Fort Worth - Traffic
#1 David Love
Posted 21 April 2005 - 02:09 PM
The report card, compiled by the National Transportation Operations Coalition, weighed elements relative to traffic signals such as maintenance, timing and progression, and handed down the 'F'.
Technology hasn't kept up with the times, and drivers are seeing red way more often than they should.
D/FW Ranks Poor In Traffic Study
On a 100-point scale, Fort Worth fails with a 57. The national average is a D-minus -- a grade of 62.
But cities like Dallas and Plano beat the average, with a grade of 73 in Dallas and 72 in Plano.
Fort Worth traffic engineers don't dispute the findings.
Many of the sensors under the streets that should trigger a signal change are broken, and the program to fix them was the victim of budget cuts several years ago, NBC 5 reported.
The city has nearly 700 traffic lights and only two people to keep them all working.
Those are just a couple of factors that contributed to Fort Worth's failing grade. There are more people on the road every day and the city admits it's just falling behind the times.
The city also admits that in Fort Worth, one in every five lights isn't working properly.
The National Traffic Signal Report Card grades out the Dallas-Fort Worth area with a C based on the overall performance of its traffic lights.
Representatives of the Texas Department of Transportation said they were proud of the C grade because of the nation's grade.
Officials with the coalition said better maintenance of local traffic signals could reduce travel time across the Metroplex by about 20 percent. Vehicular emissions also could be reduced by 9 percent, according to the coalition.
#2
Posted 22 April 2005 - 03:42 PM
Many of the sensors under the streets that should trigger a signal change are broken, and the program to fix them was the victim of budget cuts several years ago, NBC 5 reported.
So that's the reason that when I pull up to the signal light of my street and West Berry and I want to turn left or go straight, I wait forever for the light to change. It has become so bad at my street, that if I'm approaching the intersection from one block up and there is another car waiting at the light, I will turn right and cut over to the next block in order to make a right hand turn. The amount of time it takes for the minor street to turn green is unbelievable.
#3
Posted 22 April 2005 - 04:23 PM
#4 David Love
Posted 22 April 2005 - 05:06 PM
You would think city planners would realize the negative impact poor traffic design and flow have on a city center. Neglecting the arterial flow of any city’s life blood can only result in disaster.
#5
Posted 22 April 2005 - 05:13 PM
#6
Posted 22 April 2005 - 05:26 PM
#7 gdvanc
Posted 22 April 2005 - 06:14 PM
Officials with the coalition said better maintenance of local traffic signals could reduce travel time across the Metroplex by about 20 percent. Vehicular emissions also could be reduced by 9 percent, according to the coalition.
hm. i wonder how much that would cost? it would be interesting to see a comparison of the average benefit to fw residents of spending their tax dollars to address this issue with the average benefit to fw residents of spending their tax dollars for sh121t.
#8
Posted 22 April 2005 - 07:23 PM
Syncronizing traffic lights is not exactly rocket science, is it?
In a post on another thread, I mentioned two traffic lights on Bryant Irvin just south of Camp Bowie that are literally TWENTY FEET apart. And the really interesting thing is, the way they are arranged, I always have to stop at BOTH OF THEM.
I'm not a big fan of roundabouts, but they seem to make sense. At least you feel like you're getting somewhere. Anyone have any data about traffic accidents on roundabouts vs. stoplights? The roundabouts seem inherently dangerous, but I don't think I've ever actually seen an accident at one. Then again, we only have a couple of traffic circles, and about ten gazillion traffic lights.
#9 gdvanc
Posted 22 April 2005 - 08:14 PM
Syncronizing traffic lights is not exactly rocket science, is it?
Not exactly, although various factors can certainly complicate it. (topology of the traffic network, variability in number of vehicles along the paths, etc.) I wonder how many of Fort Worth's lights are capable of being synchronized. How many are sensor-driven only?
In a post on another thread, I mentioned two traffic lights on Bryant Irvin just south of Camp Bowie that are literally TWENTY FEET apart. And the really interesting thing is, the way they are arranged, I always have to stop at BOTH OF THEM.
The designer probably interned in Arlington.
I'm not a big fan of roundabouts, but they seem to make sense. At least you feel like you're getting somewhere. Anyone have any data about traffic accidents on roundabouts vs. stoplights? The roundabouts seem inherently dangerous, but I don't think I've ever actually seen an accident at one. Then again, we only have a couple of traffic circles, and about ten gazillion traffic lights.
From the Federal Highway Administration:
Roundabout Safety Comes to America
Roundabouts: An Informational Guide FHWA-RD-00-67, June 2000
A couple of quotes:
"Roundabouts may improve the safety of intersections by eliminating or altering conflict
types, by reducing speed differentials at intersections, and by forcing drivers to
decrease speeds as they proceed into and through the intersection."
and...
"Many studies have found that one of the benefits of roundabout installation is the
improvement in overall safety performance. Several studies in the U.S., Europe, and
Australia have found that roundabouts perform better in terms of safety than other
intersection forms (1, 2, 3, 4). In particular, single-lane roundabouts have been found
to perform better than two-way stop-controlled (TWSC) intersections in the U.S. (5).
Although the frequency of reported crashes is not always lower at roundabouts, the
reduced injury rates are usually reported (6). Safety is better at small and medium
capacity roundabouts than at large or multilane roundabouts (1, 7). While overall
crash frequencies have been reduced, the crash reductions are most pronounced for
motor vehicles, less pronounced for pedestrians, and equivocal for bicyclists, depending
on the study and bicycle design treatments (4, 6, 7)."
#10 David Love
Posted 22 April 2005 - 08:26 PM
I can see the headlines now: Fort Worth Unemployment Dips – Traffic Problems Solved!
#11
Posted 22 April 2005 - 09:35 PM
#12
Posted 23 April 2005 - 01:58 AM
#13 ghughes
Posted 23 April 2005 - 02:03 AM
Would that kind of project put Fort Worth on the map?
#14
Posted 23 April 2005 - 11:15 PM
Now that cable companies have modems, the city should require access to the cable net for carrying traffic data as part of the franchise agreement. Maybe the local phone company, too, for all the right-of-way access. Anyhow, with drops at signalized intersections for light control and one or more of many methods for sampling traffic speed and quantity (street, not data), a traffic optimization program running at a single location could do wonders.
Would that kind of project put Fort Worth on the map?
Nope, but it would make commuters happy. I think as we approach a new city council or mayoral election season, the candidates should REALLY show their best efforts and genuine compassion for the people of the city and direct traffic at listed locations during peak hours for about 2 months straight. Thus EARNING their way into city hall.
www.iheartfw.com
#15
Posted 25 April 2005 - 10:45 PM
Fort Worth probably has the worst roads I have ever seen with a city our size. Why our elected politicians don't do anything about this, I don't know. But I am getting sick of having to pay all of these taxes and getting subpar services at every level.
Austin and New Orleans are far worse. True, we need to keep our streets in good condition, but IMO there are other priorities ahead of having perfectly groomed roads.
Or maybe we should place more emphasis on the maintenance of our existing infrastruture and stop building as many roads out into the country side. (read SW "Parkway")
#16
Posted 23 March 2015 - 04:01 PM
Is the way that an address is designated in downtown strange?; it is to me.
JOT (640 Taylor) will be located between 5th and 6th Streets. When searching for an address of 640 Taylor, I would think that it is to be foiund between 6th and 7th Streets.
#17
Posted 23 March 2015 - 04:46 PM
- Fort Worthology and Dylan like this
#18
Posted 23 March 2015 - 05:38 PM
So you thought this was off topic in the JOT thread, but fit perfectly into a thread about traffic signal synchronization and road conditions?
#19
Posted 23 March 2015 - 05:54 PM
As long as this post has been revived. I've been fine with the Forest Park Road diet, but lately the light and Forest Park and Rosedale has been out of sync. My mercy has it been a headache when trying to go north.
#20
Posted 23 March 2015 - 10:23 PM
Rename, the address system does seem to be a little strange, but if you think about it, it makes more sense. The numbering system radiates from the front door of the courthouse. The first street from that front door is Weatherford, the next street to the south is 1st Street. Therefore the 100 block of any north/south street is between Weatherford and 1st Streets. The 200 block is between 1st and 2nd. The easy way to remember it is that the block number comes before the street of the same number.
#21
Posted 24 March 2015 - 12:21 PM
So that's the reason that when I pull up to the signal light of my street and West Berry and I want to turn left or go straight, I wait forever for the light to change. It has become so bad at my street, that if I'm approaching the intersection from one block up and there is another car waiting at the light, I will turn right and cut over to the next block in order to make a right hand turn. The amount of time it takes for the minor street to turn green is unbelievable.
I've reported that light several times. When approaching from the north, it will sense my bicycle and start to cycle - I see the Berry traffic go green to yellow to red and then immediately back to green without giving a green to the cross-street. Then they wonder why cyclists run red lights. (At this point I more typically cross on the other side of the tracks at Tortillandia.)
EDIT: I just realized that I responded to a post that's almost 10 years old. That's gotta be some kind of record.
- Volare likes this
#22
Posted 24 March 2015 - 12:52 PM
Rename, the address system does seem to be a little strange, but if you think about it, it makes more sense. The numbering system radiates from the front door of the courthouse. The first street from that front door is Weatherford, the next street to the south is 1st Street. Therefore the 100 block of any north/south street is between Weatherford and 1st Streets. The 200 block is between 1st and 2nd. The easy way to remember it is that the block number comes before the street of the same number.
Thank you. I see your point; and that does make sense.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users