Scenic 30A and 395 Intersection in Seagrove Beach
- Thread starter rdelong43065
- Start date
-
Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
Thank you Miznotebook!
First thing I see is that the homes on SE corner actually gain front yard. I assume this is because Stephens/EBSCO owns one of them. In turn they give up a little of their EBSCO property on the NE corner. Maybe this would be OK, after all they will now have more headlights shining into their restaurant.
On the other hand we now know for certain why they aren't moving the bike path to the south side which we know if that isn't done makes this whole thing a cluster.
THE ONLY solution that makes sense is to move the bike path to south side and create a right turn lane on NE corner with yield sign on a gentle curve as shown. PROBLEM SOLVED!
I also suggest adding more roadside parking for V restaurant on the east and especially the west side of 395.
First thing I see is that the homes on SE corner actually gain front yard. I assume this is because Stephens/EBSCO owns one of them. In turn they give up a little of their EBSCO property on the NE corner. Maybe this would be OK, after all they will now have more headlights shining into their restaurant.
On the other hand we now know for certain why they aren't moving the bike path to the south side which we know if that isn't done makes this whole thing a cluster.
THE ONLY solution that makes sense is to move the bike path to south side and create a right turn lane on NE corner with yield sign on a gentle curve as shown. PROBLEM SOLVED!
I also suggest adding more roadside parking for V restaurant on the east and especially the west side of 395.
The purpose of a roundabout is to keep the traffic moving. If a pedestrian is trying to cross 395 and a vehicle is in the roundabout trying to go north, the vehicle will have to stop, thus blocking the roundabout (especially if that vehicle is an 18 wheeler). Traffic doesn't keep moving, so that makes the roundabout ineffective. The pedestrian crossovers need to be totally outside the circular center and the triangular separators that make up the roundabout in order to keep traffic moving more continuously.
I agree with James Bentwood on his simpler solution with the bike path on the south and a right turn lane. Move 30A to the north slightly so that the property owners on the south don't lose their space. Put in a bike path crossover from south to north several car lengths from the intersection, say at the west property line of V.
BTW you don't see pedestrian crossings in the photo in Bob's post #175.
I agree with James Bentwood on his simpler solution with the bike path on the south and a right turn lane. Move 30A to the north slightly so that the property owners on the south don't lose their space. Put in a bike path crossover from south to north several car lengths from the intersection, say at the west property line of V.
BTW you don't see pedestrian crossings in the photo in Bob's post #175.
Okay, so here's how the roundabouts work in Australia. This is a three-way at a normally very busy intersection in the surfing resort of Torquay, Victoria, AU. I've used it several times. It works.
Color code:
Red: Vehicles must (EDIT) yield to vehicles already in the circle. Pedestrians can't cross here.
Green: Vehicles do not give the right of way to pedestrians in order to keep the traffic flowing.
Magenta: Vehicles should give the right of way to pedestrians, but are not required to.
Blue: Pedestrian crosswalks. Pedestrians can't cross the green areas if a vehicle is coming because that would stop the flow of traffic. Pedestrians can cross the magenta if a vehicle stops for them (which the vehicle should do).
This way the traffic keeps flowing. If you're gonna mix up a roundabout (which again is designed to keep traffic flowing) with pedestrian crosswalks, this is the only way to do it. It works in Australia. I've been at this intersection quite a few times.
Note: They drive on the left side of the road in AU, so things would have to be reversed in the US. Except in one place I know of -- on the bridge at I-285 and Ashford-Dunwoody road, vehicles drive on the left.
Color code:
Red: Vehicles must (EDIT) yield to vehicles already in the circle. Pedestrians can't cross here.
Green: Vehicles do not give the right of way to pedestrians in order to keep the traffic flowing.
Magenta: Vehicles should give the right of way to pedestrians, but are not required to.
Blue: Pedestrian crosswalks. Pedestrians can't cross the green areas if a vehicle is coming because that would stop the flow of traffic. Pedestrians can cross the magenta if a vehicle stops for them (which the vehicle should do).
This way the traffic keeps flowing. If you're gonna mix up a roundabout (which again is designed to keep traffic flowing) with pedestrian crosswalks, this is the only way to do it. It works in Australia. I've been at this intersection quite a few times.
Note: They drive on the left side of the road in AU, so things would have to be reversed in the US. Except in one place I know of -- on the bridge at I-285 and Ashford-Dunwoody road, vehicles drive on the left.
Attachments
Last edited:
I agree that the bike path should be on the south side. I doubt any study has been made on the volume of traffic that uses it. (Most of these plans are produced at a computer with ample air-conditioning, if you know what I mean.) But, regardless of that, the pedestrian/bike paths should be located as far away from the circle as possible. I don't see any indication of the four driveways that will also be dumping into the circle...
It's not a perfect analogy. Also there's the issue of the cars that park across 395 from Seagrove Market.
But in a roundabout you need to keep the traffic in the circular section moving, or otherwise there could be a deadlock (in operating system terminology) and no one goes anywhere. There are algorithms that can stop this (the simplest being a traffic cop at peak times).
I'm not a civil engineer, so I am talking outside my field of expertise. I am just giving an example of what I've seen work.
Certainly the county has done the research to determine the best solution from an engineering and a human/vehicle interaction perspective, as well as looking at raw data and analyzing it in a mathematical model using software like MATLAB.
Well said.
Roundabout or turn lane at 395?
Just noticed yesterday and today, the county is clearing trees, etc on the south side of 30 starting at Whiskey Bravo and heading up to 395. Do you think that means they have discarded the roundabout idea and will actually put in a turn lane, moving the bike path to the south side? Wishful thinking or reality? anybody know for sure?
On a side note, my daughter thought it strange to see a prisoner walking along 30 A with a chainsaw this morning where they are doing the cutting.
Just noticed yesterday and today, the county is clearing trees, etc on the south side of 30 starting at Whiskey Bravo and heading up to 395. Do you think that means they have discarded the roundabout idea and will actually put in a turn lane, moving the bike path to the south side? Wishful thinking or reality? anybody know for sure?
On a side note, my daughter thought it strange to see a prisoner walking along 30 A with a chainsaw this morning where they are doing the cutting.