News -> INDReporter TUE, MAY 3 10:41AM by Walter Pierce

Roundabout eyed for S. College/Bendel

The Lafayette City-Parish Council Tuesday will vote on an introductory ordinance that would allocate $150,000 to the Traffic & Transportation Department to conduct a state-mandated feasibility study on constructing a two-lane roundabout at the intersection of Coolidge Boulevard/South College Drive/Bendel Gardens Road. The feasibility study is required because South College is a state-maintained highway — La. 3025.

20110223-cover-0102
                                     Photo by Robin May
                LCG's Tony Tramel

Transportation Director Tony Tramel, according to an LCG internal memorandum, is recommending the roundabout: “It appears a proposed roundabout at the subject location would be safer, more efficient, and more convenient than the existing conditions. There is, however, a need to employ a civil engineer firm to develop controlled geometric designs and to evaluate and estimate utility relocation, right of way, and construction costs.”

“Roundabouts typically reduce crashes by 50 % - 70% or more,” Tramel indicates in the memorandum, noting that analysis of three years of crash data the intersection showed 50 preventable — rear-end, 90-degree, head-on and sideswipe — collisions at the intersection.


Walter Pierce
About the author:


Comments (25)add
...
written by Think Bigger , May 03, 2011 - 04:57 pm
I have not heard of any crashes are for that matter accidents in those areas. There might be some wait time to turn left on to South College or Bendel but other than that I don't see the wisdom in changing it or spending the monies to do it.
...
written by James Melancon , May 03, 2011 - 05:17 pm
Good idea. It's an awkward intersection. The more roundabouts, the better.
...
written by Anon , May 03, 2011 - 08:02 pm
Think Bigger ... maybe you should try Read More Carefully Then Think Big as a moniker. Read (or re-read) the last paragraph which indicates the last three years of crash data for that intersection. Roundabouts work. Less delays, fewer crashes, and Lafayette drivers have proven they quickly get the mechanics of driving them from other roundabouts installed in the parish/city area.
...
written by NORTHSIDIAN SHOTGUN , May 04, 2011 - 03:27 am
Booyah, guess who the civil engineering firm will be, joey and tony's favorite, 1/2 bubble off center FESTERMAKER , The Party's Favorite+ Mardi Gras Krewe Man OF The Year, THe Gnomeman, Festermaker.

Booyah for sure.
...
written by Hard Hat , May 04, 2011 - 03:32 am
Oh, Joey you surround yourself with people who demand so little of you. Thank God, Huh, What a relief that you do not have to standup and be counted, if so the greenman and the anorexic lawyer would have to carry you.
...
written by Iseeidiots , May 04, 2011 - 09:07 am
I see idiots at the roundabout on Verot that are so confused, every day, nearly every time I use it, which is at least twice a day. A two lane round about? In Lfayette? I don't need $150 grand to burn to tell you you're going to have problems. I'm not optomistic a roundabout will reduce the number of accidents.......
...
written by urbane , May 04, 2011 - 11:18 am
and what does this do for bicycles and pedestrians? Have you looked at the price of gas lately? How can this be safely traversed without a car?
...
written by Southsider , May 04, 2011 - 11:57 am
I have passed through that intersection twice daily for over 13 years. I can't remember the last time there was an accident at the intersection. I can't see the advantages of having a roundabout at this location. What next, Johnston & Ambassador Caffery Pwky?
...
written by Jason D. Faulk , May 04, 2011 - 02:32 pm
First of all, doing some overly simplistic math, think of the odds of yourself passing through an intersection and the routine times of the day you do this. Now think of the other 23 hours and 55 minutes per day you are not parked out in front of the intersection. Is it not likely that as even a regular user of those streets that one would not witness accidents then, and that not all of these 16-17 per year are newsworthy?

Southsider fears improved efficiency and reduced costs of operation as an exchange for having to approach a newly designed intersection more cautiously (which with a roundabout is the intent, even as it aids in the continuous movement of vehicles.) Southsider, I would offer you this, what's next is probably in fact Johnston and Ambassador Caffery. There are designs for multilane roundabouts at one other location in the area, Kaliste Saloom at Eloi Broussard roads, but probably the traffic department will try to get state to allow it to design and possibly fund one of those CTFI's similar to the one on Camellia/Guilbeau/Fryer/Rena and Johnston.

Since there is probably some unease with roundabouts and changing the status quo, here's a link to a multilane roundabout the La. DOTD is constructing out near Fort Polk where two 4 lane highways are meeting each other.
http://www.dotd.la.gov/administration/public_info/projects/roundabouts/

While I can bet the South College design won't be quite the same because of the geometry involved, or the insufficient space to put wide right turn curves into place, a roundabout at that spot is something I've been thinking on the past few years and would welcome it. As for pedestrians, what few we have will surely see a safer crossing than there is now, because currently no crosswalk is visible, nor are there complete and unobstructed sidewalks in the area. With a roundabout, a pedestrian can pretty much only get hit from one direction at a time, rather than 4 directions at a standard intersection. That's because all cars are coming from the same direction in the roundabout as those exit it. Cyclists such as myself will continue to use the street, and will do so as the cars do, and will be quite safer I believe because of the reduced speeds and general observation of drivers taking caution to navigate a roundabout without a collision. It is the very uncertainty of an intersection like this, without the normal traffic light guidance and command that serves to put the people back in charge of their safe driving practice, ultimately we are all in charge and responsible to take care in these situations, it is one reason why roundabouts are so much safer. Relish the uncertainty and the responsibility. I'll be glad to know that no one will be running a red light at 45mph any longer, especially if I am on a bike.

(One other thought, if the Brits can handle these things while driving on the wrong side of the road, can't we?)
...
written by Walter Pierce , May 04, 2011 - 02:44 pm
Good, clean thinking, Jason. Thanks for the input.
When I interviewed Tramel for a cover story we did on him a few months ago, he said he wanted to install a reduced phase intersection (the kind recently opened at Camellia/Johnston/Guilbeau) at Johnston/Ambassador.
...
written by ragin_cajun , May 04, 2011 - 03:23 pm
Jason Faulk --

"If it ain't broke, don't fix it". That's what they're trying to say. Trammel wants the City to spend money on this when it's not really a big problem.

I know you want to completely re-design the city, because that's where your expertise is. "When you hold a hammer, everything's a nail". But you, and Trammel, are going to have to accept that new ways of doing things sometimes are only reasonable on new installs.

This is common in my business, too. If I could re-build and re-design every 5 year old network in America, I could certainly build 'em all better and they'd all be faster and "smarter" because they'd all use brand new gear. But, it would be impractical. So sometimes you remove and replace, and sometimes you retrofit, but most times you just live with what you have. Sorry, that's reality.

When I was younger and inexperienced, my perspective on these things was purely technical--what we COULD do. As I've gained experience in my field, I've learned to incorporate cost/benefit into the decision-making process, and present those considerations to my clients in addtion to purely technical considerations.

With all that in mind, is there any other reason to tear down and re-build a major intersection than just 'it'd be safer, more convenient, and more efficient?' Because I could see if the rationale was "Since we're rebuilding the intersection anyway, we have this new idea..."

And another thing. I know that hearing "that's the way we've always done it" is just horrible to the more progressive among us. But when it comes to driving a car, it is very important for as many drivers as possible to have ingrained habits about how they respond to traffic conditions. And it is very safe to have those traffic conditions be as routine and predictable as possible.

Isn't it possible that intoducing new and unfamiliar traffic situations, and unfamiliar signage, and exotic lane configurations at intersections could CAUSE accidents?

Oh, and let me save Native the trouble of typing and just type his post for him....
"everyone who disagrees is racist, Vitter's a whore monger, FOX NEWS IS FAKE, Bush is to blame for everything, TEA Party is all crazy, the poor will rise up with pitchforks"

...
written by Walter Pierce , May 04, 2011 - 03:30 pm
I have to admit, ragin: You're new, standard tag line on your comments is pretty funny.
...
written by Iseeidiots , May 04, 2011 - 03:39 pm
JDFAULK, why be derogatory about Brits??? and have you noticed, a huge percentage of their vehicles, not counting the tour busses, but personal vehicles, are a lot smaller than US vehicles?
...
written by Southsider , May 04, 2011 - 06:19 pm
Southsider fears improved efficiency and reduced costs of operation as an exchange for having to approach a newly designed intersection more cautiously (which with a roundabout is the intent, even as it aids in the continuous movement of vehicles
I don't fear improved efficiency and reduce costs at all. I don't see where a roundabout would improve efficiency at all. Its not like its a traffic jam intersection, even at 7:30-8:30 nor 4:30-5:30. I think spending monies just for the sake of it is rediculous, as putting a roundabout at that location would be. As has been commented on, the roubabout on Ridge Road is a cluster, as approaching cars NOT on ridge road can't get into the roundabout as there is so much traffic already in it!
...
written by tif , May 04, 2011 - 06:50 pm
Why stop at a study? Lets make it a tif district! Yea Ha No vote from any of you.
...
written by NORTHSIDIAN SHOTGUN , May 05, 2011 - 03:23 am
It is a cluster, although cluster.... ? No one will say, the roundabout is designed to fatten a select few, as they say, you want to know why we build the, SUNSHINE BRIDGE, for a podnuh to fatten the purse, and part of the purse, has a return through the back door for the ones holding the strings and their sponsoring money men.
...
written by NORTHSIDIAN SHOTGUN , May 05, 2011 - 12:38 pm
How about you dumb ass Tony Trammel's trying to throw the whole ham to the festermaker one-eyed hung low gyroscope surveyor just let the Festermaker determine how much tar will it require to patch Surrey Street and Pinhook of the hubcap size holes to name one corner, hell is there no profit in patching any other
pot holes other than at Jodu'nt Road.
...
written by Bow Tox , May 05, 2011 - 02:27 pm
I think roundabouts are great, even if someone gets a little dizzy.
...
written by Jason D. Faulk , May 05, 2011 - 06:05 pm
I was actually making an appeal to American gumption to be the best at anything, the Brits were my foil indeed and I harbor no ill sentiment. I would have poked fun at the French, but being of Cajun ancestry and that I think the French do drive "adroitly" it just would not have been as useful.

In reply to Ragin, taking a page from your book, I would bet there is some cost-benefit ratio that makes this intersection rebuild a more affordable alternative to pursue. I'm not an engineer, but I'll presume that Mr. Tramel is trying also to get ahead of the curve for when and if South College Bridge and extension are ever opened. When that occurs, over time there will be additional traffic load in the area coming through resulting in even greater delays at Bendel and Coolidge. Being that those two streets do not form a normal 4 way intersection, if you go out there and observe the light patterns, we basically have the equivalent of what used to take place at S. College and Johnston, where there was never really full-green time for College, it was always a pair of mutually exclusive green forward and green lefts. Bendel and Coolidge have the same problem because of the movement patterns and the angles of approach. The Oil Center gets backed up, Pinhook is already overloaded, and even with a South College Bridge, most of the flow is still trying to get to Kaliste Saloom or points beyond. A roundabout at this location basically puts all movements on a natural even footing, first in, first out.

I'll still be the first to admit that sometimes, traffic corrections are like shuffling deck chairs, you'll just get to the next tie up faster, and regardless, we keep growing putting more people on the road, so traffic usually like work in this country, expands to fill the space available for it. As long as we're facilitating more cars and not faciliating a streetcar, light rail and bicycles in this town, we'll just keep having more traffic, and I agree with you, that bulldozing entire neighborhoods to build new road connections is an unlikely, unattractive and politically unpalatable choice. Absent that, the engineer is going to do everything he can to squeeze maximum value out of the system he is given. Don't you do the same?

Having said all this, is there one other reason why we should do this besides, cost, efficiency, safety, or convenience? YES: Aesthetic value. Can't put a dollar figure on civic beauty (within reason)

Being that I gather you are a network engineer, I'm sure you can appreciate the fact that networks are constantly being rebuilt and upgraded.
Where we have the space, such as in this spot, we should do the upgrade, and our pattern recognition as humans will adapt accordingly. In any event, I think a roundabout is less confusing, safer, more affordable and more just than those blinking left turn arrows that seem stuck somewhere in limbo between yellow, red, or you're going to get a redflex ticket!
...
written by Jason D. Faulk , May 05, 2011 - 06:16 pm
Oh and Southsider, if the Ridge/Rue de Belier roundabout is overloaded at peak times, then that's a sign to us that it needs to be enlarged to make it wider around.
Try one this size:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:CarlandCrossRoundaboutA30Cornwall.jpg
Pretty much anything you'd want to read with as a starter is here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundabout
And we have not even begun to talk about "Magic Roundabouts"!
...
written by ragin_cajun , May 05, 2011 - 10:03 pm
"I'm sure you can appreciate the fact that networks are constantly being rebuilt and upgraded."

Yes, they are. But I've never seen one rebuilt or upgraded without MUCH justification of why it needs to be done. The justifications I've always seen are:
1. Current network "unsupportable" by the manufacturer -- End of Life
2. Traffic load has grown too high
3. Cheaper new alternative has become available

Those reasons are compelling. I haven't yet seen any reasons that compelling from Tony Trammel for this project. I think that if LCG were strapped financially, this project would be shelved.
...
written by Jason D. Faulk , May 07, 2011 - 10:58 am
I did state one other reason: Peak hour congestion. Congestion caused not because the roadway lacks the capacity to hold and move vehicles, but because the intersection lacks the capacity to do so and because in a couple of movements, there are no other alternatives to relieve pressure on that intersection.

Roundabout is a cheaper new alternative. The traffic light control equipment if salvaged can be deployed in another location, this roundabout like one in a "virgin" location would cost less than a new traffic light control system, I believe.

I'm sure that these folks will start conveying those reasons through the media as the story gets covered repeatedly. If you have this sort of question, you should call Tramel's office and ask them. Sometimes this kind of information doesn't translate it's way into the journalist's article.

Tramel did also talk about SAFETY SAFETY SAFETY in the quote Walter provided. Now if you had a mess of network architecture which was vulnerable to security compromises and failure, well wouldn't you be asked to replace it and make it safe and secure?

You can look up Tramel's memorandum on the LCG website through the Council Agendas and Minutes.

I think preventing crashes alone will be a payoff in saving citizens money on increased insurance premiums and medical costs not all of which are covered by insurance in some sectors. This will also save Medicaid dollars for the state of Louisiana, as well as Medicare dollars. But I guess if you're in the ambulance, medical, car sales and repair and liability litigation fields, it can be a letdown.

The other key thing you're missing here is that the funds are being appropriated from the "Traffic Safety Fund." I would bet that the source of revenue for that fund is the SafeSpeed/SafeLight traffic violation tickets that City of Lafayette gets the majority cut of from RedFlex. Those funds can only be used for work related to Traffic Safety improvements. The definition of traffic safety and the breadth to which LCG is willing to include other government work with those funds would be up to their discretion though. It's all in an ordinance somewhere. As it stands now, these funds aren't leaving LCG strapped for funds anywhere else, they're in a dedicated pool and were never meant to fund anything else. That's a heck of a lot more than we can say for parks and recreation which has no dedicated baseline operations tax revenue source despite having a more or less fixed operating cost year in year out.
...
written by citizen , May 10, 2011 - 08:43 pm
a roundabout at Bendel and pinhook intersection would be more desirable, this would allow for travel from Bendel northward on Pinhook.
...
written by Bendellian , May 10, 2011 - 11:30 pm
First off, you need to consider where is the land going to taken from to provide the room to create a 4 lane roundabout in an area which is already builtup with residential, commercial and hospital property surrounding the intersection? There is another one of those "Horse Farm" type land swaps in the making between the LCG and the property owner of the old Bendel homestead. Second, so if the traffice runs continously onto Bendel Road, what happens when that small road is backed up due to the traffic signal at the Pinhook intersection? Third, what happens to the asthetics of one of the nicer old neighborhoods in Lafayette (Bendel Gardens) when the major part of the roundabout channels more traffic through the neighborhood (as a shortcut to avoid the backup that will happen at Pinhook) and when the constant flow (at night) of headlights pointing into nicer established homes inside the subdivision as they traverse ther roundabout? Think about the sorry guy who lives at the end of West BAyou where it intersects with Rena Dr. when you want to think about what its like to have that constant traffic proceeding directly towards homes at night and all day. FOurth, think about the costs of relocating or compensating the commercial interests at that intersection--Cullen Investment; LAFleur Flower shop, Lafayette General, etc.--for the taking of all or portions of property. Fifth, follow the money---all of that SAFETY SAFETY SAFETY talk remiinds me errily of the red light camera issues (its not about the money its about the safety) which is now becomming a cash cow for the LCG coffers. Spend the money to connect S. College extension across the river--that is the project that will alleviate the congestion at the Pinhook/S.Colege areas.
...
written by nothappy , June 10, 2011 - 09:42 am
waste of money! If you are going to put in a roundabout then place it along pinhook at either south college or Bendel. then people would quit using Bendel as a "percieved" shortcut between pinhook and south collge. Pinhook is where the traffic does not flow.
You must be logged in to post a comment. Log in using your Facebook account or register if you do not have an account yet.

busy 
LA LA Land
Advertisement
Most Read
Advertisement
Advertisement
in case you missed it