Slashdot Mirror


Roundabout Revolution Sweeping US

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.

8 of 1,173 comments (clear)

  1. Check the road fatalities per 100k vehicles by Aceticon · · Score: 4, Informative

    here

    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.

  2. Re:Pedestrian problems? by dunkelfalke · · Score: 4, Informative

    Zebra crossing.

    --
    "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
  3. Roundabouts are much safer by vijayiyer · · Score: 4, 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.

  4. Re:Really bad idea. by stonedcat · · 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.

    --
    You can't take the sky from me.
  5. Re:Really bad idea. by Runaway1956 · · Score: 4, 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.

    --
    "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
  6. Re:Really bad idea. by cduffy · · Score: 4, 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.

  7. Re:Really bad idea. by ymarcus · · Score: 5, Informative
    Although it seems like traffic circles should be more dangerous, I'm not sure the data backs this up. This article, for example, cites several studies that show a significant decrease in accidents and an even more significant decrease in "severe injury" crashes when roundabouts replace traffic lights. The latter, at least, makes sense since roundabouts virtually remove the possibility of head on crashes.

    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.

  8. Re:Really bad idea. by hazem · · Score: 4, 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/. 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.