NW Radial Highway

[Coyote]

Omaha city council to vote on study for Northwest Radial Highway crash data
State data shows someone dies on these Omaha roads every year. Now, the city is looking to make drivers take it slower and make it safer for pedestrians.



It's one of the busiest roads in Omaha — now, the city may spend tens of thousands of dollars to study traffic on Northwest Radial Highway. The Metropolitan Area Planning Agency, or MAPA, would study safety and improvements from 72nd Street to the north freeway. On Tuesday, the city votes on the traffic study that evaluates crash data. It could suggest wider sidewalks and roundabouts along this route, stretching from Cuming Street through Northwest Radial Highway up to Military.

Council president Pete Festersen points to data from the state, which shows someone dies in a crash along this corridor every year. "It's a high trafficked car volume every day. There is speeding along that corridor we want to address and just try to make it safer for everyone involved," Festersen said. Just last week, a woman died at 50th and Northwest Radial. Two other drivers survived.

[almighty_tuna]

NW Radial could be such a better corridor. Nix the on street parking entirely, add a protected ped/bike lane, improve lighting and sight lines (especially around 50th), and make the far right lane a dedicated bus lane.

[Dusty]

I feel like the city can just pay us the 350K so we can tell them how to design. Doing a study to do more car infrastructure like a roundabout and keeping the stroad vibe....waste of money!

Almighty Tuna....you took the words right out of my mouth. Yes, take away street parking. Step up bus line to transit only lanes. Really set the stage for upgrade for BRT/light rail line. Add protected bike lanes, better crosswalks, and better landscaping.

As I mentioned before a Dutch street design would do wonders for the city. As I posted in the Crossroads thread, just changing the sequencing of modes can make it a safer street.

Current lane configuration: drive lane, bike lane, parked lane or right turn, curb, grassy buffer, sidewalk
Should be: drive lane, parked lane or right turn lane, curb, grassy buffer if room, bike lane, sidewalk

[Dusty]

As I mentioned before a Dutch street design would do wonders for the city. As I posted in the Crossroads thread, just changing the sequencing of modes can make it a safer street.

Current lane configuration: drive lane, bike lane, parked lane or right turn, curb, grassy buffer, sidewalk
Should be: drive lane, parked lane or right turn lane, curb, grassy buffer if room, bike lane, sidewalk

This is an example of what I'm talking about. Sidewalk and bike lane side by side. A protected path from car traffic

[PWL73316]

The reason they get paid for studies is to maximize benefits while minimizing costs, and finding the local maxima that correspond into different options that make sense.

Of course it would be great to rebuild every street and road in town to have separated bike lanes and pedestrian traffic with green space in between. Doing that to all of NW Radial would cost many millions. Just saying "make it perfect" is not an actual plan.

[Dusty]

The reason they get paid for studies is to maximize benefits while minimizing costs, and finding the local maxima that correspond into different options that make sense.

Of course it would be great to rebuild every street and road in town to have separated bike lanes and pedestrian traffic with green space in between. Doing that to all of NW Radial would cost many millions. Just saying "make it perfect" is not an actual plan.

I completely disagree with you. Bike infrastructure cost pennies on the dollar compared to car infrastructure. It would not cost millions. Building bike infrastructure is no different than transit. You start with a strong corridor, add another, add another, etc. Pretty soon you will have a network to get around without a car. We have to stop making excuses like this.

Car infrastructure is bankrupting us. $350K study to tell us to spend millions more widening the street, adding more turning lanes, methods to keep us busy and poor instead of safe and resilient. Countries all over the world are converting their streets like the picture I posted. Do you want to keep feeding the car monster (Ponzi scheme) or start making walkable and livable streets?

[Renovator2559]

Love the fact that the city is in discussion, in slowing down traffic by narrowing the radial HW. The implementation of traffic slow down, will be a success in reducing fatalities based on past data of other cities.
By Radial HWY being a success, Radial HW will be the first domino to fall in making other streets just as safe.

Hopefully this prompts the city to narrow the Dodge and 72nd area in the future, as they realize that adding yet another lane that's occurring now is against pedestrian complexes adjacent, such as the Central library and the Crossroads redevelopment

[almighty_tuna]

Where do you see that NW Radial will be narrowed? I've read none of this.

[Dusty]

Where do you see that NW Radial will be narrowed? I've read none of this.

There is no mention of narrowing or any action plan as of yet. This is why they want to do a study to research ideas to increase safety.

2023-Fatal car crash last week on 50th and NW Radial. Bike fatality on N Saddle Creek and Cuming
2021- 2 fatalities on NW Radial from car crashes

[almighty_tuna]

Where do you see that NW Radial will be narrowed? I've read none of this.

There is no mention of narrowing or any action plan as of yet. This is why they want to do a study to research ideas to increase safety.

Oh, I know.

[BRoss]

Where do you see that NW Radial will be narrowed? I've read none of this.

I've seen documents in the past (can't remember where) that mentioned a road diet for NW Radial.

[Renovator2559]

Where do you see that NW Radial will be narrowed? I've read none of this.

There is no mention of narrowing or any action plan as of yet. This is why they want to do a study to research ideas to increase safety.

2023-Fatal car crash last week on 50th and NW Radial. Bike fatality on N Saddle Creek and Cuming
2021- 2 fatalities on NW Radial from car crashes

Narrowing and adding perceived obstacles like trees are the most effective ways to force cars to slow down. As well as installing a roundabout

[BRoss]

OWH had an interesting article this past weekend on Northwest Radial. I guess it was Omaha's first divided roadway. It was one of the most expensive road projects in the city at the time but ended up not helping commute times much.

And there were also plans for a Southwest Radial that never happened.

[GenX]

OWH had an interesting article this past weekend on Northwest Radial. I guess it was Omaha's first divided roadway. It was one of the most expensive road projects in the city at the time but ended up not helping commute times much.

And there were also plans for a Southwest Radial that never happened.

I don’t have a subscription, and they patched the no JavaScript workaround. I’m really interested in the Sourthwest Radial part. I’m guessing it was to be an extension of Saddle Creek south of Center?

[BRoss]

I don’t have a subscription, and they patched the no JavaScript workaround. I’m really interested in the Sourthwest Radial part. I’m guessing it was to be an extension of Saddle Creek south of Center?

There was no agreement on the route. Did it follow Leavenworth Street, or Center? How would it cut diagonally to reach south downtown?

The first proposal was for Leavenworth Street, starting with the Elmwood Park road that connects Pacific Street with 60th Street. It would have entered downtown on St. Mary’s Avenue. The next one, would have used Saddle Creek from 52nd and Center Streets to St. Mary’s.

St. Louis civil engineers shifted the focus to Center Street. Their preferred route, for double the estimate of $2 million for Leavenworth would have cut off the northwest corner of Hanscom Park (that met with a threatened lawsuit) to get from 32nd Avenue and Center to 31st Street and Woolworth Avenue before linking with St. Mary’s at 31st and Leavenworth.

The engineers had an alternative that would have used Twinridge Boulevard through the neighborhood of the same name northwest of 42nd and Center Streets to connect Center to Leavenworth and St. Mary’s.

Three times, the City Council rejected Southwest Radial plans. The need went moot with the plans for Interstate 80 and its connections at 42nd and 60th Streets.

[GenX]

I don’t have a subscription, and they patched the no JavaScript workaround. I’m really interested in the Sourthwest Radial part. I’m guessing it was to be an extension of Saddle Creek south of Center?

There was no agreement on the route. Did it follow Leavenworth Street, or Center? How would it cut diagonally to reach south downtown?

The first proposal was for Leavenworth Street, starting with the Elmwood Park road that connects Pacific Street with 60th Street. It would have entered downtown on St. Mary’s Avenue. The next one, would have used Saddle Creek from 52nd and Center Streets to St. Mary’s.

St. Louis civil engineers shifted the focus to Center Street. Their preferred route, for double the estimate of $2 million for Leavenworth would have cut off the northwest corner of Hanscom Park (that met with a threatened lawsuit) to get from 32nd Avenue and Center to 31st Street and Woolworth Avenue before linking with St. Mary’s at 31st and Leavenworth.

The engineers had an alternative that would have used Twinridge Boulevard through the neighborhood of the same name northwest of 42nd and Center Streets to connect Center to Leavenworth and St. Mary’s.

Three times, the City Council rejected Southwest Radial plans. The need went moot with the plans for Interstate 80 and its connections at 42nd and 60th Streets.

Thanks (and thanks)!! I figured I-80 was what ultimately doomed it.

[Dundeemaha]

Every major intersection had a preferred design and alternate. If just looking at preferred there would be about 5 new roundabouts. I'm a bit fuzzy on which intersections, 68th, Maple, 50th, Happy Hollow, and 40th I think. If you selectively picked from the primary and alternative options you could end up with 0 roundabouts or 10.

I should have gotten more pictures from the open house but I thought they'd be online. Here's 52nd & NW Radial proposal:



Alternate:


No firm plans on bike lane vs additional street parking but sounded like leaning toward parking.

All in all much more ambitious than I expected but I'd love a protected bike lane the whole way

[S.O.Boy]

They need to slow traffic down, but I think there could be big issues with 52nd and Benson High.

[locoluke]

I’m really lukewarm on roundabouts when it comes to pedestrian safety. I feel way more visible as a pedestrian at four-way stops and traffic lights than I do in roundabout, especially on a high traffic road. They are obviously amazing for traffic calming, though.

Also, it’s clearly not in the cards, but NE-64 from Downtown to Benson is probably the one corridor in Omaha outside of downtown with sufficient ROW for transit with dedicated lanes. I would think their no-build alternative having a projected 2050 LOS of E/F along significant portions of the corridor would serve as a strong argument for transit with a dedicated ROW on this corridor, but alas. A boy can dream.

[Mapguy]

As someone who drives the entire length of NW radial almost daily I cant say Im in favor of any major changes at all.

Cars speed on it---myself included; thats what makes it nice. NW Radial wasnt built to be pedestrian or transit friendly---it was built to get commuters to and from work quickly which if does really well.

The Medians could use a little love---a lot of dead stumps and dirt patches where grass used to be. Also a lot of homeless at Cuming St. I think some decorative fences and rocks in the median could deter people from standing in the median asking for money and make the road safer for everyone.

I dont think a protected bike lane would fit unless you got rid of all the parking and grassy medians---honestly I've never seen a biker use the road and I wouldnt want them to because its not safe. I do think they could narrow the lanes significantly to slow traffic a bit and pull the sidewalk off the curb and add grass to each side---which would make the pedestrian experience safer and more enjoyable.

NW Radial cant be everything to everyone but if I had to choose bike infrastructure or better sidewalks. Id go better sidewalks all the way.

Also the lights at 48th and NW blow that useless light up that nobody uses. Blow up the 56th lights---you really dont need lights at both 54th st and 56th nobody that uses those roads and theres a pedestrian overpass at 56th which really negates the need for a light. Also 61st st totally unnecessary light for the Benson by-pass----its a bypass it shouldnt have lights at every north south street that goes through Benson---the point of a bypass should be less lights. anybody using 61st can go 1 block east to 60th.

Having driven the 60th st detour the last few months between Ames and NW Radial I can definitely say 60th is a fairly dead arterial at rush hour. Ideally I'd blow the 60th light away too and close 60th between NW Radial and Maple St. Anybody going North/South on 60th could easily go east 2 blocks to the Maple NW radial split and turn left/right to get back on 60th.

I know this is controversial some might even say its bad---but really theres too many lights and a grid thats too small for all of these roads to require lights or even be through streets.

[Busguy2010]

I'm really not in favor of any major changes either. Disconnecting 52nd just to straighten the intersection doesn't seem like a big difference maker to me. I could see a roundabout, but not at the expense of disconnecting 52nd.

I'd simplify the Fontenelle Boulevard intersection, and an odd shaped round about would do well, but absolutely keep the no-stop eastbound aspect as a bypass.

Another at Happy Hollow would make sense too.

If anything, I also prefer taking the parking/3rd lane for sidewalks, not bike infrastructure.

[Dusty]

I said before roundabouts would be a massive setback verses pursuing a multimodal corridor. There is plenty of room for cars, bikes, transit, and pedestrians to make it a safer and walkable community.

First and most important step is to decommission its highway status. This opens up tons of options to transform it. You have 3 lanes on both sides to work with.

Solution for the 3 lanes:
1. single drive lane,
2. shared lane for cars/transit (could be converted to dedicated transit later),
3 protected bike lane

The sidewalk is already there. Improvements would involve bump outs and pedestrian refuge islands.

[Busguy2010]

I could get behind simply ditching the curb lane and painting in a right turn and transit only lane. It would be a nice test, and doesn't have to be a commitment.

[Mapguy]

NW Radial has traffic counts of 30-40k at multiple intersections--'its busier than the North freeway which has ramps and is a full divided 3 lane highway!!! None of the North Freeway exits get more than 17k daily drivers which is half of NW radial.

If any highway needs a diet and to be multi-modal its the dead North Freeway almost nobody uses.

Putting in a round-about just seems like an awful idea for a side road few people use outside of dropping off their kids at school twice a day for 8 months

[riceweb]

Putting in a round-about just seems like an awful idea for a side road few people use outside of dropping off their kids at school twice a day for 8 months

Presumably they want to slow down traffic? I wasn't at the open house, but they might generally be trying to slow cars down without impacting throughput.

[Dundeemaha]

As someone who drives the entire length of NW radial almost daily I cant say Im in favor of any major changes at all.

Cars speed on it---myself included; thats what makes it nice. NW Radial wasnt built to be pedestrian or transit friendly---it was built to get commuters to and from work quickly which if does really well.

The Medians could use a little love---a lot of dead stumps and dirt patches where grass used to be. Also a lot of homeless at Cuming St. I think some decorative fences and rocks in the median could deter people from standing in the median asking for money and make the road safer for everyone.

I dont think a protected bike lane would fit unless you got rid of all the parking and grassy medians---honestly I've never seen a biker use the road and I wouldnt want them to because its not safe. I do think they could narrow the lanes significantly to slow traffic a bit and pull the sidewalk off the curb and add grass to each side---which would make the pedestrian experience safer and more enjoyable.

NW Radial cant be everything to everyone but if I had to choose bike infrastructure or better sidewalks. Id go better sidewalks all the way.

Also the lights at 48th and NW blow that useless light up that nobody uses. Blow up the 56th lights---you really dont need lights at both 54th st and 56th nobody that uses those roads and theres a pedestrian overpass at 56th which really negates the need for a light. Also 61st st totally unnecessary light for the Benson by-pass----its a bypass it shouldnt have lights at every north south street that goes through Benson---the point of a bypass should be less lights. anybody using 61st can go 1 block east to 60th.

Having driven the 60th st detour the last few months between Ames and NW Radial I can definitely say 60th is a fairly dead arterial at rush hour. Ideally I'd blow the 60th light away too and close 60th between NW Radial and Maple St. Anybody going North/South on 60th could easily go east 2 blocks to the Maple NW radial split and turn left/right to get back on 60th.

I know this is controversial some might even say its bad---but really theres too many lights and a grid thats too small for all of these roads to require lights or even be through streets.

I also drive NW Radial nearly daily and the key issue here is that NW Radial is dangerous. It's higher than average in deaths and injuries due to crashes for all modes and also specifically for pedestrians. It's not a grade separated highway, its design is unsafe and encourages reckless driving. So yeah, you'll probably have to spend 2-10min longer on your commute but at least less people will die.

[Dundeemaha]

They posted the proposal to https://keepomahamoving.com/projects/cu ... idor-study but they're all large PDFs so I split them, here they are as images:

[Mapguy]

Great pics of the proposed project!!!

I think its a bit unreasonable to ask commuters to go through 7 roundabouts to get to and from work if every single proposed roundabout is put in. But maybe Im being selfish?

I think roundabouts are transportation fad much like 1 way streets were once a fad. They are 1 tool in a box with many tools that can be used to make roads safer.

Narrowing streets, planting trees, improving lighting, can also calm traffic---but is maybe a little less sexy than a 7!?!! Round-about proposal

[Louie]

This looks crazy to me

[Brad]

Great pics of the proposed project!!!

I think its a bit unreasonable to ask commuters to go through 7 roundabouts to get to and from work if every single proposed roundabout is put in. But maybe Im being selfish?

I think roundabouts are transportation fad much like 1 way streets were once a fad. They are 1 tool in a box with many tools that can be used to make roads safer.

Narrowing streets, planting trees, improving lighting, can also calm traffic---but is maybe a little less sexy than a 7!?!! Round-about proposal

I love roundabouts and wouldn't mind them putting in every single one of those. I know we have too many dumb drivers that can't handle a roundabout, but when people use them correctly, they are great. I'd much rather go slow through a roundabout than sit at a red light.

[Dundeemaha]

I think I'd rather have 7 roundabouts than 1. If there are 7 people will have no choice but to get used to them. If there's 1 it'll still be such an anomaly.

[Busguy2010]

What I'd do -

63rd roundabout
Fontenelle roundabout with eastbound bypass
Happy hollow roundabout

Thats it.

Do not disconnect 60th and 52nd...To be looking at disconnecting two major pieces of the grid, yet still connect a roundabout at 50th is asinine.

[Dundeemaha]

Multiple fatal crashes have happened at 50th and 52nd in the last few years. Every building, light pole and traffic light within 50 yards at 50th has been hit by a car. They're clearly not safe in their current configuration. Something has to change whether it's roundabouts or disconnecting the intersection.

My favourite part of the 52nd proposal is cutting off Corby St. it just adds too much complexity with cars coming in and out of the gas station at odd angles as people on 52nd are turning down on to Corby to bypass the intersection.

[remline]

The Open House "Boards​​​​​​​" document suggests that roundabouts are safer for pedestrians. I find these two arguments fairly compelling:

• Shorter Crossings: Pedestrians cross one lane of traffic at a time, with a shorter overall crossing distance than a traditional intersection.
• Center Refuge Island: The splitter island provides a safe waiting area, allowing pedestrians to focus on one direction of traffic at a time.

[locoluke]

The Open House "Boards​​​​​​​" document suggests that roundabouts are safer for pedestrians. I find these two arguments fairly compelling:

• Shorter Crossings: Pedestrians cross one lane of traffic at a time, with a shorter overall crossing distance than a traditional intersection.
• Center Refuge Island: The splitter island provides a safe waiting area, allowing pedestrians to focus on one direction of traffic at a time.

I think the argument for roundabouts being less safe for pedestrians has to do with the lack of signalization. Crossing a roundabout can feel a least a little like crossing a slip lane or a highway on/off ramp. It's worth noting though that it seems like most data backs up the idea that roundabouts are generally safer for pedestrians. This MnDOT article sums it up pretty well.

[remline]

I think the argument for roundabouts being less safe for pedestrians has to do with the lack of signalization. Crossing a roundabout can feel a least a little like crossing a slip lane or a highway on/off ramp. It's worth noting though that it seems like most data backs up the idea that roundabouts are generally safer for pedestrians. This MnDOT article sums it up pretty well.

Thanks for the link; that is an interesting article. This is an important note: "…be very discerning when considering multiple-lane roundabouts as rates of driver yielding to pedestrians were slightly lower than at single-lane roundabouts." I can certainly believe that; I'm not really a fan of multi-lane roundabouts, but I love single-lane roundabouts.

I think you are right that lack of signals can make pedestrians feel nervous. Of course, stopping for red lights (especially when turning right) is hardly a universally observed practice.