Roundabouts instead of bridges

[Slowpoke_TX]

Originally Posted by wdatabase

I would much rather proceed cautiously at 40 through a roundabout, than have to go from 65 to a full stop a half a dozen times... especially when there's no traffic.

I'd much rather proceed at 65 while exiting traffic uses the ramps to merge onto the next freeway.

Oh who am I kidding, nobody around here can merge worth a ...

[Slowpoke_TX]

Originally Posted by wdatabase

Modern roundabouts are nothing like the ones from decades ago. This was posted April, 2013.


FHWA Roundabout educational video - YouTube

First of all, have you never driven the traffic circles at either end of the Washburn Tunnel?

Second, do you see nothing bass-ackwards about the government trying to influence the citizenry? They shouldn't be telling us what they want to do - what with our tax dollars, to boot! They should be asking us what solutions we want enacted.

[phox1515]

CO has a lot fo roundabouts... they really work well in my opinion because except for the heaviest of traffic it keeps flowing. I was in CO to help the red cross with the recent flood disaster and had to commute from my hotel in fort collins to the north district HQ in loveland. the exit in loveland had a round about and despite lots of traffic it took me about 15 seconds to get where i was going...

they also have faster speed limits... 75 mph outside of denver and 65 in the city. I know parts of the 10 are 80+ but i'm talking about rural areas of the freeway.

[dastexan]

Originally Posted by phox1515

CO has a lot fo roundabouts... they really work well in my opinion because except for the heaviest of traffic it keeps flowing. I was in CO to help the red cross with the recent flood disaster and had to commute from my hotel in fort collins to the north district HQ in loveland. the exit in loveland had a round about and despite lots of traffic it took me about 15 seconds to get where i was going...

they also have faster speed limits... 75 mph outside of denver and 65 in the city. I know parts of the 10 are 80+ but i'm talking about rural areas of the freeway.

Almost all of San Antonio highways now except for those in the downtown area are 65 mph for whatever its worth.


The maddening thing regarding speeds (which doesnt really apply to San Antonio) are the 65 mph speed limits in the rural areas of 35 E/W leading up to Dallas and Ft Worth (Johnson and Ellis counties mostly)

[Slowpoke_TX]

Originally Posted by wdatabase

Hey - slow traffic (and parking lots called intersections) is why I am on a rant about this. (and you would only slow to 40 as you approach the roundabout.) I would much rather proceed cautiously at 40 through a roundabout, than have to go from 65 to a full stop a half a dozen times... especially when there's no traffic.

If 1604 traffic didn't already come to a stop at highway 90, then MAYBE I could agree with you. I don't see the purpose in a high speed loop - with stops. There's a reason 1604 is nicknamed "the death loop".

If the roundabout were used in combination with overpasses / underpasses, then I would most likely support the idea as a way to manage surface-street traffic. But 1604 should be a limited-access freeway from I-10 (on the eastside) around the north side to Hwy 90 on the westside. And flyovers would do a much better job of keeping traffic moving than the current system of stoplights and low-speed cloverleaf ramps.

[Merovee]

Originally Posted by wdatabase

Well that sounds like evolution working perfectly

Will do on the Alameda Circle. Thanks.

Another traffic circle I forgot about is on Fulton and Blanco.

Not even google maps shows it in the regular map mode yet.