DOCSLIB.ORG

March 2014 Traffic Analysis and Roundabout Concept Development

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
March 2014 Traffic Analysis and Roundabout Concept Development Traffi c Analysis and Roundabout Concept Development for San Marco Avenue (SR A1A)/ Prepared for: San Carlos Avenue/May Street St. Augustine, Florida Revised, March 2014 Florida Department of Transportation District Two Prepared by: HDR Engineering, Inc. TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND ROUNDABOUT CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT FOR SAN MARCO AVENUE (SR A1A) AT SAN CARLOS AVENUE/MAY STREET ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA PREPARED FOR: Florida Department of Transportation District Two PREPARED BY: HDR Engineering, Inc. 265 SW Malone Street, Suite 111 Lake City, FL 32025-0018 Revised, March 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Introduction ..................................................................................................................... 1 Traffic Data Collection .................................................................................................... 1 Field Review .................................................................................................................... 3 Operational Analysis Results ...................................................................................... 10 Traffic Analysis Summary and Conclusions .............................................................. 16 Conceptual Design ....................................................................................................... 18 Appendices .................................................................................................................... 19 Appendix A – Traffic Analysis Appendix B – Roundabout Design Criteria Appendix C – Roundabout Conceptual Design Plans Appendix D – WB-50 Vehicle Paths Appendix E – LRE Construction Cost Estimate Revised, March 2014 Traffic Analysis & Roundabout Concept Development San Marco Ave (SR A1A) at San Carlos Ave/May St LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1 - Weekday versus Saturday Total Intersection Volume Comparison ......................... 1 Table 2 – Intersection Operational Analysis Summary ......................................................... 11 Table 3 – Roundabout vs. Signalized Intersection Delay Thresholds by LOS ...................... 12 Table 4 – Queue Analysis Summary ..................................................................................... 12 Table 5 – Travel Time Comparison ....................................................................................... 15 Table 6 – Roundabout Construction Cost and Right of Way Impacts ................................... 18 LIST OF FIGURES Page Figure 1 - Site Location Map ................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2 – Existing Intersection Geometry .............................................................................. 5 Figure 3 – Intersection Signal Phasing ................................................................................... 6 Figure 4 – Trolley and Boat Traffic .......................................................................................... 7 Figure 5 – Westbound Queue between US 1 and San Marco Avenue ................................... 7 Figure 6 – Westbound Queue on May Street .......................................................................... 8 Figure 7 – Predominant Movements and Maximum Observed Queuing ................................ 9 Revised, March 2014 Traffic Analysis & Roundabout Concept Development San Marco Ave (SR A1A) at San Carlos Ave/May St INTRODUCTION The following memorandum documents the analysis conducted in support of a study to determine the need and viability of a single-lane modern roundabout at the intersections of San Marco Avenue (SR A1A) with San Carlos Avenue and May Street (SR A1A) located in St. Augustine, St. Johns County, Florida. Figure 1 shows the location of the study intersections. TRAFFIC DATA COLLECTION Eight-hour intersection turning movement counts were conducted at the San Marco Avenue intersections at San Carlos Avenue and May Street on Saturday, August 31st, 2013 and Tuesday, September 10th, 2013 to document the traffic volumes on both a peak holiday weekend as well as a typical weekday. As shown in Table 1, the total weekday PM peak hour volumes are very similar to the total Saturday PM peak hour volumes, while the total Saturday AM peak hour and midday peak hour (MD) traffic is 15 to 20 percent higher than the total weekday AM and MD traffic. Table 1 - Weekday versus Saturday Total Intersection Volume Comparison San Marco Ave / San Carlos Peak San Marco Ave / May St Ave Hour Period Weekday Saturday % Diff Weekday Saturday % Diff AM 1474 1771 20% 1254 1475 18% MD 1555 1792 15% 1335 1545 16% PM 1795 1784 -1% 1529 1507 -1% Subsequent to the initial traffic counts, an additional eight-hour turning movement count was conducted at the adjacent signalized intersection at US 1/San Carlos Avenue on Wednesday, January 8, 2014. This count data was collected to allow the US 1 intersection to be incorporated into the roundabout analysis to determine if it would be negatively impacted by queuing extending east from the US 1 intersection, which is located approximately 370 feet to the west of the San Marco Avenue/San Carlos Avenue intersection. To allow the US 1 intersection traffic data to be correlated to the previously collected traffic data, an additional eight-hour intersection turning movement count was completed at the San Marco Avenue/San Carlos Avenue intersection concurrently with the US 1 intersection traffic count. The differences in the San Marco Avenue/San Carlos Avenue intersection count data were used to adjust the US 1 traffic count data to match it to the traffic levels at the San Marco Avenue/San Carlos Avenue intersection from August and September 2013. Revised, March 2014 Traffic Analysis & Roundabout Concept Development San Marco Ave (SR A1A) at San Carlos Ave/May St 1 PROJECT SITE Figure 1 | Location Map Sources: Esri, DeLorme, NAVTEQ, USGS, Intermap, iPC, NRCAN, Esri Japan, As shown in Table 1, the weekday PM peak hour had the highest traffic volumes, while the Saturday PM peak hour volumes were similar to those during the midday peak hour (the highest Saturday volumes). Because the PM peak hour conditions for the weekday and Saturday days represented the worst case traffic conditions, the traffic analysis and simulation was limited to just the PM peak hour. Figure A-1 and Figure A-2 in Appendix A show the PM peak hour volumes at the three study intersections for the existing weekday and holiday weekend day conditions, respectively. Figure A-3 and Figure A-4 in Appendix A present the same PM peak hour traffic volumes for the existing weekday and holiday weekend day conditions, respectively, but with the two San Marco Avenue intersections converted to a single lane, five-leg roundabout. Field Review A field review was conducted on Saturday, August 31st, 2013 to evaluate the operations of the study intersection over the Labor Day weekend. The field review documented the operating conditions of the study intersections; verified geometric characteristics, signage and traffic signal phasing; and, documented the predominant movements at the intersection and queuing observed. The following subsections present a summary of the field observations. Roadway Network San Marco Avenue (SR A1A) has two closely-spaced intersections at San Carlos Avenue and May Street (SR A1A) which are controlled by two signals. The signals are operated under one controller and have coordinated timing and phasing. The US 1 / San Carlos Avenue intersection, located approximately 370 feet west of the San Marco Avenue/San Carlos Avenue intersection also operates in coordination with these two signals. Downtown St. Augustine is located approximately one mile to the south and the intersections provide a vital link for motorists traveling north-south on San Marco Avenue and east-west between US 1 to the west and the beaches to the east. Two of the study roadways are designated as SR A1A, as the alignment comes from the south on San Marco Avenue and turns east on May Street and heads towards the beaches. Roadway Characteristics San Marco Avenue, San Carlos Avenue and May Street are all two-lane, undivided roadways with low posted speeds ranging from 20 to 30 mph. The drainage systems include both closed (curb and gutter) and open (sheet flow into swales) systems. US 1 is a four-lane divided highway with a posted speed of 40 mph in the vicinity of the San Carlos Avenue intersection. Revised, March 2014 Traffic Analysis & Roundabout Concept Development San Marco Ave (SR A1A) at San Carlos Ave/May St 3 Intersection Geometry The junction of San Marco Avenue with San Carlos Avenue and May Street is formed by the San Carlos Avenue and May Street east-west roadways intersecting the north-south San Marco Avenue roadway. May Street and San Marco Avenue form a T-intersection that is located approximately 160 feet north of the four-leg San Carlos Avenue and San Marco Avenue intersection. At the May Street intersection, there are currently exclusive turn lanes provided for the northbound right turn (channelized), southbound left turn, and westbound left turn. At the San Carlos Avenue intersection, there is an exclusive turn lane provided for the northbound left turn. The US 1 / San Carlos Avenue intersection provides an exclusive southbound left turn lane, but only a single westbound lane on San Carlos Avenue. Figure 2 illustrates the existing intersection geometry. Intersection/Signal Operations The two signalized intersections forming the San Marco Avenue / San Carlos Avenue/ May Street junction operate on one controller
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Roundabout Planning, Design, and Operations Manual
    Roundabout Planning, Design, and Operations Manual December 2015 Alabama Department of Transportation ROUNDABOUT PLANNING, DESIGN, AND OPERATIONS MANUAL December 2015 Prepared by: The University Transportation Center for of Alabama Steven L. Jones, Ph.D. Abdulai Abdul Majeed Steering Committee Tim Barnett, P.E., ALDOT Office of Safety Operations Stuart Manson, P.E., ALDOT Office of Safety Operations Sonya Baker, ALDOT Office of Safety Operations Stacey Glass, P.E., ALDOT Maintenance Stan Biddick, ALDOT Design Bryan Fair, ALDOT Planning Steve Walker, P.E., ALDOT R.O.W. Vince Calametti, P.E., ALDOT 9th Division James Brown, P.E., ALDOT 2nd Division James Foster, P.E., Mobile County Clint Andrews, Federal Highway Administration Blair Perry, P.E., Gresham Smith & Partners Howard McCulloch, P.E., NE Roundabouts DISCLAIMER This manual provides guidelines and recommended practices for planning and designing roundabouts in the State of Alabama. This manual cannot address or anticipate all possible field conditions that will affect a roundabout design. It remains the ultimate responsibility of the design engineer to ensure that a design is appropriate for prevailing traffic and field conditions. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Introduction 1.1. Purpose ...................................................................................................... 1-5 1.2. Scope and Organization ............................................................................... 1-7 1.3. Limitations ...................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • City Maintained Street Inventory
    City Maintained Streets Inventory DATE APPROX. AVG. STREET NAME ACCEPTED BEGINNING AT ENDING AT LENGTH WIDTH ACADEMYText0: ST Text6: HENDERSONVLText8: RD BROOKSHIREText10: ST T0.13 Tex20 ACADEMYText0: ST EXT Text6: FERNText8: ST MARIETTAText10: ST T0.06 Tex17 ACTONText0: WOODS RD Text6:9/1/1994 ACTONText8: CIRCLE DEADText10: END T0.24 Tex19 ADAMSText0: HILL RD Text6: BINGHAMText8: RD LOUISANAText10: AVE T0.17 Tex18 ADAMSText0: ST Text6: BARTLETText8: ST CHOCTAWText10: ST T0.16 Tex27 ADAMSWOODText0: RD Text6: CARIBOUText8: RD ENDText10: OF PAVEMENT T0.16 Tex26 AIKENText0: ALLEY Text6: TACOMAText8: CIR WESTOVERText10: ALLEY T0.05 Tex12 ALABAMAText0: AVE Text6: HANOVERText8: ST SWANNANOAText10: AVE T0.33 Tex24 ALBEMARLEText0: PL Text6: BAIRDText8: ST ENDText10: MAINT T0.09 Tex18 ALBEMARLEText0: RD Text6: BAIRDText8: ST ORCHARDText10: RD T0.2 Tex20 ALCLAREText0: CT Text6: ENDText8: C&G ENDText10: PVMT T0.06 Tex22 ALCLAREText0: DR Text6: CHANGEText8: IN WIDTH ENDText10: C&G T0.17 Tex18 ALCLAREText0: DR Text6: SAREVAText8: AVE CHANGEText10: IN WIDTH T0.18 Tex26 ALEXANDERText0: DR Text6: ARDIMONText8: PK WINDSWEPTText10: DR T0.37 Tex24 ALEXANDERText0: DR Text6: MARTINText8: LUTHER KING WEAVERText10: ST T0.02 Tex33 ALEXANDERText0: DR Text6: CURVEText8: ST ARDMIONText10: PK T0.42 Tex24 ALLENText0: AVE 0Text6:/18/1988 U.S.Text8: 25 ENDText10: PAV'T T0.23 Tex19 ALLENText0: ST Text6: STATEText8: ST HAYWOODText10: RD T0.19 Tex23 ALLESARNText0: RD Text6: ELKWOODText8: AVE ENDText10: PVMT T0.11 Tex22 ALLIANCEText0: CT 4Text6:/14/2009 RIDGEFIELDText8:
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Intersections –– Stopping at Intersections Are Places Where a Number of Road Users Cross Intersections Paths
    4 rules of the road Chapter 3, signs, signals and road markings, gave you some in this chapter information about the most common signs, signals and road markings you will see when driving. This chapter gives • Understanding you the information you’ll need to help you drive safely at intersections intersections, use lanes correctly and park legally. – signalling – types of intersections Understanding intersections – stopping at Intersections are places where a number of road users cross intersections paths. There is often a lot of activity in intersections, so it’s – right‑of‑way at important to be alert. Remember that other road users may be intersections in a hurry, and may want to move into the same space that you • Using lanes are planning on moving into. correctly – which lane Signalling should you use Signals are important — they let other traffic know what you are – lane tracking intending to do. You should signal when you’re preparing to: – turning lanes – reserved lanes • turn left or right – pulling into a • change lanes lane • park – passing – merging • move toward, or away from, the side of the road. – highway or freeway Types of intersections entrances and exits Controlled intersections – cul‑de‑sacs A controlled intersection is one that has signs or traffic lights – turning around telling you what to do. To drive safely in these intersections, you • Parking tips and need to know what the signals and signs mean, and also the rules right‑of‑way rules. But always be cautious. Other drivers may not be paying attention to the signs and signals. Uncontrolled intersections Uncontrolled intersections have no signs or traffic lights.
    [Show full text]
  • ALLEY (NS) – Washington Avenue to Wright Avenue, Deane Boulevard to Quincy Avenue
    ALLEY (NS) – Washington Avenue to Wright Avenue, Deane Boulevard to Quincy Avenue Alderman District 9 – Trevor Jung Existing pavement - Bituminous Right-of-way width - 16’ PCI – Alleys not rated Improvement Cost - Concrete at $74.00/ft Alderman Request Last Public Hearing Date – Never City of Racine - Assessment Schedule CITY ENGINEER'S OFFICE AUTHORITY - Benefits and Damage FOR: PORTLAND CEMENT CONCRETE PAVING RESOLUTION NUMBER 058319 15-May-20 LOCATION - Alley (NS) from Washington Ave to Wright Ave, Deane Blv Page 1 of 2 TAXNO NAME FRONTAGE RATE BENEFITS ADJUST SPEC. ADJ. ADDRESS MAILING ADDRESS ASSESSMENT 10192000 Mauer, Kristi L. 35.000$74.00 $2,590.00 $0.00 $0.00 1367 Deane Boulevard 1367 Deane Boulevard Racine, WI 53405 $2,590.00 10193000 Arndt, Ryan 35.000$74.00 $2,590.00 $0.00 $0.00 1365 Deane Boulevard 1365 Deane Boulevard Racine, WI 53405 $2,590.00 10194000 Kosterman, Robert P. & Margaret M. 35.000$74.00 $2,590.00 $0.00 $0.00 1363 Deane Boulevard 1363 Deane Boulevard Racine, WI 53405 $2,590.00 10195000 Lochowitz, Justin 35.000$74.00 $2,590.00 $0.00 $0.00 1359 Deane Boulevard 1359 Deane Boulevard Racine, WI 53405 $2,590.00 10195000 Lochowitz, Justin 35.000$74.00 $2,590.00 $0.00 $0.00 1359 Deane Boulevard 1359 Deane Boulevard Racine, WI 53405 $2,590.00 10196000 Johnson, Kenneth Sr. 35.000$74.00 $2,590.00 $0.00 $0.00 Cloyd, Christina 1355 Deane Boulevard 1355 Deane Boulevard Racine, WI 53405 $2,590.00 10197000 Garcia, Gregory 40.000$74.00 $2,960.00 $0.00 $0.00 1351 Deane Boulevard 1351 Deane Boulevard Racine, WI 53405 $2,960.00 10198000 Williams, Randall 40.000$74.00 $2,960.00 $0.00 $0.00 Veltus, Julie 1345 Deane Boulevard 5735 Ridgecrest Drive Racine, WI 53403 $2,960.00 10199000 Degroot, Matthew J.
    [Show full text]
  • Access Management Manual, September 5, 2019 TABLE of CONTENTS
    AccessAccess ManagementManagement ManualManual T E X A S Prepared by the City of Irving Public Works/Traffic and Transportation Department Adopted September 5, 2019 Access Management Manual, September 5, 2019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1 Introduction Page 1.0 Purpose 1 1.1 Scope 1 1.2 Definitions 3 1.3 Authority 10 Section 2 Principles of Access Management 2.1 Relationship between Access and Mobility 11 2.2 Integration of Land Use and Transportation 11 2.3 Relationship between Access and Roadway Efficiency 12 2.4 Relationship between Access and Traffic Safety 12 Section 3 Access Management Programs and Policies 3.1 Identifying Functional Hierarchy of Roadways 14 3.1.1 Sub-Classifications of Roadways 14 3.1.1.1 Revising the “Master Thoroughfare Plan” 15 3.1.2 Comprehensive Plan 15 3.1.3 Discretionary Treatment by the Director 15 3.2 Land Use 15 3.3 Unified Access Planning Policy 16 3.4 Granting Access 16 3.4.1 General Mutual Access 17 3.4.2 Expiration of Access Permission 17 3.4.3 “Grandfathered” Access and Non-Conforming Access 17 3.4.4 Illegal Access 19 3.4.4.1 Stealth Connection 19 3.4.5 Temporary Access 19 3.4.6 Emergency Access 19 3.4.7 Abandoned Access 20 3.4.8 Field Access 20 3.4.9 Provision for Special Case Access 20 3.4.10 Appeals, Variances and Administrative Remedies 20 3.5 Parking and Access Policy 20 3.6 Access vs Accessibility 21 3.7 Precedence of Access Rights Policy 21 3.8 Right to Access A Specific Roadway 22 3.9 Traffic Impact Analyses (TIA’s) 22 3.9.1 Level of Service (LOS) 22 3.9.2 Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) Requirements
    [Show full text]
  • Installing Alley-Gates
    INSTALLING ALLEY-GATES: PRACTICAL LESSONS FROM BURGLARY PREVENTION PROJECTS Briefing Note 2/01 Shane Johnson and Camille Loxley July 2001 “The views expressed in this briefing note are those of the authors, not necessarily those of the Home Office (nor do they reflect Government policy).” Introduction Benefits of an alley-gate Alley-gating, the installation of security gates across Reducing burglary footpath and alleyways, is a form of situational crime Results from the 1998 British Crime Survey1 showed prevention that attempts to reduce the opportunity to that 55% of burglaries with entry occurred through the commit crimes such as domestic burglary. When rear in terraced and detached/semi-detached houses. installed and properly used, alley-gates should control Moreover, an analysis of recorded crime data for the access to vulnerable target areas – usually paths or county of Merseyside shows that this pattern is alleys at the rear and to the sides of houses. Although particularly evident for terraced housing, with entry there are good reasons for thinking that alley-gates being gained via the rear of the property for around 72% should reduce burglary, there is as yet little hard of burglaries. The implication of such findings is that in evidence that they do. This will be available later in the theory, by restricting access to the rear of properties, year when evaluations of projects funded by the Crime alley-gating should have a very significant effect on Reduction Programme report their findings. In the burglary, although there are as yet no impact interim, however, the promise of alley-gating is enough evaluations of alley-gating schemes available.
    [Show full text]
  • Circular Walk from Bury Knowle Park to the C. S. LEWIS NATURE
    Circular walk from Bury Knowle Park to the C. S. LEWIS NATURE RESERVE in Risinghurst, and on up to SHOTOVER; then a restricted byway to HORSPATH, and back to Headington through fields to THE RIDINGS (under 5½ miles/8.8 km) Walking boots essential in the Horspath area after rainy periods (1) Bury Knowle Park in central Headington to Risinghurst Leave Bury Knowle Park via the main gate, turn left on to the London Road, and cross that road at the first pelican crossing (opposite St Andrew’s School). Continue a short way eastwards on the London Road, and then take the first turning on the right down Wharton Road. Take the second turning on the left into St Leonard’s Road. Take the first turning on the right into Holley Crescent, and when it curves right, turn left on to Vallis Alley, the footpath that starts between Nos. 22 and 20 Holley Crescent. (This is a remnant of the old funeral path that the people of Quarry used to take to get to St Andrew’s Church before their own parish church opened in 1849.) If the alley is crowded, it is possible to go into Margaret Road recreation ground on the right and get back out on to the path again just before the pavilion. Continue on Vallis Alley all the way to the end, then cross Quarry High Street and enter the footpath that is opposite (Chapel Alley). The former Quarry Methodist Chapel of 1860 is on your left. At the end of Chapel Alley turn left into Quarry Hollow, then take the first right into Quarry School Place, with Headington Quarry Nursery School (formerly Headington Quarry National School) on your right.
    [Show full text]
  • Shared Streets and Alleyways – White Paper
    City of Ashland, Ashland Transportation System Plan Shared Streets and Alleyways – White Paper To: Jim Olson, City of Ashland Cc: Project Management Team From: Adrian Witte and Drew Meisel, Alta Planning + Design Date: February 2, 2011 Re: Task 7.1.O White Paper: “Shared Streets and Alleyways” - DRAFT Direction to the Planning Commission and Transportation Commission Five sets of white papers are being produced to present information on tools, opportunities, and potential strategies that could help Ashland become a nationwide leader as a green transportation community. Each white paper will present general information regarding a topic and then provide ideas on where and how that tool, strategy, and/or policy could be used within Ashland. You will have the opportunity to review the content of each white paper and share your thoughts, concerns, questions, and ideas in a joint Planning Commission/Transportation Commission meeting. Based on discussions at the meeting, the material in the white paper will be: 1) Revised and incorporated into the alternatives analysis for the draft TSP; or 2) Eliminated from consideration and excluded from the alternatives analysis. The overall intent of the white paper series is to explore opportunities and discuss the many possibilities for Ashland. Shared Streets Introduction Shared Streets aim to provide a better balance of the needs of all road users to improve safety, comfort, and livability. They are similar to European concepts such as the Dutch based ‘Woonerf’ and the United Kingdom’s ‘Home Zone’, with some distinct differences. This balance is accomplished through integration rather than segregation of users. By eschewing many of the traditional roadway treatments such as curbs, signs, and pavement markings, the distinction between modes is blurred.
    [Show full text]
  • What Are the Advantages of Roundabouts?
    What is a roundabout? A roundabout is an intersection where traffic travels around a Circulatory central island in a counter- Truck Apron Roadway clockwise direction. Vehicles entering or exiting the roundabout must yield to vehicles, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Figure 1 presents the elements of a roundabout. Yield Line Splitter Island Figure 1: Elements of a Roundabout What are the advantages of roundabouts? • Less Traffic Conflict: Figure 2 compares the conflict points between a conventional intersection and a modern roundabout. The lower number of conflict points translates to less potential for accidents. • Greater safety(1): Primarily achieved by slower speeds and elimination of left turns. Design elements of the roundabouts cause drivers to reduce their speeds. • Efficient traffic flow: Up to 50% increase in traffic capacity • Reduced Pollution and fuel usage: Less stops, shorter queues and no left turn storage. • Money saved: No signal equipment to install or maintain, plus savings in electricity use. • Community benefits: Traffic calming and enhanced aesthetics by landscaping. (1) Statistics published by the U.S. Dept. of transportation, Federal Highway Administration shows roundabouts to have the following advantages over conventional intersections: • 90% reduction in fatalities • 76% reduction in injuries • 35% reduction in pedestrian accidents. Signalized Intersection Roundabout Figure 2: Conflict Point Comparison How to Use a Roundabout Driving a car • Slow down as you approach the intersection. • Yield to pedestrians and bicyclists crossing the roadway. • Watch for signs and pavement markings. • Enter the roundabout if gap in traffic is sufficient. • Drive in a counter-clockwise direction around the roundabout until you reach your exit. Do not stop or pass other vehicles.
    [Show full text]
  • Indiana Drivers Manual: Ch. 7
    CHAPTER 7 | Safe Vehicle Operation CHAPTER SEVEN | SAFE VEHICLE OPERATION Even the most experienced drivers can be distracted while driving. A defensive driver looks out for the actions of other drivers and anticipates potential problems. LANE MARKINGS Lane markings separate traffic and alert drivers when it is permissible to pass other vehicles. Yellow Lane Markings Yellow lane markings separate multiple lanes of traffic going in opposite directions. You may cross a broken yellow line to pass another vehicle when it is safe, but you should not cross a solid yellow line except to turn. Two-lane road with a solid yellow line Two-lane road with a broken Four-lane road with a solid yellow line yellow line White Lane Markings White lane markings separate multiple lanes of traffic going in the same direction. Most roads with more than two lanes have broken white lines to separate the lanes. You may cross a broken white line when it is safe to change lanes, but you should not cross a solid white line. Three lanes of traffic with broken white lines CHANGING LANES AND PASSING OTHER VEHICLES Change only one lane at a time. When changing lanes to prepare for a turn, you must signal your intention to do so at least 200 feet prior to changing lanes or turning. Your signal distance must be at least 300 feet before the turn if you are operating a vehicle in a speed zone of at least 50 miles per hour. Do not weave in and out of lanes, which will greatly increase your risk of an accident.
    [Show full text]
  • Rules for Driving Roundabouts
    RULES FOR DRIVING ROUNDABOUTS www.wisconsinroundabouts.gov General information for all roundabouts Steps for driving a roundabout: Roundabouts are becoming more common 1. Slow down. Obey traffic signs. in the U.S. because they provide safer and 2. Yield to pedestrians and bicyclists. more efficient traffic flow than standard 3. Yield to traffic on your left intersections. By keeping traffic moving one-way already in the roundabout. in a counterclockwise direction, there are fewer 4. Enter the roundabout when conflict points and traffic flows smoothly. there is a safe gap in traffic. Crash statistics show that roundabouts 5. Keep your speed low reduce fatal crashes about 90%, reduce within the roundabout. injury crashes about 75%, and reduce overall 6. As you approach your exit, crashes about 35%, when compared Draft 5 February 2, 2009 turn on your right turn signal. to other types of intersection control. 7. Yield to pedestrians and When driving a roundabout, the same bicycles as you exit. general rules apply as for maneuvering Emergency vehicles in the roundabout through any other type of intersection. P Always yield to emergency vehicles. Truck apron P If you have not entered the roundabout, pull Large vehicles need more space when driving over and allow emergency vehicles to pass. in a roundabout. A truck apron is a paved area P If you have entered the roundabout, on the inside of the roundabout for the rear wheels continue to your exit, then pull over of large trucks to use when turning, sometimes and allow emergency vehicles to pass. referred to as off-tracking.
    [Show full text]
  • Movingforward
    FORWARD movingfAll 2010 A quarterly review of news and information about Pennsylvania local roads. When to Use Stop Signs in Alleys A Guide to Understanding the State’s Requirements Related to Traffic-Control Devices at Alley Intersections by Patrick Wright, Pennoni Associates When deciding whether to use stop signs and other An alley is considered a “highway” in the Vehicle traffic-control devices in alleys, municipalities Code because it is a “roadway open to the use of the should be familiar with two major issues. The first public.” Following this logic, the junction of an alley is whether traffic control is even required, and the with another highway (including another alley) is con- second is how to properly place the signs especially sidered an “intersection” under the Vehicle Code, and within the space constraints found in most alleys. thus crosswalks (whether marked or unmarked) exist. Understanding Alleys What Traffic-Control and Intersections Devices Are Required? Alleys are defined separately in both the Now that the definitions of alleys and intersec- Pennsylvania Vehicle Code (Title 75) and the tions have been clarified, the next step is to deter- Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices mine what traffic-control devices are required for (MUTCD). According to the Vehicle Code (Title alleys. As at any intersection, the Vehicle Code does 75, Section 102) as well as the MUTCD, an alley not necessarily require stop signs or other traffic-con- is “a street or highway intended to provide access to trol devices. Instead, the code has specific “rules of the rear or side of lots or buildings in urban districts the road” that govern driving behavior and the right- and not intended for the purpose of through of-way at intersections depending on the situation.
    [Show full text]