Saw some rumblings on FB about recommended removal of the beacon in 5 Points and a recommendation to create a roundabout. Anyone know anything about this?
Christy Frazier posted today that the beacon is staying, but will be moved over about 5 - 7 feet.
A roundabout would be fantastic.
Quote from: CoastalJax on May 19, 2016, 04:26:36 PM
A roundabout would be fantastic.
I think the most you could fit there would be a mini roundabout - and since American drivers don't know how to use those, it would likely cause confusion and problems. The light makes the most sense!
Roundabout won't fit without chopping off parts of sidewalks that already exist and taking some private property as well. The area is just too tight.
The beacon might not have to be moved at all, but the blinkers might have to go dark. (FDOT standards bunk). It is very possible that the beacon might be able to be restored to its appearance before it was hit by a city bus in 1961. It had a neon sign on top that said "5 Points Shopping Center." Really neat looking like a navigation buoy.
The 5 Points Merchants Association and RAP started a plan three years ago to try to make the whole 5 Points area more pedestrian friendly (wider sidewalks, shorter crosswalks, traffic calming, etc.) since pedestrian traffic has increased so much. Oddly, car traffic has not increased at the intersections in the last ten years according to the traffic consultants. The plan includes changes to ALL of the intersections around 5 Points.
Lomax will get the makeover that Park St. got in the plan ten years ago.
The roundabout idea was finally nixed at a public meeting today with representatives from the Merchants Assn, property owners, RAP, the traffic consultants, and the City. It would have required eliminating the expansion of the sidewalks, taking some sidewalks that already exist and taking some private property to make it fit. It would not be friendly to pedestrians at all and would be very expensive. The consultants discarded the idea at the very beginning, but it came up again a few months ago to be reconsidered.
5 Points Beacon forever!!
Quote from: Dog Walker on May 19, 2016, 04:49:28 PM
Roundabout won't fit without chopping off parts of sidewalks that already exist and taking some private property as well. The area is just too tight.
The beacon might not have to be moved at all, but the blinkers might have to go dark. (FDOT standards bunk).
sorry but that is simply not true. A small (but not mini) roundabout can fit. It is all about having a mountable apron for buses, trucks, and emergency vehicles. That said, I support whatever is best for the area.
As for your FDOT comment, it isn't a state road. That is purely the position of the City's traffic engineer.
I think the beacon is kinda cool, in a uniquely 5pts kind of way.
Quotesorry but that is simply not true. A small (but not mini) roundabout can fit.
It does not really matter if FDOT or Jesus himself came down and wants to "make it fit", the fact of the matter is that if the merchants, residents, property owners and RAP/city do not want a change. So who really cares about fitting a square peg in a round hole?
No one wants it, leave it alone.
The current intersection/beacon is a horrible, horrible failure of traffic control. I use it as live entertainment every time I have lunch at Hovan. The beacon is absolutely useless and nobody can seem to read the sign that says "keep right". Almost nobody uses it properly and the number near rear-endings that occur because people don't know about the two sides that don't have stop signs... It is atrocious and I'm stunned that it has been in place so long, as "traffic control".
The round-about at San Marco Square works perfectly so the comment of "American drivers don't know how to use them" is pretty ridiculous and insulting. The one at Prudential & San Marco (by MOCA) works well too... so not sure why people are saying they don't work and wouldn't fit in that intersection.
The beacon was not originally a traffic control device but a location marker and an intersection warning since Park St curves right there. After it was damaged in 1962 the City, in its "infinite wisdom" added the "keep right" signs and made it into one. It is certainly in the wrong place for it.
There was actually a similar beacon in the late 1920's at the intersection of Post and Margaret. Does anyone know when it was removed? Lakelander recently found a picture of it.
What do "5 Points" areas in other cities do?
Quote from: BridgeTroll on May 20, 2016, 08:49:34 AM
What do "5 Points" areas in other cities do?
There is a "5 Points" in Atlanta which is much larger. Doesn't it have traffic signals? Anybody?
Quote from: marty904 on May 20, 2016, 07:57:02 AM
The current intersection/beacon is a horrible, horrible failure of traffic control. I use it as live entertainment every time I have lunch at Hovan. The beacon is absolutely useless and nobody can seem to read the sign that says "keep right". Almost nobody uses it properly and the number near rear-endings that occur because people don't know about the two sides that don't have stop signs... It is atrocious and I'm stunned that it has been in place so long, as "traffic control".
The round-about at San Marco Square works perfectly so the comment of "American drivers don't know how to use them" is pretty ridiculous and insulting. The one at Prudential & San Marco (by MOCA) works well too... so not sure why people are saying they don't work and wouldn't fit in that intersection.
Exactly, it's a complete mess and a constant accident-waiting-to-happen scenario. There is definitely room for a small round-about without intruding on private property nearby.
Quote from: marty904 on May 20, 2016, 07:57:02 AM
The round-about at San Marco Square works perfectly so the comment of "American drivers don't know how to use them" is pretty ridiculous and insulting. The one at Prudential & San Marco (by MOCA) works well too... so not sure why people are saying they don't work and wouldn't fit in that intersection.
I was referring to mini roundabouts - try to pay attention and maybe you won't be so easily insulted ;)
I've lived in Riverside for years now and frequent 5 Points quite regularly and drive though on an almost daily basis and I've never seen an accident happen at the beacon.
Quote from: Dog Walker on May 20, 2016, 08:41:01 AM
The beacon was not originally a traffic control device but a location marker and an intersection warning since Park St curves right there. After it was damaged in 1962 the City, in its "infinite wisdom" added the "keep right" signs and made it into one. It is certainly in the wrong place for it.
There was actually a similar beacon in the late 1920's at the intersection of Post and Margaret. Does anyone know when it was removed? Lakelander recently found a picture of it.
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/3497368033_RP6J5k8-L.jpg)
Quote from: TPC on May 20, 2016, 10:26:02 AM
I've lived in Riverside for years now and frequent 5 Points quite regularly and drive though on an almost daily basis and I've never seen an accident happen at the beacon.
Yeah, I lived there for over 10 years and can't recall any accidents.
I don't agree with the roundabout idea, as the beacon doesn't really function as one. For example, you wouldn't drive around the beacon to travel across Park on Margaret.
Quote from: BridgeTroll on May 20, 2016, 08:49:34 AM
What do "5 Points" areas in other cities do?
Here's Birmingham, they have lights there:
(http://i.imgur.com/nuzZRr0.jpg)
Google maps link: https://goo.gl/maps/EaTCmJyKn712
Quote from: Adam White on May 20, 2016, 10:30:33 AM
Quote from: TPC on May 20, 2016, 10:26:02 AM
I've lived in Riverside for years now and frequent 5 Points quite regularly and drive though on an almost daily basis and I've never seen an accident happen at the beacon.
Yeah, I lived there for over 10 years and can't recall any accidents.
I don't agree with the roundabout idea, as the beacon doesn't really function as one. For example, you wouldn't drive around the beacon to travel across Park on Margaret.
I've seen people do that however.
Quote from: Josh on May 20, 2016, 11:02:29 AM
Quote from: Adam White on May 20, 2016, 10:30:33 AM
Quote from: TPC on May 20, 2016, 10:26:02 AM
I've lived in Riverside for years now and frequent 5 Points quite regularly and drive though on an almost daily basis and I've never seen an accident happen at the beacon.
Yeah, I lived there for over 10 years and can't recall any accidents.
I don't agree with the roundabout idea, as the beacon doesn't really function as one. For example, you wouldn't drive around the beacon to travel across Park on Margaret.
I've seen people do that however.
Yeah - me too. And it looks really funny.
I'm confused. Isn't it supposed to function as modified roundabout? Basically a roundabout where certain lanes have priority?
Are you saying you stay left on Margaret? Even though it says Keep Right?
Quote from: Bridges on May 20, 2016, 11:24:15 AM
I'm confused. Isn't it supposed to function as modified roundabout? Basically a roundabout where certain lanes have priority?
Are you saying you stay left on Margaret? Even though it says Keep Right?
Here's how that approach would look.
https://www.google.com/maps/@30.3135898,-81.6812792,3a,75y,358.56h,80.98t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1s7JueuqIKdGfhtCeiZYNaGA!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3D7JueuqIKdGfhtCeiZYNaGA%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D99.8501%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656
It should be pretty obvious that you should just go straight, but if you treat the sign as the gospel, you're going to be going way out of your way to go straight.
The best way to treat the intersection is just look at is as an offset 4-way intersection where Park Street doesn't have a stop sign, and there's an additional side street.
If Lomax does go 1-way it will help a lot during busy hours.
^exactly - you only keep to the right when traveling past the bollard.
Didn't Stephen Tocknell draw up a plan for this intersection for the Brown Administration?
Quote from: Adam White on May 20, 2016, 09:45:54 AM
Quote from: marty904 on May 20, 2016, 07:57:02 AM
The round-about at San Marco Square works perfectly so the comment of "American drivers don't know how to use them" is pretty ridiculous and insulting. The one at Prudential & San Marco (by MOCA) works well too... so not sure why people are saying they don't work and wouldn't fit in that intersection.
I was referring to mini roundabouts - try to pay attention and maybe you won't be so easily insulted ;)
I'm pretty sure what you are calling a mini roundabout is exactly what they recently constructed in San Marco and is what the other poster is talking about too. I can't think of one example of a mini roundabout or larger roundabout in this area or other areas I've lived that had issues because "Americans don't know how to use them." This is what everyone assumes before they build them here, and there is a huge uproar, then once they are in place they work fine and everyone is happy.
Quote from: CCMjax on May 20, 2016, 12:15:58 PM
Quote from: Adam White on May 20, 2016, 09:45:54 AM
Quote from: marty904 on May 20, 2016, 07:57:02 AM
The round-about at San Marco Square works perfectly so the comment of "American drivers don't know how to use them" is pretty ridiculous and insulting. The one at Prudential & San Marco (by MOCA) works well too... so not sure why people are saying they don't work and wouldn't fit in that intersection.
I was referring to mini roundabouts - try to pay attention and maybe you won't be so easily insulted ;)
I'm pretty sure what you are calling a mini roundabout is exactly what they recently constructed in San Marco and is what the other poster is talking about too. I can't think of one example of a mini roundabout or larger roundabout in this area or other areas I've lived that had issues because "Americans don't know how to use them." This is what everyone assumes before they build them here, and there is a huge uproar, then once they are in place they work fine and everyone is happy.
Does it look like this? Because if it does, I sincerely apologise. But this is what I meant:
http://www.cbrd.co.uk/articles/roundabouts/img/mini.jpg (http://www.cbrd.co.uk/articles/roundabouts/img/mini.jpg)
As far as Americans not getting them, I speak from personal experience. Of course, not everyone is me or whatever.
Quote from: jlmann on May 20, 2016, 02:13:09 PM
wrong. you keep right. you do not go across park.
the history is interesting and explains the location being in a place where keeping right seems weird, but the sign is there saying "keep right" in every direction for a reason.
Unless this JSO officer is wrong:
http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/402032/jessie-lynne-kerr/2010-11-08/whats-right-way-get-through-five-points (http://jacksonville.com/opinion/blog/402032/jessie-lynne-kerr/2010-11-08/whats-right-way-get-through-five-points)
but I echo others- never seen an accident. but plenty of near misses and face palm entertainment while at hovan
I honestly think he's wrong - because I've seen plenty of cops travel across Park on Margaret without doing a loop around the bollard (if traveling north or whatever direction that is).
Quote from: jlmann on May 20, 2016, 02:36:24 PM
QuoteI honestly think he's wrong - because I've seen plenty of cops travel across Park on Margaret without doing a loop around the bollard (if traveling north or whatever direction that is).
In my experience I wouldn't call observing cops behavior a great strategy for determining the legality of an action
True... but by that argument, a single cop's opinion probably isn't necessarily reliable, either.
Quote from: jlmann on May 20, 2016, 03:30:31 PM
QuoteTrue... but by that argument, a single cop's opinion probably isn't necessarily reliable, either.
JSO got a call from a TU reporter (RIP Jessie Lynne Kerr) and clearly forwarded the question to someone who they thought would provide a reliable answer
Quote
Amended & Adopted 8/11/15
Introduced by Council Member Love & Co-sponsored by Council Member Carter and amended by the Rules Committee:
RESOLUTION 2015-547-A
A RESOLUTION HONORING AND COMMENDING JACKSONVILLE SHERIFF'S OFFICE SENIOR OFFICER THOMAS C. EDWARDS FOR 27 YEARS OF EXEMPLARY SERVICE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Senior Officer Thomas C. Edwards retires from the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office after 27 years of exemplary, widely recognized, dedicated service; and
WHEREAS, a native of Jacksonville, Officer Edwards was raised on the City's Southside and was a 1983 graduate of Sandalwood High School; and
WHEREAS, upon high school graduation, Officer Edwards entered the United States Army and embarked on a distinguished, decorated tour of duty in service for his country; and
WHEREAS, serving as a Military Police Canine Handler at Ft. Sill, Oklahoma, Officer Edwards and his K-9 partner, "Pins," participated in numerous dog competitions, placing in the top three K-9 teams in the United States Canine Association Dog Trials Region 11 (Texas, Oklahoma, Missouri); he and his K-9 partner subsequently participated in the 1985 United States Canine Association National Dog Trials held in Detroit, Michigan where they finished in the top one third of K-9 teams in the nation; at age 20, Officer Edwards was recognized as the youngest K-9 handler to compete on a national level; and
WHEREAS, Officer Edwards' military awards include: Army Service Ribbon, Good Conduct Medal, Army Achievement Medal with two oak leaf clusters, and the Army Commendation Medal;
It goes on but you get the idea. Not just some random officer that picked up the phone that day.
Its funny how opinionated people are around riverside on this issue. When I point out these facts its like watching conservatives swat away the obvious, myriad data that support climate change being a reality.
"That pole's in weird place. Hmm...says KEEP RIGHT. Logic be damned!! Straight just feels right ya know? I'm goin straight!!!"
I don't see how any of that has to do with his ability to navigate five points correctly. Maybe he's right. I am no authority on the subject - but I lived there for over 10 years (and had frequented 5 points for far longer) and never got a ticket. All my friends drove through it the same way. And as I've said, I've seen plenty of cops do it, too.
As far as I am aware, the sign relates to driving on Park.
Quote from: jlmann on May 20, 2016, 03:54:49 PM
QuoteI don't see how any of that has to do with his ability to navigate five points correctly. Maybe he's right. I am no authority on the subject - but I lived there for over 10 years (and had frequented 5 points for far longer) and never got a ticket. All my friends drove through it the same way. And as I've said, I've seen plenty of cops do it, too.
As far as I am aware, the sign relates to driving on Park.
The keep right signs face all directions.
I'm just saying this guy is reputable, experienced officer who was asked a question by a reporter knowing, in all likelihood, it would be published in the TU, not technically but effectively becoming an official opinion from JSO.
I've never seen a ticket given out and citizens and cops do it every 5 minutes. BUT it's not technically correct. That's all I'm sayin.
Without getting some formal proclamation from JSO I'd say Officer Edward's published account is as close to an official ruling as can be found. But it's hard to overrule one's gut as the intersection reveals so well. Going straight does seem quite truthy, I must admit.
truth·i·ness
/ˈtro͞oTHēnis/
noun informal the quality of seeming or being felt to be true, even if not necessarily true.
Yeah, it does - and it matters if you are going from Margaret to Park (through 5 points) - that is where the sign points (traffic queued there faces the sign) and you would indeed keep right.
Quote from: marty904 on May 20, 2016, 07:57:02 AM
The one at Prudential & San Marco (by MOCA) works well too... so not sure why people are saying they don't work and wouldn't fit in that intersection.
I believe you mean MOSH
Quote from: jlmann on May 20, 2016, 04:22:47 PM
oy.
Look at the pic in that article. And read it again just to absorb the clarity and specificity with which Officer Edwards addresses this issue. It almost seems like he thought about his response, even.
There a 4 keep right signs. Two of which face traffic on Margaret. There is no asterisk or fine print.
See my comment earlier about this reminding me of arguing about climate change with hard core conservatives. The facts have been laid out. They seem pretty clear.
Not making a judgment about Mr. White beyond him sticking to his guns in the face of evidence contrary to his position, but what is about the conservative brain? I pretty much stopped arguing politics as I did in my youth. The brain that subscribes to that type of world view is literally hard-wired to ignore evidence that conflicts with their deeply held beliefs. Hey Science! can you figure out how to reprogram this defect? We could solve the worlds problems in an afternoon.
Good day sirs and maams,
I could do without the insults about my brain. And I know you're new here and all, but anyone who's spent any amount of time on this forum knows I'm not conservative.
There are a wealth of opinions on this 5 points issue - you have quoted one "source" which we have no way of knowing is the authority on the issue. As I said before (if you bothered to read it) - maybe the cop is right. Does that fit with the idea that my brain is hardwired a certain way? I admit I may have it wrong - but I have seen too much evidence to the contrary of your position to just accept that you're right on this and I (and many others) are wrong. But I could be wrong.
Quote from: jlmann on May 20, 2016, 05:53:53 PM
Sorry to insult. I was really just musing aloud about the similarities of frustrating conversations where I feel strongly the facts are clear despite the technically correct thing feeling a bit weird in the real world. I see came off as way ruder than intended.
I said I would leave, but wanted to apologize as I look forward to respectful debate here.
BUT!!
From the article: Quote"Here is an official account from Officer Thomas C. Edwards of the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office assigned to Zone 4:
"Basically, the Five Points intersection is an access-controlled roundabout. Southbound and eastbound Park Street have the right of way due to their sides of the intersection flashing yellow. Westbound Lomax Street and northbound and southbound Margaret Street have stop signs as well as flashing red lights on the control post.
With regard to right of way from those roadways, you should yield to the first car to arrive at the stop sign, or if unsure, to the vehicle to your right.
When proceeding into the intersection from any of the roadways, you should keep right of the control post as you travel through the intersection and as always should not enter the intersection if you will have to stop, causing your vehicle to block another vehicle's path within the intersection."
To be clear: a thoughtful response on record in the TU from a lauded and respected JSO officer with decades of experience who is assigned to the area including 5 pts. is not just one "source" that carries the same weight as random people's opinions based on what they feel, or how much time spent in the neighborhood. I would welcome a legitimate source that contradicts me beyond "ahh you just go straight. that's what most people do." That isn't a source.
I think it's an opinion and the use of the word "official" in that article was just journalism. I don't read this as an official statement by the JSO.
We're never going to agree on this, so I'm just going to bow out now. And it's bedtime anyway. Have a good night.
Quote from: Adam White on May 20, 2016, 10:30:33 AM
Quote from: TPC on May 20, 2016, 10:26:02 AM
I've lived in Riverside for years now and frequent 5 Points quite regularly and drive though on an almost daily basis and I've never seen an accident happen at the beacon.
Yeah, I lived there for over 10 years and can't recall any accidents.
I don't agree with the roundabout idea, as the beacon doesn't really function as one. For example, you wouldn't drive around the beacon to travel across Park on Margaret.
Yes, you would drive around the beacon to go from Park to Margaret (if you were paying attention to the "keep right" sign). The legal traffic sign stating "keep right" would indicate that you should in fact, go around the beacon - if, you know, one was paying attention...
Quote from: Adam White on May 20, 2016, 11:32:46 AM
^exactly - you only keep to the right when traveling past the bollard.
lol so that would be the equivalent to if you approach a road that says "One Way", you only have to abide by that sign if you don't need to go that way... I guess now street signs and traffic control devices are up for "interpretation" for what suits the individual driver.
Quote from: SuzySpringfield on May 20, 2016, 04:42:27 PM
Quote from: marty904 on May 20, 2016, 07:57:02 AM
The one at Prudential & San Marco (by MOCA) works well too... so not sure why people are saying they don't work and wouldn't fit in that intersection.
I believe you mean MOSH
Yes, MOSH. Thanks for the correction :)
Quote from: marty904 on May 21, 2016, 07:16:58 AM
Quote from: SuzySpringfield on May 20, 2016, 04:42:27 PM
Quote from: marty904 on May 20, 2016, 07:57:02 AM
The one at Prudential & San Marco (by MOCA) works well too... so not sure why people are saying they don't work and wouldn't fit in that intersection.
I believe you mean MOSH
Yes, MOSH. Thanks for the correction :)
So... is it a mini roundabout? I've not seen it.
Quote from: marty904 on May 21, 2016, 07:16:58 AM
Quote from: SuzySpringfield on May 20, 2016, 04:42:27 PM
Quote from: marty904 on May 20, 2016, 07:57:02 AM
The one at Prudential & San Marco (by MOCA) works well too... so not sure why people are saying they don't work and wouldn't fit in that intersection.
I believe you mean MOSH
Yes, MOSH. Thanks for the correction :)
Pedestrians do not use the crosswalks at this roundabout or the one at Laura St. The new 5 Points intersection design is about making the pedestrians the priority, not the cars. A roundabout would push the pedestrians quite a ways away from the intersection, making folks walk farther to get from one point to another.
Its a new light rail discussion here. No one wants the change, no one wants a mini-roundabout, no one wants to change what is there.
How hard is it for drivers to see (3) stop signs and flashing lights? There are many more accidents elsewhere in the city for dumber purposes. The residents don't want to change it, the city does not want to change it, the merchants don't want to change it, so........why change it?
Leave it alone.
As both pedestrian and driving traffic continues to increase through Five Points, it's the city's responsibility to update the infrastructure. There's no easy way to do that at the intersection, hence the unique solution. Something similar happened at the intersection in San Marco; a lot of people doubted it at first, but it's much better and more pedestrian friendly than it was.
Quote from: Adam White on May 21, 2016, 07:32:24 AM
Quote from: marty904 on May 21, 2016, 07:16:58 AM
Quote from: SuzySpringfield on May 20, 2016, 04:42:27 PM
Quote from: marty904 on May 20, 2016, 07:57:02 AM
The one at Prudential & San Marco (by MOCA) works well too... so not sure why people are saying they don't work and wouldn't fit in that intersection.
I believe you mean MOSH
Yes, MOSH. Thanks for the correction :)
So... is it a mini roundabout? I've not seen it.
Some refer to it as a Stop-About, there are stop signs on the entrance roads, I stead of Yield signs.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on May 21, 2016, 02:35:04 PM
Quote from: Adam White on May 21, 2016, 07:32:24 AM
Quote from: marty904 on May 21, 2016, 07:16:58 AM
Quote from: SuzySpringfield on May 20, 2016, 04:42:27 PM
Quote from: marty904 on May 20, 2016, 07:57:02 AM
The one at Prudential & San Marco (by MOCA) works well too... so not sure why people are saying they don't work and wouldn't fit in that intersection.
I believe you mean MOSH
Yes, MOSH. Thanks for the correction :)
So... is it a mini roundabout? I've not seen it.
Some refer to it as a Stop-About, there are stop signs on the entrance roads, I stead of Yield signs.
I just looked that up on Google maps satellite view and it isn't what I was referring to. Looks like a regular roundabout to me.
Look in street view, there are stop signs where there shouldn't be.
Quote from: mtraininjax on May 21, 2016, 09:26:47 AM
No one wants the change, no one wants a mini-roundabout, no one wants to change what is there.
If that were true, there would not have been substantive discussion over the past few months....or a petition signed by many merchants last month.
Fact is, the most important thing to the merchants is keeping the beacon. Until an agreement was reached the other day, it was not clear the beacon could stay with the configuration remaining mainly as it is.
Quote from: Charles Hunter on May 21, 2016, 08:09:18 PM
Look in street view, there are stop signs where there shouldn't be.
Roundabouts can have stop signs or stop lights or whatever.
But I was referring to the fact that it looks like a regular - as opposed to mini - roundabout. I was told by another poster (when I said American drivers didn't know how to use mini roundabouts) that there was one at that location. That does not appear to be the case, as far as I can tell.
Quote from: Adam White on May 22, 2016, 03:19:22 AM
Quote from: Charles Hunter on May 21, 2016, 08:09:18 PM
Look in street view, there are stop signs where there shouldn't be.
Roundabouts can have stop signs or stop lights or whatever.
But I was referring to the fact that it looks like a regular - as opposed to mini - roundabout. I was told by another poster (when I said American drivers didn't know how to use mini roundabouts) that there was one at that location. That does not appear to be the case, as far as I can tell.
Mini, Midi, Maxi... whatever - I've only been speaking of (a round-about) in my comments. They are all the same virtual thing so the word mini means nothing to me in the context of this discussion.
Bottom line is that the (round-abouts) all down San Marco, from European Street to the square, as well as the one in front of the Landing, all work pretty damn well and we (Americans) use them in the way they were designed. Whether there is a solid "thing" in the middle that forces you to not drive over it or whether it's painted in the road, round-abouts work pretty well and if the engineers do a proper job, traffic will be forced to go the right way.
As far as pedestrians, there is a simple solution (IMO) - don't put the cross walks at the most congested point where 5 lanes of traffic are trying to meet and cross paths! Put the cross walks back a little bit from the the intersection (like the one in front of the Cinema on Park in 5 Points). I'm no traffic engineer but it makes sense to me that if you bring all the pedestrians and all the vehicles (from 5 lanes) together, to try and cross at the same place, it is going to be the worst possible thing, where as if you have pedestrians crossing only a single lane, where there is only a single row of cars to stop, then that makes a lot more sense and a lot less (stopping) of vehicles for pedestrian crossings.
Quote from: marty904 on May 22, 2016, 08:53:38 AM
Quote from: Adam White on May 22, 2016, 03:19:22 AM
Quote from: Charles Hunter on May 21, 2016, 08:09:18 PM
Look in street view, there are stop signs where there shouldn't be.
Roundabouts can have stop signs or stop lights or whatever.
But I was referring to the fact that it looks like a regular - as opposed to mini - roundabout. I was told by another poster (when I said American drivers didn't know how to use mini roundabouts) that there was one at that location. That does not appear to be the case, as far as I can tell.
Mini, Midi, Maxi... whatever - I've only been speaking of (a round-about) in my comments. They are all the same virtual thing so the word mini means nothing to me in the context of this discussion.
Bottom line is that the (round-abouts) all down San Marco, from European Street to the square, as well as the one in front of the Landing, all work pretty damn well and we (Americans) use them in the way they were designed. Whether there is a solid "thing" in the middle that forces you to not drive over it or whether it's painted in the road, round-abouts work pretty well and if the engineers do a proper job, traffic will be forced to go the right way.
As far as pedestrians, there is a simple solution (IMO) - don't put the cross walks at the most congested point where 5 lanes of traffic are trying to meet and cross paths! Put the cross walks back a little bit from the the intersection (like the one in front of the Cinema on Park in 5 Points). I'm no traffic engineer but it makes sense to me that if you bring all the pedestrians and all the vehicles (from 5 lanes) together, to try and cross at the same place, it is going to be the worst possible thing, where as if you have pedestrians crossing only a single lane, where there is only a single row of cars to stop, then that makes a lot more sense and a lot less (stopping) of vehicles for pedestrian crossings.
Well, "we" (Americans, including me) apparently don't - because I've been advised that the 5 points beacon is a roundabout and we cannot agree on how to drive through it correctly. So at least half of us don't know what we're doing.
I'd love to see people driving through 5 points at night and encountering a small white disk painted on the road for the first time. I'm
positive they'd know
exactly what to do.
Come on, Adam, give up the ghost man. You're clearly wrong on the Five Points issue and the confusing practice you and others employed doesn't change right or wrong no matter how "reasonable" the mistake was.
I did enjoy the jlmann virtue signaling, though. Few conservatives argue climate change (a long-term change in the Earth's climate, or of a region on Earth);
but knowledgeable people deny man-made global warming (the increase in Earth's average surface temperature due to rising levels of greenhouse gases);
because the science (the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world through observation and experiment) simply doesn't support the contention . . .
which is precisely why the partisan hacks have dropped the "global warming" mantra and scurried over to the "climate change" cloak. They are hoping the purposeful conflation of the two allows the ongoing scam to continue. Don't bet on it. Few true scientists scream the science is settled, the science is settled. Instead, they say: show me your work.
Because science is about observation, review and testing to prove, disprove or further question the proposition.
Which brings us back to Five Points. Adam has informally contributed to the observation, review and testing of the Five Points intersection problem and he has tended to demonstrate the need for an update. Maybe for those who are particularly anal the signs shouldn't say "Keep Right" but should instead be replaced by a two-line traffic sign saying "All Entry, Keep Right" placed both well before drivers enter the intersection *and* at the beacon itself -- would that do it for you, Adam?
Quote from: RattlerGator on May 23, 2016, 10:30:07 AM
Which brings us back to Five Points. Adam has informally contributed to the observation, review and testing of the Five Points intersection problem and he has tended to demonstrate the need for an update. Maybe for those who are particularly anal the signs shouldn't say "Keep Right" but should instead be replaced by a two-line traffic sign saying "All Entry, Keep Right" placed both well before drivers enter the intersection *and* at the beacon itself -- would that do it for you, Adam?
I think the "keep right" signs make perfect sense - one must "keep right" when passing the bollard. There is no instruction to circle the bollard (such as would be present in the event it was a roundabout).
I am going to be in Jax in a few weeks' time. If I see a cop in Riverside, I will ask him/her what the protocol is for the intersection and report back (regardless of whether he/she agrees with my understanding of the rules).
In response to your query - it's a moot point now anyway, as I understand that the bollard is to be moved to the centre of the intersection. I do think signage instructing drivers how to navigate the "roundabout" is necessary.
Quote from: Adam White on May 23, 2016, 10:36:58 AMI think the "keep right" signs make perfect sense - one must "keep right" when passing the bollard. There is no instruction to circle the bollard (such as would be present in the event it was a roundabout).
If you can only keep right of the beacon you have to circle it. There doesn't need to be any instruction.
Quote from: acme54321 on May 23, 2016, 11:11:06 AM
Quote from: Adam White on May 23, 2016, 10:36:58 AMI think the "keep right" signs make perfect sense - one must "keep right" when passing the bollard. There is no instruction to circle the bollard (such as would be present in the event it was a roundabout).
If you can only keep right of the beacon you have to circle it. There doesn't need to be any instruction.
Not true. If, for example, you are traveling down Park towards Five Points and wish to turn left onto Margaret, you can do so without circling the bollard - because you pass Margaret Street before you ever get to the bollard. That's because the bollard is not in the middle of the intersection.
There was a graphic that was circulated a while ago about this, which makes it abundantly clear.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place/Jacksonville,+FL+32204,+USA/@30.3138338,-81.6814261,3a,75y,62.23h,90t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sIvV2FcS71kuxLJ6cOiR2Bw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo0.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DIvV2FcS71kuxLJ6cOiR2Bw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D58.618324%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656!4m5!3m4!1s0x88e5b77c0876b6ff:0xbd6bd3cededebcee!8m2!3d30.3152434!4d-81.6856808
I think this aerial photograph with the overlaid street center lines make it clear that this "not a roundabout" is in fact, not a roundabout.
(http://i.imgur.com/jo4NOKl.jpg)
Quote from: Josh on May 23, 2016, 11:51:25 AM
I think this aerial photograph with the overlaid street center lines make it clear that this "not a roundabout" is in fact, not a roundabout.
(http://i.imgur.com/jo4NOKl.jpg)
And if you decided to circle the "roundabout" to turn left onto Margaret from Park, you'd run the risk of causing a collision when you whip back around and hit someone who thought you were traveling to Five Points.
Roundabouts with a pedestrian crosswalk signal are relatively common in Michigan, like this one in Rochester Hills:
https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6952796,-83.1532738,3a,35.6y,271.23h,88.63t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sO7nIY7BRTPBF6e-Tc4uBiw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DO7nIY7BRTPBF6e-Tc4uBiw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D24.384514%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656 (https://www.google.com/maps/@42.6952796,-83.1532738,3a,35.6y,271.23h,88.63t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1sO7nIY7BRTPBF6e-Tc4uBiw!2e0!6s%2F%2Fgeo3.ggpht.com%2Fcbk%3Fpanoid%3DO7nIY7BRTPBF6e-Tc4uBiw%26output%3Dthumbnail%26cb_client%3Dmaps_sv.tactile.gps%26thumb%3D2%26w%3D203%26h%3D100%26yaw%3D24.384514%26pitch%3D0!7i13312!8i6656)
I'm sure you could modify that idea into a smaller size fit for Five Points than the suburbs of Rochester Hills.
Careful, make too big of a deal out of this and JTA will build an overpass.
Quote from: Josh on May 23, 2016, 11:51:25 AM
I think this aerial photograph with the overlaid street center lines make it clear that this "not a roundabout" is in fact, not a roundabout.
(http://i.imgur.com/jo4NOKl.jpg)
I'd hardly call those lines the "street center." The line for Lomax goes over a curb and hits a parked car.
Quote from: johnnyliar on May 23, 2016, 01:14:04 PM
Quote from: Josh on May 23, 2016, 11:51:25 AM
I think this aerial photograph with the overlaid street center lines make it clear that this "not a roundabout" is in fact, not a roundabout.
(http://i.imgur.com/jo4NOKl.jpg)
I'd hardly call those lines the "street center." The line for Lomax goes over a curb and hits a parked car.
Yeah, it would be easier to actually see the streets without the lines.
Whether 5 Points is a roundabout or not, I hope everyone can agree that it ought to be easier for pedestrians to cross these streets than it is now.
The question is how do we make that happen?
Quote from: lowlyplanner on May 23, 2016, 01:59:37 PM
Whether 5 Points is a roundabout or not, I hope everyone can agree that it ought to be easier for pedestrians to cross these streets than it is now.
The question is how do we make that happen?
Is that a Lowly Worm avatar? Nice!
I agree - Five Points should be more pedestrian-friendly. Not that it's terrible now, but it should be better. I think zebra crossings would be good - and I'd be loath to suggest Americans don't know how to deal with those. So it just makes sense, really.
Quote from: Murder_me_Rachel on May 23, 2016, 04:03:35 PM
Quote from: Adam White on May 23, 2016, 02:12:48 PM
Quote from: lowlyplanner on May 23, 2016, 01:59:37 PM
Whether 5 Points is a roundabout or not, I hope everyone can agree that it ought to be easier for pedestrians to cross these streets than it is now.
The question is how do we make that happen?
Is that a Lowly Worm avatar? Nice!
I agree - Five Points should be more pedestrian-friendly. Not that it's terrible now, but it should be better. I think zebra crossings would be good - and I'd be loath to suggest Americans don't know how to deal with those. So it just makes sense, really.
While it is a clusterfuck for traffic, I think the traffic actually yields to pedestrians pretty well and as a matter of course. I have never felt unsafe crossing and I walk in that area a lot.
The only times I really recall it being an issue for me was at night. But during the days it's not too bad - the only real issue is probably the lack of crossings. You have to wait for a break in traffic to leg it across in some spots.
There was an open, public meeting for this a few years ago at SunRay.
Crosswalk improvements were definitely discussed. Using flashing lights, a raised crosswalk, speedbumps, ped. priority signaling, etc... But even in a room full of what you would hope to be progressive thinkers, the main argument that kept creeping back up was, "How would raised crosswalks affect the morning and afternoon traffic?"
AYFKM? So a room full of people trying to get a feel for 'pedestrian' improvements kept circling the wagons around not wanting to piss off the commuters through the area.
It's hard to have a truly walkable area when even the pro-pedestrian people don't want to run the risk of messing up their morning commute.
Also, same issue on the topic about turning College and Post back to one way with considerable pedestrian/bike improvements.
I find some of the crossings are better than others. But Park Street between Hovan and Wendy's and Margaret between the pharmacy and Wendy's can both be tough.
Pedestrians shouldn't have to wait for traffic or hurry across...
The more 5 Points feels like 1 place - from the main drag on Park Street to M Shack to Lomax to Mossfire and Black Sheep down to Starbucks and Memorial Park - the larger it will feel and the more of a draw it will be.
I think officially, pedestrians get the right of way, meaning traffic is supposed to yield to them like at the crosswalk by Sunray, and any other. Part of the issue here is that there is a mix of stop signs and free crossings, with no clear way to indicate yielding. This problem is only going to get worse as Five Points and the rest of Riverside continue to grow. Presumably that will be something that's fixed in the update, and it'll be clearer that pedestrians always have the right of way. The alternative - leaving it as is - doesn't sound like a viable solution in the long term.
Quote from: blfair on May 23, 2016, 12:58:41 PM
Careful, make too big of a deal out of this and JTA will build an overpass.
Not really their style anymore
Great photo, Josh. Thanks for posting it.
Quote from: Adam White on May 19, 2016, 03:21:03 PM
Christy Frazier posted today that the beacon is staying, but will be moved over about 5 - 7 feet.
Surely some preliminary drawings have been completed if there have been meetings and some sort of intended resolution about this issue. Where are they?
Quote from: RattlerGator on May 24, 2016, 09:33:11 AM
Quote from: Adam White on May 19, 2016, 03:21:03 PM
Christy Frazier posted today that the beacon is staying, but will be moved over about 5 - 7 feet.
Surely some preliminary drawings have been completed if there have been meetings and some sort of intended resolution about this issue. Where are they?
I have no idea. Christy is a friend and she posted something about it on Facebook. Something to the effect of thinking it was going to be taken away but that it was saved by the merchants, etc. She's a merchant, so I guess she was consulted. I wonder if RAP know anything.
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/5-points-iconic-traffic-light-may-be-removed/216311043 (http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/5-points-iconic-traffic-light-may-be-removed/216311043)
Bill Bishop is........alive and available for comment if you need him. ::)
Wow, 6 pages about a bollard and the definition of a roundabout... Love this forum ;D
Are there any actual traffic engineers on this board who can comment on what they perceive to be the best solution. I would like to see some drawings or sketches of proposals as well, RattlerGator.
Quote from: jlmann on May 27, 2016, 10:57:33 AM
haha look at those 2 cars in the video keeping right of the beacon...boy are they lucky they didn't get t-boned from park st!!!
(http://sd.keepcalm-o-matic.co.uk/i-w600/keep-calm-see-you-next-tuesday-2.jpg)
Quote from: Adam White on May 27, 2016, 01:50:37 PM
(http://sd.keepcalm-o-matic.co.uk/i-w600/keep-calm-see-you-next-tuesday-2.jpg)
Insert Frye meme:
Not sure if 'See you next Tuesday' is genuine because of upcoming travel plans
or a thinly veiled euphemism aimed at jlmann...
;)
Quote from: jlmann on May 27, 2016, 02:58:34 PM
still cant believe youre a self described liberal/progressive
in the future maybe pipe down when the adult progressives are talking i suspect you'll just make us look bad
your ability to stick to your old opinion and ways of thinking and screen out contradictory information would make you a rock star conservative. ever consider running for office?
I'm not a liberal or a "progressive" whatever that means. I am, for lack of a better word, a socialist (though I cringe at people using such descriptors). But I am a former member of the SPUSA, a former Fabian and a current member of Left Unity. So make what you will of that.
Quote from: Non-RedNeck Westsider on May 27, 2016, 02:34:57 PM
Quote from: Adam White on May 27, 2016, 01:50:37 PM
(http://sd.keepcalm-o-matic.co.uk/i-w600/keep-calm-see-you-next-tuesday-2.jpg)
Insert Frye meme:
Not sure if 'See you next Tuesday' is genuine because of upcoming travel plans
or a thinly veiled euphemism aimed at jlmann...
;)
I swear it was a reference to your upcoming Memorial Day weekend (and my bank holiday weekend). I swear.
Quote from: jlmann on May 27, 2016, 02:53:14 PM
hardyhar. its really unfortunate you've been wrong these years adam. it can be tough to face sometimes even over a traffic beacon but try to cope
i backed off the comments on your brain, but it's pretty clear how lacking your analytical skills are. never have you offered anything other than your unsubstantiated opinion and some anecdotal observations from someone who apparently does even live in jax any longer.
but yeah im the See.U.N.T. because i refuse to let you characterize your unfounded opinion as a legitimate alternative to that which is correct
(https://cdn.meme.am/instances/500x/37875261.jpg)
I have said before that I might be wrong. But apparently you missed that. And I stand by what I said - I might be wrong, but I am going to need more than a single column in the Times Union before I accept what you seem to think is the undeniable truth.
I think I'm being more than reasonable about this. You have been resolute in your position and have been the one that first started with the personal insults. All over a fucking traffic bollard.
Quote from: jlmann on May 27, 2016, 03:11:13 PM
well clearly i wasn't the only one who thought you were calling me a, lets say, runt
I'd be lying if I said otherwise. It was all a bit of "banter" (which apparently these days is offered as a defense for being a dickhead). So, sorry about that.
I just don't like the constant sniping - I think it's perfectly reasonable for us to have differing opinions without having to get personal or take it too seriously.
Quote from: jlmann on May 27, 2016, 03:11:13 PM
well clearly i wasn't the only one who thought you were calling me a, lets say, runt
Hahahaha... I honestly didn't know.
Quote from: jlmann on May 27, 2016, 03:33:00 PM
im all for innocent banter
that's what i was doing by pointing out the cars in the video, admittedly in a cheeky fashion. a wise crack and lil jab at ya. i mean come on given this pedantic discussion you have to admit its a little funny the first 10 seconds or so have 2 cars driving as they do
i just don't see how calling someone about the worst name out there, even if in a veiled fashion, is comparable to my comment sarcastic as it may have been
Well, you know how us conservatives are. I could've called you Pocahontas.
http://uk.businessinsider.com/donald-trump-elizabeth-warren-pocahontas-mouth-2016-5?r=US&IR=T
Quote from: jlmann on May 27, 2016, 04:38:12 PM
but hey it's Friday afternoon- in all seriousness no need to leave it on a harsh note. have a good weekend, adam, you seem like a fine enough chap. im just jealous of your bankers hours
You too - enjoy your holiday. Hopefully you get decent weather.
What the hell just happened here? The last 2 pages of this thread played out like an after school special from the 80's. Y'all went from "Cunt" to "Kumbaya" and now patting each other on the butt as you mosey off to the Memorial Day weekend... Can we get back on topic please?
And San Marco has 2 roundabouts near the Lions and they all seem to live in peace and harmony....damn!
Quote from: marty904 on May 28, 2016, 07:22:56 AM
What the hell just happened here? The last 2 pages of this thread played out like an after school special from the 80's. Ya'll went from "Cunt" to "Kumbaya" and now patting each other on the butt as you mosey off to the Memorial Day weekend... Can we get back on topic please?
*y'all (you all)
Happy Memorial Day.
Quote from: mtraininjax on May 28, 2016, 12:58:27 PM
And San Marco has 2 roundabouts near the Lions and they all seem to live in peace and harmony....damn!
I agree...but there is a group of people that believe those don't work...and that there has been increased traffic in the neighborhood because of it. I would submit any traffic increase is due to I-95 construction and/or the growing popularity of the square following the reconfiguration.
Somewhere up thread someone asked about other 5 point intersections.
In Jax (or is it Neptune? ) Beach where Penman, Florida, and another street come together - traffic signals.
In Atlantic Beach, where Plaza, Seminole, and another street meet - All Way Stop signs. Which people don't seem to know how to use.
Columbia, SC has two 5 points intersections in their "5 Points". Both are signalized but one includes a small park now.
(http://www.world-guides.com/images/columbia/columbia_travel_five_points.jpg)
In Nashville, their 5 points intersection is signalized. However, one leg is one way.
(http://www.brettweaverstudio.com/images/uploads/BWeaver_5PointsEastNashville_oil_24x36.jpg)
Quotebut there is a group of people that believe those don't work
Good for them, I don't see the city tearing them up anytime soon. I would however like to see them out there protesting roundabouts. Would be a great use of their time.
Close off Park from Lomax to Post to automobiles and make it strictly a walk and bike zone. Then put in a traditional 4 way light and...voila... 8)
Quote from: BridgeTroll on May 30, 2016, 07:59:43 PM
Close off Park from Lomax to Post to automobiles and make it strictly a walk and bike zone. Then put in a traditional 4 way light and...voila... 8)
This was absolutely one of the suggestions discussed during the open meeting a few years ago. Seems like a great suggestion; seemed like one then, too.
Cars win. Sorry.
Come on, be real here. Park is the major artery trough RA. To close it off anywhere would be a total mess.
Quote from: mtraininjax on May 30, 2016, 02:01:12 PM
Good for them, I don't see the city tearing them up anytime soon. I would however like to see them out there protesting roundabouts. Would be a great use of their time.
I am a big fan of your open-minded positive attitude!
Quote from: jlmann on May 31, 2016, 04:27:21 PM
pardon my ignorance, but have any studies touched on this commuter issue? do they study to that level of detail?
making park pedestrian is probably a bit drastic at this point, but if more minor changes would make traffic a little more difficult I wonder if it might force traffic that is just passing through to rely more on 95 and Roosevelt and not venture down park unless they had a destination in the 5 pts area
thus, yes rush hour may be nightmare for a while, but eventually people further west may stop going that route to and from work (I say maybe not a bad thing if they are a large % of traffic)
when people are coming in from other parts of town to visit they don't seem to be the ones zipping through making it dangerous- its the regulars. perhaps making it less of a thoroughfare could be a good thing. a little slower traffic and less volume hardly seems like it will slow down the neighborhoods growth at this point.
just curious the thoughts of planners/pros w/ more experience on this thinking and welcome your input
I wonder if they were to pedestrianize it, if it would just force drivers to use Post and/or College. Or to I-10 (or is it 95) via Stockton? Surely there could be a way or ways to mitigate the possible impact of closing Park to traffic.
I think Jax could use more pedestrian-only streets. Maybe one downtown, too.
QuoteI think Jax could use more pedestrian-only streets. Maybe one downtown, too.
Most of East Coastline Drive is now empty of everything. Most streets that were cut off after Monroe was chopped in 2 by the albatross known as the courthouse, could go into ped friendly. Why not make more blocks around the courthouse void of cars? From Adams North, pick your streets and close them, no real loss, no real traffic downtown. The only real place where there are lots of people daily is the courthouse, start there.
http://residentnews.net/2016/06/01/proposed-5-points-concept-plan-flux/ (http://residentnews.net/2016/06/01/proposed-5-points-concept-plan-flux/)
Proposed 5 Points Concept Plan still in flux