Wisconsin overspending on roundabouts?

[tradephoric]

Get used to the roundabouts. They're not going anywhere.

Roundabouts are not going anywhere, no doubt, but the complex roundabouts that were aggressively built in Wisconsin over the past 8 years may become a thing of the past.  Back in 2008 there were zero roundabouts in Wisconsin that had 3 circulating lanes (by all means correct me if I'm wrong).  Today, there are 20 roundabouts in the state that have 3 circulating lanes.  From my understanding there is now a moratorium in Wisconsin on designing roundabouts that have 3 circulating lanes due to the problems they have encountered (specially high crash rates.. one example being the Moorland roundabout already mentioned).  They are finally getting a feel for which roundabouts work well and which ones are likely to be problematic.

[dvferyance]

I don't expect them to go away completely but I sure wish they would get rid of the ones on Moorland. Those are the worst ones by far. I don't like the ones on Hwy 83 either except for the one at 59 I am ok with that one. Most of the rest I am ok with but I do think there are enough in this state as is and if the the transportation budget has a shortfall a moratorium is necessary.

[dvferyance]

I attended the public hearing back in 2007 the overwhelming majority didn't want them. The DOT should have respected the wishes of the people of New Berlin and not done it.

How many people were at the meeting? 25? 50? 100? The population of New Berlin is 40,000. So no, those weren't what "the wishes of the people of New Berlin" were. Those were the wishes of the people that were in the room.

How many times has someone come to a DOT meeting strictly to support something? I know as a fact that the number is much lower than those who show up to oppose. Basically, those meetings are to get feedback, not to place a final vote.

I'll go one higher than jakeroot - I still think roundabouts at that intersection would be the preferred alternative. Probably not three lanes, but it would likely still be roundabouts. Those intersections were awful in their previous configuration with traffic stacking and waiting all over the place - especially with the tight spacing with the Beloit Rd. intersection to the North, and Rock Run to the South.

So how do you know what the wishes of the people of New Berlin were? You don't even live in New Berlin. I do know the city leaders were against it. If the DOT isn't listening to the people at the meeting then there was no point in having the meeting in the first place. It was a waste of all of our time that night to come to it.

[jakeroot]

I don't expect them to go away completely but I sure wish they would get rid of the ones on Moorland.

So how do you know what the wishes of the people of New Berlin were? You don't even live in New Berlin. I do know the city leaders were against it. If the DOT isn't listening to the people at the meeting then there was no point in having the meeting in the first place. It was a waste of all of our time that night to come to it.

Generally, the public supports a given road project unless they voice an opinion stating otherwise. In the case of New Berlin, while there was some opposition, there wasn't enough for the DOT to spend millions re-working the design. Should the two roundabouts go away? No, but I think that WisDOT would be wise to revisit the roundabout in five to seven years, to see if crash rates drop or not.

Most of the rest I am ok with but I do think there are enough in this state as is and if the the transportation budget has a shortfall a moratorium is necessary.

That doesn't make any sense. Roundabouts don't usually cost anymore than a signal (though there's obviously exceptions on both sides of the spectrum). Unless you're talking about replacing roundabouts with two-way stops (which is silly), the state isn't going to save any money by building traditional signalized intersections (two way stops don't have the same through-put as roundabouts, so for the purpose of this discussion, the only two options for intersections are roundabouts and signals).

[peterj920]

In this state signals are usually cheaper than roundabouts.  In most cases signals at an intersection cost about $200,000 while roundabouts cost between $1-$2 million, along with an intersection that has to be closed for about 2 months.  Brown County was building roundabouts for about half that cost. WISDOT also spends way more on landscaping and lighting on their roundabouts.  I put 2 streetviews of roundabouts on US 10 to get an idea of how many lights are placed at a rural roundabout intersection by the agency. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@44.2139482,-88.2831605,3a,75y,279.45h,78.92t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sH5j98RHq_fGDluoVoaBHag!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

There is a curve that is lit below, but there are quite a few lights. 

https://www.google.com/maps/@44.213052,-88.3229724,3a,75y,43.65h,78.2t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sYejDVJ2RCpxH89cws4MoOQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en

[jakeroot]

In this state signals are usually cheaper than roundabouts.  In most cases signals at an intersection cost about $200,000 while roundabouts cost between $1-$2 million, along with an intersection that has to be closed for about 2 months.  Brown County was building roundabouts for about half that cost.

If the intersection doesn't need to be modified, certainly signals are cheaper. But many times, intersections are modified because one of the intersecting roads is being widened. If this is the case, roundabouts and signals cost roughly the same thing (both require new pavement, wiring for lights, etc). Roundabouts have the advantage of being cheaper to maintain, and can operate without power.

[GeekJedi]

So how do you know what the wishes of the people of New Berlin were? You don't even live in New Berlin. I do know the city leaders were against it. If the DOT isn't listening to the people at the meeting then there was no point in having the meeting in the first place. It was a waste of all of our time that night to come to it.

Unlike you, I'm *not* projecting onto them and assuming 40,000 people agree with me based on those in attendance at a meeting. I'm simply saying you're wrong in assuming that you "do* know. You simply don't. My fact is just that - more people attend a public meeting to complain about something than support something. Period. When it comes to stuff like this, people that don't want something are more passionate than those who do.

The point of the meeting was not to make a final decision. That's foolish. You're not going to make a major transportation decision because a handful of people in a room disagree. You will take their concerns into consideration, but you just don't cancel a project because 50 people don't like it.

Also, keep in mind that roundabouts here have become politically charged. There are some talk show hosts that have decided that roundabouts are a "Liberal Jim Doyle" thing and that's why they should not be built. Those people are immediately filtered out.

[SEWIGuy]

Also, keep in mind that roundabouts here have become politically charged. There are some talk show hosts that have decided that roundabouts are a "Liberal Jim Doyle" thing and that's why they should not be built. Those people are immediately filtered out.

I can pretty much guaranty you that this is the source of the OP's rage on this issue.

[peterj920]

Also, keep in mind that roundabouts here have become politically charged. There are some talk show hosts that have decided that roundabouts are a "Liberal Jim Doyle" thing and that's why they should not be built. Those people are immediately filtered out.

I can pretty much guaranty you that this is the source of the OP's rage on this issue.

From Jim Doyle to Scott Walker roundabouts are still being built at the same pace.  I just have a hard time seeing tall grass along roadways and Waysides closing, yet roundabouts are replacing traffic signals that work fine in a lot of areas.  In Northeast Wisconsin, US 10/Wis 57, Wis 54/Seminary Rd and Wis 32/County B were intersections that worked perfectly fine with the traffic signals in place.  The roundabout construction closed the intersections for nearly 3 months, and cost over $1 million a piece.  The US 10/Wis 57 roundabout cost over $2 million because of real estate costs and having to tear down a building to make room for it.  Back when WISDOT cut back on grass cutting, they said it would save $1.5 million.  Constructing one less roundabout would nearly cover that expense.  I also think WISDOT overspends on construction costs for building them since Brown County has been building roundabouts for about half the cost of WISDOT. 

[SEWIGuy]

Also, keep in mind that roundabouts here have become politically charged. There are some talk show hosts that have decided that roundabouts are a "Liberal Jim Doyle" thing and that's why they should not be built. Those people are immediately filtered out.

I can pretty much guaranty you that this is the source of the OP's rage on this issue.

From Jim Doyle to Scott Walker roundabouts are still being built at the same pace.  I just have a hard time seeing tall grass along roadways and Waysides closing, yet roundabouts are replacing traffic signals that work fine in a lot of areas.  In Northeast Wisconsin, US 10/Wis 57, Wis 54/Seminary Rd and Wis 32/County B were intersections that worked perfectly fine with the traffic signals in place.  The roundabout construction closed the intersections for nearly 3 months, and cost over $1 million a piece.  The US 10/Wis 57 roundabout cost over $2 million because of real estate costs and having to tear down a building to make room for it.  Back when WISDOT cut back on grass cutting, they said it would save $1.5 million.  Constructing one less roundabout would nearly cover that expense.  I also think WISDOT overspends on construction costs for building them since Brown County has been building roundabouts for about half the cost of WISDOT. 

It isn't apples to apples comparing the capital cost of a roundabout, which will then have a usable life measuring in the decades, with the annual operating costs of cutting grass.  That is why the capital costs of roadways (and roundabouts) are usually covered through bonding - the public pays for them over time because they have a use over time.

[GeekJedi]

It isn't apples to apples comparing the capital cost of a roundabout, which will then have a usable life measuring in the decades, with the annual operating costs of cutting grass.  That is why the capital costs of roadways (and roundabouts) are usually covered through bonding - the public pays for them over time because they have a use over time.

Exactly. And we get back to the simple fact that things like mowing aren't getting cut at the expense of roundabouts. It's not even comparing apples to oranges. It's more like comparing apples to missile launchers in this case.

[lordsutch]

At least in the case of Georgia, the roundabouts have been coming in substantially cheaper than $1-2 million per intersection, and typically don't require the intersection to be closed during construction. One example I'm aware of near Macon on US 80 near Lizella did close the cross street for a couple of months, but the detour was only a few thousand feet and there was a lot of grading involved to get the land level for the roundabout.

[7/8]

At least in the case of Georgia, the roundabouts have been coming in substantially cheaper than $1-2 million per intersection, and typically don't require the intersection to be closed during construction. One example I'm aware of near Macon on US 80 near Lizella did close the cross street for a couple of months, but the detour was only a few thousand feet and there was a lot of grading involved to get the land level for the roundabout.

They're also building a pair of roundabouts in Waterloo, ON on Erb St, and they've managed to keep the road open during their construction. They appear to be half done (the north halves of both roundabouts are paved and have curbs).

This article on the project says the following:

The developer is footing the $1.4-million bill for the roundabout at the Costco site and some related work.

It says roundabout singular, even though there are two of them, so I'm not sure if they cost $1.4 million combined or each. Also, with currency conversion, $1.4 million CAD is about $1.07 million USD.

[dvferyance]

As I recall years ago the DOT was thinking about putting a roundabout at the intersection of University and Summit in Waukesha. I don't know why they didn't I would have been perfectly fine with one there. Would have made way more sense then the ones in New Berlin that's for sure.

[peterj920]

The project below is a big reason why I started this thread.  The intersection of US 45 and Wis 96 works perfectly fine with the traffic signals.  Why does money need to be spent on a roundabout if signals are already in place?

http://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/about-wisdot/newsroom/news-rel/124a-nc.aspx

[SEWIGuy]

The project below is a big reason why I started this thread.  The intersection of US 45 and Wis 96 works perfectly fine with the traffic signals.  Why does money need to be spent on a roundabout if signals are already in place?

http://wisconsindot.gov/Pages/about-wisdot/newsroom/news-rel/124a-nc.aspx

I guess you didn't read their justification just one click away from the page you linked.  Doesn't sound like the signals are adequate from a safety perspective.

"Overview

A recent crash analysis identified a safety concern at the US 45/WIS 96 intersection on US 45 between Waupaca/Outagamie County D and Waupaca County W.

Between 2010 and 2014, there were four right angle crashes; three westbound-southbound crashes and one eastbound-southbound crash. Of those, two westbound vehicles ran a red light and one eastbound vehicle ran a red light. Westbound and eastbound traffic may have had difficulty seeing the traffic signals.

There was also one left-turn angle crash, one sideswipe, one run-off-the-road crash, and four rear-end crashes. Three of the four rear-end crashes were vehicles slowing or stopped for a red light. Five of the 11 crashes at this intersection occurred on wet/snowy/icy pavement.

Current left turn lane lengths on US 45 are not long enough to provide adequate deceleration for turning vehicles. Additionally, the turn lanes are configured in a way that opposing left turn vehicles obstruct the view of oncoming traffic.

The purpose of this project is to increase safety by reducing the number and severity of potential crashes while maintaining current and future capacity needs for the intersection and overall functional needs of the US 45 corridor."

[quickshade]

Living in a bit more of an open area in Illinois, I don't understand why we don't have more roundabouts.  We have one in Johnsburg and traffic flows a lot better than before. Every time I see a mention in a study about to much traffic at an intersection the solution always seems to be a traffic light. But the traffic count at the intersection does not warrant it. I've come to the conclusion that old people don't know how to navigate them and just complain every time they are added as a possible solution for the problem.