

I hope that never happens. We don't need the increase in traffic it will bring to the subdivision.

[wdatabase]

Like I said in an earlier post - I am not sure what the logic of a high speed loop is (1604) with stops.

Just a few miles south all traffic on 1604 comes to a stop at Hwy 90 anyway.

Here is an aerial view of 1604 and Culebra (pretty much what they are going to build at Potranco and 1604 - what an incredible waste of money, space, gas, and time imho).... and what I suggest would be a more efficient, cheaper, and even more attractive alternative... note all the traffic PARKED in the top picture. But hey - at least all that traffic on 1604 is moving!

[TXStrat]

The one thing that would benefit San Antonio area traffic, and prevent us from becoming like Austin in the 1990s, would be to jump on turning 1604 into a complete, limited access freeway now. Don't wait until after it becomes a problem, look at the population trends and do it now. Call it the 810 outer loop or 235 loop or whatever. We are the seventh largest city in the country and we have 410 as the only interstate loop, and it is in very close proximity to the city center, and thus ineffective to handle the growth happening in the outer areas of the city limits.

[TXStrat]

Originally Posted by wdatabase

Like I said in an earlier post - I am not sure what the logic of a high speed loop is (1604) with stops.

Just a few miles south all traffic on 1604 comes to a stop at Hwy 90 anyway.

Here is an aerial view of 1604 and Culebra (pretty much what they are going to build at Potranco and 1604 - what an incredible waste of money and space imho).... and what I suggest would be a more efficient, cheaper, and even more attractive alternative... note all the traffic PARKED (and not moving!) in the top picture! But hey - at least all that traffic on 1604 is moving!

Don't forget the combination roundabout/overpass solution. Also very efficient. An example.

[wdatabase]

Originally Posted by TXStrat

Don't forget the combination roundabout/overpass solution. Also very efficient. An example.

Absolutely. Excellent design. Whatever it takes. TXDOT's current mindset is traffic control, not traffic flow.

[wdatabase]

This is our district engineer. Mario Jorge.... pretty sure he is the one designing these outdated, inefficient intersections...



I just sent him a link to this thread - in the hopes I get some feedback, before we get another multi million dollar parking lot on Potranco.

http://www.txdot.gov/inside-txdot/di...tonio/bio.html

Contact Us

[Shock]

What is your experience with transportation design and why should I believe you over TxDoT certified engineers?

[wdatabase]

Originally Posted by Shock

What is your experience with transportation design and why should I believe you over TxDoT certified engineers?

None, and you shouldn't. If you like (and accept) the status quo, just ignore my common sense!

My only experience is I have travelled the world, and every time I come back home, I get frustrated to the core when I get stuck in traffic jams at traffic controlled intersections - often when there's no cross traffic. I have driven millions of miles in a dozen or so countries, and most of the western U.S. Maybe THAT should be part of the required curriculum for TXDOT engineers!

I think the aerial view of Culebra and 1604 (above) says it all.

Just because someone is a certified engineer doesn't mean they have good ideas. In fact, it can be quite the opposite.

[rynetwo]

Originally Posted by wdatabase

None, and you shouldn't. If you like (and accept) the status quo, just ignore my common sense!

My only experience is I have travelled the world, and every time I come back home, I get frustrated to the core when I get stuck in traffic jams at traffic controlled intersections - often when there's no cross traffic. I have driven millions of miles in a dozen or so countries, and most of the western U.S. Maybe THAT should be part of the required curriculum for TXDOT engineers!

I think the aerial view of Culebra and 1604 (above) says it all.

Just because someone is a certified engineer doesn't mean they have good ideas. In fact, it can be quite the opposite.

No one is saying roundabouts are not useful tools for controlling traffic.

Even in London they have plenty of intersections where the minor road (Potranco) stops at lights and the major road flies over as a bridge. Maybe you work will pay off and they examine the roundabout but I'm 100% sure they are not going to have an at grade roundabout at the intersection.

One possibility might be the combination roundabout/overpass but that looks like it needs more land than the Potranco intersection has.