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.
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.
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?
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.
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.
No sig today...
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.
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...
Fanatically anti-fanatical
Just think of them as token rings.
When you get the hang of roundabouts we'll teach you how to use these: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_Roundabout_(Swindon)
No sig today...
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.
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
Like any tool, roundabouts have to be used in appropriate situations. I used to work in traffic engineering, and adding roundabouts (or signals and stop sings, for that matter) requires careful study and the meeting of certain criteria (called warrants). Warrants include such things as daily vehicle volume, peak hourly volumes, pedistrian volumes, and delay times. In the right place, roundabouts allow traffic to flow better than a signal and with greater safety. Head-on and t-bone collisions (the two most dangerous types of traffic accidents) are virtually eliminated. The accidents that do happen will be at a lower speed and a gentler angle.
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.
That roundabout is genius - it's so confusing that everyone drives really carefully and there are probably less serious accidents there than 'normal' roundabout.
Sig (appended to the end of comments you post, 120 chars)
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.
Awww, how cute. Look everyone, he still has faith in humanity.
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.