If I look at the roundabout in the first link https://highways.dot.gov/safety/intersection-safety/intersection-types/roundabouts, I will be able to drive a car a lot faster turning right than in a traditional intersection. I can do that as the incoming lane is angled towards the direction of travel. Why not use an incoming lane perpendicular to the roundabout, which would force the speed to come down?
Have number of vehicles per day stayed the same as when it was an intersection?
Do the roundabout get safer or less safe as people get used to them?
I have used the equivalence to “right turn on red” in many community meetings. It does wake Americans up to realise they have been conforming to the central tenet of roundabout protocol ever since high school drivers ed. But the default response of “enjoying” this weird type of fake ignorance make me work hard at keeping my cool.
A major advantage of roundabouts that you fail to mention is that they make travel times more predictable. When you travel signalized intersections you take pot luck as to how long you'll wait at a red light. When you're lucky you sail through on greens, but when you're unlucky and hit a signal going red each adds minutes to your travel time. Roundabouts slow every driver down but only stop you occasionally and then only for seconds. I love 'em and not just for their safety.
In the early-mid 2000s, traffic engineers were steadfastly opposed b/c of the low speeds. They didn't realize the overall time savings of slowly moving through the system.
I especially like seeing how roundabouts are safer for cyclists and pedestrians. Again the current status quo as a non-driver in a crosswalk is already dangerous. Having the “walk” signal means you still have to watch for cars turning right on red (often not even stopping before the crosswalk, if at all). And then you have to watch out for the cars turning left, often at high speed and their only focus is on yielding to oncoming traffic -- not to whoever’s in the crosswalk.
So refreshing to read this! One common objection I see to roundabouts is “Well Americans just don’t know how to yield,” as if the status quo of right-on-red isn’t the exact same thing -- just more dangerous for pedestrians *and* for drivers given how fast cars fly through the green.
As an urban designer working in the USA for 30 years after 25 years in my native England, I totally agree about the superiority of roundabouts. They are an accepted way of life in almost every country EXCEPT America. Roundabout protocols are embedded in driver education from the start in the UK for example. So different than here. I have given up trying to educate my fellow Americans about roundabouts - the mindless hostility from communities simply got too much!
If I look at the roundabout in the first link https://highways.dot.gov/safety/intersection-safety/intersection-types/roundabouts, I will be able to drive a car a lot faster turning right than in a traditional intersection. I can do that as the incoming lane is angled towards the direction of travel. Why not use an incoming lane perpendicular to the roundabout, which would force the speed to come down?
Have number of vehicles per day stayed the same as when it was an intersection?
Do the roundabout get safer or less safe as people get used to them?
I have used the equivalence to “right turn on red” in many community meetings. It does wake Americans up to realise they have been conforming to the central tenet of roundabout protocol ever since high school drivers ed. But the default response of “enjoying” this weird type of fake ignorance make me work hard at keeping my cool.
A major advantage of roundabouts that you fail to mention is that they make travel times more predictable. When you travel signalized intersections you take pot luck as to how long you'll wait at a red light. When you're lucky you sail through on greens, but when you're unlucky and hit a signal going red each adds minutes to your travel time. Roundabouts slow every driver down but only stop you occasionally and then only for seconds. I love 'em and not just for their safety.
In the early-mid 2000s, traffic engineers were steadfastly opposed b/c of the low speeds. They didn't realize the overall time savings of slowly moving through the system.
I especially like seeing how roundabouts are safer for cyclists and pedestrians. Again the current status quo as a non-driver in a crosswalk is already dangerous. Having the “walk” signal means you still have to watch for cars turning right on red (often not even stopping before the crosswalk, if at all). And then you have to watch out for the cars turning left, often at high speed and their only focus is on yielding to oncoming traffic -- not to whoever’s in the crosswalk.
So refreshing to read this! One common objection I see to roundabouts is “Well Americans just don’t know how to yield,” as if the status quo of right-on-red isn’t the exact same thing -- just more dangerous for pedestrians *and* for drivers given how fast cars fly through the green.
Good point, hadn't thought of the RTOR comparison. My default response is a dramatic eye roll. ;)
As an urban designer working in the USA for 30 years after 25 years in my native England, I totally agree about the superiority of roundabouts. They are an accepted way of life in almost every country EXCEPT America. Roundabout protocols are embedded in driver education from the start in the UK for example. So different than here. I have given up trying to educate my fellow Americans about roundabouts - the mindless hostility from communities simply got too much!
American Exceptionalism = when everybody gets safe infrastructure except us.