Mike on Traffic

Are U-Turns Safe?

You want us to make a u-turn? In some situations the answer is yes. Requiring single occupant vehicles to make u-turns and subsequent right turns instead of direct left turns is a well documented strategy for improving safety and minimizing delay along arterial corridors. According to the Transportation Research Board of The National Academies Access Management Manual, “U-turns are generally safer than direct left turns. A study of the safety and operational implications of U-turns versus direct left turns on multilane arterial roadways with a nonreversible median was conducted in Florida in 2000. The analysis of 250 sites revealed that right-turn plus U-turn maneuvers on six lane arterials exhibited a 17.8% lower crash rate and 27.3% lower injury/fatality rate than direct left turns. The study also found that U-turning drivers experience less delay than those making a direct left turn from a drive-way under high-volume conditions. The findings were statistically significant at a 95% confidence level.”

The Wisconsin DOT just put together a summary document of government agency policies regarding u-turns. Minnesota’s State Statute (169.19 TURNING, STARTING, AND SIGNALING. Subd. 2. U-turn) says:

No vehicle shall be turned so as to proceed in the opposite direction upon any curve, or upon the approach to or near the crest of a grade, where such vehicle cannot be seen by the driver of any other vehicle approaching from either direction within 1,000 feet, nor shall the driver of a vehicle turn the vehicle so as to proceed in the opposite direction unless the movement can be made safely and without interfering with other traffic.

 To summarize – if you can see down the road far enough to make a u-turn, it is safe and can help the overall operation of the roadway corridor.

How to Remove an Unneeded Sign

We all see signs in neighborhoods that probably aren't needed (should you slow down because of children or are the children slow?).

This great tip was posted by Rick Perez (City of Federal Way, WA, USA) in the Institute of Transportation Engineers Traffic Engineering Council Newsletter:  "Do you have “Deaf Children” or “Blind Child” signs that have been installed for many years and don’t know how to “politically” remove them? Try what the City of Federal Way, WA, USA, does and “bag” them for a few weeks. If no one calls to complain, then remove the unneeded sign. If someone calls to complain, you can explain that you were checking on the need for the sign because it had been in place for years. Usually, no one calls."

 

Red Light Running Retraction?

As with most issues, automated enforcement of red light running (aka photo cop) seems to be a mixed bag.  Here is a new article from the University of South Florida claiming crashes and injuries go up at intersections with photo cop because motorists slam on their brakes and get rear-ended more often.  This finding is inconsistent with Minneapolis' experience.  Maybe the stealthy mobile unit I wrote about in my last post would get everyone to drive cautiously everywhere instead of the few intersections where they know the cameras are mounted. 

Automated Traffic Enforcement

To provide safe roads, we need the three E's - Engineering (designing good facilities), Enforcement (ticketing to ensure people drive the roads as they were engineered to be driven), and Education (such as the MADD campaign against drunk driving).  They are three angles to attack the same goal - reducing crashes.  I am going to depart a little bit from traffic engineering and venture into enforcement.

Minneapolis tried photo enforcement to ticket vehicles running red lights at traffic signals (dubbed photo cop).  It was struck down by the courts because they were unlawfully ticketing the vehicle and not the motorist.  From a safety perspective, this is a shame because they had a statistically significant drop in crashes while photo cop was operating (31% overall reduction and 42% reduction in right angle crashes which are typically the crashes that cause injuries).

India is taking photo enforcement to a new level with a mobile traffic enforcement van (article).  The Interceptor CrashLab has a telescoping video camera that records vehicles about half a mile away.  They use it for red light running or speed enforcement.   If Minnesota changed its laws to allow the photo cop, this would be an interesting way to implement a roving system that would keep motorists obeying the laws at all intersections instead of just a handful that have permanent equipment. 

Is Minneapolis Multi-Modal without Rickshaws?

The Twin Cities have bus, light rail transit, pedestrian, and passenger vehicle transportation facilities.  With the North Star line we will add commuter rail.  But what about those trips that are too short to drive but too far to walk (i.e. the 8 blocks going from a loft in the Minneapolis warehouse district to the Lunds grocery store over the river)?  We have a horse drawn carriage and Segway tourist company that both work the St. Anthony Main area during nice weather, but they are priced to be an experience not a mode of transportation.  We also have taxis, but it seems silly to call a cab for that short distance.

Raleigh, NC has the Raleigh Rickshaw Co. serving its downtown area.  Is this the next big thing for Minneapolis or St. Paul?  Maybe we'll get rid of buses on Nicollet Mall and convert it to a rickshaw corridor.