FINALLY...CALIFORNIA
CONSIDERS “ROUNDABOUTS MUST BE CONSIDERED” POLICY FOR ALL
INTERSECTION INVESTMENTS
Current
TV ads promoting the State of New York cite the State being
historically first in lots of areas—including the first lengthy
transportation canal—and asserts the State still a leader in
industry and commerce today. Early last century New York led the
nation in developing rules of the road, the beginnings of highway
design and safety, and traffic management--largely through the
efforts of William Phelps Eno who born in a wealthy family actually
never got a driver license.
Eno
also gets credit for taking a traffic concept from a French town
planner and installed the first traffic circle in New York City in
1905, Columbus Circle. This precursor of the modern roundabout was
followed shortly thereafter in 1907 by Paris' Place Charles DeGaulle
(then Place l'Etoile), and a circle in the first “garden city”,
new town Letchworth, UK in 1909. It is fitting then that New York
became the home of the first “roundabouts only” policy begun in
2005. New roundabouts can now be found throughout the State in spite
of recent funding constraints for highway investment. For example,
the Town of Malta, a suburb of Albany, already has twelve roundabouts
with two more in development. New roundabouts can also be found in
the downtowns and town centers, for examples, Glens Falls, Hamburg,
Plattsburgh, Voorheesville, and Albany itself.
The
“roundabouts only” policy of the New York State Department of
Transportation (NYSDOT) was joined by the Virginia department (a
“preference” for roundabouts) and two Canadian provincial
departments, British Columbia (first) and Alberta. The Canadian rules
call for roundabouts use whenever “more than two-way stop control”
is required to control traffic. Once in place “roundabouts only”
policies lead to most new installations being roundabouts and
conversions of most, if not all, signalized intersections to
roundabouts.
The
“roundabouts only” policy located in the NYSDOT “Highway Design
Manual” is as follows:
- Intersection at Grade5.9.1...when a project includes reconstructing or constructing new intersections, a roundabout alternative is to be analyzed to determine if it is a feasible solution based on site constraints, including ROW, environmental factors, and other design constraints.
...When
the analysis shows that a roundabout is a feasible alternative, it
should be considered the Department’s preferred
alternative due to the proven substantial safety benefits and
other operational benefits.
And
California? Well behind the curve in adopting roundabout technology,
the State transportation agency, Caltrans, seven years after New York
moves towards a pro-roundabout approach as that agency ponders a
policy which “requires consideration of a roundabout” when any
investment takes place at an intersection. Within the past few
years—really every year--California experienced high profile T-bone
crashes at intersections, including the death of famed author David
Halberstam and a horrific crash killing Anaheim Angels rookie pitcher
Nick Adenhart (who had just pitched an excellent game) and two
friends when the car Adenhart was driving got T-boned by a by a car
running a red light.
The
emerging Caltrans policy helps propel other states and localities to
moved towards “roundabouts only” policies for no other reason
than safety, the primary reason behind pro-roundabout policies to
date. (Of course at busy intersections roundabouts cut delay for
all users, reduce pollutant emissions and gas use by about 30%, cost
less to maintain, and enhance scenic quality.) On average, anything
but a roundabout generates serious and fatal injuries at a 900%
greater rate. For walkers, a single lane roundabout reduces
fatalities by about 90% and at two lane roundabouts also reduce
walker injury crashes significantly.
With
proper designs, roundabouts overall provide a safety benefit to
bicyclists.
Welcome
to the roundabout age California!
No comments:
Post a Comment