Crash prone 'modern roundabouts'

[tradephoric]

Looking at an aerial of the US 53 Eau Claire roundabout it's not surprising there aren't many crashes.  Scully Drive services a Gander Mountain (a big store, but that's the only traffic being generated) and Old Town Hall Road has some small businesses along it.  There just isn't much conflict at this roundabout as the majority of traffic is continuing straight on US 53.

https://www.google.com/maps/@44.7643843,-91.4200398,787m/data=!3m1!1e3

[tradephoric]

JMAN, do you have any word on how many crashes there have been at the roundabout at Highway 124 and Business 29 outside Chippewa Falls?  It was constructed around 2009 and replaced a full-blown interchange.  There are slip lanes for all legs which should reduce the conflicts inside the roundabout itself.  Any experience with this roundabout?

https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9210902,-91.3808932,259m/data=!3m1!1e3

[jeffandnicole]

Looking at an aerial of the US 53 Eau Claire roundabout it's not surprising there aren't many crashes.  Scully Drive services a Gander Mountain (a big store, but that's the only traffic being generated) and Old Town Hall Road has some small businesses along it.  There just isn't much conflict at this roundabout as the majority of traffic is continuing straight on US 53.

https://www.google.com/maps/@44.7643843,-91.4200398,787m/data=!3m1!1e3

On a side note, interesting stripping for the off ramp there, even though there's no left turn movement.  Usually those lanes would be stripped to 'guide' people into a right turn.  Looking back on the GSV I can understand it during construction...7 years ago.   But no reason not to have revised it since.

The on-ramp isn't much better, as if it was meant for traffic to turn left onto it.

https://goo.gl/maps/qybfKukfA992

[jakeroot]

Looking at an aerial of the US 53 Eau Claire roundabout it's not surprising there aren't many crashes.  Scully Drive services a Gander Mountain (a big store, but that's the only traffic being generated) and Old Town Hall Road has some small businesses along it.  There just isn't much conflict at this roundabout as the majority of traffic is continuing straight on US 53.

https://www.google.com/maps/@44.7643843,-91.4200398,787m/data=!3m1!1e3

On a side note, interesting stripping for the off ramp there, even though there's no left turn movement.  Usually those lanes would be stripped to 'guide' people into a right turn.  Looking back on the GSV I can understand it during construction...7 years ago.   But no reason not to have revised it since.

The on-ramp isn't much better, as if it was meant for traffic to turn left onto it.

https://goo.gl/maps/qybfKukfA992

I can understand the off-ramp. Sometimes, if there isn't sufficient merge area, it's better to have a right-angle "yield" (though I don't agree with the stop sign seen here -- something like this is what I prefer: https://goo.gl/UTjZjj).

The on-ramp though...it's not something I haven't seen before, but it's certainly not something I prefer.

[jeffandnicole]

Looking at an aerial of the US 53 Eau Claire roundabout it’s not surprising there aren’t many crashes.  Scully Drive services a Gander Mountain (a big store, but that’s the only traffic being generated) and Old Town Hall Road has some small businesses along it.  There just isn’t much conflict at this roundabout as the majority of traffic is continuing straight on US 53.

https://www.google.com/maps/@44.7643843,-91.4200398,787m/data=!3m1!1e3

On a side note, interesting stripping for the off ramp there, even though there's no left turn movement.  Usually those lanes would be stripped to 'guide' people into a right turn.  Looking back on the GSV I can understand it during construction...7 years ago.   But no reason not to have revised it since.

The on-ramp isn't much better, as if it was meant for traffic to turn left onto it.

https://goo.gl/maps/qybfKukfA992

I can understand the off-ramp. Sometimes, if there isn't sufficient merge area, it's better to have a right-angle "yield" (though I don't agree with the stop sign seen here -- something like this is what I prefer: https://goo.gl/UTjZjj).

The on-ramp though...it's not something I haven't seen before, but it's certainly not something I prefer.

I was referring to the fact the left yellow line goes straight into the intersection, with a straight stop bar to boot.  At least the stop bar is angled towards the right of the lane, but in reality the whole stop bar should be angled, with the yellow line curving to the right as well.

[JMAN_WiS&S]

JMAN, do you have any word on how many crashes there have been at the roundabout at Highway 124 and Business 29 outside Chippewa Falls?  It was constructed around 2009 and replaced a full-blown interchange.  There are slip lanes for all legs which should reduce the conflicts inside the roundabout itself.  Any experience with this roundabout?

https://www.google.com/maps/@44.9210902,-91.3808932,259m/data=!3m1!1e3

I have driven and ridden through that one before, not sure on crash stats, the intersection is fairly self explanatory. I find it cool how you can still see row grading where the old sb-> eb flyover ramp used to be.

[tradephoric]

The infamous 50/60 Lakeville roundabout has had another crash recently.  This time a women and 3 of her kids had to be extricated from an Escalade after it flipped over on it's side.  This is the same roundabout that saw 44 crashes in the first two months of operation back in 2015:

http://sunthisweek.com/2016/04/15/woman-children-pulled-from-lakeville-rollover-crash/

[dvferyance]

Simple answer the roundabouts on Moorland Rd in New Berlin by I-43. They could be the worst in the country.

[tradephoric]

^Here is a dated article discussing the Moorland Road roundabouts at I-43.  At that time (2008 data) the Moorland Road/Rock Ridge roundabout had the highest crash rate of any other major intersection in New Berlin.  The article goes on to state that the number of injury accidents is way down.  This is a total fabrication.  What the article is looking at is the severity of accidents at the roundabout and not total injury accidents.... 

While there are more accidents at the roundabout, the number of injury accidents is way down... Of the 44 reportable and nonreportable accidents at Rock Ridge/Moorland in a 15-month period from the end of 2007 through January 2009, only three were injury accidents, he said. That is far lower than the seven out of 13 accidents that were injury accidents at the Rock Ridge and Moorland intersection with traffic lights, Rieder said. Those 13 accidents happened over a period of seven years.
http://www.newberlinnow.com/news/56607067.html

Just look at the data the article cites:
Before roundabout (7 years of crash data):   13 total crashes; 7 injury crashes 
After roundabout (15-months of crash data):  44 total crashes; 3 injury crashes

How can this article claim that the number of injury accidents is way down?  We are comparing 15-months of post-roundabout crash data to 7 years of pre-roundabout crash data.  If you actually average it out by injury crashes per year, injury crashes have more than doubled (going from 1 injury crashes/year before the roundabout to 2.4 injury crashes/year after the roundabout).

[jakeroot]

^^

Not sure why any of that matters today. No doubt they may be stretching the numbers a little, but the numbers are still old and irrelevant.. I'd love to see some new data on those roundabouts.

[tradephoric]

For the record, I don't believe the Moorland Road roundabouts are performing that badly.  A crash rate of 2.0 MEV (which is cited in the article) is right on the cusp of being considered a satisfactory crash rate.  There are roundabouts with crash rates much higher than the Moorland Road roundabouts that would concern me more.  Interchange roundabouts, for whatever reason, seem to have lower crash rates than non-interchange roundabouts and that could explain why Moorland Road roundabouts are performing OK.  I definitely wouldn't consider it the worst in the country. 

All that said, that New Berlin article is a powder puff propaganda piece by trying to claim that injury accidents are WAY down at the roundabout. 

[jakeroot]

For the record, I don't believe the Moorland Road roundabouts are performing that badly.  A crash rate of 2.0 MEV (which is cited in the article) is right on the cusp of being considered a satisfactory crash rate.  There are roundabouts with crash rates much higher than the Moorland Road roundabouts that would concern me more.  Interchange roundabouts, for whatever reason, seem to have lower crash rates than non-interchange roundabouts and that could explain why Moorland Road roundabouts are performing OK.  I definitely wouldn't consider it the worst in the country.

There's also the point that the northern roundabout is exceptionally large, much larger than any modern roundabout I've seen before. I'm sure that has something to do with it as well (visibility being one of them).

All that said, that New Berlin article is a powder puff propaganda piece by trying to claim that injury accidents are WAY down at the roundabout.

I would guess that the author didn't quite understand the topic.

[dvferyance]

For the record, I don't believe the Moorland Road roundabouts are performing that badly.  A crash rate of 2.0 MEV (which is cited in the article) is right on the cusp of being considered a satisfactory crash rate.  There are roundabouts with crash rates much higher than the Moorland Road roundabouts that would concern me more.  Interchange roundabouts, for whatever reason, seem to have lower crash rates than non-interchange roundabouts and that could explain why Moorland Road roundabouts are performing OK.  I definitely wouldn't consider it the worst in the country. 

All that said, that New Berlin article is a powder puff propaganda piece by trying to claim that injury accidents are WAY down at the roundabout.

There are still problems no doubt. Some mornings traffic backs up on to I-43 I have seen this not once but several times. The SB Moorland turn to Rock Ridge is a nightmare and very confusing. I had a very close call there not too long ago. What bothers me the most is nobody in New Berlin wanted it the DOT should have respected the wishes of the people. After all it's us the residents of New Berlin that have to deal with it not the DOT engineers that were pushing for it. While I am unaware of the crash rates now there I can say there is getting to be more traffic than what they can handle. And when more development kicks in to the south watch out.

[tradephoric]

A local morning show spent a half hour today talking about the crash prone roundabouts in metro Detroit. 

http://www.mediafire.com/download/w2h1dd0n8xey7de/06072016podcastpart1_cutted2.mp3

[AlexandriaVA]

But were they modern? I was going to chalk the accidents up to Midwestern simpletons, but if the fine folks of Indiana can figure out roundabouts, what's holding back Michiganers?

[tradephoric]

^A similar naïve comment was made early on in this thread:

Speaks more to the (in)flexibility of Michigan drivers than it does any inherent safety risk with roundabouts.  New roundabouts elsewhere have seen major drops in the number of crashes.

Crash prone roundabouts throughout the country have been discussed on this thread.  The roundabout at 116th Street & Keystone in Carmel, Indiana has a very high crash rate.  Keep in mind the majority of Carmel roundabouts are either single lane or the simplified 1x2 variety.  The few complex 2x2 roundabouts Carmel do have high crash rates.

[nhoward45]

The term "roundabout" is merely rebranding for the older term, traffic circle.   These were nuisances and traffic hazards in the 1940s and 1950s, and in many areas were replaced with grade separated interchanges or bypassed with freeways.  Traffic circles may be OK in a low speed residential environment, but are dangerous in any heavily trafficked area.  Traffic signals may slow down vehicle flow, but are less risky than traffic circles.  Rebranding changes nothing.  A garbage man is a garbage man, even if rebranded a sanitary engineer.

This is not a regional issue either.  The list of high risk traffic circles includes Southern, Western, Northeastern, and Canadian locations as well as Midwestern ones.

[jakeroot]

The term "roundabout" is merely rebranding for the older term, traffic circle.   These were nuisances and traffic hazards in the 1940s and 1950s, and in many areas were replaced with grade separated interchanges or bypassed with freeways.  Traffic circles may be OK in a low speed residential environment, but are dangerous in any heavily trafficked area.  Traffic signals may slow down vehicle flow, but are less risky than traffic circles.  Rebranding changes nothing.  A garbage man is a garbage man, even if rebranded a sanitary engineer.

This is not a regional issue either.  The list of high risk traffic circles includes Southern, Western, Northeastern, and Canadian locations as well as Midwestern ones.

Let me know when you're done spouting nonsense. Not a single thing you just wrote is even remotely accurate.

[kphoger]

The term "roundabout" is merely rebranding for the older term, traffic circle.   These were nuisances and traffic hazards in the 1940s and 1950s, and in many areas were replaced with grade separated interchanges or bypassed with freeways.  Traffic circles may be OK in a low speed residential environment, but are dangerous in any heavily trafficked area.  Traffic signals may slow down vehicle flow, but are less risky than traffic circles.  Rebranding changes nothing.  A garbage man is a garbage man, even if rebranded a sanitary engineer.

This is not a regional issue either.  The list of high risk traffic circles includes Southern, Western, Northeastern, and Canadian locations as well as Midwestern ones.

Let me know when you're done spouting nonsense. Not a single thing you just wrote is even remotely accurate.

Since you, nhoward45, appear to be a new member, let's make this clearer for you.  A modern roundabout must meet specific design criteria, the most important two being flared approaches and yield upon entry.  These two criteria were certainly not universally implemented in the 1940s and 1950s.

And risk can be analyzed in two ways:  total crashes or severity of crashes.  Roundabouts tend to increase the number of total crashes but diminish the severity of those crashes.  This topic is actually sort of about how good of a job they do at this.  What it looks like, offhand, is that you just jumped into page 19 of a discussion without reading the rest of it.

[nhoward45]

Please explain the difference between traffic circles or roundabouts.

If traffic circles/roundabouts were such a great idea, please explain why highway engineers in last four decades of the 20th Century replaced or bypassed them. 

In Texas, the Harry Hines traffic circle in Dallas was replaced by grade separation at the intersection.  Traffic circles in Fort Worth and Lubbock were bypassed through the construction of Interstate highways. 

[Rothman]

Somebody forgot to do their homework.

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/innovative/roundabouts/

[kphoger]

Please explain the difference between traffic circles or roundabouts.

There's a Google for that.

If traffic circles/roundabouts were such a great idea, please explain why highway engineers in last four decades of the 20th Century replaced or bypassed them.

Because older-style traffic circles had safety issues.  As traffic counts increased, these problems increased in significance.

Traffic circles in Fort Worth and Lubbock were bypassed through the construction of Interstate highways.

Bypassed or replaced?  If they were bypassed, then that would mean the traffic circles are still there.  If they were replaced, then...well, obviously, since Interstates are freeways, and freeways don't have cross-traffic.

[kalvado]

Somebody forgot to do their homework.

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/innovative/roundabouts/

I love to compare roundabouts to an insulin: can be a lifesaver, but needs to be used properly - and definitely not an omnicure.
But unlike insulin, roundabouts are advertised as such...

[US 81]

...

Traffic circles in Fort Worth and Lubbock were bypassed through the construction of Interstate highways.

Bypassed or replaced?  If they were bypassed, then that would mean the traffic circles are still there.  If they were replaced, then...well, obviously, since Interstates are freeways, and freeways don't have cross-traffic.

"Bypassed" is correct for Ft. Worth. Lubbock's was replaced during construction of I-27.

[tradephoric]

Bo and Luke Duke were driving around Romania. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M6plangUrO0