Goin’ Round on Roundabouts

The following is a wonderful discussion on roundabouts that took place on WALKSacramento’s e-mail discussion list in April 2011, preserved here for reference and review by others:

- What exactly is a roundabout? Go here to find out!!

——————————————————————————————-

2011/4/9 Terry Preston said:

Walkers,

I found the following roundabout in the oddest place (I thought) on a rural round north of Fairfield CA:

What the heck is this doing here, I thought?  There’s a packing house on one side of the road, fields on two others and an apartment complex on the last.  Odd place for what to me has always been an urban feature.  Last place I thought to see Mother Earth (that’s her, according to an inscription) calming traffic.

I got the back story from a local.  The road (I forget the name, I took this photo in February) runs north of Hwy 80.  People were using it as high speed alternative when Hwy 80 was jammed.  Stop signs at this intersection were laughed at.  So the locals decided to put in something that had to slow down traffic, would be hard to ignore and would look cool on top of all that.  And there she is.

Further north, I found a road sign, “Protect our rural community, stop urban sprawl!”

You find inspiration in the most surprising places.

Thanks!!

Terry Preston
Complete Streets Coordinator, WALKSacramento
916-446-9255

————————————————————————-

Paul Zykofsky:

Hi Terry:

Nice!  Looks like it’s at the intersection of Rockville Road and Abernathy Road.  (Quick search on Google.)  While in the U.S. we’re seeing many urban roundabouts, in France you see a lot more in rural areas than in urban areas.  The reason, I suspect, is that in dense urban places there isn’t enough room to fit them in; not a problem in rural areas where they can easily replace a signal or stop-controlled intersection.

Paul

- Go here for roundabout design basics.

————————————————————————-

Eugene Lozano:

It is unfortunate that roundabouts are being promoted as providing increase safety for pedestrians while providing greater ease for motorists.

I would like pedestrian advocates to understand that roundabouts are a hazard to people with little or no vision.  All auditory cues used by blind pedestrians are lost at roundabout locations.

I would encourage you to try to make a crossing without using your vision and you will find you have no sense as to where moving traffic is coming from as well as finding motorists unwilling to yield the right of way to you.

Thank you for your consideration to the safety of pedestrians with visual impairments.

Gene Lozano

- Go here to find out how roundabouts can accommodate the visually impaired.

————————————————————————-

Randy Aeschlimann:

Terry,

I go downtown quite often for meeting. Being the cheap person I am I park at the park at C Street and Sixteenth Street, free parking. As I walk to WalkSac or the BOS meetings I go through an intersection that has a roundabout. I forget  the location of this intersection. I’m going downtown tomorrow I could email the location and perhaps you could visit it sometime.  Anyway it is not easy crossing this intersection. Cars go fast , they don’t slow down and they make turns without signaling. Sometime there are tall plants in the roundabout that make it hard to see cars coming and I know they can’t see me. I take more caution when crossing as a pedestrian. I don’t drive downtown much but when I come to a roundabout I slow down because it is hard for me to see pedestrians.

Thanks

Randy

————————————————————————-

Scott Clark:

Randy, I believe what you are referring to is not a roundabout, but a mini-circle with arguably some design flaws (views obstructed by landscaping, stop controlled vs yield control legs, angle of deflection not enough to slow speeds). The mini-circle fits in a smaller space than a roundabout and still reduces the conflict points for vehicles, but they aren’t necessarily as pedestrian friendly. At a roundabout all legs are yield controlled, and properly designed roundabouts include sufficient deflection to ensure low speeds, and key for the pedestrian are splitter islands at the approaches that slow vehicles and allow pedestrians to cross one direction of travel at a time.

Scott

- Go here to see the difference between a Roundabout and a Traffic Circle.

————————————————————————-

Randy responded:

Terry,

Thanks to all of you for the discussion on roundabouts. I always learn something from WalkSacramento, keep up the good work.

Do you think the residents asked for these mini-circles to slow down traffic?

I know the residents maintain the plant life but I’m don’t know who plants these areas. I know, as I’m sure you all do, the plants grow very high at times. Enough so it is difficult to see pedestrians.

I was downtown yesterday and I think at E and 13th there is a mini-circle.

Three cars were going east and they all made a U turn and headed west. I looked at the sign and I don’t think a U turn was an option. These mini-circles work because I pay more attention when walking and driving.

Randy

————————————————————————-

Randy,

With regard to the genesis of the mini-circles, my memory may be a bit fuzzy, so others are welcome to clarify, but (at least some of) the circles, along with the various half-street closures and the little refuge islands and other concrete obstacles that dot the streets in mid-town were part of a “mid-town traffic calming project” that the city initiated in the mid to late 1990′s. As much as I ever understood it, the idea was to try and get as much of the cut-through traffic as possible off the residential streets and force it over to the J and L St corridors. Essentially they did that by creating an obstacle course/maze out of the neighborhood to make it less appealing to commuters.

I recall hearing at the time that there was some outreach done with local residents but I don’t know how extensive it was. I was working in mid-town at the time and commuting (not by bike) and recall that there was very little information provided to the general public before these little concrete obstacles started popping up everywhere.  I wasn’t involved with SABA at the time so I’m not sure what, if any, input they had. I believe that this predated WALKSacramento.

Ted Link-Oberstar

——————————————————————————————-

Scott Clark:

The roundabout at West River Dr and Orchard that Ted mentions serves two nearby schools and does a great job handling all the pedestrians, bicycles, parent drivers, and large school buses that come with it.

Orchard and West River Drive

Two other roundabouts to check out in Sacramento are at Heritage and Northborough (N Natomas) and Windbridge and Rush River (Pocket).

Scott

Heritage and Northborough Drive

Windbridge and Rush River

Windbridge and Rush River – street view

————————————————————————-

Ted Link-Oberstar:

Scott, Thanks for the clarification. I was going to jump in with a similar comment but you beat me to it. The traffic furniture that the city installed in mid-town back a decade or more ago are not roundabouts. They are poorly designed mini-circles that create as many problems as they solve. But there are at least two roundabouts in the city that I’m aware of that are reasonably well designed.  Both of the ones I know of are in South Natomas, at San Juan Rd and Azevedo Dr. and on West River Drive at Orchard Ln.  (folks can Google Map them to take a look). I imagine there may be others I’m not aware of.

In any case, the purpose of roundabouts is to force traffic to slow, which gives motorists at least a chance to see pedestrians. Properly designed, they also allow pedestrians to focus on traffic only from one direction at a time.

Now Gene does make a good point regarding potential hazards for visually impaired pedestrians. One of the weaknesses, especially for the visually impaired (and some would argue also for children) is that rondabouts don’t require people to come to a complete stop.  But one of the places that they tend to be useful is in locations where other methods of getting people to actually stop are ineffective.  For example, sometimes on higher speed roadways, particularly at intersections with minor streets, stop signs are an ineffective method of traffic control because, either indadvertently or intentionally, a significant percentage of motorists simply blow through them. That, of course, creates a hazard for pedestrians, whether visually impaired or not, (as well as other motorists) because there is an expectation that the vehicle is going to stop and instead, it may barely slow down. A properly designed roundabout at least compels the vehicle to slow, which increases the opportunity for the driver to see and react to pedestrians, bikes and other vehicles. Traffic signals, of course, may be more effective than stop signs in these situations but they are expensive and, when used too frequently, can also desensitize motorists .

Factors such as volume and type of ped traffic (i.e. children, elderly, disabled) need to be evaluated to decide what type of treatment (or combination of treatments) may be most effective and appropriate at a particular location.  Roundabouts certainly aren’t a panacea. But properly designed, they are a useful tool in some situations.

Ted Link-Oberstar

San Juan and Azevedo (near Ted’s house)

San Juan and Azevedo – street view

————————————————————————-

Eric Fredericks:

Scott and Ted,

You’re way quicker on the draw than me. Thanks for your thoughtful responses.

One other thing I might mention is that people also confuse roundabouts and rotaries, which people often incorrectly reference as scary roundabout examples (like in Paris, the Arc de Triumph is a rotary). The modern roundabout has distinct geometrical features that force drivers to slow down. I was also informed that they always have “tails” (often including a median refuge for peds).

I do not know the status of guidance for visually impaired pedestrians at roundabouts, but I have long thought that there should be some sort of specialized tactile device or system that alerts the visually impaired pedestrian that the crossing is a roundabout. I also wonder if rectangular rapid flashing beacons are allowed for use nationwide that they could be an effective traffic operation device to work in tandem with a well-designed single-lane roundabout. I honestly believe that if measures such as this are taken at roundabouts, then they are actually *safer* for the visually impaired than the preponderance of signalized intersections. I won’t go as far to say all because banning right turns on red and scramble signals I think can be immensely beneficial. But even in those situations you still have safety issues for the visually impaired.

I want to state that this is also a huge concern of mine, because in so many ways roundabouts are superior  to other types of controlled intersections and I would love to see more used in the US. We have a serious commitment to the needs of people with disabilities in this country, more so than almost all other countries, and I’d love to see that continue too. I hope we can find a way to make roundabouts work for all users.

-Eric

Eric Fredericks
neighborhoods.org

Posted in Complete Streets | Leave a comment

Safe Streets for All: An Active Living Workshop with Dan Burden – Dec 19

WALKSacramento, AARP and over fifty participants including advocates, local planners and transportation staff had an exciting and informative time on Monday, December 19 as Dan Burden led a walk and workshop at the Fruitridge Community Center, 4000 Fruitridge Rd,  in Sacramento.  The morning started off with a presentation by Burden on what makes a walkable street and thriving neighborhood, followed by a walk audit down Fruitridge Road, up 44th Avenue and then a challenging trek across Highway 99 to the busy and active intersection of Franklin Avenue.

The theme for the day was Active Living for our growing senior population.  Regional planning projections see a ‘graying’ region, with more residents looking for smaller living space, and access to goods and services that don’t require driving a car.

Regional projections for the next twenty years finds:

• Over 303,000 more homes needed

• Over 871,000 more people in the region

• 71% of new households headed by someone 55 years or older

What can we do to meet this challenge?  How can we design our roads, draft our plans, and develop our new and existing roads and communities to meet the future?  Participants reviewed a summary of the region’s Sustainable Communities Strategy/Metropolitan Transportation Plan and signed a petition.

- Read the Sacramento Bee’s excellent coverage of the walk, including video:

- For more on what you get from a walk with Dan Burden, check out his video here.

Next steps, looking at ways to work with our partners to bring his views and recommendations for the Fruitridge Road corridor to life and to continue work with our state and local partners to make our communities safer, healthier and more sustainable for all of us, regardless of age or ability.

What You Can Do:

Add your voice to the call for safe and sustainable planning here.  We will be posting our comments soon, for your reference.

Posted in Complete Streets, Events, MTP, Sustainable Communities | Leave a comment

Integrating Health and Equity into the Sacramento Region’s Regional Plan – Dec 13

The workshop was hosted on December 13, 2011, at the Sierra Health Foundation by the American Lung Association in California, the Healthy Places Coalition, Human Impact Partners and ClimatePlan. Along with local partners WALKSacramento, Environmental Council of Sacramento, and the Coalition on Regional Equity, the workshop brought together over fifty health professionals and sustainable communities advocates to bring health measurements and outcomes into regional planning.

The focus was on the current draft Sacramento region’s Sustainable Communities Strategy/ Metropolitan Transportation Plan, but the long term goal was to incorporate health and equity into planning at all levels.

Key points from the breakout sessions were:

Active Transportation:

1) Complete streets implantation is key to active transportation – need to measure progress towards goal

2) Projects proposed for consideration- health proponents should be quantified and be able to be first priority in funding

3) Bike lanes and infrastructure needs to be tied with land use- interconnectivity, destination should be factored in siting of specific projects

4) Democratizing data- not everyone can work through models, data as laid out- other groups can have access

Equity:

1) Make a significant effort on community engagement/public participation, including CBOs, neighborhood associations, using a variety of communication outlets. Securing commitment from SACOG to include genuine public participation-in updating public participation manual

2) Ensuring SACOG fulfills civil rights obligations throughout the plan, not just equity chapter. Account and analyze displacement and gentrification potential

3) Affordable transportation access – offer discounted passes, lobbying regional transportation board to consider income scales

4) Modeling transparency- models based on assumptions, can be flawed. Accountability for assumptions

Performance Metrics:

1) Value to health and equity metrics for evaluation as well as for comparing land use and transportation in region

2) Monitoring and tracking projects in SCS projects moving forward

3) Who should track metrics- jurisdictions and advocates

4) Use existing data to track metrics but also important to establish better data tracking for futureSCS

5) Baseline measurements to track, also measure and track qualitative metrics

It was a very productive day.  Go here for a thorough summary of the event provided by ClimatePlan.


Posted in Complete Streets, Events, MTP, Sustainable Communities | Leave a comment

A Pedestrian-Bicycle Roadmap for the review of the 2011 Draft SACOG Metropolitan Transportation Plan

As the Sacramento community prepares to draft comments on the SACOG draft Metropolitan Transportation Plan / Sustainable Communities Strategy, I wanted to share with you a letter written by WALKSacramento’s former Executive Director, Anne Geraghty, because it provides many of the questions we should ask about the draft Sacramento MTP’s potential to promote active transportation.

Also – we invite you to join us on Friday, November 18 from 12:00 – 1:00 at the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District, 777 12th Street, 3rd Floor, in downtown Sacramento.   Kacey Lizon, SACOG’s MTP coordinator, will walk us through an outline of the MTP and answer questions. This is a regular meeting of WALKSacramento’s Complete Streets Coalition – all are welcome.


November 8, 2011

A Pedestrian-Bicycle Roadmap
for the review of the
2011 Draft SACOG Metropolitan Transportation Plan

SACOG members, colleagues and friends:

WALKSacramento was pleased to receive an early draft of the 2011 update of the Sacramento Area Council of Government’s (SACOG) Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP).  We are outlining our initial concerns in order that the regional community can become aware of the implications of this MTP for the mobility of people of all ages who walk and bike and then provide comments to SACOG on these issues.  We will be hosting workshops in early December in each of the SACOG counties to get input related to pedestrian and bicycle concerns.  Our more detailed review and recommendations will follow.

SACOG staff has been working hard to put together this latest draft and to get it out for public comment and then have time for revisions in order to meet its April 2012 deadline for adoption.  The MTP is updated every four years.  The MTP must meet many state and federal requirements, but in the end it is a running list of transportation project priorities.  It defines which transportation investments will come first and which must wait.

WALKSacramento was formed in 1998 out of a concern than the needs of pedestrians were not being addressed in the MTP or local transportation and land use plans.  In fact, this concern was first expressed at a Lung Association committee meeting organized to address the 1997 draft MTP.  WALKSacramento believed at that time that if pedestrian needs were addressed many of the other transportation, traffic congestion and air quality at both the local and regional level would be addressed.  We continue to so believe.

Much has happened since 1997.  Both the City and County of Sacramento now have pedestrian master plans and are working steadily to implement these plans.   Other SACOG communities have developed such plans as well.   WALKSacramento has been involved in the preparation of many of these documents and, as well, has been involved in many Safe Routes to School efforts throughout the Sacramento area.  WALKSacramento, working with a multi-agency advisory committee, developed recommendations to make the Los Rios Community colleges pedestrian, bicycle and transit friendly as outlined in the “Los Rios Transportation Connections Plan” of 2008.  Some of these recommendations are beginning to be implemented.

This fall, with a grant from The California Endowment, Walt Seifert and Anne Geraghty, former executive directors of the Sacramento Area Bicycle Advocates (SABA) and WALKSacramento, respectively, visited jurisdictions in Sutter and Yuba Counties.  They found great interest in walking and bicycling: the City of Yuba just adopted an outstanding new bicycle master plan; Sutter County is finalizing a bicycle-pedestrian master plan and Yuba County has just initiated work to develop a bicycle master plan.  As they visited these jurisdictions they saw much potential for making more trips by foot and bike.  It speaks to us about the importance of every jurisdiction having pedestrian and bicycle master plans.

In September 2010, WALKSacramento commented on SACOG’s proposed MTP scenarios and recommended that SACOG consider a “4th Scenario.”[1] This scenario would be a Complete Streets scenario that reprioritized transportation investments so that safety and mobility infrastructure for pedestrians and bicyclists could be completed in a reasonable amount of time – twelve years, or three MTP cycles.  We joined with other community organizations and individuals to form the “Safe Routes For All” Coalition with the goal of influencing SACOG’s selection of a scenario that supported a greater emphasis on this Complete Streets vision.   This enlarged the Safe Routes to School vision of a safe pedestrian and bicycle environment for our children to include safety for all adults so that all can walk and bicycle safely to nearby destinations including transit.  As we participated in the many SACOG workshops we learned that no matter what density people prefer most desire walkable and bikable communities.

Our region has a national reputation for being sensitive to the needs of pedestrians and bicyclists.  We have good policies at both the local and regional level.  As stated earlier, many of SACOG’s 28 jurisdictions have pedestrian and/or bicycle master plans.  Yet the implementation of those plans is slow.  If the pace continues as it has in recent years, it will be 40-50 years before our citizens will have a safe walking and bicycling environment – way beyond the current MTP horizon of 2035.  This does not seem right.

We think it is critical to ask these questions:  Do we have the right transportation priorities?  Is the widening of roads to provide greater speed for commuters the highest priority for our region?  Or are the needs of our children, our aging population and all of us to be able to walk and bicycle as important or more important?  These questions have implications for our health, our air quality, and our goals to reduce climate change emissions.

We are in difficult times economically, so our transportation investments must be doubly scrutinized to be sure that they are the most cost-effective investments possible.  With its multiple benefits including job creation and its relative low cost, we think that pedestrian and bicycle infrastructure investments will prove to have excellent cost-effectiveness by providing safety for our children walking and bicycling to school, improved health for all people who will be able to and bike because of safer conditions, improved air quality through reductions in vehicle miles traveled, and greater community cohesiveness from the interaction supported by walkable and bikable neighborhoods.

With this perspective of safe mobility for all modes, we offer the following initial questions related to the Draft 2011 MTP.

Chapter 1 – Introduction: Building a Sustainable System

  • How will pedestrian, bicycle and transit investments support a sustainable system?  How can we make improvements to the system’s sustainability with greater emphasis on pedestrian and bicycle investments?

Chapter 2 – Planning Process

  • How many cities and counties in the region have Complete Street policies and plans?
  • How many have pedestrian and bicycle master plans?
  • How can levee maintenance and rehabilitation include multiuse trail development?  Are county and regional levee plans needed?

Chapter 3 – Summary of Growth and Land Use Forecast

Chapter 4 – Summary of Budget and Investments

  • Road and highway maintenance and rehabilitation can be an economical way to increase Complete Streets and mobility for walking and bicycling.  The addition of bike lanes, the consideration of lane restriping to make room for bike lanes and sidewalks, and the addition of crosswalk markings and other crossing enhancements can greatly expand the pedestrian and bicycle network.  Is this a requirement for receiving funds?  Is SACOG working to provide training on how to implement the latest research findings regarding crosswalk markings and “road diets”?  What amount of pedestrian and bicycle network and intersection improvement will occur with these road maintenance and rehabilitation investments?
  • What bicycle and pedestrian investments are envisioned?
  • What proportion of regional funds will go to bicycle and pedestrian investments?

Chapter 5A, B, C – Trends and Performance

  • 5C – Transit and Non-Motorized Travel
    • What is the number of miles of Complete Streets of major roadways – arterials and collectors?
    • What is the number of miles of arterials and collectors without bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure?
    • How does land use create pedestrian and bicycle demand?  What is the latent demand that is not being met due to unsafe pedestrian and bicycle conditions?
    • What areas of our region have Complete Streets, and how do they influence the number of people walking and bicycling?  What areas of the region have good walkability and bikability?
    • What do the traffic fatality and injury statistics tell us?  What are the statistics by jurisdiction?  What is the relationship between fatalities, injuries and infrastructure?

Chapter 6 – Policies and Supportive Strategies

  • What are the Region’s Complete Streets policies?
  • What are the Region’s goal and timeframe for achieving Complete Streets?

Chapter 7 – Environmental Sustainability

  • What would a “4th Scenario” contribute to environmental sustainability?
  • How would a “4th Scenario” reduce per capita emissions, and would it achieve a total reduction in emissions?   (Total reduction is not projected by this plan).
  • How would a “4th Scenario” contribute to individual and community health?
  • What would be the difference in emissions and health between the 4th Scenario and that proposed in the draft MTP?

Chapter 8 – Equity and Choice

  • How does the analysis of Environmental Justice areas impacts address walking and bicycling?  Pedestrian access is a key to providing transit accessibility so how does the analysis address this aspect of transit accessibility?

Chapter 9 – Economic Vitality

  • This chapter focuses solely on commuting and goods movement.  What about the economic importance of creating walkable and bikable communities?  Aren’t these key ingredients of a good “quality of life” – and also key ingredients in attracting new businesses to invest in our region?
  • What about the economic importance of a regional bicycle network to support increased tourism?
  • What about the economic importance of health and the costs of our health care?  How could the development of a truly walkable and bikeable region contribute to our health and the reduction of health costs?

Chapter 10 – Financial Stewardship

  • Again, how does road repair lead to more Complete Streets?
  • How does provision of good pedestrian access provide greater usage of public transit?
  • How does implementation of Complete Streets lead to greater system efficiency and productivity?
  • How safe will our roadways be for walking and bicycling?

Appendices:

A – Project List

We have not yet reviewed the MTP in depth.  As it is not a small document, has many appendices, and is of critical importance to many, we thought it beneficial to identify the issues that we will be looking at a sort of road map as we and others review the MTP in detail.

The draft MTP is  on SACOG’s website at: http://www.sacog.org/calendar/2011/11/03/transportation/pdf/2-MTP%20SCS.pdf.

We urge all of our Complete Street and Safe Routes For All colleagues to review the draft MTP, to participate in our upcoming workshops, and to work with us to provide useful comments to SACOG and its member jurisdictions on the draft MTP’s policies and transportation project priorities.

Best regards,

Teri Duarte, MPH                                           Anne Geraghty

Executive Director                                          Policy Consultant


[1] WALKSacramento letter to Kacey Lizon, Sacramento Area Council of Governments, Re: SACOG’s 2010 MTP: A Fourth Scenario, September 3, 2010.

Posted in Complete Streets, MTP | Leave a comment

Safe Routes to School 5 E’s Conference 2011 a Success!!

Thank you to all who made it out on Friday, October 21, for the 3rd Sacramento Safe Routes to School Five E’s Conference. Over 60 Safe Routes to School advocates gathered at the Sacramento County Office of Education to hear presentations from local SRTS experts, to receive tips for developing and drafting good grants, and to review real SRTS grant applications that have been awarded.

Accompanying the conference was the roll-out of the draft Sacramento County Safe Routes to School Toolkit, a guide that will assist parents, guardians, school site staff, and school district staff to build an effective SRTS program and prepare for future funding opportunities. The toolkit is still in draft stage, but we’ll have it here on our website as soon as it is finalized, so check back over the next few months.

The conference is over, but WALKSacramento’s Safe Routes to School work continues. We’ll be conducting walk audits in Citrus Heights next month, and throughout the region next year. If you’re interested in attending a walk audit, please contact Alexis Kelso, WALKSacramento’s Safe Routes to School Coordinator.

Posted in Events, Safe Routes to School | Leave a comment