| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

Lifecycle Cost

Page history last edited by Frank Broen 14 years, 8 months ago

Subject: Comparitive costs

As has been discussed on this list to the previously, we do not have a

really good data on economic comparisons of various intersection

traffic control devices, or even total agreement on what should be

considered in lifecycle cost analyses.

They website below gives a comprehensive review of the stop sign.  Thing

of interest in the is the cost figure of $280 for two stop signs;

however, includes a series of motorists, operating costs per year with

a total of $210,061 per year per intersection.  These are 1990 figures

split could be easily updated.

http://www.ci.troy.mi.us/trafficengineering/Multiway.htm

I believe we need an extensive, comprehensive research study comparing a

number of intersection traffic control devices at a number of common

scenarios.

Gene


Of Dona Sauerburger

 

 

"Real")

 

 

Howard, it is because roundabouts are so much safer than other intersections

that they should be made available not just to the strongest and most able

users, but also to our most vulnerable users -- children, people with visual

or cognitive disabilities, elderly, etc.

 

-- Dona

_________________________________________________

Dona Sauerburger, COMS

1606 Huntcliff Way, Gambrills, Maryland 21054

sauerburger@mindspring.com

301-858-0138

 

www.sauerburger.org/Dona

__________________________________________________

----- Original Message -----

 

 

 

Below are a few e-mails from the ITE listserve last week relating to this

same issue.  For those that don't mind spending a few minutes reading it

might be worthwhile.  Based on knowing that peds aren't likely to go 100'

out of their way to take a more dangerous crossing location why don't we

consider doing both - image attached...

 

so much for a nice, easy, no signalization at roundabouts discussion kind of

Friday... :-(

 

I would have to agree with Rick's viewpoint regarding the requirement of all

2 lane roundabouts to require signalization as being less than optimal for

all involved.

 

I would also have to agree with Jim that if there was an extremely high

probability of visually impaired pedestrians that some form of signalization

is warranted.  I feel this way regardless of whether it is a single lane or

multi-lane roundabout.

 

The problem is that the proposal doesn't have any warrant besides being 2

lanes.  At least 1 country that I know of, I'm pretty sure there may be a

few others as well, have warrants based on volume of peds and vehicles to

determine when signals are warranted at roundabouts.  Hopefully the presence

of a visually impaired pedestrian generator trumps the volume warrants.

 

I have no problem with signalizing roundabout crossings if there is a need

or benefit.  But, a requirement to signalize all 2 lane roundabout crossings

is not going to provide the best result.  Rick brought up a valid concern

that 2 lane roundabouts will be less likely to make it through the design

approval process if they require the same additional cost to signalize the

crossings as the other likely considered intersection treatment (a signal)

costs overall.

 

Do people really think it will be easy to get a 2 lane roundabout approved

if we have 2 options:

 

1st - a signal costing $300K

 

2nd - a roundabout costing $800K - plus another $200 to $250K to signalize

it.

 

My fear is that this additional expense (signalization) will make quite a

few locations where 2 lane roundabouts could have provided substantial

safety benefits to so many users become cost prohibitive.  I have heard

quite a few people respond with "well, if roundabouts are so much safer the

roundabout option will still be cheaper overall in a benefit-cost analysis."

I would agree with this in a perfect world - but especially with the

financial limitations today I think too many organizations will take the

"short-sighted" view of which one is cheaper today.

 

Now, regarding the hawk signal.  If you go to the Tucson website

( http://www.dot.ci.tucson.az.us/traffic3/video/HAWK.wmv

 


 

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.