Traffic Circle for Westport Road

JBinKC · Post by **JBinKC** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:38 pm

At the most recent downzoning meeting for the Plaza/Westport neighborhood John DeBauch with the city planning dept. asked everyone present to start considering wants and needs of the SW Trfwy-Westport rd crossing. They are considering a traffic circle for this intersection, but nothing is set in stone. They are trying to figure out the best solution for cars and pedestrians. There will be a meeting in early January for a public forum to discuss this. If I get more details I will share them...

DiggityDawg · Post by **DiggityDawg** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:41 pm

That intersection isn't too great, but a traffic circle? I REALLY hope they don't go that route. That idea has "clusterf*ck" written all over it - pardon mah French.

KCLofts · Post by **KCLofts** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 12:47 pm

Aside from Meyer Circle, KC really doesn't have any major traffic circles. I know this sounds silly, but I don't think a lot of people in town know how to use a traffic circle. I think it would be chaos for a while.

But, they have to do something because that area is a complete mess right now.

ComandanteCero · Post by **ComandanteCero** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:01 pm

well, come on, give our fine citizens some credit, lol. Navigating a traffic circle isn't exactly rocket science, the Ward Parkway traffic circle works pretty well IMO. People have a general sense of how to use it (and people who don't are usually very cautious and alert, so by default they don't cause too much trouble). I think the real problem comes when you have isolated traffic circles with little use, then people start getting brain farts and going wrong ways and doing other idiocy (because no one else is around they don't feel the same pressure to act with caution). I could see a grand fountain going up at that corner, it could be really cool if done correctly. Sounds like a cool idea

Highlander · Post by **Highlander** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:48 pm

ComandanteCero wrote:well, come on, give our fine citizens some credit, lol. Navigating a traffic circle isn't exactly rocket science, the Ward Parkway traffic circle works pretty well IMO. People have a general sense of how to use it (and people who don't are usually very cautious and alert, so by default they don't cause too much trouble). I think the real problem comes when you have isolated traffic circles with little use, then people start getting brain farts and going wrong ways and doing other idiocy (because no one else is around they don't feel the same pressure to act with caution). I could see a grand fountain going up at that corner, it could be really cool if done correctly. Sounds like a cool idea

I think you may be talking about two different things here. A traffic circle such as Ward Parkway is simply aesthetic, there is no traffic control built into it and negotiating takes requires being able to drive around a curve. A circle built for traffic control, like a round-about, is something very different and functions kind of like a 4-way yield sign. Round-abouts do take a while to get used to, and knowing the way Americans drive, it could indeed become a cluster ****. Round-abouts are almost always better than traffic lights but tend to break down when there is a constant traffic flow through the intersection without much turning (it's the turning that creates the opportunity for alternate directions to procede).

JBinKC · Post by **JBinKC** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 1:56 pm

From what I understand a round about and a traffic circle are two different things...I think a round about would work better here with all the pedestrians around the area.

Tosspot · Post by **Tosspot** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 2:33 pm

Highlander wrote:
ComandanteCero wrote:well, come on, give our fine citizens some credit, lol. Navigating a traffic circle isn't exactly rocket science, the Ward Parkway traffic circle works pretty well IMO. People have a general sense of how to use it (and people who don't are usually very cautious and alert, so by default they don't cause too much trouble). I think the real problem comes when you have isolated traffic circles with little use, then people start getting brain farts and going wrong ways and doing other idiocy (because no one else is around they don't feel the same pressure to act with caution). I could see a grand fountain going up at that corner, it could be really cool if done correctly. Sounds like a cool idea
I think you may be talking about two different things here. A traffic circle such as Ward Parkway is simply aesthetic, there is no traffic control built into it and negotiating takes requires being able to drive around a curve. A circle built for traffic control, like a round-about, is something very different and functions kind of like a 4-way yield sign. Round-abouts do take a while to get used to, and knowing the way Americans drive, it could indeed become a cluster ****. Round-abouts are almost always better than traffic lights but tend to break down when there is a constant traffic flow through the intersection without much turning (it's the turning that creates the opportunity for alternate directions to procede).

Highlander,

I assume you've also noticed that Americans can't drive, have you not?

eliphar17 · Post by **eliphar17** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 2:38 pm

Traffic circle = Ward Parkway & Meyer Boulevard = traffic on Ward Parkway has the right-of-way and traffic entering the circle from elsewhere yields to Ward Parkway traffic.

Roundabout = two small but equal streets, there are a few in Olathe = all traffic entering the circle yields to traffic in the circle already.

I imagine a roundabout would not be ideal for such a high-traffic intersection as this, since no one has the right-of-way to just drive through a roundabout (as in a traffic circle). A traffic circle might possibly work, though I doubt it - but then I'm not a traffic engineer.

Highlander · Post by **Highlander** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 7:44 pm

Tosspot wrote:
Highlander,

I assume you've also noticed that Americans can't drive, have you not?

Well, I've noticed that Americans are a bit selfish and impatient when they drive. Those qualities may not mix well with round-abouts where you have to follow the rules to make things work. I think most people would tend to drive straight through rather than to yield to those already in the roundabout. I had to train myself to yield when I first got over to Europe.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 7:47 pm

I actually like the traffic circle idea. I think it would work well in that situation.

Not sure who ped. friendly circles are though....seems like they would be anti-pedestrians since there is never a crosswalk signal.

tat2kc · Post by **tat2kc** » Sat Dec 18, 2004 10:03 pm

I've worked with some of my students at the roundabouts in Olathe, and no they are not pedestrian friendly. The crosswalks are far, far too close to the roundabout to make it safe. The crosswalk is barely one car length from the roundabout. If more than one car is exiting the roundabout onto a street, and a pedestrian is in the crosswalk, cars will actually have to stop in the roundabout to allow for the crossing. This would create a major traffic hazard. Also, visually impaired pedestrians use the sounds of traffic to determine when it is safe to cross. The crosswalks are too close to the roundabout for a blind person to localize to the traffic patterns, and make a determination about whether the car is continuing on the roundabout, or exiting onto the street. If they guess wrong, there would be no time for the driver to stop w/o going through the crosswalk, and not time for the blind pedestrian to self-correct and get out of the way.

I have a blind student I work with at Olathe North High School, who lives 2 blocks from the school, and this year must be bussed to school, because the roundabouts in front of the school are so poorly designed that he is unable to safely cross the street. And this is a kid who is able to travel anywhere in the urban core and cross any street completely alone, and safely.

Roundabouts sound good, and move cars effeciently. But the ones here in the metro are some of the most poorly designed ones I've seen.

moderne · Post by **moderne** » Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:50 pm

I live a block from this intersection. I will walk 2 blocks to avoid trying to cross there. I use other streets and drive around the block rather than use the intersection. One of the biggest problems other than 6 major streets coming together and one of them being a glorified pioneer wagon trail is the little jog of 43rd west of Belleview in front of the florist and cleaners. Traffic backs up onto Belleview and drivers try to scoot off of it onto westbound Westport,l causing many accidents. Somhow in the total redesign of this area this little jog needs to be eliminated. At one time some type of sculptural tribute to Thomas Hart Benton was envisioned on the large island. I would like to see this revived.

Beltonhawk · Post by **Beltonhawk** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:42 am

I posted this link on another thread, but I'll throw it in here too.

Here's a page showing a 3-D animation on how a roundabout works. They are definitely different from traffic circles. I made that mistake in the past.

http://www.kctriangle.org/1h_design.htm

Click Longview Roundabout

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:50 am

Beltonhawk wrote:I posted this link on another thread, but I'll throw it in here too.

Here's a page showing a 3-D animation on how a roundabout works. They are definitely different from traffic circles. I made that mistake in the past.

http://www.kctriangle.org/1h_design.htm

Click Longview Roundabout

I think the general public uses the terms interchangeably. I've searched a few sites and there is a difference but I'm not sure we have any old school traffic circles in KC...maybe Meyer's circle could be considered one.

I still don't see it being ped. friendly. They say it's more safe because you only have to look one direction but in a very busy intersection it would seem impossible to get enough break in the traffic to cross w/o a signal to stop the traffic...especially for a handicapped person.

DanCa · Post by **DanCa** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 11:58 am

I can see a roundabout working for this intersection. They seem great for intersections of multiple streets. I learned to use them in England and I always remember thinking to myself, "look right, signal and go left". Of course you do the opposite here. But what people here never do is signal. You signal going into the roundabout and more importantly, signal right when you're getting out.

We have a big roundabout here in my city in the middle of downtown, referred to as "the Orange Circle". It has a park w/benches and a fountain in the middle. It's been there for at least a hundred years and has been featured in numerous movies. I've never seen a wreck in it yet. There are 4 crosswalks and stores surrounding the circle so it gets lots of pedestrian traffic as well.

Post by **dangerboy** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 12:32 pm

A true roundabout could be good here, if it can be made pedestrian-friendly. There is certainly enough vacant land in the middle of the intersection to do something. At the very least we need some left turn lanes.

Something needs to be done, as the traffic seems to be getting more congested here.

scooterj · Post by **scooterj** » Mon Dec 20, 2004 1:55 pm

DanCa wrote:You signal going into the roundabout and more importantly, signal right when you're getting out.

Why do you signal when going in... isn't it obvious that you are going in? And would you signal that as a right turn or as a left merge?

(Can't stand roundabouts and see no way one could ever work at this intersection. The backups would be enormous and it'd be constantly clogged with wrecks.)

paisstat · Post by **paisstat** » Tue Dec 21, 2004 1:57 pm

I believe a traffic circle is exactly what that intersection needs and have thought so for a while. The space is already in place and no buildings would have to be torn down. Additionally that intersection is terrible and usually gridlocked, especially at rush hour. I believe a circle would be a very efficient way in which to control the traffic and make it flow more smootly. Moreover, it would be nice to install a fountain in the center, where that cristmas tree is now, and of course retain as many of those grand old trees as possible.

KCPowercat · Post by **KCPowercat** » Tue Dec 21, 2004 2:22 pm

Here is my first try and traffic planning

first here is an aerial of the current.

Here is my proposal. The traffic circle would have to start a little further north than the current greenspace I think to effectively deflect westport rd. traffic. Might have to sacrifice some of that huge surface lot on the NW corner of the intersection (huge loss I know).

In this propsal the 43rd street 2 lane rd. is eliminated...no need for it. It's a rough drawing but hopefully it gets the point across. I don't think the entrance/exits are too close together but my online traffic planning degree hasn't got here yet so I might be wrong.

moderne · Post by **moderne** » Tue Dec 21, 2004 2:24 pm

As a neighbor to ths mess of an intersection who has had numerous close calls with JoCountians who cant maneuver through it, I deem I have veto power and say NO CIRCLE!