![Transportation Transportation](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/transportation_64.png)
![Government Government](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/government_64.png)
![United States United States](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/usa_64.png)
![News News](http://a.fsdn.com/sd/topics/news_64.png)
Roundabout Revolution Sweeping US 1173
chrb writes "BBC News reports that U.S. cities are installing more roundabouts than ever before. The first British-style roundabout appeared in the U.S. in 1990, and now some cities — such as Carmel in Indiana, are rapidly replacing intersections with roundabouts. Supporters claim that roundabouts result in increased traffic flow, reductions in both the severity and incidence of accidents, and fuel savings. Critics say that roundabouts are more difficult to navigate for unfamiliar American drivers, lead to higher taxes and accidents, and require everyday acts of spontaneous co-operation and yielding to others — acts that are 'un-American.'" As a driver who's hit all of the continental U.S. states except North Dakota, I dread roundabouts and rotaries for all the near accidents (and at least one actual accident) I've seen them inspire, and have been unhappy to see them spread. Spontaneous driver cooperation doesn't necessarily need the round shape, either.
Really bad idea. (Score:4, Interesting)
I like rotaries for two reasons: when there's no traffic, it's nicer than having to stop at an arbitrary red light and wait for a mandatory 2 minutes while the lights cycle. Secondly, if I am not sure whether to turn or not, I can just take another spin around the circle until I see the street sign I'm looking for (assuming there is one, not a given on some of the sign-challenged Northeast roads).
But I loathe rotaries when there's a lot of traffic. You can sit there for a lot longer than you would at a red light. Plus, some places make a rotary out of a 5-way intersection which can be incredibly confusing. It's a tradeoff, I guess, but overall I'd rather drive in a straight line
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:4, Interesting)
But I loathe rotaries when there's a lot of traffic. You can sit there for a lot longer than you would at a red light.
I don't see why it would be any longer than a four-way stop. And it'd be an improvement over a couple intersections in Fort Wayne, Indiana, that don't detect a bicycle parked directly over the crack in the road where the vehicle sensor loop is buried. I sometimes have to wait eight minutes for a truck to pull up behind me and trip the vehicle sensor so that my lane gets a green light.
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:5, Interesting)
Most places have exemptions for bicycles and motorbikes at intersections for these reasons. Basically, the law says that you treat the red light as a stop sign and proceed when it's safe. You should check your local laws.
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:5, Informative)
There is a federal guideline for this and most states and cities follow it. It's the federal guideline known as the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/ [dot.gov]. Where it provides guidance, most follow it exactly, with exceptions being rare. However there are often local situations not covered precisely in the MUTCD.
Roundabouts, including their markings, are covered in Chapter 3C http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part3/part3c.htm [dot.gov].
Re: (Score:3)
I don't see why it would be any longer than a four-way stop.
If you are at an intersection of a road that has traffic going primarily along one road, and you are on the other - then yes you can wait a fair bit of time at a roundabout for a break in the traffic in order to proceed. Roundabouts, work best when traffic approaches the intersection from all directions at a similar rate.
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:4, Interesting)
DISCLAIMER: I am not a city engineer, but I've spent far too much spare time researching these issues.
They take longer for two main reasons: in heavy traffic, a full roundabout is either constantly moving, or dead stopped like a parking lot. In either case, you can't get in because everyone is bumper-to-bumper.
The heavy traffic scenario is where city planners fail hard, because they too easily forget that roundabouts still shuffle the same number of vehicles into the same congested streets. If these get backed up, so does the roundabout.
There are, fundamentally, three solutions to traffic, and nobody wants to implement them:
a. less cars
b. more lanes
c. less concentration in commercial and industrial sectors
Solution A requires vastly improved public transit, for which no city official wants to shoulder the cost, or more telework which employers are still reluctant to undertake. Solution B requires expropriation to make room, and often leads to complicated entry/exit ramps, and all that costs a shitload of money. Solution C depends on Solution A, so we're doubly screwed.
Re: (Score:3)
Mandate flexible working hours across major employers, maybe institute peak-hour congestion charges on roads. It might be perceived as evil government meddling by some, but it would internalize some congestion externalities...
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, well the UK driving test is actually worth something. I had to do a hill start, 3 point turn, right-hand reverse, parallel parking, different speeds of driving, turning out of a blind intersection, roundabouts, emergency stop, and probably more that I don't remember.
In the US, I turned right out of the DMV onto a 30mph road, turned first right, turned first right, turned first right, turned first right, and then turned back into the DMV. I had already passed the "written" part of the test (really, multiple choice. One question was 'what does this sign mean?'. It was a STOP sign...). That was it. Apparently that's all you need to drive one of the massive honking SUV's they have out here at 100^W 65(hah!) mph on the freeway. It does explain a lot about the (apallingly-bad) standards of driving out here though. The Italians are better drivers. As someone who's lived in Rome, I really mean that...
Oh and for the record, I far prefer roundabouts to 4-way intersections. They're really pretty simple, guys... To be fair, that's probably more because that's what I started with, but still, to hear yanks talk about them, you'd think they were the spawn of Satan or something.
Simon
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
This. Here in Portugal, the roundabout fever started a bit more than a decade ago. If there's a public transportation strike, they become totally impossible to navigate, with people cutting ahead, or blocking exits, or whatever. I think the ideal, if costlier, solution would be to have traffic lights blinking yellow, except for rush hour, where they'd operate normally. Roundabouts near supermarket gas stations (which have cheaper fuel by ~0.10 €/l) are also problematic because eventually the queues rea
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:5, Insightful)
Some roundabouts in australia have traffic lights fitted which only turn on during peak hour.
Best of both worlds: you never stop under light traffic (most of the day) and the traffic lights keep it flowing as much as possible during peak traffic.
Re: (Score:3)
This is something I've experienced recently in the UK, a major roundabout on my commute combining two main roads at peak now has lights on it. The combination of lights/roundabout is definitely better than just roundabout used to be at busy periods, but at off-peak periods, or during school holidays when roads are quiet the roundabout alone without lights was much better.
But the other week one of the lights half way round was out, no problem for me, but sucked for those trying to come off that road though n
Re: (Score:3)
I see blocked up traffic light intersections all the time in San Francisco. Nobody can go anywhere because people enter the intersection while it's still green but not empty and then block traffic going the other direction. This happens all the time on the large 4 lane 1-way streets.
Thankfully I ride my bike around SF and can just zip through the congestion.
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:4, Interesting)
Doesn't placing traffic lights on roundabouts defeat the purpose?
There are roundabouts that only have certain entrances/exits traffic lighted - that assures a primary route doesn't clog it, without forcing other routes to wait for a green light if there's a gap.
There are also roundabouts that have "peak time" traffic lights. When the flow of traffic is at its heaviest (when roundabouts become less optimal) the lights switch on and work much as lights anywhere do, but at other times you get the benefits and convenience of a roundabout.
they install them in little-used residential streets. It means no traffic to bother with, but it also means I have to navigate a silly turn instead of going straight
This is why we use mini-roundabouts which are usually a painted circle on the road (with maybe a convex tarmac circle that peaks at less than the height of the kerb). The rules of the road are exactly as for a roundabout, but if it's clear you just drive straight over the centre of it.
Those work extremely well..
Re: (Score:3)
Austin has a few roundabouts. However, I dread them highly. One is places on a two way street with no third intersection (Riverside drive). Normally this wouldn't be an issue, but when I go that route, I encounter:
1: People staying in the roundabout and gunning it in order to cause a wreck with merging traffic.
2: People going the wrong way on the roundabout. Yes, I know this sounds crazy, but it isn't that uncommon for someone to be trying to go the wrong way and cause a head on wreck.
3: People who j
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:5, Informative)
You're either trolling or ignorant... Many places I need to ride, there either are no sidewalks or they're incomplete and only exist in segments or at intersections. You'll also find that in some areas of the US it is illegal to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk. I have personally been ticketed in the past for this in my home town.
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, it is not LEGAL to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk You're part of the problem that Bing is referring to. A bicycle isn't just a toy, it is a vehicle, subject to vehicle laws in each state.
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:5, Interesting)
Actually, it is not LEGAL to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk [...]
Depends on where you live.
Here in California, riding on the sidewalk may be legal depending on where you live. It is not decided at the state level. So, for example, it may illegal to ride your bike on sidewalk in San Francisco but perfectly legal to ride your bike on the sidewalk in Garden Grove. It might be legal to ride on the sidewalks of Newport Beach, but not the ones on Main Street.
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:5, Informative)
You might try taking the TS101 class offered nationwide by the League of American Bicyclists. Your local class will be tailored to your state and local laws -- but one thing they all teach is accident statistics. Riding on the sidewalk, even when legal, entails far more risk than riding in the street (being one of the top 3 causes of cyclist-at-fault accidents -- the other two being riding at night without lights and riding the wrong way on the street). [Another useful thing to come out of those accident statistics -- all but ~3% of accidents have avoidance or mitigation mechanisms available. Proper lane positioning, signalling, emergency manoeuvring, and simply following traffic laws all do a world of good].
When you're on the sidewalk, folks pulling in and out of driveways aren't generally looking for anything faster than a pedestrian. The advice you give could get people killed.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually -- "taking the lane" when legal and appropriate is one of the things TS101 teaches. If there's more than one lane going in each direction, and the rightmost lane isn't wide enough for safe passing (here in Texas, there's only a legal presumption that this is true for a lane wider than 14 feet), using your lane positioning to prompt other drivers to change lanes can be considerably safer than encouraging them to pass as closely as possible by riding in the far right.
("When appropriate" is a key phra
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:5, Insightful)
Both opinions in TFA are right. The traffic flow, overall, is better but they also lead to many people not really knowing how to behave in them.
We have a lot of them in Switzerland and their number is growing. I feel we have more roundabouts than normal intersections now. Subjectively, of course. And still many people don't know how to behave.
Two factors are important: Build them large enough, so traffic flowing in has a chance to anticipate an open spot. And make people aware of how they work. Tell it on the radio, in TV spots and so on.
In Switzerland, cars in the roundabout have the right of way (interestingly enough, though, if that thing has more than one lane, inner lanes DON'T have right of way, which makes no sense...) and you only signal right when you LEAVE it. OR you signal right if you know you'll be leaving at the next exit.
It works very well, in most cases and I have yet to hear of accidents in them.
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:5, Insightful)
Both opinions in TFA are right. The traffic flow, overall, is better but they also lead to many people not really knowing how to behave in them.
Um, people can learn....right?
If we never tried anything new because people don't know how to do it yet then we'd still be banging rocks together to make dinner.
Re: (Score:3)
Um, people can learn....right?
No, they can't. Just look at the dipshits who cause problems on highway on-ramps because they can't figure out how to safely merge with traffic. Roundabouts will be the same thing, but just at lower speeds.
Re:rageometer (Score:5, Insightful)
These is masses of data here in the UK, and it all says roundaboutses have fewer accidents than lights, and they are less serious accidents, and pass more traffic with less waiting. It has also been demonstrated that some junctions are safer and faster without any rules. (Mostly where traffic density is very high, and no one can reach 4MPH).
However, the UK has had roundabouts longer than any of today's drivers have been on the road, and we have a driving test that requires you to negotiate them safely, using your indicators correctly. Its true that some people ignore their training, and some have forgotten.
As I understand it, the test in America is "Have you got $50?" and does not require any knowledge or skill to pass it. It may be 75 years before Americans can use roundabouts safely. After all, many cannot change gear (or even lane) safely.
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:5, Funny)
Awww, how cute. Look everyone, he still has faith in humanity.
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:5, Funny)
Thee aren't people, these are Americans
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:5, Interesting)
Two factors are important: Build them large enough, so traffic flowing in has a chance to anticipate an open spot. And make people aware of how they work. Tell it on the radio, in TV spots and so on.
Exactly. These are two important points. Canada is also adopting the roundabout in some areas and the size is a real issue as many are so small that you might as well just put a 4-way stop or traffic lights in because the traffic just backs up in all four directions anyway -- the roundabout is too small to allow the traffic to keep flowing and merging. On the point of education, I received a flyer in the mail at the beginning of the year providing instructions on how to properly use a roundabout. You can see the website it pointed to here: http://www.regionofwaterloo.ca/en/gettingaround/roundabouts.asp?OpenDocument&mode=1 [regionofwaterloo.ca]
The interesting thing for me was that I had been in England since 2000 and only returned back to my native Canada in 2010 to suddenly see roundabouts as part of the roadways. My first reaction was, "But almost nobody would have taken a driving test that would include roundabout protocol" -- this was painfully obvious when I saw the "seat of the pants" approach many took to coming upon a roundabout. I'm now back in England and actually kept the flyer I received to show to the locals here -- I have rarely seen such laughter upon reading a pamphlet.
I'm guessing, but I would wager roundabouts are cheaper to implement than the other traffic flow solutions -- the authorities like to talk about safety, improved traffic flow etc. but when you put in a new element on the roadways with minimal education and build it on an ineffective scale, then that makes me think that cost is the driving factor.
Re: (Score:3)
I always thought that traffic circles differed from roundabouts in that entering cars are controlled by a stop, instead of simply yielding?
I really love roundabouts when placed in the right situation. It's better than coming to up on a stop sign (or worse, some arbitrary traffic light) at dead or lightly traveled intersections. In heavier traffic though, I'm really not sure if they'd be any better (or worse) than a traffic light. Of course, traffic lights themselves have a lot of room for improvement in the
Re: (Score:3)
Quite often in the UK, busier roundabouts can be assisted by traffic lights at certain times of the day. This way, it's free flowing when the roads are clear, but when there is simply too much traffic, the lights help out.
Re: (Score:3)
Roundabouts work really well when you have more-or-less even traffic leaving at each exit. If you don't, for instance if there's one primary route that always leaves at the second or higher exit, it can really jam up. In Ireland there was a real roundabout craze for a while so there's loads of them and many drivers just don't bother to indicate correctly, which makes them very dangerous. Should be a flogging offense, dammit!
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:5, Funny)
Here in Michigan, we're starting to replace stop sign/lights intersections with roundabouts, and on the whole, I really like them... when done right.
But as always, leave it to the US govt to take a good idea and f*** it up beyond hope. [a2gov.org] I couldn't find a picture of the traffic sign approaching these roundabouts but it's even more confusing than the picture.
The first time I went through this roundabout, I couldn't read the sign fast enough to really tell where to go and basically dove into the first roundabout in almost blind panic. Luckily it was late at night and there were no other cars, but I can only imagine the mass confusion at high traffic.
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:5, Interesting)
When you get the hang of roundabouts we'll teach you how to use these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_Roundabout_(Swindon) [wikipedia.org]
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
I can't for the life of me understand why anything in the picture you've linked as "fscked up beyond hope" is difficult to navigate.
But I'm used to roundabouts.
Time for you americans to get used to them too. They are _way_ more efficient.
Re: (Score:2)
But I loathe rotaries when there's a lot of traffic. You can sit there for a lot longer than you would at a red light.
In Britain, some busier roundabouts have part-time traffic lights for that very reason. (And, yes, the lights are used at busy times only... :)
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:5, Insightful)
Roundabouts (or rotaries, or traffic circles, as they're known in parts of the U.S.) induce confusion and fear in many drivers
Just because they're new and different.
People absolutely freaked out when my town got its first roundabout. Now, a few years later, nobody cares.
Give it some time and they'll be as commonplace and unremarkable as anything else on the road.
This article from an insurance periodical suggests that it's aggressive drivers who are making rotaries more dangerous.
Aggressive drivers make everything more dangerous.
I like rotaries for two reasons: when there's no traffic, it's nicer than having to stop at an arbitrary red light and wait for a mandatory 2 minutes while the lights cycle. Secondly, if I am not sure whether to turn or not, I can just take another spin around the circle until I see the street sign I'm looking for (assuming there is one, not a given on some of the sign-challenged Northeast roads).
But I loathe rotaries when there's a lot of traffic. You can sit there for a lot longer than you would at a red light. Plus, some places make a rotary out of a 5-way intersection which can be incredibly confusing. It's a tradeoff, I guess, but overall I'd rather drive in a straight line :)
Like anything else, you need the right tool for the job.
Lots of places are hearing about how awesome roundabouts are and are throwing them in everywhere - even where they aren't helpful.
If you've got a high volume of traffic, you need a larger roundabout. Something with a couple lanes to it, to handle the higher traffic. But that means it needs to take up a larger area. And, in many cases, it's just easier to do a stop light.
We've got a couple 5-way intersections here in town, and they'd actually be less-confusing with a properly-implemented roundabout. You just have to ensure that there's enough space between intersections that people can enter/exit safely.
Re: (Score:3)
Snow Removal and Emergency Vehicles (Score:4, Interesting)
One of the big pitfalls for roundabouts that I saw in Montana when they tried to implement them was not taking into account snow removal (at big deal in Bozeman, MT) and emergency vehicles. They placed large concrete islands in the middle of the intersection, and there was not enough room for the larger vehicles to navigate around it. The snow plows couldn't even see the island after a big storm and would run right over it.
They are not the end-all solution, but in certain circumstances, I can see where they would be beneficial.
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:5, Informative)
However, as other posters have pointed out, there are several kinds of intersection, each with their own factors that must be accounted for, (traffic volume, etc.) and it is unclear if the studies have taken into account the differing characteristics of the intersections that were replaced.
Additionally, the IIHS, for one, considers roundabouts distinct from rotaries. Since many others do not make this distinction, it is difficult to tell what kind of traffic circles were studied, and what kind of traffic circles are being installed in the US's "roundabout revolution."
Either way, the knee-jerk reaction of "rotaries are dangerous" at the least needs a conditional and at best is quite false.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
The "go around again" option is a really great feature of rotaries. While motorcycling in England we weren't sure which smaller road to take from the large rotary in Leeds. So we went around again while my wife unfolded the table sized Michelin road map, and again while I read highway numbers to her. Then happily headed down the road we needed to take. We didn't block up traffic, have to go down a wrong road, bang a u-turn, or all the other problems of traditional intersections. Although I'm sure that we ca
Re: (Score:3)
Roundabouts (or rotaries, or traffic circles, as they're known in parts of the U.S.) induce confusion and fear in many drivers, although they can be useful at times. This article [liveinsurancenews.com] from an insurance periodical suggests that it's aggressive drivers who are making rotaries more dangerous.
The fear is induced because people are clueless how to navigate them. If they become a regular fact of life, and of driving exams I would expect the fear would be the same as it is in other countries. Wait until you get your first magic roundabout and then we'll talk about fear.
Re:Really bad idea. (Score:5, Insightful)
All of that said, there is always the problem of the unwritten "political" warrant. The mayor wants a stop sign (or signal or roundabout) here, so one is going in even if it is worse for the traffic. Of course, there are also fads to put in roundabouts (or what have you). Some of the roundabouts are going to be unwarranted or conditions will change. Roundabouts work best when applied correctly.
Re: (Score:3)
Wow.... (Score:4, Insightful)
Wow... Just Wow... That's an argument against roundabouts?!? I personally find that one of the most sad statements I've read in a long time.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Says a lot about America when 'spontaneous co-operation and yielding to others' is considered un-American. Not sure how being unfamiliar with something is actually a bad thing or a case for an argument, everything is unfamiliar to a person as they progress through life.
Don't worry though, this generation will die off, just like the generation that didn't understand the Internet, and then the rest of us can carry on with our lives.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, the argument about unfamiliarity is not a great one either, but I can understand it. It took a good 10 years for people to understand them properly in Europe. I got them covered in my driving lessons, but people older than me had to learn them without coaching. Even today, you find people who don't handle them properly, but for most people they aren't confusing any more. It will take time, that is sure. A bit like switching to metric would take time, but that's a whole other can of worms.
Re:Wow.... (Score:4, Informative)
I think the "spontaneous co-operation and yielding to others" varies a lot with location. I live in Texas, and once you get out of the city, it's quite common. On small roads, the people will even move over to the shoulder to let you pass. In the city (well Houston at least), it's not as common, but it still happens. I generally try to do this out of enlightened self-interest. Better to avoid an accident than be in one. Especially with 18 wheelers, where, right or wrong, if I get in an accident with them, I lose bigtime. I'd rather the lane change be controlled than become a pancake.
But when I recently drove to California (Long Beach in particular), I noticed such actions were unknown. When I stopped to let a guy out of a parking lot (it was a red light anyway), he looked at me like I was some kind of weirdo. The whole time I was there, I never saw any sort of cooperation. But I did have to play chicken almost daily. Made me appreciate Texas drivers.
Re:Wow.... (Score:4, Insightful)
While this sort of "cooperation" can be occasionally useful, I find it generally annoying here in Utah where many folks do the same things. They're think they're being nice by letting folks in, stopping in the middle of traffic, not taking their proper turn at four way stops, and other such nonsense. Well, you're not being nice, you're confusing everyone around you because they don't know what you're going to do next. And it causes accidents. The traffic laws were designed to work without me needing to be able to look at you signalling to me from inside your car. Just follow the laws. If I have to wait, then I wait, but let's not cause an accident.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Wow... Just Wow... That's an argument against roundabouts?!? I personally find that one of the most sad statements I've read in a long time.
I was hoping that the submitter had a British sense of humour and was using a little known concept called sarcasm.
Re: (Score:2)
We're on slashdot, I only read the summary ;-)
Way before 1990 (Score:3)
Washington DC has had roundabouts since 1791, when the city was built modeled on European cities.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Washington DC has rotaries [wikipedia.org], not roundabouts [wikipedia.org].
Re:Way before 1990 (Score:4, Interesting)
Washington DC has rotaries [wikipedia.org], not roundabouts [wikipedia.org].
How about reading your own link:
"Traffic circle" is a term mainly used in the United States to describe a junction which in other countries would be called a roundabout.
.
Re: (Score:2)
Georgetown, DE has a circle at its center that apparently dates back to the same time period.
Re: (Score:2)
No, it doesn't. It has traffic circles, which are larger, higher-speed, and don't work as well. True roundabouts have only existed for about a century.
First in 1990? Really? (Score:3)
I love roundabouts in low traffic areas (Score:2)
About time too (Score:5, Insightful)
They are only a problem for people who are unused to them. As with all change, it will take time for people to get used to them.
If it is aggressive drivers (as previously commented) who are causing accidents, this will push their insurance up and perhaps they will become more cautious. Isn't that the nature of free market economics that the Americans seem so fond of?
Re: (Score:2)
It will also make North Americans better prepared to drive in Europe. Win-win.
Re:About time too (Score:5, Funny)
Higher Taxes? (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm British, so maybe I'm biased, but I'm pretty sure that roundabouts do not increase taxes. Seems like an odd claim to make.
FWIW, roundabouts aren't really that difficult to use. You just drive round them.
Re: (Score:3)
Higher taxes? Its the standard answer to any question that America seems to come up with, despite being quite the reverse. Americans hate paying taxes, even if its something for their own good, and they receive a direct benefit from those taxes.
Most intersections in the states require lights and electronics that need to be maintained, requiring a small team to replace light bulbs etc.
A roundabout would probably need a gardener once a year. Possibly not even that if it's paved.
Not so dangerous (Score:2)
Pedestrian problems? (Score:5, Insightful)
How do pedestrians get across roads with rotaries? With traffic lights there is a clear system for pedestrian traffic. As I approach a rotary as a driver I am looking for space between traffic to merge into the circle. I am not looking for pedestrians.
Re:Pedestrian problems? (Score:5, Informative)
Zebra crossing.
Re:Pedestrian problems? (Score:4, Interesting)
A few places in Montreal use round-abouts with zebra crossings for pedestrians, with a small sign that says "100$ fine if you do not give priority to pedestrians". While there are always exceptions, it works pretty well.
Cars drive a bit slower, but given that they don't have long lights to wait for, it is generally faster. Win-win.
(which is a bit surprising, since Montreal is probably one of the worst cities in North America with regards to respecting road signs, by either motorists, cyclists or pedestrians, but my impression is that when removing road clutter, people kind of start thinking again)
Re:Pedestrian problems? (Score:5, Interesting)
The thing I find puzzling about the American resistance to roundabouts is that they actually contain no new concepts at all, you don't have to 'learn' anything to use them. Topologically, they are just a one way street with T-junctions.
Ever pulled out of a side street into one-way traffic? That's exactly what you do when you join a roundabout. Even turned off a one way street into a side street? That's exactly what you do when you leave.
To answer your question, have you ever walked along a main street and crossed a side street that didn't have traffic lights? That's exactly what you do when you cross at a roundabout.
Re:Pedestrian problems? (Score:4, Interesting)
Usually, they just cross --- I live in Reading, UK, and it's full of roundabouts that work like this. There's usually an island between the two lanes just as the road enters the roundabout; partly this is acts as a spreader to split the lanes and make the junctions easier to manage for cars, but as a side effect it gives pedestrians somewhere to stop in the middle, so they only have to cross one lane at a time.
When I started to drive I hated roundabouts; there were too many places to look and I couldn't track all the inputs needed to negotiate them safely. Once I got used to them, I really like them. They scale beautifully to the level of traffic and varying number of exits and can keep the traffic moving smoothly up to quite heavy loads. On really heavy traffic there's various tricks you can do to keep them working well: one cunning one is the use of spiral lanes. In this variant, as you approach the roundabout you move into the correct lane for your destination, merge onto the roundabout and follow your lane straight into the appropriate exit.
They're particularly good on motorway exits; a common approach is to have an elevated roundabout above the motorway, with sliproads connecting roundabout exits to the motorway. You can leave the motorway, merge onto the roundabout, and then it becomes trivial to select your exit either to a minor road or back onto the motorway in either direction.
They don't work well when the traffic isn't evenly distributed; imagine a four-exit roundabout with heavy traffic moving east-west and you want to get on to the roundabout from the south. You'll end up spending quite some time waiting for a gap, because you have to give way to the traffic that's already on the roundabout. If there's traffic coming from the north, it all works properly; they enter the roundabout, force the east-west traffic to stop to give way to them, which creates a gap that you can move out into.
They completely fail when you put lights on them. Once that happens, all the elegant traffic management falls apart completely and you end up with complicated, frustrating multistage junctions. There's one terrible roundabout in Reading (at Winnersh Triangle; locals will know it) where not only have they put lights on it but in a desperate attempt to solve the traffic problems have actually put a road straight across the middle. Years of tuning have reduced the irritation level to merely annoying, but it's still a poor junction. But then, there isn't really such a thing as a good junction at that level of traffic.
Right now the Reading council has a thing about replacing small, effective roundabouts with lights. Everyone is screaming high heaven about it. One set of lights they just put in (Shinfield Road) has pretty much doubled my commute time, due to lousy design, failure to do the research, delays, and generally Not Being A Roundabout.
If you are unsure and fear runabouts (Score:2)
you probably shouldn't be on the road as you are already a danger to others. Nothing worse then someone behind a wheel that is unrure of themselves and their surroundings.
Higher taxes? (Score:2)
Just how are these things supposed to raise taxes? The article claimed they're cheaper than traffic lights, so how the hell do they cause higher taxes?
UnAmerican? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's interesting that cooperation and yielding to others is considered "un-American" by at least some Americans. That simple statements speaks volumes about the dire straights that the United States is in.
Maybe these traffic circles are a good idea after all. Maybe it will teach more Americans that cooperation is not a synonym for communism. Maybe it will teach them that they can profit from cooperation. Or maybe the ones who refuse to co-operate will slowly be killed off in a never-ending stream of roundabout traffic accidents. Either way, that might be best for the country in the long run...
Not new and Not good (Score:2)
"Roundabouts" are nothing new in the U.S.. They were called "traffic circles" when I was a kind in New Jersey. Eventually the state went to considerable expense to tear them out and put intersections with traffic lights back in. They led to a lot of accidents.
I hate to see other people have to relearn a lesson that an entire state already figured out.
Re: (Score:3)
Traffic circles are not roundabouts:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roundabout#Difference_from_traffic_circles [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
LOL What you're saying is, people from the US, are incapable of learning very very very basic traffic rules, that people in MANY other countries, can learn without hassle.
Hilarious. I love the US, where "driving in circles" is considered a hard maneuver which causes a lot of accidents.
Roundabouts- good, sometimes (Score:3)
I'd like to start by saying that I'm British, from an area with lots of roundabouts.
Roundabouts do work, but only in certain circumstances. They work well for junctions where there isn't a 'dominant flow' of traffic in a particular direction and traffic isn't too heavy; right turns (left turns in the US) are easier to accomodate than at a traffic light junction, most of the time there is a short wait for traffic entering (if at all) and no particular movement clogs up the other arms of the roundabout.
Where there is a dominant flow, traffic from the other directions can be made to wait a very long time for a gap if one of the roads is constantly spewing traffic onto the roundabout. If the traffic exceeds the capacity of the roundabout, or there is a bottleneck on one of the roads off the roundabout, then all hell breaks loose as traffic is unable to leave and blocks off all the other exits.
In some situations roundabouts can increase accidents; especially when placed to connect a very minor road with little traffic to a major one, as drivers can get so used to 'nothing coming' from the minor road that they plough onto the roundabout without looking properly. Roundabouts near petrol stations can suffer from lots of spinouts, as drivers skid on diesel spilt from overfilled trucks.
(Perhaps) interestingly, in the UK the current fad is to put traffic signals onto roundabouts to increase their capacity, as they're often used here for major junctions with a shitload of traffic, and they jam up. For light to moderate traffic loads, connecting roads of relatively equal importance, they work well.
sinister plot (Score:2, Funny)
...more difficult to navigate for unfamiliar American drivers...
Yeah, in other words: they're traps for old people, who get stuck in them and go around and around until they pass out from exhaustion and die. You see, once Obama figured out that his "death panels" were unacceptable to voters, this is what he came up with to reduce Medicare expenses.
Carmel (Score:3)
I've driven over a thousand miles in the last three years in the british isles, and I really like roundabouts. I also drive in Carmel IN several times a year, and roundabouts here are a whole different ballgame. The British isles have roads that are small and terrain that makes them not arrow straight (like in Carmel). Many british roads are only one lane with "passing places". These passing place roads would kill american drivers. So it seems that the British citizenry seem to understand that the road is not "theirs" and everybody is in this together. So there is a sense of cooperation.
The Carmel roundabouts are driven by people who are used to lanes that are 30 feet wide, and who have a sense of entitlement that their Yukon Denali is here now, and everybody better get out of the way. Then you throw in a mix of confused drivers and aggressive drivers, and the Carmel roundabouts aren't as enjoyable as the british ones.
But honestly, Must things suck in America compared to the british isles.
Don't get me started about the lack of proper transmissions here in the states; we apparently think our cars should be golf carts.
Sheldon
Check the road fatalities per 100k vehicles (Score:5, Informative)
here [wikipedia.org]
The US is conveniently located close to the UK.
Notice twice as many fatalities per 100000 vehicles in the US (15) than the UK (7).
It's a similary picture in most of Western Europe and there are plenty of roundabouts all over Europe.
Doesn't really prove anything, but it seems unlikelly that roundabouts significantly increase the number of traffic accidents. Even if they do, they certainly do not increase the number of deaths.
Roundabouts are much safer (Score:5, Informative)
Would you rather be t-boned by an idiot driver who runs a stop sign or hit in a glancing blow by an idiot driver who can't navigate a roundabout? A good roundabout where the curbing forces tangential entry is safer.
Re: (Score:3)
People (the young) sometimes try and take them too fast and crash into railings.
Actual crashes on the roundabout are almost unheard of.
Skill level of U.S. drivers (Score:4, Interesting)
The fact is, it's harder to get a driver's license in a lot of other countries. The standards and expectations are higher. In the U.S., I exaggerate only very slightly to suggest that a driver's license (and even automobile ownership) are seen as a fundamental human right, rather than a privilege. Most places, public transit is something that poor people use until they work hard enough to live the American dream (with accompanying house in the 'burbs and two-car garage).
Many other driving nations impose stricter conditions on new drivers, graduated licensing schemes (which require the passages of time and/or tests before new drivers are allowed greater driving privileges--the use of high-speed highways, driving late at night, driving without another experienced driver, etc. may all be prohibited to new drivers), older minimum driving ages, and more complex driving tests than the United States.
Despite its abundant roundabouts, the UK enjoys a non-motorway death rate about 15% below that of the U.S. [wikipedia.org] (Their motorway death rate is more than 60% less, but that's pretty much irrelevant to the roundabout issue.) Better public transit also means that people who can't or shouldn't be driving are less tempted to do so.
Thumbs up for Roundabouts (Score:4, Interesting)
My first experience with roundabouts was during a vacation to Australia (Brisbane). They are absolutely everywhere and once I'd gotten used to the etiquette in play, I fell in love with them. I drove from Brisbane all the way north to a little resort where we were catching a chart to snorkle the Reef. Traffic never really stops, folks on the roundabout have the right-of-way, but the pace is deliberately slow so that merges on and off and controlled and traffic continues to flow.
You *cannot* run a red light or miss a traffic signal as the intersection usually has a garden or statue *right in the middle of traffic*. If you are somehow so inattentive or drunk entering the intersection that you miss the big wall in front of you, folks on the roundabout have plenty of time to recognize that you aren't going to stop as you *are* in their field of vision as they travel on the circle. They can either stop or take evasive action as you smash into the concrete barricade. Drivers are empowered and required to remain attentive, even when they have the right-of-way. As you need to make a tight circle while on the traffic circle, you *must* drop speed or you'll never make the turn. Accidents on a traffic circle tend to be low-speed with minor or no injuries.
A standard traffic light abdicates all responsibility to a device. Vehicles traveling in a straight line through an intersection tend to do so at or above the speed limit - so pedestrian and driver error is frequently catastrophic or fatal. I don't know about others, but I'll take an increase in fender-benders to avoid head-on or t-bone accidents.
http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/roundabouts.html [iihs.org] has some excellent information about roundabouts. Note in point 5:
"5 What are the common types of crashes at roundabouts? What can be done to prevent them?
Despite the demonstrated safety benefits of roundabouts, some crashes still occur. Fewer crashes are typically seen at single-lane roundabouts compared with multilane roundabouts.5
An Institute study of crashes at 38 roundabouts in Maryland found that four crash types (run-off-road, rear-end, sideswipe, and entering-circulating) accounted for almost all crashes. A common crash type at both single-lane and double-lane roundabouts involved vehicles colliding with the central island. These crashes, which often involved unsafe speeds, accounted for almost half of all single-vehicle run-off-road crashes. Collisions occurred more frequently at entrances to roundabouts rather than within the circulatory roadway or at exits. About three-quarters of the crashes involved property damage. There were no right-angle or head-on collisions, potentially severe crash types that commonly occur at traditional intersections.6
In the Maryland study, Institute researchers concluded that unsafe speeds were an important crash factor. Some drivers may not have seen the roundabout in time. Measures to alert drivers of the need to reduce speeds (e.g., speed limit signs well in advance of roundabouts) and increase the conspicuity of roundabouts (e.g., larger roundabout ahead signs and YIELD signs, enhanced landscaping of center islands, pavement with reflector markings) may help to reduce crashes at roundabouts. Certain design features such as adequate curvature of approach roads also may aid in reducing speeds."
Shoot the Transportation Engineer! (Score:3)
Shoot the Transportation Engineer! that ever came up with the roundabout AND the merging exit and entry lanes on highways (another circle of death)! Yes, on paper, if people ACTUALLY drove by the "Rules of the Road" and "Right of Way"-let alone the actual LAWS that govern vehicular operation in ANY country-they would do all the things they say. BUT, this is yet another classic case of theory v. reality. In theory, given the laws and rules of the road this would work. In reality, people learn stuff about driving to pass a test and then forget it all 15 seconds after they have the driver's license in their hand! People in the U.S. can't handle a four way stop! It's right of way based and they can't even remember those simple rules! SHEESH!
I like them but many are to stupid to use them (Score:3)
Roundabouts are great when drivers actually use them as intended the problem is there are too many rude asshats to make them practical. Here where I live there are 6 of them, I cant count the times that I watch people just whip around them without even looking to see if other cars are coming or if there are other cars already waiting to turn into them. I had a guy plow into me at one last year, he claimed that since he had a yield sign at the entrance that meant I was supposed to stop in the middle of the loop for him...actually made the point to argue that in court when he was issued a ticket. Drivers around here are idiots though, thats why we now have stop lights at freeway on ramps...people were too stupid to realize that if you leave no room for cars to merge into traffic eventually you just create enough congestion that no one can go anywhere.
Mini Roundabouts (Score:3)
Just wait until your government figures out they can just paint a big white circle on a junction and call it a 'mini-roundabout' - half the people approaching it treat it as a roundabout, the other half treat it as a junction. Hilarity/death ensues.
Roundabout in Braintree, Mass. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
The USA is just a bunch of NIMBYS. This thread is living proof.
Re: (Score:3)
While I actually enjoy navigating circles, a well designed intersection with an adaptive traffic l
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I disagree. They are the best thing ever when people know how to use them. I have seen some up here in Canada and get all excited when I see them :)
If you want a candidate for worst traffic control structure ever invented, it's the 2 or 4 way stop signs. Utterly horrible. They should all be replaced with mini-roundabouts.
I say YAY to them down there for embracing this and I truly hope they follow suite up here and go roundabout-crazy :)
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. Unfortunately, most Americans don't know or ignore this. The other problem with not knowing the rules are the drivers who stop before entering when they don't need to. New rotaries should be posted with basic signs until they're more common. They recently installed several in my area and they greatly relieved congestion and peak gridlock. The Atlanta area is a prime candidate for rotaries but installation would probably become a Tea Party issue.
Re:Cooperation Crap (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
The problem here is that there's no real alternative to driving for most of the US, to the point that it can literally be drive or die of starvation.
So, they hand out driver's licenses like candy, and even when they take them away, people just drive illegally.
Re: (Score:3)
Crudely put. But accurate.