Spalding DeDecker Associates, Inc.

Transcription

Improving Traffic Flow
for
Efficiency and Safety



Established in 1954
70 employees
Specialization and Expertise
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦
Land Surveying
Land Development
Pavement Management
Transportation
Municipal Engineering / GIS
Construction Engineering
(248) 844-5400 www.sda-eng.com
Thomas J. Sovel, PE [email protected]
Vice President / Land Development Senior Project Manager
Licensed Professional Engineer in 40 States plus Washington DC
“THE KNACK”

THE QUESTIONS:
◦
◦
◦
◦
Who is happy with the traffic flow on all of their properties?
No complaints, no conflicts, no near misses?
No traffic backups or angry parents?
Who thinks their problems are worse than everybody else’s?

THE PROBLEMS
◦ The majority of schools are at least 20-30 years old and were likely not
built to handle the student population that now exists
◦ Fewer and fewer people allow their kids to ride the bus or walk to school.
◦ Schools of choice add significant traffic
◦ Walk zones have expanded to reduce transportation costs
◦ Traffic on adjoining streets may be congested with non-school traffic
◦ Limited ingress/egress points into a school property
◦ Nobody wants to follow the rules
This video may accurately reflect the mentality and
maturity level of the parents that drop off or pick up their
kids:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dV3yJdvRolo
This video is all too common, reflecting heavy traffic on
the main roads and bad behavior:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjRB1FdfzgA
This video shows a problem with inadequate
ingress/egress routes:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZX-lxcvM_3Q
SO WHAT DO YOU DO ABOUT IT???

ANALYSIS
◦ This is not a traffic study
◦ Review traffic flow. Include school personnel
(very important)
◦ Note number of buses
◦ Note number of parent drop-off/pick-ups
◦ Note number of student drivers (high schools
only)
◦ Note areas of pedestrian movement
◦ Review specific conflict areas and areas of
concern

PRIORITIES:
◦ Safety, safety, safety
◦ Separate the different types of traffic to the greatest extent
possible: buses, cars, pedestrians
◦ Improve efficiencies wherever possible

BUS OPTIONS
◦ Bus drivers may be difficult to deal with, but it will be easier to
make them change than to make parents change
◦ Select appropriate bus staging area based on available space

BUS STACKING OPTIONS
◦ Parking Spaces
◦ Single File Queue
◦ Double Lane Stacking

BUS PARKING SPACES
◦ Ideal for large number of
buses where a wide area is
available.
◦ All buses exit at the same
time after all students have
loaded.
◦ 20 buses requires
approximately a 275’ long
parking field

SINGLE FILE QUEUE
◦ Better suited to a small
number of buses
◦ Buses require a minimum
of 45’, so 20 buses would
require 900’ of queue
length.

DOUBLE LANE STACKING
◦ Space saver for a large number
of buses where there is
insufficient space for bus parking
◦ 20 buses would require
approximately 500’ queue length
◦ Driveway should be wide enough
for three buses to allow for one
through lane.
◦ All buses leave at the same time

VEHICLE PICK-UP AND DROP-OFF OPTIONS
◦
◦
◦
◦
Single File Queue
Double Lane Stacking
Park and Walk
Offsite Drop Area / Shuttle

SINGLE FILE QUEUE
◦ Requires a long queue length (25’ min. per
car)
◦ Can be dangerous, as students race to their
parent’s car and as vehicles leave
haphazardly once they have their child.

DOUBLE LANE STACKING
◦ Requires half the queue length.
◦ Teachers must control the
release of vehicles in stages.
◦ Heavy involvement of teachers
or parent helpers is required

Park and Walk
◦ Parents park and walk their
children in and out of school.
◦ Not well suited for a large
number of parents picking up
or dropping off.
◦ May want to use this for lower
grade levels with their own
access area.
◦ Best to avoid this situation in
conjunction with a drop-off
lane due to pedestrian-vehicle
conflict

Remote Drop-off / Pick-up Area
◦ Force parents to drop off kids at a remote lot
◦ Buses would be utilized to shuttle kids to/from school,
unless the separate lot is close enough to the school.
◦ Significantly reduces traffic at the school and improves
safety.
◦ May require agreement with property owner if offsite
area is not owned by the District.
◦ This is especially useful if it is a school of choice
situation.

CASE STUDIES
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦
◦
Doherty Elementary School
Pierce Elementary School
Amerman Elementary School
Northville High School.
Royal Oak Middle School
Midland – New Elementary School
DOHERTY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
ORIGINAL CONDITIONS
CONCEPT PLANNING
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
CONCEPT PLANNING
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ALTERNATE ENTRY/
EXIT DRIVE TO THE SOUTH
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
FINAL LAYOUT
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
PIERCE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
ORIGINAL CONDITIONS
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
CONCEPT PLANNING
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
CONCEPT PLANNING – PREFERRED OPTION
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
FINAL LAYOUT
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
AMERMAN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
ORIGINAL CONDITIONS
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
CONCEPT PLANNING - DRAFT
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
CONCEPT PLANNING - FINAL
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
FINAL CONSTRUCTION
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
NORTHVILLE HIGH SCHOOL
ORIGINAL CONDITIONS
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
CONCEPT PLANNING
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
CONCEPT PLANNING
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
CONCEPT PLANNING
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
FINAL LAYOUT
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
ROYAL OAK MIDDLE SCHOOL
ORIGINAL CONDITIONS
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
CONCEPT PLAN
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
FINAL PLAN
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
MIDLAND – NEW CENTRAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
EXISTING CONDITIONS
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
CONCEPT PLAN
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES
SUGGESTED MODIFICATION
TRAFFIC LIGHT
ADDITIONAL INBOUND
AND OUTBOUND LANES

EDUCATING THE USERS
◦
◦
◦
◦
Mailer detailing modifications to the traffic flow
Email distribution with posting to the website
Social media links.
Youtube demonstration videos:
 Salem H.S. (Salem,VA) instructional video
 Willowgrove School - (Saskatoon) instructional video
◦ THERE WILL BE A LEARNING CURVE!

FINAL COMMENTS
◦ Safety is Critical. Efficiency is important but usually not the
driving force.
◦ Doesn’t always require a lot of money to modify traffic flow –
sometimes it’s as easy as restriping.
◦ When it does cost money – how much do you throw at a
problem that lasts for 15-20 minutes each day? This needs to
be considered unless you are dealing with a safety issue.
◦ Easiest to implement changes as part of a paving improvement
project.
QUESTIONS?

Spalding DeDecker Associates, Inc.

Transcription

Similar documents

An Effective Way Of Growing Your Business

brochure

Reverse Telemarketing Campaign

stelton lanes

Solutions for The Contact Center

August 04 NL.qxd - Call Center Times

E - DEVLET

August, 2012 Dear Group Leader, If you are looking

Poelking Centers Dayton Area

Itai - Resume - Working Doc

Now in Progress! Keep Promoting!

League Promotion Ready to Roll 8 Member Centers Offering New

event layout

E - Broucher - training and beyond

Control Phreak

OfficeServ DataView User Manual

PATA Travel Mart 2015