Questions Raised on Traffic Safety After Accident Averted at Intersection of Roosevelt Island Motorgate Helix Ramp and Main Street By RIRA Planning Committee Chairperson - Is an All Way Stop Sign Needed at the Intersection?
Public Safety Officer Directing Traffic at Motorgate Helix
Roosevelt Island Residents Association (RIRA) Planning Committee Chairperson Frank Farance is concerned with traffic safety at the intersection of the Motorgate Helix Ramp and Main Street.
View Larger Map
Mr. Farance shares a message he sent this past Saturday to Roosevelt Island Public Safety Director Keith Guerra.
Director Guerra-A Public Safety Officer has recently been assigned to direct traffic at intersection of the Motorgate Ramp Helix and Main Street on Saturday's during the Farmers Market.
We have spoken about this several times, but this now requires quick attention.
Today at 12:51, I was returning to Roosevelt Island in a taxi. The officer at the bottom of the helix waved us on (we were turning left), meanwhile the red bus barreled through the intersection northbound oblivious to the traffic situation and the officer's instructions. Even though we had the right of way (because of the officer's direction), the red bus almost hit us. The PSD officer shouted at the red bus driver (with no effect).
I know you have received requests to have an officer on Saturdays at the base of the helix to improve safety and I'm not suggesting you change.
However, it has been the position of the Roosevelt Island Residents Association for several years that an ALL-WAY stop configuration is the best. It was an ALL-WAY stop for about three decades until circa 2005 when RIOC started removing stop signs on Main Street in the hopes that the red bus would run more reliably (the loss of stop signs had no positive effect on the red bus schedule).
One reason this intersection is dangerous is that it has unbalanced stop signs: one for southbound traffic, but none for northbound traffic. Thus, both westbound and southbound traffic believe northbound traffic will stop (and it won't).
This intersection is confusing because there aren't any others like in NYC. At the April RIRA Common Council meeting, I asked the commander of the 114th Precinct if he was familiar with any intersection like this in Astoria, Long Island City, or anywhere else and he couldn't think of one (Mr. Bryan attended and he can report on the discussion).
So today you had the extra benefit of a PSD officer, yet an accident almost occurred. The officer didn't do anything wrong, it was clearly the fault of (1) the red bus driver who was not paying attention to the officer in the intersection, and (2) the intersection itself is unsafe and prone to accidents.
You mentioned that the present configuration conforms to the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD 2009), but that is not so. MUTCD sections 2B.05 and 2C.59 apply yet the present configuration violates those requirements (see excerpts below) that clearly acknowledge the driver's expectations when arriving in an intersection and require the use of ONCOMING-TRAFFIC/TRAFFIC-FROM-LEFT DOES NOT STOP plaques (plaques are missing).
I am requesting two things:
(1) Reconfigure the helix intersection to an ALL-WAY stop: northbound STOP sign, additional ALL-WAY plaques, and roadway markings would say STOP northbound. Do not continue use of unbalanced intersections, do not install traffic-does-not-stop plaques. The ALL-WAY stop would help pedestrians crossing the helix roadway because northbound traffic pushes its way through (unsafely) and an ALL-WAY would force a full stop prior to cars confronting pedestrians.
(2) Instruct the red bus drivers to pay attention to Public Safety Officers directing traffic.
Today's scenario (in theory) had the best: a PSD officer directing traffic, a taxi driver from Olympic Car Service who is familiar with Island traffic patterns, and a RIOC red bus driver thoroughly familiar with the traffic and regular Saturday help from PSD in the intersection. However, we still almost had an accident. Rather than continue to deny that the present configuration is safe, why not try a safer configuration that had worked well for three decades.
Thank you.
Frank Farance
RIRA Planning Committee Chair
Section 2B.05 STOP Sign (R1-1) and ALL WAY Plaque (R1-3P)
Standard:
01 When it is determined that a full stop is always required on an approach to an intersection, a STOP (R1-1) sign (see Figure 2B-1) shall be used.
02 The STOP sign shall be an octagon with a white legend and border on a red background.
03 Secondary legends shall not be used on STOP sign faces.
04 At intersections where all approaches are controlled by STOP signs (see Section 2B.07), an ALL WAY supplemental plaque (R1-3P) shall be mounted below each STOP sign. The ALL WAY plaque (see Figure 2B-1) shall have a white legend and border on a red background.
05 The ALL WAY plaque shall only be used if all intersection approaches are controlled by STOP signs.
06 Supplemental plaques with legends such as 2-WAY, 3-WAY, 4-WAY, or other numbers of ways shall not be used with STOP signs.
Support:
07 The use of the CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP (W4-4P) plaque (and other plaques with variations ofthis word message) is described in Section 2C.59.
Guidance:
08 Plaques with the appropriate alternative messages of TRAFFIC FROM LEFT (RIGHT) DOES NOT STOP (W4-4aP) or ONCOMING TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP (W4-4bP) should be used at intersections where STOP signs control all but one approach to the intersection, unless the only non-stopped approach is from a one-way street.
Option:
09 An EXCEPT RIGHT TURN (R1-10P) plaque (see Figure 2B-1) may be mounted below the STOP sign if an engineering study determines that a special combination of geometry and traffic volumes is present that makes it possible for right-turning traffic on the approach to be permitted to enter the intersection without stopping.
Support:
10 The design and application of Stop Beacons are described in Section 4L.05.
------------------------------------------
Section 2C.59 CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP Plaque (W4-4P)
Option:
01 The CROSS TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP (W4-4P) plaque (see Figure 2C-9) may be used in combination with a STOP sign when engineering judgment indicates that conditions are present that are causing or could cause drivers to misinterpret the intersection as an all-way stop.
02 Alternative messages (see Figure 2C-9) such as TRAFFIC FROM LEFT (RIGHT) DOES NOT STOP (W4-4aP) or ONCOMING TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP (W4-4bP) may be used when such messages more accurately describe the traffic controls established at the intersection.
Guidance:
03 Plaques with the appropriate alternative messages of TRAFFIC FROM LEFT (RIGHT) DOES NOT STOP or ONCOMING TRAFFIC DOES NOT STOP should be used at intersections where STOP signs control all but one approach to the intersection, unless the only non-stopped approach is from a one-way street.
Standard:
04 If a W4-4P plaque or a plaque with an alternative message is used, it shall be mounted below the STOP sign.
UPDATE 1:30 PM - Mr. Farance follow up his message to Director Guerra.
More information here
Director Guerra-
As a followup on street signage, the new "[STATE LAW] STOP FOR PEDESTRIANS WITHIN CROSSWALK" signs are the wrong signs and provide conflicting instructions to drivers -- drivers might believe they don't have to stop at all. According to the MUTCD 2009, the Stop/Yield For Pedestrian Within Crosswalk signs are to be used at "uncontrolled multi-lane approach" (see MUTCD 2009 Section 2B.11). The emphasis here is on "uncontrolled", which is incorrect for the Roosevelt Island crosswalks where there is a STOP sign (543 Main, 591 Main, 645 Main, etc.). By using the "STOP FOR PEDESTRIANS WITHIN CROSSWALK" (sign R1-6a) drivers believe they can proceed an NORMAL speeds (i.e., no full stop) UNLESS THERE IS A PEDESTRIAN IN THE CROSSWALK. Certainly, we INTEND for drivers to make a full stop at these intersections, but the new signage is wrong.
If you'd like, I can show you a video of how other NYS drivers treat these signs (i.e., driving through at normal speeds).
As for the remainder of the Island, there is no distinction between the STOP (R1-6a) and YIELD (R1-6) variants of "[STATE LAW] STOP/YIELD FOR/TO PEDESTRIANS WITHIN CROSSWALK" because the driver must STOP (regardless of STOP or YIELD) if there is a pedestrian in the crosswalk. Elsewhere in NY State, I've seen the STOP version used at crosswalks like the ones at 510 Main and 564 Main.
Regardless, the signs present a confusing picture of NYS law: are we supposed to STOP or YIELD to pedestrians in a crosswalk? The law is one or the other, not both, right?
I make the recommendations:
(1) Replace all present R1-6 "[STATE LAW] YIELD FOR PEDESTRIANS ..." with R1-6a "[STATE LAW] STOP FOR PEDESTRIAN ..." if that is in fact the correct NYS law.
(2) Immediately remove the present "[STATE LAW] STOP FOR PEDESTRIAN ..." because they conflict with other signage and give drivers the impression they don't need to stop at all (regardless of whether or not there are pedestrians in the crosswalk).
(3) For crosswalks with STOPs, immediately return the mid-street STOP SIGNS and plan for a better long-term solution on reminding drivers to stop (flashing lights, etc.).
