When are they ever going to fix the Druid Hills-Clairmont right turn? (North Druid Hills: safety, design)

[toll_booth]

The right turn from eastbound Druid Hills to southbound Clairmont:

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.8128.../data=!3m1!1e3

has to be one of the worst-designed right turns I've ever seen.

1. It's a stop sign, not a yield sign, right next to a busy intersection.
2. It comes in at a sharp angle.
3. Trees obstruct the view onto Clairmont.

Put a light there, even a no-turn-on-red sign there if you have to. Rebuild the ramp if you must. But get rid of that stupid stop sign.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by toll_booth

The right turn from eastbound Druid Hills to southbound Clairmont:

https://www.google.com/maps/@33.8128.../data=!3m1!1e3

has to be one of the worst-designed right turns I've ever seen.

1. It's a stop sign, not a yield sign, right next to a busy intersection.
2. It comes in at a sharp angle.
3. Trees obstruct the view onto Clairmont.

Put a light there, even a no-turn-on-red sign there if you have to. Rebuild the ramp if you must. But get rid of that stupid stop sign.

From what I've heard, its intentional in order to be a revenue maker. Write more tickets.

[bu2]

If you want a worse one, try turning right off northbound Moreland onto North Avenue. Very difficult to do while staying in your lane and off the curb.

[MattCW]

Definitely needs to be a yield sign.

[toll_booth]

Originally Posted by MattCW

Definitely needs to be a yield sign.

In its current setup it would be difficult to justify as a yield sign. Entry angle is too sharp and there are trees in the way.

Needs a light there or even a redesign.

[Thulsa]

That used to be a yield sign, and it was an even bigger problem than.
As I recall, the reason it was changed to a stop was for two reasons.
One is that pedestrians could not get across that lane due to cars hardly slowing down to make the right turn through the yield sign.


Two, the right-turning North Druid cars would hardly slow down before zipping onto Clairmont as they tried to merge with the flowing Clairmont traffic. It was a mess.


IMHO, that island and separate right-turn lane needs to be removed so all traffic is facing the traffic light.
That is, what is now a separate lane is moved back to be contiguous with the rest of N Druid Hills, and then controlled with a right-turn arrow if necessary.

[arjay57]

The entirety of North Druid Hills seems like a mess to me.

[cqholt]

Originally Posted by Thulsa

That used to be a yield sign, and it was an even bigger problem than.
As I recall, the reason it was changed to a stop was for two reasons.
One is that pedestrians could not get across that lane due to cars hardly slowing down to make the right turn through the yield sign.


Two, the right-turning North Druid cars would hardly slow down before zipping onto Clairmont as they tried to merge with the flowing Clairmont traffic. It was a mess.


IMHO, that island and separate right-turn lane needs to be removed so all traffic is facing the traffic light.
That is, what is now a separate lane is moved back to be contiguous with the rest of N Druid Hills, and then controlled with a right-turn arrow if necessary.

This entire thread, other than this comment read "who cares about pedestrian safety safety, I wanna go fast!"

Because of the distance of this intersection from the signalized, it is a separate intersection and therefore is controlled by different traffic control device than the signal.

[MattCW]

Originally Posted by arjay57

The entirety of North Druid Hills seems like a mess to me.

It needs another through lane in each direction from I-85 to 78.

[bu2]

Originally Posted by arjay57

The entirety of North Druid Hills seems like a mess to me.

Your perception is accurate.