Uncategorized

I love this idea. The post title is obnoxious, the intrusiveness of the idea so complete, the numbers so compelling. In a nutshell – left turns across oncoming traffic cause a disproportionate number of accidents (I’ve been in one, my wife wrote off her first car this way) and slow down traffic significantly, compared to established and well tested alternatives – namely streets configured to require u-turn/right-turn combinations instead of left turns.

“Sound absurd? Think again. According to Smithsonian Magazine, researchers at North Carolina State University have found that the superstreet design is more efficient and safer than allowing drivers to turn across traffic. After examining data from 13 superstreet intersections and comparing them to their traditional counterparts, researchers found that, on average, the superstreets delivered a 20-percent decrease in travel time and caused 46 percent fewer reported traffic collisions. More importantly, the superstreet design caused 63-percent fewer accidents that resulted in personal injury.” [Autoblog]

On one hand, the numbers from NC are compelling. On the other hand, it looks (from the illustration) like it would consume more space and cost more than a simple four-way intersection. Its also interesting that it goes distinctly against the somewhat popular vancouverist notions of around avoiding high-flowing, high-speed traffic arteries.

Image Credit: North Carolina DOT

{ 3 comments }