Continuous Flow Intersections

[Jeremy]

it just doesn't look any more efficient than any other intersection. you still have 4 directions of traffic that have to stop at lights, but now 2 directions have to stop twice.

disclaimer: i have not read the info, my opinion is based on the demo's only.

 

[Spork]

It's a radical concept but they could just time the lights on Bangerter...

I know it doesn't involve millions to do so they will never do it.

Looking at the continuous flow concept right now I can almost guarantee the left turn lane isn't going to be far enough away from the intersection.

 

[hambone]

well it looks like theyy have started construction so you might as well avoid that intersection for the next two years

 

[Tacoma]

come on! the site said 6 mo!!! !

 

[spencurai]

I fail to see how that is a continuous flow setup...they added twice the lights...how is that solving the problem?

 

[waynehartwig]

Yeah, it worked for me that time...

WOW!

 

[BlackDog]

solets say the guy making a left onto bangerter form 35th s is plowed, after work party, catches the wife with the mailman, whatever, and misses the new light for the dedicated left that gets to cut across in front of him, good times.

 

[Tacoma]

I can't wait for the crash footage. This is going to be good.

 

[RockMonkey]

So no one is willing to give this thing a chance? It's different so it's automatically bad? Props to UDOT for trying to solve the problem with something new that has been proven to work elsewhere.

 

[Tacoma]

What, do you work for UDOT?

If it works, super. There is heavy potential for badness though. And it is cheaper than bridges and less visually offensive than them as well.

 

[waynehartwig]

What, do you work for UDOT?

If it works, super. There is heavy potential for badness though. And it is cheaper than bridges and less visually offensive than them as well.

He does seem pretty protective....

I say try it and see.. Worst that will happen is they will re do it in 2 years and probably put a oc in....

 

[92XJeeper]

Looks like a clusterf**k intersection to me.

Speaking of roundabouts, they are very effective at keeping traffic moving. I loved them when I lived in England. Until more drivers learn basic driving skills, however, I'm not so sure that the Wasatch Front is ready for them.

 

[hambone]

So no one is willing to give this thing a chance? It's different so it's automatically bad? Props to UDOT for trying to solve the problem with something new that has been proven to work elsewhere.

if it work great but i live right down the road from this intersection and i have noticed people in this area are so stupid they cant figure out the curent intersection so it is safe to say they will all die in the new intersection. now that i think about it this might be what udot had in mind from the begining

 

[RWH]

No Worries, The Japanese have just invented something that will eliminate all State road crew personel. A shovel that stands up by itself!!!

 

[waynehartwig]

so it is safe to say they will all die in the new intersection

You talk like this is a bad thing...? I already say there are way to many idiots in the world, maybe this will clean that up a bit.

 

[waynehartwig]

Looks like a clusterf**k intersection to me.

Speaking of roundabouts, they are very effective at keeping traffic moving. I loved them when I lived in England. Until more drivers learn basic driving skills, however, I'm not so sure that the Wasatch Front is ready for them.

Could you imagine the clusterf**k a 4 lane roundabout would cause in Utah, or any other state in the country for all that matters? The dipsticks can't use a single lane one now.

EDIT: I like roundabouts, unless I'm behind someone that doesn't know what they are for or how to use them....

 

[RockMonkey]

What, do you work for UDOT?

If it works, super. There is heavy potential for badness though. And it is cheaper than bridges and less visually offensive than them as well.

Nope, don't work for UDOT. I do drive a lot though, including using this particular intersection several times per day. I'm all for anything that gets me through it faster, especially if it's cheap to build. I just don't understand the criticism for trying something different. Seems closed-minded to me.

 

[Tacoma]

I'm very curious about this intersection now. Damn RME!

What I want to see is what happens when the left-turners back up across the oncoming lanes, when the oncoming lanes get the green. May be interesting.

This reminds me of Trax. Who can't see a train? Apparently lots of people and it was amazing to see.

I'm not actually against better traffic flow, I am just a little skeptical, that's all. As you may know, I spend a good amount of time driving as well LOL to put it mildly, and it has informed my opinion of traffic control. It might work great!

 

[StrobeNGH]

Here in Pittsburgh, the land of sensible intersections and excellent roads (Tacoma is laughing right now), they have timed most of their lights. Once you get on the major road, and get caught up with the light cycle, you do not have to stop.
It is VERY nice . . .

If PITTSBURGH can figure out how to time the lights, why doesn't Utah do it?
All of the problems with Bangerter would be taken care of . . .

I am always leery when the government throws more $$$ at problems instead of trying simply solutions that work elsewhere . . . The continuous flow intersection is someone's brainchild, who wants to make a mark in the world, and they have the pull to make it happen.

 

[Herzog]

I don't see how they can call it "continuous".

I was envisioning something more along the lines of that crossfire game from a couple decades ago.