“Roundabouts:” Better for the Environment. But Better for Cyclists?

[duff_duffy]

They just put one of these down the road from me. Absolutely awesome for cars. I remember when they put it in thinking this is the dumbest idea….I was so wrong. It saved a typical 3-4 minute wait x 100’s of cars a day in time. Road used to get backed up all the time and now at most a 1 car backup, usually just someone not knowing what to do.

However, from cyclist perspective I go out of my way to avoid it. Cars seem to assume I am immediately taking first turn if they even bother to slow down for me. I don’t let my kids near the intersection either, walking or riding even though it also has crosswalks that light. Too risky.

[osbk67]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

[I]Carmel, a city of 102,000 north of Indianapolis, has 140 roundabouts, with over a dozen still to come. No American city has more. The main reason is safety; compared with regular intersections, roundabouts significantly reduce injuries and deaths.

But there’s also a climate benefit.

Because modern roundabouts don’t have red lights where cars sit and idle, they don’t burn as much gasoline. While there are few studies, the former city engineer for Carmel, Mike McBride, estimates that each roundabout saves about 20,000 gallons of fuel annually, which means the cars of Carmel emit many fewer tons of planet-heating carbon emissions each year. And U.S. highway officials broadly agree that roundabouts reduce tailpipe emissions.

Acknowledging that anything to do with the climate these days is a polarising issue, I have my doubts here. If two-thirds of Carmel's population drives, and each of 140 roundabouts saves 20000 gallons, that's 40 gallons each for 70000 drivers. If each drives 10000 miles at 25mpg that's 10% of their total annual consumption.

I suspect infrastructure that smooths and speeds motorised traffic doesn't reduce consumption, it enables more usage. Especially when it concurrently discourages non-motorised alternatives. Break even at best atmo. YMMV...

[ScottRAB]

Originally Posted by Dead Man

lights at a traffic circle? gross

the only traffic circle i know of that isnt "yield" all around is the one at Caesar Chavez and Glisan in portland, and its basically a disaster. i wouldnt be surprised if there have been more accidents there than would be with a regular 4 way stop. you have to make lane changes in it, nobody is ever really sure which lane does what until it does it, and between the people running the stop sign and trying to zip into the lane they need and and the people who have no clue who has right o way where, its not fun to get through on a bike when traffic is remotely heavy

There are hundreds of traffic circles in Portland, OR, and almost all have two stop signs. Chavez at Glisan is still a traffic circle, but the lane use is clearly marked and there are no lane changes to exit. The right entering lane can only turn right and the left entering lane can go right, through or left. Its true oddity is the bus stops in the circle. People not stopping at the stop signs all the time is only natural. It happens at regular intersections with stop signs that are overkill and a traffic circle with stop signs is multiple overkill.

[ScottRAB]

Originally Posted by osbk67

I suspect infrastructure that smooths and speeds motorised traffic doesn't reduce consumption, it enables more usage. Especially when it concurrently discourages non-motorised alternatives. Break even at best atmo. YMMV...

Confusion about speeding traffic and reducing delay is a common misunderstanding. Modern roundabouts reduce delay, they do not speed up traffic, unless you compare them to autos being stopped at red lights or stop signs.
Modern roundabouts operate at under 25 mph and are proven safer than other common forms of intersection. The slower speeds and standard designs make them very safe for pedestrians and cyclists.

[ScottRAB]

Originally Posted by duff_duffy

They just put one of these down the road from me. Absolutely awesome for cars. I remember when they put it in thinking this is the dumbest idea….I was so wrong. It saved a typical 3-4 minute wait x 100’s of cars a day in time. Road used to get backed up all the time and now at most a 1 car backup, usually just someone not knowing what to do.

However, from cyclist perspective I go out of my way to avoid it. Cars seem to assume I am immediately taking first turn if they even bother to slow down for me. I don’t let my kids near the intersection either, walking or riding even though it also has crosswalks that light. Too risky.

Your fear is controlling you. No pedestrians have died in a roundabout in the US crossing at the crosswalks. Roundabouts have refuge islands at the crossings so pedestrians only have to concentrate on one direction at a time. This is particularly safer for younger and older pedestrians. Experienced cyclists merge with traffic, since the under 25 mph design speed is easier to work with and there are no right hooks. Inexperienced riders use the ramps and widened sidewalks to travel around the circular roadway.

[ScottRAB]

Originally Posted by reuben

Plus, DC has square or rectangular roundabouts, if you can imagine such a thing.

I don't live in DC, but my success rate at getting in the correct lane to make the correct turn is very low.

This just means you don't know the difference between a traffic circle and a modern roundabout.

Many people confuse other and older styles of circular intersections with modern roundabouts. High speed, east coast rotaries, large multi-lane traffic circles (Arc D’Triomphe, Dupont Circle), and small neighborhood traffic circles are not modern roundabouts and UK 'roundabouts' are not the same as North American 'modern roundabouts'. The Brits even call a merry-go-round a kid’s roundabout.
What is, and is not, a modern roundabout:
FHWA: http://www.ltrc.lsu.edu/ltc_09/pdf/Doctor,%20Mark.pdf
UMass video: https://www.umass.edu/newsoffice/art...n-center-video
WA DOT: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsCoI7lERGE

[XXtwindad]

Originally Posted by ScottRAB

This just means you don't know the difference between a traffic circle and a modern roundabout.

Many people confuse other and older styles of circular intersections with modern roundabouts. High speed, east coast rotaries, large multi-lane traffic circles (Arc D’Triomphe, Dupont Circle), and small neighborhood traffic circles are not modern roundabouts and UK 'roundabouts' are not the same as North American 'modern roundabouts'. The Brits even call a merry-go-round a kid’s roundabout.
What is, and is not, a modern roundabout:
FHWA: http://www.ltrc.lsu.edu/ltc_09/pdf/Doctor,%20Mark.pdf
UMass video: https://www.umass.edu/newsoffice/art...n-center-video
WA DOT: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vsCoI7lERGE

Well, that was edifying. Clearly, you have a background pertaining to the subject. And some strong opinions. 😉

[benb]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

Well, that was edifying. Clearly, you have a background pertaining to the subject. And some strong opinions. 😉

The "modern roundabout" he is showing in that post is exactly what is so non-stressful to ride through as a cyclist. We have several within riding distance of my house and really they're a complete non-issue and much less painful to navigate than a lot of intersections with lights that they replace. These things should be smiles all the way down.

[reuben]

I'm fairly certain that I know the difference between a circle and a rectangle.

[cojames]

Interesting thread and strange to see my town mentioned. Most of the roundabouts I ride in Carmel are fairly compact and single lane. I find them preferable to ride through as I don’t have to stop and unclip. It’s nice to flow with traffic but I always anticipate that cars entering don’t see me, just habit.

[tellyho]

I ride through two rotaries (MA) on my commute daily and have consequently had a bunch of time to ponder their utility. As cyclists, we struggle to be perceived as equivalent to a car in the roadway - I find that I'm very ignorable if I'm not at least a foot into the lane. Rotaries crystalize this issue - bikes go from semi-ignorable to an equivalent vehicle. Unfortunately, most cars are not thinking about that and quite used to ignoring us. I take up the entire lane rolling into the rotary and on my travels around it for this reason. It's still a dangerous situation.

[mistermo]

Originally Posted by XXtwindad

...does it hold true for cyclists as well?


Carmel, a city of 102,000 north of Indianapolis, has 140 roundabouts, with over a dozen still to come. No American city has more. The main reason is safety; compared with regular intersections, roundabouts significantly reduce injuries and deaths.

But there’s also a climate benefit.

Because modern roundabouts don’t have red lights where cars sit and idle, they don’t burn as much gasoline. While there are few studies, the former city engineer for Carmel, Mike McBride, estimates that each roundabout saves about 20,000 gallons of fuel annually, which means the cars of Carmel emit many fewer tons of planet-heating carbon emissions each year. And U.S. highway officials broadly agree that roundabouts reduce tailpipe emissions.

Modern roundabouts, by comparison, are compact, with lower speed limits, traffic yields rather than stops and generally fewer lanes. Unlike traffic circles where cars enter at 90-degree angles, traffic flows into modern roundabouts at a smaller angle, drastically cutting the chances of getting T-boned. Well-designed ones are also more friendly to pedestrians and cyclists.

I live in Indianapolis and work in Carmel, roundabout capital of the world. I'm writing this message as I'm about to head home, certain to pass through lots of roundabouts.

Experiencing these roundabouts daily, I emphatically like them. I'm an impatient guy and sitting at a stoplight, with no traffic crossing, makes my blood pressure rise. Roundabouts greatly improve the flow of traffic. They also reduce the speed. Serious traffic accidents have been greatly reduced, given the lower speeds.

From a cyclists perspective, and I ride through Carmel often, roundabouts are a mixed bag. When its rush hour, they're frightening-I'd prefer a stop.

However, when riding in Indianapolis (no roundabouts), most of us only slow for stop signs and red lights, unless there's cross-traffic. If you're the type of cyclist who stops for stop signs and red lights, traffic or not, then yeah, you won't like a roundabout.

But nearly every cyclist I ride rolls through the stop. Roundabouts, on off hours and weekends, are delightful. The roads in Carmel are smooth and nice. Unless you've been dropped and were hoping to catch the group at the next red light, roundabouts are better for cyclists, when traffic is light. If you get a gap and want to make it stick, roundabouts are your friend.

[aydraper]

Someone in Henry County must have done a study or traveled to Europe. Has to have the most roundabouts per Capita in Georgia, the South and maybe the US. I usually ride there early am on the weekends so don’t see much traffic. But I’m very cautious when I see a car approaching. I don’t trust they aren’t going to just drive right in.

[MikeD]

New research shows roundabouts are dangerous to cyclists https://apple.news/AQOXkx6olR8Gg2tbKP3zG1A

[fried bake]

Originally Posted by cyat.es

Pittsburgh just went on a tear installing mini-rotaries in place of stop signs to create what they call "neighborways". BikePGH championed these as a cyclist safety campaign.

My house is at one of these "rotar-ized" intersections, and from my perch overlooking it I've seen no abatement to the chaos below. Drivers don't know what to do when they approach it, so despite still having stop signs, most blow through, often going the wrong direction. Until the most recent round of construction, speeds haven't slowed… until last week when they removed 6" of pavement to resurface. Now it's like a humungous inverted speed bump and it's glorious.

https://imgur.com/a/TS9geTq

This is interesting. It sounds like the roundabout has caused people to run stop signs. Is the typical roundabout design to have stop signs at entrances?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk