Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

RJT_RVA t1_jag932l wrote

God I love this (even though the bus lanes won't ever happen due to Museum District NIMBYs) A+ high effort post.

4

Soloemilia t1_jaga6rh wrote

Can you label CVS and subway and 7-11 por favor?

4

gdtrfb804 t1_jagdbho wrote

Very cool! I like how you ran the bus lanes under the roundabout. Now all you need to top it off is a Lavar Stony statue in the middle. 😂

10

PussyKatzzz t1_jaggmvy wrote

Looks cool! But come on, we both know no one driving in that circle is going to actually stop for peds trying to cross.

55

TheBroox t1_jaghfel wrote

Your traffic circle is fucked. The interior lane can't double as a turn lane if the exterior lane isn't forced to exit. You will end up with people on the inner circle trying to exit through people on the outside lane trying to continue around the circle.

109

againer t1_jagsdea wrote

With the way people drive in this city, this thing is guaranteed to be a 6 to 8 car pile up regularly.

37

plummbob t1_jagspzw wrote

Tweek the inner turn lane.

Wild that half the usable land area in that picture is just parking.

13

Newyew22 t1_jagxfnc wrote

Bless you for thinking Virginia drivers know the first thing about navigating traffic circles safely.

49

SlapDaddySlaps t1_jah1fen wrote

This looks like a nightmare. Richmond would totally approve

6

justblahetoday t1_jah1iya wrote

You should just start repainting the lines like Kramer did.

7

DefaultSubsAreTerrib t1_jah2qx8 wrote

I like that the medians give pedestrians a safe stepping stone to cross the street half at a time instead of waiting for the rare case when the whole road to stop for them. I really think pedestrian islands like these make it much safer to cross.

I'm not sure that traffic circles like these make anyone safer though. It seems like there would continuously be traffic, making it harder for pedestrians to cross even half way

7

Density_Allocation t1_jah6yrh wrote

Traffic circles are pretty good for a safe and efficient flow of cars (if they know how to use it) but they’re not really great for pedestrians. With a constant flow of car and bus traffic, there’s not really any chance for pedestrians to cross. Other than that I think it’s a pretty great idea!

3

gravy_boot t1_jahazu6 wrote

Replying to PussyKatzzz (#2,137,012)

I’m no traffic engineer but couldn’t there be stop lights hooked to ped xing buttons? I think DC has examples of this although those circles are bigger, not sure if size limits here would be an issue.

5

10698 t1_jahcdz2 wrote

Replying to gravy_boot (#2,137,453)

Traffic signals have no place in a traffic circle. That's how you end up with dysfunctional clusterf*cks like the Fairfax Circle.

https://ggwash.org/view/3181/make-fairfax-circle-a-real-circle

"This circle has a series of lights, which effectively kills any chance of it being a true traffic circle. This also makes merging into the circle difficult, because given the light cycle the circle may be filled with stopped cars which often create their own lanes."

19

10698 t1_jahe1kj wrote

Replying to Newyew22 (#2,137,212)

🙋‍♂️ This one does.

And yet I also agree with you 100%.

In Driver's Ed, western Hanover County circa 1995, traffic circles got about 10 seconds of instructional time. I still remember being told we'd never see one unless we went to Gordonsville or Northern Virginia.

I love them and breeze right through, but I trust nobody else who's in or near the circle. Head on a swivel, foot ready on the brake pedal.

8

airquotesNotAtWork t1_jahhdz9 wrote

You’d want the pedestrian crosswalks to be a few feet back from the circle for better visibility. Overall not a viable solution for this intersection especially with a bus tunnel lol

I do really like the changes to the intersections with Marshall and Meyers though!

2

Aliecatruns t1_jahjjdl wrote

Just what we need. Another traffic circle nobody knows how to use correctly!

1

piratestears t1_jahl3j6 wrote

Now redevelop the parking lots around it and this could be like a mini-Dupont Circle.

2

gravy_boot t1_jahmt7t wrote

Replying to 10698 (#2,137,496)

I was basing this on the presumption in the comment I replied to that it's not safe for pedestrians as a standard no-lights circle (not that I necessarily agree with that), and thinking more along the lines of Dupont/Logan where there are light-controlled xing areas inside the circle between the corners, allowing peds to move around the circle and into the common area in the middle.

> "This circle has a series of lights, which effectively kills any chance of it being a true traffic circle. ..."

But is it better than an 8-lane 4-way stop light?

> " This also makes merging into the circle difficult, because given the light cycle the circle may be filled with stopped cars which often create their own lanes."

The in the dc examples, the inner/outer lanes are physically separated so this doesn't happen.

Another thought would be to let ped x-ing buttons control the existing lights one block out from the circle, to stem the flow of cars long enough to cross without snarling the traffic already in the circle.

1

[deleted] t1_jahnhdj wrote

I like the idea but lets be real if you put a roundabout anywhere on broad so many people would die

1

gravy_boot t1_jaho4qv wrote

Replying to lafleurricky (#2,137,849)

This is true, but the alternative would likely be worse considering those intersections move a lot of people/cars, and wouldn't support the large central common areas. Broad/Boulevard may not be big enough for this, although it's bordered by things a lot of people wouldn't miss if they were gobbled up by an expansion...

1

The_Kentwood_Farms t1_jahp6lt wrote

Replying to carmen_cygni (#2,137,395)

Yes! I grew up in a small MA town that hinged on two rotaries. There was no signage, people just knew how to navigate them, people drove through them like raped apes, but there was still very little issues because folks just knew how to use them.

2

szeis4cookie t1_jahrcty wrote

That will flow cars better, at the expense of pedestrians trying to cross. I'm not sure how you fix that without defeating the purpose of the roundabout - if you move the crosswalks back from the intersection car traffic wouldn't yield unless you put in a traffic light, and if you put in a traffic light you're right back where you started. Ped bridges/underpasses add expense and ADA compliance complexity.

2

Moxy-Proxy t1_jahrp5j wrote

That’s great! I would only show 1 right turn lane instead of two.

1

BureauOfBureaucrats t1_jahzt1m wrote

Rotaries ideally have 1 more lane than the roads going into it, to be used as a left turn-only lane. Otherwise, it’s perfect. Putting the PULSE underneath is a wonderful idea.

2

anapunas t1_jai6qv2 wrote

Eh, it seems that richmond planners have limited knowledge of pedestrian safety too. And they're supposed to be the experts... so your professional level.

1

mize68 t1_jaio5ot wrote

Keep to your day job.

−2

weapnx20 t1_jajemzt wrote

Wait a minute, this isn’t city skylines

1

Farmerjoerva t1_jajowyp wrote

You definitely haven’t lived in Richmond very long that would be an absolute nightmare, and people would die

0

Utretch t1_jajvct4 wrote

Replying to 10698 (#2,137,496)

Not strictly true you can have set ups where pedestrians are given right of way intermittently. You can even make them smart unlike our ancient timer based systems.

3

picklingspice t1_jaklm2s wrote

eh. Close enough. Can't really draw double turn/double straight lanes like that though which is exactly why roundabouts are always so annoyingly complicated.

1