🛣 Headlines About California Highways – July 2023

[cahwyguy]

It's the end of the month. It's hot, so I'll keep it short and sweet. Here are your headlines for July: https://cahighways.org/wordpress/?p=16568

Ready, set, discuss.

[Quillz]

Should be noted roundabouts and traffic circles are not the same. Roundabouts refer to when traffic entering has priority, traffic circles are when traffic in the circle has priority. California almost exclusively builds the latter.

[SeriesE]

99S to 58W ramp is a no brainer. What caused them to change their mind? Initial centennial corridor plans said that connection is redundant.

The 57/60 concurrency should've been double decked or just close the Grand Avenue interchange (many other closely interchanges can be used to get to the area)

[heynow415]

Should be noted roundabouts and traffic circles are not the same. Roundabouts refer to when traffic entering has priority, traffic circles are when traffic in the circle has priority. California almost exclusively builds the latter.

It is actually the opposite.  Roundabouts are entry controlled with yield signs and deflected approaches and traffic within the roundabout has the right of way.  Traffic circles, and their larger, east coast version Rotaries, may have entry control or even control within the circular flow.  In a free-flow circulation pattern, giving the right of way to those entering the right of way over those already in it would fail as the roundabout/traffic circle reaches capacity as those already in the circle would not be able to move while those with the right of way try to squeeze in.  It is similar to a full elevator in that someone is going to have to get off in order for someone else to get on, even if the person outside the elevator pushed the button to call it to their floor.

There are older traffic circles in California, like the Marin/Mendocino/Arlington circle in Berkeley or a couple I recall in Long Beach but I'm not aware of any locations in California where a traffic circle has been constructed in the recent past, but there are lots of roundabouts.    I-80/SR 89 in Truckee has roundabouts; Columbus Circle in New York City is a traffic circle.

[DTComposer]

There are older traffic circles in California, like the Marin/Mendocino/Arlington circle in Berkeley or a couple I recall in Long Beach but I'm not aware of any locations in California where a traffic circle has been constructed in the recent past, but there are lots of roundabouts.    I-80/SR 89 in Truckee has roundabouts; Columbus Circle in New York City is a traffic circle.

If you're thinking of "The Traffic Circle" in Long Beach (formally the Los Alamitos Circle; junction of CA-1, former CA-19, and Los Coyotes Diagonal), it was built as a traffic circle in the 1930s but converted to a roundabout in the 1990s. All traffic must yield entering the roundabout (save for a separated lane for CA-1 south).

When I lived there there were three entry lanes into the circle, but the circle itself was not striped, and you could predict the accidents watching people drift across from the inside to make their exit. It's since been striped for two lanes within the circle.

[Max Rockatansky]

Belmont Circle predates Los Alamitos by a couple years in Fresno.  It more or less still functions as a traffic circle, although the city put up some half assed "yield"  signs for entering traffic.  Within the circle there isn't any striping and it definitely can accommodate cars running alongside each other.

[Max Rockatansky]

Amusingly I probably will get some use out of the improved pedestrian access on 218.  When I go running in the dark on 218 I have to move to the Seaside section between Del Monte and Fremont.  The shoulder is at least wide enough in Seaside to easily run alongside.

[heynow415]

There are older traffic circles in California, like the Marin/Mendocino/Arlington circle in Berkeley or a couple I recall in Long Beach but I'm not aware of any locations in California where a traffic circle has been constructed in the recent past, but there are lots of roundabouts.    I-80/SR 89 in Truckee has roundabouts; Columbus Circle in New York City is a traffic circle.

If you're thinking of "The Traffic Circle" in Long Beach (formally the Los Alamitos Circle; junction of CA-1, former CA-19, and Los Coyotes Diagonal), it was built as a traffic circle in the 1930s but converted to a roundabout in the 1990s. All traffic must yield entering the roundabout (save for a separated lane for CA-1 south).

When I lived there there were three entry lanes into the circle, but the circle itself was not striped, and you could predict the accidents watching people drift across from the inside to make their exit. It's since been striped for two lanes within the circle.

That's the one I was thinking of.  I remember it in its pre-roundabout configuration.  Once in it, it was like going around the Arc de Triomphe in Paris - nice wide circle with no lane markings so it was a free-for-all navigating through it. Even so, it still worked.  It had the same safety aspects in that head-on and t-bone collisions weren't possible and those driving it knew the rules of engagement so sideswipes and rear-enders just didn't seem to happen (or happen often).

[pderocco]

So they stole a car lane from the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge and gave it to cyclists, and now it carries about 220 cyclists a day. The AADT for that bridge is 144,000. Multiply by a typical 1.5 people per vehicle, divide by six lanes, and you get 36,000 people per lane per day. Apparently, one cyclist is worth 163 people in cars. #Science!

[pderocco]

Are accidents along CA-58 between CA-223 and Hart Flat Road more prevalent than accidents at the CA-223 intersection? The latter has always struck me as a nightmare of an intersection. Sure, not many people turn left from CA-223, but a lot of trucks turn left from CA-58 WB.

[Plutonic Panda]

So they stole a car lane from the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge and gave it to cyclists, and now it carries about 220 cyclists a day. The AADT for that bridge is 144,000. Multiply by a typical 1.5 people per vehicle, divide by six lanes, and you get 36,000 people per lane per day. Apparently, one cyclist is worth 163 people in cars. #Science!

They may remove it and convert it back to a car lane. I read when I was up there people are pissed and want the car lane back. I saw maybe 10 bikes using it when I was sitting in car lanes packed with traffic. It wouldn't be cheap but they need to construct a new bridge or attach a bike structure to the current bridge if possible.

[Max Rockatansky]

So they stole a car lane from the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge and gave it to cyclists, and now it carries about 220 cyclists a day. The AADT for that bridge is 144,000. Multiply by a typical 1.5 people per vehicle, divide by six lanes, and you get 36,000 people per lane per day. Apparently, one cyclist is worth 163 people in cars. #Science!

They may remove it and convert it back to a car lane. I read when I was up there people are pissed and want the car lane back. I saw maybe 10 bikes using it when I was sitting in car lanes packed with traffic. It wouldn't be cheap but they need to construct a new bridge or attach a bike structure to the current bridge if possible.

Will they though?  There was some serious push to get that under utilized bike lane. 

[Plutonic Panda]

So they stole a car lane from the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge and gave it to cyclists, and now it carries about 220 cyclists a day. The AADT for that bridge is 144,000. Multiply by a typical 1.5 people per vehicle, divide by six lanes, and you get 36,000 people per lane per day. Apparently, one cyclist is worth 163 people in cars. #Science!

They may remove it and convert it back to a car lane. I read when I was up there people are pissed and want the car lane back. I saw maybe 10 bikes using it when I was sitting in car lanes packed with traffic. It wouldn't be cheap but they need to construct a new bridge or attach a bike structure to the current bridge if possible.

Will they though?  There was some serious push to get that under utilized bike lane.

I wouldn't be surprised if they don't. I knew about it but I was shocked to see it in person.

[heynow415]

So they stole a car lane from the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge and gave it to cyclists, and now it carries about 220 cyclists a day. The AADT for that bridge is 144,000. Multiply by a typical 1.5 people per vehicle, divide by six lanes, and you get 36,000 people per lane per day. Apparently, one cyclist is worth 163 people in cars. #Science!

They did not "steal" a lane from vehicle usage for the bike path; it's been two lanes westbound since the 1977 drought when a pipeline was constructed across the bridge since Marin's reservoirs were going dry.  In the meantime, it's been used for construction staging and a shoulder.  The bike lane was done as an experimental project which time has run so the debate is what to do now.  Not having use of the shoulder has impacted traffic flow when someone breaks down or there is a collision since that space is no longer available to get out of the way. 

Doing a peak-hour lane in that space on the bridge, like is present on the lower, eastbound deck, is one option under consideration, but Caltrans likes having shoulder space available to do maintenance work (the barrier between the bike path and car lanes is a zipper wall so it can be moved back and forth as needed) so a full-time three lane setup is improbable.  The other issue with westbound is the toll plaza, which widens out to 8 lanes and then has everyone merge back again.  With electronic tolling, replacing the booths with a gantry, and keep the lane count at 3 as it is on the approach would also help with the backups.  There is also the issue on the Marin end of what would happen to the third lane.  It could become an exit-only lane for Sir Francis Drake Blvd but there is a short merge onramp from San Quentin that conflicts with that exit now, so that would likely need to be moved to the west.  Unless a separate direct WB 580 to SB 101 connector is constructed, having 3 lanes dumping into to 101 north would not be a good move.

[pderocco]

If they want to get bicycles across the bridge, why don't they have a shuttle bus? Even with the wait, it would probably still be faster than cycling. And running a shuttle for, well, forever would still be cheaper than building a structure for a bike lane the length of the bridge.