I've received some correspondence on the PK roundabout this weekend. One of these residents is also a professional Traffic Engineer with decades of experience. The other is a nearby resident that utilizes this circle on a very routine basis.
They both have informed opinions.
The takeaway: The circle is too small, the good of the roundabout outweighs the bad, and a few tweaks can help make it better.
The frequent user resident's perspective:
"I noted your recent comments regarding the 2018 FDOT study claiming that a round about was not the best solution on Perdido Key Drive. However, sometimes the transportation department’s statistical analysis gets it wrong. True, the round about is too small, but it has vastly improved the safety of the intersection. What is needed are rumble strips, which have been authorized, and a lower speed limit, which has not been authorized. Said lower speed limit would allow safer ingress into the circle considering west bound traffic acts like its merely a curve in the road. Please do not abandon the round about because a vocal few want to speed through on their daily commute. From the Alabama line to the bridge is less than 6 miles, so a slower speed limit at Johnson Beach Road will not materially alter their travel time."
The resident who also is a seasoned traffic engineer's perspective:
"Hello! I would like to point out a major issue I have observed, as an experienced transportation engineer, with the roundabout at Johnson Beach. It is too small. See attached. The standard diameter is 105’ for a single lane roundabout. I would love to know if it really cost $1.7M as I recently read? I understand R/W costs could have been a good part of this because corner clips could be expensive at this location. That is one of the only major downfalls with a roundabout. I’ve been involved in so many roundabouts (beginning when I was City Traffic Engineer and afterwards) in Tallahassee including full 2-lane roundabouts. Regardless, I am 100% still supportive of roundabouts as traffic control devices versus signalization. Much safer, typically. But the size of this one has negative effects on capacity and safety in my opinion."
7 comments:
I dont know anything about anything, and I had the same conclusion. It is too small, and folks dont use their turn signals. It reminds me of some I have driven in small gated communities.
Everyman: Oh yeah that's a great idea. Rumble strips and slower speed limits--that'll really clear that traffic. With a few minor tweaks, you just might get things backed up to the Barrancas Bridge. Why not shoot for the moon, bollox it up out there completely by design, slap a "road diet" sticker on it, and call it a traffic win? (Hint: that's what the Seasidish PKA set wanted when they advocated for this thing.)
Traffic engineers: you can't fool us...moving cars isn't rocket science. :) Yep, we all know: it's too small.
Further study might reveal this supplementary, highly technical diagnosis:
SUDD, or Squished-Up Development Debacle.
It's hooey to cherry pick two opinions that support a bias-- I get the impression that the most desirable option is to put a bandaid on the existing boondoggle and call it a victory. But really, why these two, when I've seen numerous takes from other citizens who use the roundabout (one word) daily? You've had several people on this forum say they have engineering experience with various suggestions. The first featured opinion, is steeped in irrelevancy. No one who lives here is complaining about their commute times to and from work.
If you drive on the roundabout Friday, Saturday, or Sunday during summer, espcially during check-in and check-out times, it's a hot mess. I drive it at least 4 times every day- the weekday mornings are never congested unless there's been an accident . And truly, what bearing does the distance of the Alabama bridge have on anything at all? It's much too far away to be of any significance on this matter. It's about congestion on PKD between GBH (and sometimes, on particualy bad days, Bauer) and River Road. Thats' where 70% of Perdido Key lives and rents.
It probably IS safer now, but we were starting from quite a low benchmark; in fairness, a traffic light would have been safer too.
Anyone who drives on the circle can tell you it isn't wide enough and the turns aren't far enough apart to signal intent- these aren't revelations. The residents seem to have gotten the hang of it and know what to look out for, but unfortunately this area isn't populated by FTRs so much in the summer. That creates lots of confusion.
I have a serious question. Was there not enough room for a 105 ft roundabout?
Serious question - how come what was shown to citizens at meetings was not what was built? The original drawings for this was a full size traffic circle but as usual, it was modified and nothing like the original plan. Just like the bike paths….draw one thing to show everyone so it gets approval from citizens but implementation results in a much inferior outcome. We deserve better. Perdido Key has been the cash cow and will continue to be unless we make the necessary changes to keep our tax dollars local and have a local representative looking out for PK. Traffic definitely needs to be slowed down - another cross walk was just put in as you exit the circle going north - how’s that going to work? Exit circle, accelerate, slam on brakes for another poorly lit/warning pedestrian crossing? Doesn’t take an engineer to figure out that is a poor plan and deaths waiting to happen. Come drive it Jeff….at least once a month and you would figure it out quickly that we have some incompetent planners and leaders.
2:59, obviously Commissioner Bergosh has more info on that than I do, so this isn't answering for him. Just to say that the moment that thing in, a lot of people's suspicion has been that some higher ups from the previous administration had the mouse house needs of an adjacent developer/landowner too much in mind. (Ahem.)
8:15--Not certain about your assertion that what was presented was not built. I was told that the designed roundabout, as designed, was what the residents wanted and would foot the bill and be functional as a traffic device in that location. The revelation about at least a 105' circumference required for functionality is a revelation to me that will be looked at, along with all other aspects including a currently underway engineering assessment of the roundabout's performance in peak traffic hours. I'm not going to say folks who are gone were incompetent--I will say they wanted what they wanted and were strident about getting it, about slamming the square peg in the round hole. But it's alright, I will get a solution implemented, I'm working on it presently.
Post a Comment