How would you re-stripe this intersection?

[empirestate]

https://goo.gl/maps/nkJqZ

Basically, the west and north legs of this intersection are the predominant through movement, so they're striped (and signaled) accordingly. But as somebody pointed out when I cited this location in another thread, the striping on the curved section has opposing directions of traffic separated by white pavement markings, instead of yellow. But of course, the same white line continues northward, where it does indeed separate traffic in the same direction of travel.

Besides that, the whole setup is a little funky (and there's a driveway adjacent to the south leg of the intersection that seems to be confusing matters a bit more). How would you re-stripe this so that it's both correct and intuitive? (And would you change how it's signaled as well, assuming you've taken it upon yourself to look into that aspect too?)

Just re-stripe, though; you're not allowed to physically re-configure the intersection. Keep the basic functionality, with the predominant north-and-west movement, the same, and just change the paint.

[realjd]

Like this:

[Rothman]

Like this:

Eesh.  That merge down to one lane on the curve is nasty.

[empirestate]

I should add that the north-to-west through lane (the curve) flows independently of the signal; it's controlled instead by a Yield sign. So the striping should reflect that, I guess.

[jakeroot]

I should add that the north-to-west through lane (the curve) flows independently of the signal; it's controlled instead by a Yield sign. So the striping should reflect that, I guess.

Last I checked, there was a right-pointing arrow on the signal facing north. Is it gone now?

[empirestate]

I should add that the north-to-west through lane (the curve) flows independently of the signal; it's controlled instead by a Yield sign. So the striping should reflect that, I guess.

Last I checked, there was a right-pointing arrow on the signal facing north. Is it gone now?

Um, gosh, I'm not sure. I drive through this every day; you'd think I would know!

I'm pretty sure it has changed from what's on StreetView; for example, I don't think that stop bar is still there in the middle of the intersection. (I guess that was for someone pulling out of the driveway and having to stop at the second signal?)

EDIT: Just went through and checked; everything's exactly as you see it here. 

I guess the arrow is still there; when it's on, you don't have to yield (there's nobody with r-o-w over you). When the arrow is off, you still don't have to stop at the light, but you do then have to yield.

[davewiecking]

Maybe the owner of the Oregon Road Professional Center paid someone off because they were tired of dealing with both the stop sign on their driveway, then the stop bar and separate traffic light when heading north. I was going to suggest that the driveway should be moved to the other side of the U shaped parking lot, but GSV shows there's a stone wall and bicyclist in the way. Can't exit to the east, because Old Oregon Rd is one way southbound, and another stone wall in the way (I was prepared to argue that this doesn't count as reconfiguring the intersection, merely a private access to it, and I was trying to move the driveway on the cheap...). I like Realjd's proposal, and don't see the "merge on the curve" as a problem-it's not actually a merge. However I don't like the lower dashed line. If that's to access the driveway, that traffic should go straight southbound, then jog over when passing thru the intersection.

[realjd]

Like this:

Eesh.  That merge down to one lane on the curve is nasty.

Looking at it again, I think removing the right most yellow dashed line on the east side of the SB lane (the straight one on the right) and adding a white dashed line to the west side of the same lane, connecting to the right edge of that painted triangle, may be a better answer. I'll mark it up tomorrow if I have time.

[CtrlAltDel]

I apologize for the crudeness of my work, but I would do something like this:

[empirestate]

Like this:

Eesh.  That merge down to one lane on the curve is nasty.

Looking at it again, I think removing the right most yellow dashed line on the east side of the SB lane (the straight one on the right) and adding a white dashed line to the west side of the same lane, connecting to the right edge of that painted triangle, may be a better answer. I'll mark it up tomorrow if I have time.

I'm thinking that the yellow painted island you've added needs to extend a bit more to the northeast, and perhaps be hatched like the white triangle, up to where it becomes tangent with the south-to-south lane.

Also, I wonder if anybody coming out of the driveway is realistically going to stop at that center stop bar. They're just going to head north by bearing to the right, as if they were coming the wrong way out of Old Oregon Road. (And by the by, did anybody notice what appears to be an all-red aspect signal facing that wrong-way approach?)

[KG909]

[jakeroot]

This whole intersection blows -- just throw in a mini-roundabout and call it a day.

[empirestate]

This whole intersection blows -- just throw in a mini-roundabout and call it a day.

They did that already just to the west of here. But remember, you're not allowed to reconfigure, only re-stripe to accurately reflect how the intersection currently works.

[vtk]

https://goo.gl/maps/nkJqZ

How would you re-stripe this so that it's both correct and intuitive? (And would you change how it's signaled as well, assuming you've taken it upon yourself to look into that aspect too?)

Four-phase signal. Phase 1, longest: Oregon Rd EB to all other legs, plus Oscawana Lake Rd SB to Oregon Rd WB.  Phase 2: Oregon Rd WB to all other legs.  Phase 3: Oscawana Lake Rd SB to all other legs.  Phase 4, shortest, only if triggered by detector: Private driveway in SW corner to all other legs.

Also note I removed one access point to the gas station.  I suppose that doesn't have to be removed completely; a one-way slip from Oregon Rd WB into the gas station should not be problematic.

I was going to suggest that the driveway should be moved ... but GSV shows there's a ... bicyclist in the way.

[froggie]

But remember, you're not allowed to reconfigure, only re-stripe to accurately reflect how the intersection currently works.

Screw that.  Throw in the roundabout.

[vtk]

This whole intersection blows -- just throw in a mini-roundabout and call it a day.

But you've cut off the only access to that one property on the SW corner.  Move the roundabout west slightly, so the driveway to that property is the 4th leg connecting to the roundabout.  Then Old Oregon Rd can just slip off of Oregon Rd EB just after it leaves the roundabout.

[jakeroot]

But you've cut off the only access to that one property on the SW corner.

Not as such. I just didn't draw it.

Move the roundabout west slightly, so the driveway to that property is the 4th leg connecting to the roundabout.  Then Old Oregon Rd can just slip off of Oregon Rd EB just after it leaves the roundabout.

I don't want to make it that easy to access the property. It would be better off as a curb-cut from that one corner of the roundabout. I'll re-draw the intersection again to demonstrate what I mean.

[empirestate]

But remember, you're not allowed to reconfigure, only re-stripe to accurately reflect how the intersection currently works.

Screw that.  Throw in the roundabout.

Throw it in all you want, but that's a different thread: https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=7062.0. I'm focusing on pavement markings here, otherwise I would have posted it there.

Or, if preferred, mods are welcome to merge this into that thread.

[vtk]

But you've cut off the only access to that one property on the SW corner.

Not as such. I just didn't draw it.

Move the roundabout west slightly, so the driveway to that property is the 4th leg connecting to the roundabout.  Then Old Oregon Rd can just slip off of Oregon Rd EB just after it leaves the roundabout.

I don't want to make it that easy to access the property. It would be better off as a curb-cut from that one corner of the roundabout. I'll re-draw the intersection again to demonstrate what I mean.

To me, a "hidden" exit and entrance to a roundabout seems like it could cause some severe issues with the roundabout's function, though I guess it's not much of an issue when everything is single-lane.  Still, to do it right – compliant with MUTCD and the convention of achieving safe roundabout design by treating it like a tight ring of intersections – you'd have to design the roundabout geometry as if the driveway is a full-blown street, then stripe it as if the driveway isn't there if you don't want it to be "too easy to access" the property.  I'm not even sure that's a concern worth mucking up the roundabout for; given the size of the parking lot on that property, I'd guess they would rather have an easier time getting people in and out.

I also feel like pointing out that there's plenty of existing pavement at this intersection, so the roundabout design(s) proposed here can actually be achieved with pavement markings alone.

[froggie]

I also feel like pointing out that there's plenty of existing pavement at this intersection, so the roundabout design(s) proposed here can actually be achieved with pavement markings alone.

Exactly.  A roundabout could probably be done starting with paint and some bollards, then build in the curbs later.

[empirestate]

I also feel like pointing out that there's plenty of existing pavement at this intersection, so the roundabout design(s) proposed here can actually be achieved with pavement markings alone.

Exactly.  A roundabout could probably be done starting with paint and some bollards, then build in the curbs later.

OK, fair enough, you could achieve a roundabout with paint alone. (And it wouldn't surprise me if an actual reconfiguration to a real roundabout did occur in the near future.)

But what I meant to ask was how you might correct or improve the pavement striping in this example without changing how the intersection functions. So, there would still be a through movement between the north and west legs, and there would still be a little mini-crossroads in the southeast quadrant.

The second part was to see if there's a way to change the signaling so that you don't have an approach (from north to west) that's sometimes controlled by a Yield sign and sometimes by a traffic signal.

[davewiecking]

Is this road open to large trucks? I think a semi might have trouble negotiating the proposed traffic circle without running over the middle, and possibly lanes looping the other way, but it's hard to tell the scale. As to keeping the north to west movement, I'll prove that I also can't read the original post's intent (or pretend that this will fit on the existing asphalt) and suggest a slip ramp be painted and bollarded next to the circle for that movement. (Yes, I've invented a new verb.)

To someone familiar with this area, I noticed that just to the east is a narrow residential road named Peekskill Hollow Turnpike. Is that the oldest road in this area?

[jakeroot]

Is this road open to large trucks? I think a semi might have trouble negotiating the proposed traffic circle without running over the middle, and possibly lanes looping the other way, but it's hard to tell the scale.

At least as far as my design goes, the area in the middle of the circle is just painted, so a large vehicle may pass over the center.

[empirestate]

Is this road open to large trucks? I think a semi might have trouble negotiating the proposed traffic circle without running over the middle, and possibly lanes looping the other way, but it's hard to tell the scale.

The through movement, Oregon Road, is open to trucks; I can't say I've ever seen a semi but I don't know that they're specifically prohibited. Old Oregon Road (to the south) allows no commercial traffic except local delivery. Lockwood Road (to the east), I'm not certain, but many of the local roads in the area have 5-ton limits.

By the way, the north and west legs are both part of Oregon Road. The name "Oscawana Lake Road" picks up at the county line; it's also Putnam CR 20.

To someone familiar with this area, I noticed that just to the east is a narrow residential road named Peekskill Hollow Turnpike. Is that the oldest road in this area?

Certainly one of them. Oldest good map I can find is from 1838, and already all of the main roads at Oregon Corners are shown, including both forks of Peekskill Hollow Road/Turnpike. Even the non-"old" route of Oregon Road is extant by mid-century.

[M3019C LPS20]

I'm not sure how I'd reconfigure everything, but that intersection is wild. There's practically one signal for each direction instead of two. I also like the 8" arrow indications with the LED inserts.