State DOT to hold public hearing next Wednesday on proposed roundabout at Route 77 and Ledge Road
The New York State Department of Transportation announced today it will host a public hearing next week for the proposed intersection improvements at Route 77 and Ledge Road in the Town of Alabama, which include the installation of a modern roundabout and other safety enhancements.
The hearing is set to take place at the Alabama Fire Hall, located at 2230 Judge Road in Oakfield, at 6 p.m. on Wednesday, May 29.
Department of Transportation staff will be available from 5:30 to 6 p.m. and directly after the hearing, for approximately 30 minutes, to discuss the project and answer questions.
Anyone interested in expressing their views concerning the project will be given the opportunity to do so in person or through written statements. A short presentation will be given at the start of the hearing, followed by comments from the public.
NYSDOT has current information posted online regarding roundabouts, as well as downloadable brochures here. A copy of the Draft Design Report is available for review at the NYSDOT Regional Office and the Town of Alabama Clerk’s Office.
done deal my friends... the powers that be want a round about and a round about is what they'll get...
I agree, the decision was made a long time ago and nothing is going to change that, it will be shoved down our throats no matter what anyone says. Traffic circles are what's "trending". They are the engineer's answer to every traffic problem involving cross streets/roads and it doesn't matter that there are far cheaper ways to deal with the issue that are just as effective and won't cause as many problems as it solves. Common sense be damned.
Hard to say the decision is made when it isn't done yet. People opposed the traffic circle at Suicide Corners and the DOT backed down.
Engineers love traffic circles because they work. Sometimes, often times, the best thing to do is listen to the experts. Traffic circles reduce severe/deadly crashes. That's just a fact.
No other mechanism -- lights, speed bumps, flashing signs (any option you care to name) is as effective.
You're always going to have inattentive drivers. Human nature isn't going to change no matter how much you might wish it might. That's why traffic circles work. They force drivers to pay attention, they force them to slow down, the ensure the smooth flow of traffic.
Commons sense has only one right answer when it comes to reducing accidents, especially deadly right-angle accidents, at intersections: traffic circles.
That being the case why are they not at all intersections? How many lives have been saved at the Oak St. traffic circle? You know, the one the tractor trailers drive over all the time.
Ray, you do know that the circle was designed for the tractor trailers to drive over it, right?
In researching this a bit, I discovered that to DOT there is a distinction between roundabouts and traffic circles. Who knew? The DOT is proceeding with a planned roundabout in Fredonia (Chautauqua county) at the 4-lane intersection of Rts 20 and 60. It is, arguably, one of the busiest in the county - with many businesses, the Fredonia Central School campus and a proposed hospital within 1000 feet. Community objections were of no avail. Construction is expected to begin this year
Ray, there have been no fatal accidents at the Oak Street roundabout since it was built.
There have no serious injuries accidents.
There have been no accidents causing major damage to a vehicle.
As John points out, trucks use the roundabout exactly as it was designed to be used.
I guess I'm just old and don't like change. I don't have any issues with stopping for a stop sign or a red traffic light. It is so easy, press brake pedal with foot. I may have an issue facing a "round- about" while driving 55 mph. Oh they are going to put up signs? and flashing lights? speed bumps? to reduce the speed.? The intersection in question has been there for 50 million years, leave it alone for another 50..
Actually the State really, really, wanted a round about at suicide corners. They were going to use eminent domain to take the house there on the corner to make room for it. The homeowner went through the process to have the home declared a landmark, because of its history as carriage house and inn. Which totally boned the DOT, you cant take a landmark property with eminent domain.
What I think, what you think really doesn't matter. I've been around long enough to know that what the state wants the state gets. When it comes to spending money which could be better spent elsewhere they are experts. Why try the least expensive, least intrusive method to get drivers to obey traffic laws when you can spend the greatest amount of money (and remove a sizeable piece of some homeowners front yards in the process) to accomplish your goals. If I believed a traffic circle was the only option available to make the corner safer I would say "bite the bullet and full speed ahead". However I have lived in the area for 35 years, cross that intersection on a regular basis and have never had an accident or a close call. Apparently there are drivers who don't realize that a stop sign means stop, look both ways and wait until it is clear before you proceed into the intersection. This involves good judgement and sometimes patience. A traffic signal takes the judgement out of the equation, red you stop, green you go. There will still be drivers who will violate the law, but those same people will fail to wait their turn to enter a traffic circle. Granted they will be moving slower but lowering the speed limit to 30 miles an hour on Rt. 77 in that area would do the same thing. I and most everyone else who passes through there would be unhappy about that too. The difference is it would cost next to nothing and the million plus they will spend for us to drive around in circles could be used to fix a few pothole infested roads.
FYI: I'm done, I will say no more...…………..I put that poorly. What I meant to say was: I'll shut up now.
"What I think, what you think really doesn't matter."
It isn't about what you are I think. It's about those pesky, immutable things called facts.
"Why try the least expensive, least intrusive method to get drivers to obey traffic laws"
Why risk lives with experimentation instead of doing what is known to work based on facts?
"However I have lived in the area for 35 years, cross that intersection on a regular basis and have never had an accident or a close call."
That's called randomness, pure random chance. It proves nothing. It's anecdotal.
"... slower but lowering the speed limit to 30 miles an hour on Rt. 77 ..."
How many times have you driven down a road that seemed wide open, not many houses or other buildings and not much traffic and so you tool along at 55 mph only to find out later that the speed limit was 45 mph? We all do it. We've all done it. And that's why there are legal standards for how speed limits are set. If a speed limit is set arbitrarily without a traffic study, a person who receives a ticket for breaking that speed limit can challenge it in court. A speed limit must have a statistical basis based on how people actually use the roadway. There are other factors but that is a key consideration.