3 ms·
Did you read the blog post? >The new roundabout needed to be built in the same space as the old intersection. To the east is a steep hill. To the southwest the
by timdiggerm 2y ago
Did you read the blog post?
>The new roundabout needed to be built in the same space as the old intersection. To the east is a steep hill. To the southwest there are protected wetlands. There wasn’t space or budget to mitigate the potential impact in either direction.
- zamadatix 2y agoI'd like to think I'm clever but I cannot claim to be able to come up with alternative shapes to intersections without first having read the blog post about what they chose :). Budget to fix the hill yes, it's a real life thing, but one can still wish they had been able to allocate things to do it right. As far as the wetlands... https://i.imgur.com/x0WGHXa.jpeg https://i.imgur.com/x0WGHXa.jpeg how many lives is a small part of that narrow strip of wetlands between a farm and 2 roads worth? Easy to change? No... but the right thing to have changed? I think so. Now that they've done neither the intersection is still not very safe (IMO, time will tell) and the limited budget was consumed in doing so. Solely focused on dealing with "what sounded like the easiest and cheapest intersection to put in" I think they did a decent job, I just wish they had been able to do more. Intersections like this not only remain unsafe but give a bad public taste to roundabouts that are able to be properly done - "Oh I HATE roundabouts, I can't ever tell when to yield or where the lanes go. I don't want one in town" when really it's just a horrific roundabout they went through.