ACtion Magazine - January/February 2016 - (Page 8)

Too much control W hile I use public transportation most days, I drive from home to the train station. Though I am on a train by 7:00 a.m., there is still quite a bit of traffic congestion between my home and the station. The morning drive is certainly slowed by the sheer volume of traffic, but I have observed that the traffic congestion is further complicated by a seemingly unreasonable number of traffic control devices on the roads I travel to the train station. By my count, there are thirteen such devices in what is a six mile drive; a potential of being stopped almost every halfmile. And most of the traffic lights do not seem to be calibrated to the flow of traffic at particular times of the day or to the onset of vehicles approaching from an intersecting road to the one in which I am driving. Thus, drivers commonly end up with a line of traffic stopped at a light for at least one minute for no reason or to allow a car to merge into traffic. Common sense also tells me that such (apparently unnecessary) stopping and waiting at an intersection controlled by such a device is adding to the emissions already coming from the vehicles on the road. Of course, a few of these intersections also prohibit drivers from making a right turn on a red light, adding to the potential delays while sitting in the vehicle and waiting for the green light even though there is no traffic on the other road for some time while waiting. Pennsylvania has adopted by regulation the Federal Highway Administration's Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. According to that Manual, the estimate is one signalized intersection per 1,000 population. Also per that Manual, the standard (for when a signal should be 10 installed) is "An engineering study of traffic conditions, pedestrian characteristics, and physical characteristics of the location shall be performed to determine whether installation of a traffic control signal is justified at a particular location." One of the guides (a recommended, but not mandatory, practice) for whether or not to install a signal is, "[A] traffic control signal should not be installed if it will seriously disrupt progressive traffic flow." Based upon my personal experiences, it appears that the engineers in my locale must turn a blind eye to that guide - I will gladly be a putative Uber driver one morning and take " ...the engineers in my locale must turn a blind eye to that guide a group of engineers with me on my drive to the station. According to the Federal Manual the engineering study data may include, "[T]he number of vehicles entering the intersection in each hour from each approach during 12 hours of an average day. It is desirable that the hours selected contain the greatest percentage of the 24-hour traffic volume." The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation has published a Traffic Engineering Manual of its own with regard to traffic control devices. Per this Manual, "Always base the decision to use a particular device at a specific location on an engineering study and the application of engineering judgment." A traffic light was recently installed along the route to the train station at an intersection in which the traffic volume emerging from the ACTION * January/February 2016 Keith Leonard, Esquire road onto the state highway has not dramatically changed over the twenty plus years that I have been driving the highway to the station. I want to read the engineering study used to confirm that a traffic light was needed at this intersection after so many years without one and without any substantive increase in the traffic on the lesser traveled road. Moreover, there is no pedestrian crosswalk at this intersection. There are now four traffic lights regulating traffic on a state highway over a span of less than one and onehalf miles. It seems that a state legislator resides in the municipality in which those devices are located and he was very supportive of the latest traffic signal. It is undisputed that traffic signals reduce the number of angle collisions where there are conflicting movements of traffic at an intersection, but can lead to a higher number of rear-end collisions. Traffic signals are also expensive for the taxpayers. As observed by another state's transportation department, "Traffic signals should be used only where lesser forms of control have proven ineffective because signals almost always create more 'overall intersection delay.'" Wise words indeed. ❆ Remember that laws are constantly changing and are often not uniform throughout the United States. Do not place unqualified reliance on the information in this article. Always contact legal counsel for detailed advice. If you have a particular issue, law or problem you would like to see addressed in a future column, please contact me at KLeonard@LeonardSciolla. com, or Leonard, Sciolla, Hutchison, Leonard & Tinari, LLP, 215-567-1530.

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of ACtion Magazine - January/February 2016

F.R.E.D. Goes to Tomorrowland
Pioneers
Outlook
Service Port
Leonard's law
Virtual View
Last Watch
Member Profile
Cooling Corner
Industry News
Association News
New Products and Services

ACtion Magazine - January/February 2016