Subproblem 6a - Page 3 of 3 |
ID# C306A03 |
Sub-problem 6a:
Feasibility of Conversion to a Roundabout
The traffic volumes at a
three-legged roundabout are much easier to compute than those at a
four-legged roundabout, because of the non-existent movements. The
computations will be simplified even further here because of the existing
channelization that effectively removes the EB and NB right turns from the
operation. Assuming no U-turns, Exhibit 3-43 shows the computed entry
and circulating volumes at each entry point.
Exhibit 3-43. Roundabout Entry and Circulating
Volumes |
Entry Point |
Entry Volume |
Circulating
Volume |
Eastbound approach |
EB Through (2,010) |
WB Left (120) |
Northbound approach |
Northbound Left
(257) |
EB Through (2,010) |
Westbound approach |
WB Through + WB Left
(358 + 120 = 478) |
NB Left (257) |
At this point it is clear
that the circulating volume, 2,010 vph, opposing the traffic entering on the
northbound approach exceeds the stated upper limit of 1,200 vph. We will
therefore abandon the HCM analysis at this point with the conclusion that
the HCM is not able to provide an indication that a single-lane roundabout
could accommodate the traffic.
This does not in itself
indicate that a roundabout should be conclusively dismissed as a legitimate
method of accommodating traffic at this intersection. It simply demonstrates
that the HCM is not able to confirm that a single-lane roundabout would be a
feasible solution to the problem. A more comprehensive roundabout
feasibility study, probably involving a multi-lane roundabout, would be
required for the operating agency if they were to pursue the notion of a
roundabout at this location. Outside of the HCM, a very good sourcebook for
conducting this type of analysis is
Roundabouts: An Informational Guide.
[
Back ] [ Continue ] to
Sub-Problem 6b