The Civil Traffic Engineer response to these pictures:
"Someone did not do turning radius minimums before they line painted."
My only question about the 2-way conversion was ... "If it's not broke, why fix it?"
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Is this a sign of the times with the conversion of 2-way traffic on Braddock and Cameron?
Are these pictures attached a view of what the citizenry should expect with the Delivery drivers with the conversion of 2-way traffic on Braddock and Cameron? I personally do have any issue with the 2-way but someone (a Civil Traffic Engineer) was quick to point out, you forget about the truck traffic, well I witnessed that 1st hand today.
The Civil Traffic Engineer response to these pictures:
"Someone did not do turning radius minimums before they line painted."
My only question about the 2-way conversion was ... "If it's not broke, why fix it?"
The Civil Traffic Engineer response to these pictures:
"Someone did not do turning radius minimums before they line painted."
My only question about the 2-way conversion was ... "If it's not broke, why fix it?"
2 comments:
Aren't these new two-way streets restricted (in certain portions of the street) to "truck traffic". It does certainly look like the engineers failed to do a turning radius minimums study BEFORE they painted the lines.....Is there even a "no right turn" sign for trucks at this intersection. Poor planning......
That looks like a truck with a 53' trailer...they really should not be in the downtown area because those are not typical delivery trucks (they usually have far, far shorter trailers, or are single-unit trucks)...I wonder if the driver took a wrong turn, honestly. To accommodate a truck that large, the road would have to be more like 5-lanes wide simply to allow for proper turning, or the buildings on each corner would have to be demolished.
Post a Comment