Roundabout Design Problem: A Better Solution Is Needed

Adrian Hands
12/06 08:12 PM

Hillsborough St “treacherous” for cyclists?

I bike west on Hillsborough from the Gardner St bus stop to Jones Franklin most weekday mornings, on the right side of the right lane, and haven’t had any problems.  There’s a beer truck that stops to unload, completely occupying the right lane, so I merge to the left—no problem.

Going east, the fact that there’s only one travel lane in the evening (the right lane becomes an on-street parking facility after about 6:30pm) makes it less easy for cars and bikes to share the space, but I still don’t find it “treacherous”.  The worst part is the really broken surface near cup-a-joe’s.  I presume they’ve delayed fixing that in anticipation of the redesign.

When I bike into downtown Raleigh on Hillsborough, I often turn left onto Morgan.  That means I need to merge into the left lane.  A roundabout (without an express bypass) eliminates the need to make a left turn and eliminates the need to merge left.  It will be important for Morgan St-bound cyclists to “take the lane” within the roundabout to prevent a “right hook” from motorists continuing on Hillsborough.

A roundabout with an “express bypass” for traffic continuing east on Hillsborough would mean that the Morgan St-bound cyclist would need to merge into the left lane to avoid the bypass—so the merge would remain though the turn would be eliminated it.  After exiting the roundabout, the cyclist would be met with an express lane on the cyclist’s right.

What are the proposed lane widths?

If the outside lanes are 14’-wide, that will be great for cyclists.  Wide outside lanes allow cars to safely overtake bikes within the lane, while not “caging” bikes in to narrow bicycle lanes.  There is and will be plenty of pressure to keep the overall cross section confined on Hillsborough—there’s lots of existing structures and pedestrians along the street, and those sidewalks should remain ample and ped-friendly buildings (built-out to the sidewalk) should be preserved.  But his will limit the space available for things like express bypass lanes.  They may be tempted to squeeze lane width—do NOT let that happen.  Cyclists are safest with 14-wide lanes.

Will they be installing raised medians?

Raised/planted medians were in the designs presented some years ago by Kimley-Horn Associates.  Raised medians should never be used on roads with fewer than two lanes in either direction as the median prevents cars from passing cyclists at a safe distance.  The effective lane width is also reduced by what roadway engineers call the “shy distance”—the distance vehicle operators maintain between their vehicle and fixed obstructions.

Local examples of raised medians creating dangerous situations for cyclists can be found on Carpenter-Firestation Rd and Reedy Creek Rd.  Those single-lane-in-each-direction roads were recently re-engineered to add this treachery, don’t let that happen on Hillsborough St!  There’s strong support for planted medians—they’re pretty, but nasty.

Are the bulb-outs (aka neck-downs) still in the design?

The proposed bulb-outs alarmed me when I saw them in the design.  Particularly disturbing was a Kimley-Horn artist’s rendition that showed clearly that the artist was clueless about safe cycling—little stick-figure cyclists were thrown onto the diagram riding in parking lanes headed straight for the curb.  Since then, I’ve read DOT’s documentation on bulb-outs, and I’m beginning to rather LIKE the concept.  Bulb-outs, according to DOT, are for use at intersections on roads with on-street car parking.  Bulb-outs should NEVER encroach on the travel lane.  Bulb-outs prevent parking at the intersection, and give pedestrians a “head start” on crossing.  Preventing a car from parking at the intersection keeps the sight-lines clear at the intersection—making it safer for all vehicle operators (including cyclists).

Adrian Hands
12/06 08:12 PM

The most recent bike-car collision I know of on Hillsborough happened when a cyclist attempted to pass a line of stopped cars, passing on their left.  Unsurprisingly the cars were stopped because the one in front was waiting for the opportunity to turn left.  In a no-passing zone, a left-turning operator will not be looking for vehicles crossing their path from behind.  The cyclist got hit hard, and ticketed.  The cyclist was behaving dangerously, and that should be discouraged, but it should be recognized that roundabouts offer a way to prevent this situation by eliminating left turns—all turns are to the right in a roundabout.

Roundabouts are common in France and I’ve biked through a lot of them there.  They are generally safe for cyclists, but cyclists should be aware of the “right-hook” problem and take the lane.  Vehicle operators failing to signal their exit is a problem for other operators attempting to enter the roundabout.  This is true for both cyclists and motorists, and should be recognized and anticipated.  The city can try police enforcement, but I doubt they’d have a lasting impact.  In parts of Europe, bike lanes and bike tracks are common (especially in urban areas) but they’ve found that while bike lanes slightly reduce crashes on straight-ways, they drastically INCREASE crashes at intersections, outstripping the safety gains on the straight-ways and resulting in a net increase in crashes.  Sharrows are a more modern, and safer, alternative.

I don’t see how a special “bicycle ‘exit’ lane coming out of the roundabout” would work or would help anyone.  The conflict isn’t with bikes exiting.  The potential for conflict exists when an exiting car crosses the path of a cyclist continuing in the roundabout.  If you want to use a pavement marking to reduce the potential for conflict, I’d look at placing a sharrow in the roundabout indicating where cyclists should position themselves to continue past an exit.  With the express bypass another conflict point occurs when the cyclist who exited the roundabout finds themselves on the left of “express” traffic merging in from the bypass.

If the express bypass is 14’ wide, or even 12’ wide, and I’m going straight, I’d gladly use the express to bypass the roundabout.  But when I’m coming from the roundabout (after entering the roundabout from a cross-road), I’d be concerned about traffic merging on my right from the express.  As a cyclist, I’d also be concerned about motorists attempting to pass me within the roundabout, particularly when I’m continuing past a roundabout exit.

Ensure that there is sufficient lane width (14’) for all the proposed facilities, the surfacing is smooth, the sight-lines unobstructed and eliminate any plans for raised medians and you could have a great street for biking.  Keep the sidewalks wide, and the buildings opening to the sidewalk (instead of a parking lot) and it could also be great for pedestrians.  The small center islands in the road where it meets the roundabout entrance/exit provide protection for pedestrian’s crossing and discourage motor vehicles from overtaking cyclists until after the roundabout.

Adrian Hands
12/06 09:32 PM

By the way, here’s an article from today’s NYT illustrating one of the problems with bike lanes, particularly where there’s on-street parking:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/06/nyregion/06mbrfs-biker.html

(or below)

In London, the CTC did a study to find out why London women were run over by trucks at right turning intersections so much more often than London men.  It turned out that London women were more likely to ride up in a bike lane alongside a truck at an intersection, while London men were more likely to run the red light instead of stopping alongside the truck.  The safeest thing to do is to stop, in queue, behind the other stopped vehicles—a practice discouraged by bike lanes.

A bicyclist riding northbound on the Avenue of the Americas yesterday morning died after he struck an open car door, fell off his bicycle and landed in the street, where he was hit by a truck, the police said. The cyclist, David Smith, 63, of West Ninth Street, was taken to Bellevue Hospital Center, where he was pronounced dead, the police said. The accident happened shortly before 8:30 a.m. in front of 989 Avenue of the Americas, near 36th Street, the police said. Mr. Smith, who was riding in a designated bicycle lane, hit the car?s door after someone on the passenger side opened it into his path, the police said. It was unclear if he was wearing a helmet. The police issued two summonses to the car?s driver, Benjamin Siano, 52, of Staten Island, for parking at a fire hydrant and for blocking a bicycle lane. They also issued a summons to his passenger, Augustus Browne, 31, of Staten Island, for opening a door unsafely into traffic, the police said.

freshsqueze
12/07 12:49 AM

The express lane in this design is a waste of space.  I saw the previous council hearing on this proposal, and it didn’t look like PB&J;had changed their scheme at all.  It was very apparent that they had spent their time on other projects between these meetings.

Betsy
12/07 02:41 PM

The engineering firm in this case is taking its direction from the Raleigh Public Works staff leadership, which has a motor-vehicle orientation towards all questions of street design. 

Look at the staff reports that come out of Public Works to the Council meetings: every aspect of vehicular convenience is accommodated, but almost no consideration is given to bike and ped orientation.  The public has to bring its own expertise to bear on those items by begging at public meetings and raising specific ped-orientation issues as individuals comment on the plan. 

You have to remember that nearly every transportation engineer in this country was trained by someone who was trained by someone who was trained by Robert Moses.

Pablo
12/09 06:17 AM

Robert Moses. Hmm…isn’t he the asshole who is responsible for the Dodger’s moving to LA?

We should have plenty of planners who were trained in the 80’s/90’s that should be more ped friendly.

I agree, this is a meeting not to miss. Be there or possibly regret the next decade on H-street.

orulz
12/10 02:51 PM

I suspect that at the Dec. 11th hearing we will hear more about alternatives to the bypass lane roundabout design. The public hearing notice on the city’s website says:

“Staff from the City of Raleigh and engineers from PBS&J; design consultants will present several intersection improvement alternatives at the meeting and are seeking public input.”

I still think that a traffic signal is best for this intersection, for the sole reason that it takes up less space. Any roundabout design will make it pretty much impossible to build something on the Jade Garden parking lot, but a T-intersection will make for a nicely shaped parcel for redevelopment.

Instead of worrying about accomodating the traffic solely on Hillsborough, the city should be talking about increasing connectivity downtown to provide an alternate route and spread the traffic around instead. I for one would like to see Morgan Street extended west (around or through Pullen Park Lofts apartments) as far as Ashe. Ashe is comparatively underutilized, and this would provide an excellent way for traffic on Morgan to get into and out of downtown without ever getting on Hillsborough in the first place.

Michael
12/10 04:24 PM

I know this is a bit of a digression from the discussion above, but I’ve been thinking for a long time it would be a great idea to build a streetcar line along hillsborough street, from the Capitol to Meredith College.  There used to be one back at the turn of the last century and it seems like it could do a lot to help out businesses along the strip in front of NCSU.  It would give some drunken students a ride home from the Glenwood strip and other downtown watering holes, and maybe cause some of the bar scene downtown to consider moving down to the Hillborough strip.  I wonder if the city has considered this at all in their roundabout musings.  I wonder if we shouldn’t consider such a possiblilty when thinking about roudabouts.  I hope they wouldn’t preclude the possiblilty of a streetcar.

CVB
12/12 03:06 AM

Amen to all that Adrian said above about bike lanes. Not needed, especially if you are adding roundabouts.

That said, the design still has to incorporate bike-friendly features, such as lane widths and obstacle-free medians to allow safe passage of bikes by cars (as noted by Adrian).

Shibby
12/12 04:10 AM

I think one of the main issues is that many designers are more concerned about moving cars than moving people and not taking a look at the bigger picture.  In this caes, they are so focused on just this little project that they fail to see the other main arteries (Wade/Western) and are forgetting the goals of what NC State and the community want for Hillsborough Street - Pedestrian & biker friendly and inviting to come to, not speed by.

john b
12/12 04:10 PM

in the last public meeting people wanted to see alternatives to the bypass lane roundabout design. in this one, the engineers to their credit provided much more detail about the impact and design of other possibilities for this intersection. What became bluntly obvious though is that the engineers were not tasked to look at the broader impact of this intersection farther than a couple blocks away. No plan presented did more than solve specific problems at that intersection while creating new ones. there has still been no real effort to look at the effect of that intersection on the entirety of hillsborough street and downtown raleigh. and for that i blame the council and not the engineers.