We went to DC this weekend to see the Washed Ashore art exhibit at the zoo and $Wife had to navigate a couple circles. DC has some, and probably is the “oldest” reference for them locally. They go back to the main DC construction, which I recognize is essentially a toddler compared to the European cities.
$Wife did great, although she does complain about them every time.
My first guess would be China. I’ve seen pictures of highways there that make any I’ve seen look tiny.
Dog Bone Junctions are great for when you want a roundabout but already have a bridge that’s only wide enough for the old avenue.
It’s new construction, I think they just liked them.
[quote=“RRabbit42, post:40, topic:1205”]
Wherever it’s from, if they can build a 19-lane highway, then they can build a better mass transit system.[/quote]
Mass Transit only works taking people from a people concentrated area to a concentrated area. Indianapolis has some feeder road issues, and people keep bringing up light rail as a solution. Except the commuting radius for Indianapolis is like 60 miles, and I used to drive more than that, and the “main” downtown area is like a five mile circle. Not to mention the number of people who work on the loop and don’t even get downtown, or the people who live in one burb and work in another. And the 4-6 months a year where the average person won’t walk outside in Indianapolis, at least not until employers put showers at the office, and or the workers all buy parkas.
I went around that circle again yesterday. Looks like they regraded the center - took out the raised planter and most of the smaller bushes, relocated the tree more off center (why???) and put in some other kind of planting, maybe Reed Grass, that still block the view a bit, but not as bad as before.
This seems to be a thing with large roundabouts. The ornamental tree is never central. Ever.
Off center things = messing with OCD people
I think it may be to prevent fatalities when the inevitable idiot drives straight through.
I could totally see that
Yeah, makes sense. I’d not thought of that. Then again we usually have all sorts of things on our roundabouts like signs and bollards and the occasional stoner.
I don’t know if you use guard posts in the US, but we use them over here in Europe; usually about three feet tall, white with a black stripe, and a reflective strip on them. On the motorway they have ID tags so if you break down you can tell the recovery company exactly where you are, which is clever.
Anyway I bring them up because I’ve just watched three young kids run past carrying some (having unbolted them from their mounts, I guess) being chased by a traffic warden… I love my days off, there’s always something stilly to watch.
Sounds like the kernel of a Benny Hill skit in the making…
Mile markers here on highways. Though a couple states with long stretches have had to replace the 420 mile marker with a 419.9 marker.
They stopped replacing the exit and mile marker 69 signs on I-45. When I was in middle or high school, they used to get stolen, until the state or whoever gave up or wised up. The two exits right there, which are less than 1/2 mile apart, are now Exit 68 and Exit 70A.
It can even vary within a state. I haven’t seen exit numbers based on cross streets, but I have seen sequential numbering as well as mile-based numbering. And some states still have the “Old Exit 12” signs tacked onto the legs of the exits that they’ve converted to mile-based numbering.
I think they have finally started taking down the ‘Old’ signs from the exits on the North-East Extension of the Pennsylvania Turnpike now that you mention it.
Indiana has reversed the mileage on 69. So exit 10 is now exit 210 (Old Exit 10).
Weird how it worked out like that.
I didn’t even notice this summer when I was on that road.
Wow, a couple of WTFs there!
And sure enough, from a wiki…
Except for California, because reasons
Nine states as of June 2008 and the District of Columbia use sequential numbering schemes on at least one highway, although the 2009 edition of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices
(MUTCD) requires these jurisdictions to transition to distance-based
numbering. Although a ten-year compliance period was proposed for the
new edition of the MUTCD,[4]
a compliance date for this change was ultimately not adopted with the
2009 edition, meaning that the transition is accomplished through a
systematic upgrading of existing signing and there is no specific date
by which the change must be implemented. However, the FHWA has required
that all federally-funded routes with sequential numbering to adopt
mileage-based exit numbers; the FHWA has required each state that
currently uses sequential exit numbering to submit a plan to eventually
transition to distance-based exit numbers.[5]
Some of the states that currently have sequential numbering either have
or intend to request a waiver from the Federal Highway Administration
to retain their current numbering systems, while others have planned a
gradual transition to mileage-based exit numbering over time as existing
signage reaches the end of its serviceable life and is replaced. The
mile-based requirement also mandates multiple exits in the same mile to
use A, B, C, etc.; the “consecutive” numbering scheme (which must be
phased out) for multi-directional interchanges sometimes uses N-S, or
E-W.
I find this very interesting for some reason.
Also, sorta related:
Mileage count increases from west to east on most even-numbered
Interstates; on odd-numbered Interstates mileage count increases from
south to north.
(Emphasis mine) Heh, most.
Sheesh and there was me thinking that junctions 19, 19A and 19B on the A1 were daft…
(there is a reason though, A and B were built long after 20 was built)
