Crash prone 'modern roundabouts'

[jakeroot]

A driver was killed last Tuesday at a roundabout in Liberty Lake, WA after striking a concrete retaining wall in the central island of a roundabout.  They should change the headline to read "Alcohol, speed, and a concrete retaining wall believed to be factor in man's fatal crash into Liberty Lake roundabout". 

Alcohol, speed believed to be factor in man's fatal crash into Liberty Lake roundabout
https://www.khq.com/news/police-alcohol-speed-believed-to-be-factor-in-man-s/article_a40e0da6-e9c4-11e9-af1e-d7c910840c47.html

God dammit. I thought my area was smarter than this. That's a brand new roundabout too.

The other roundabout, just a bit east at Harvard Road, has a brick retaining wall as well: https://goo.gl/maps/3TC5imWQiNZgNdL96  <-- this approach that I've linked is particularly bad. The brick "Welcome to Liberty Lake" sign is directly across from the approach from the westbound I-90 off-ramp. If drivers take this off-ramp, I shall hope they would continue paying enough attention to not hit the roundabout. But it sure would hurt if they did.

[MNHighwayMan]

Yep, let's go ahead and blame the roundabout again, and not the fact that the driver was intoxicated.

[tradephoric]

Yep, let's go ahead and blame the roundabout again, and not the fact that the driver was intoxicated.

Imagine if retractable bollards were installed at signalized intersections that lift up when the light turns red to 'intercept' intoxicated drivers from blowing through the red light.  It might look something like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQ9778Y-rqU

The retractable bollards would be a great safety feature as they would 'force' drivers to stop at the red light. If a bunch of intoxicated drivers are killed crashing into the retractable bollards, you can't blame that on the design.  After all, they shouldn't have run the red light.  But there you go blaming my new design.

[jakeroot]

Yep, let's go ahead and blame the roundabout again, and not the fact that the driver was intoxicated.

Still dead thanks to intersection design, and nothing else. Plenty of people drive drunk all the time without killing themselves or others.

We might be able to sit here and say "well, it's good he killed himself before he killed someone else", but city officials have the duty to protect all citizens, both from each other and themselves, no matter their state of mind. It's why we have seatbelt laws and other shit like that. If you were driving drunk, god forbid, would you be glad that the city designed something that would almost certainly kill you? Last I checked, DUIs were not punishable by death.

[Rothman]

No, if he hadn't been drunk, he would have navigated the intersection safely.  The design is a minimal factor at best in his death.

I find driving drunk one of the most irresponsible activies one can engage in.  The idea that because some who drive drunk make it home in one piece means they are just as safe as any other driver is absurd.

[jeffandnicole]

Yep, let's go ahead and blame the roundabout again, and not the fact that the driver was intoxicated.

Still dead thanks to intersection design, and nothing else. Plenty of people drive drunk all the time without killing themselves or others.

We might be able to sit here and say "well, it's good he killed himself before he killed someone else", but city officials have the duty to protect all citizens, both from each other and themselves, no matter their state of mind. It's why we have seatbelt laws and other shit like that. If you were driving drunk, god forbid, would you be glad that the city designed something that would almost certainly kill you? Last I checked, DUIs were not punishable by death.

Plenty of drunks crash into others at standard intersections.  Plenty of drunks navigate roundabouts without crashing into it.

Honestly, I'm surprised you're defending a drunk driver. A transportation department has a *reasonable* duty to protect drivers from deadly impacts. Which is in the form of speed limits, advisory speeds, etc. There are some things that are meant to protect, such as bollards in front of doors. On the other hand, we don't see guardrails at every telephone pole. Clearly if this guy managed to slam into this roundabout at such a high rate of speed to cause death, it probably saved an innocent life down the road.

[kalvado]

Yep, let's go ahead and blame the roundabout again, and not the fact that the driver was intoxicated.

Still dead thanks to intersection design, and nothing else. Plenty of people drive drunk all the time without killing themselves or others.

We might be able to sit here and say "well, it's good he killed himself before he killed someone else", but city officials have the duty to protect all citizens, both from each other and themselves, no matter their state of mind. It's why we have seatbelt laws and other shit like that. If you were driving drunk, god forbid, would you be glad that the city designed something that would almost certainly kill you? Last I checked, DUIs were not punishable by death.

Plenty of drunks crash into others at standard intersections.  Plenty of drunks navigate roundabouts without crashing into it.

Honestly, I'm surprised you're defending a drunk driver. A transportation department has a *reasonable* duty to protect drivers from deadly impacts. Which is in the form of speed limits, advisory speeds, etc. There are some things that are meant to protect, such as bollards in front of doors. On the other hand, we don't see guardrails at every telephone pole. Clearly if this guy managed to slam into this roundabout at such a high rate of speed to cause death, it probably saved an innocent life down the road.

Yet this is a count of a fatal accident for safety comparison of roundabout vs other designs.

[jeffandnicole]

Yep, let's go ahead and blame the roundabout again, and not the fact that the driver was intoxicated.

Still dead thanks to intersection design, and nothing else. Plenty of people drive drunk all the time without killing themselves or others.

We might be able to sit here and say "well, it's good he killed himself before he killed someone else", but city officials have the duty to protect all citizens, both from each other and themselves, no matter their state of mind. It's why we have seatbelt laws and other shit like that. If you were driving drunk, god forbid, would you be glad that the city designed something that would almost certainly kill you? Last I checked, DUIs were not punishable by death.

Plenty of drunks crash into others at standard intersections.  Plenty of drunks navigate roundabouts without crashing into it.

Honestly, I'm surprised you're defending a drunk driver. A transportation department has a *reasonable* duty to protect drivers from deadly impacts. Which is in the form of speed limits, advisory speeds, etc. There are some things that are meant to protect, such as bollards in front of doors. On the other hand, we don't see guardrails at every telephone pole. Clearly if this guy managed to slam into this roundabout at such a high rate of speed to cause death, it probably saved an innocent life down the road.

Yet this is a count of a fatal accident for safety comparison of roundabout vs other designs.

Except I've yet to see a count of fatales at other intersection types in this discussion. There were approximately 10,800 fatal DUI crashes in 2018.

[kalvado]

Yep, let's go ahead and blame the roundabout again, and not the fact that the driver was intoxicated.

Still dead thanks to intersection design, and nothing else. Plenty of people drive drunk all the time without killing themselves or others.

We might be able to sit here and say "well, it's good he killed himself before he killed someone else", but city officials have the duty to protect all citizens, both from each other and themselves, no matter their state of mind. It's why we have seatbelt laws and other shit like that. If you were driving drunk, god forbid, would you be glad that the city designed something that would almost certainly kill you? Last I checked, DUIs were not punishable by death.

Plenty of drunks crash into others at standard intersections.  Plenty of drunks navigate roundabouts without crashing into it.

Honestly, I'm surprised you're defending a drunk driver. A transportation department has a *reasonable* duty to protect drivers from deadly impacts. Which is in the form of speed limits, advisory speeds, etc. There are some things that are meant to protect, such as bollards in front of doors. On the other hand, we don't see guardrails at every telephone pole. Clearly if this guy managed to slam into this roundabout at such a high rate of speed to cause death, it probably saved an innocent life down the road.

Yet this is a count of a fatal accident for safety comparison of roundabout vs other designs.

Except I've yet to see a count of fatales at other intersection types in this discussion. There were approximately 10,800 fatal DUI crashes in 2018.

ANY safety review of ANY intersection will consider a total number of crashes - fatal, injury, property-only - without separation into drunk/sober domain. Alcohol statistics is done only on a higher level, area-wise and not for specific locations.
Feel free to look up material on your state DOT site, you can usually find location-specific data published before major intersection reconstructions.

[tradephoric]

Except I've yet to see a count of fatales at other intersection types in this discussion. There were approximately 10,800 fatal DUI crashes in 2018.

With so many drunk drivers on the road it should be assumed that a drunk is going to plow through the middle of a roundabout (specifically at rural and suburban roundabouts where approach speeds are higher).  The question is do we want that drunk driver to strike a 6 foot tall retaining wall (likely killing the driver & vehicle) or a 6 inch tall curb (likely killing just the vehicle).  In one scenario, the drunk driver is laying on a gurney and in the other they are sitting in the back of a cop car. 

When someone has a cavalier attitude when a drunk driver is killed at a roundabout, it gives them an excuse not to look at the overall roundabout design.  But these roundabout crashes aren't limited to drunks.  News stories on this thread include an elderly couple in California plowing through the middle of a roundabout and a distracted teenager plowing through the middle of a roundabout while they were texting.  Maybe every time someone hears about a roundabout fatality, they should assume the driver was distracted and not drunk if it means they would consider the roundabout design and how it could be made safer.

[webny99]

Sure, the roundabout should have been designed differently, but undeniably, the driver was in the wrong for driving while intoxicated.
Those two are not mutually exclusive. It took both problems for this incident to occur.

However, imagine if someone had fainted or passed out while approaching the roundabout, with the same result. Then we would only be talking about the intersection design, and not the larger issue of whatever caused the person to be in the state they were in.
Long story short: both problems need to be addressed. But depending on the specifics of why the driver couldn't navigate properly, the intersection design could very well be the bigger problem at hand.

[kalvado]

Sure, the roundabout should have been designed differently, but undeniably, the driver was in the wrong for driving while intoxicated.
Those two are not mutually exclusive. It took both problems for this incident to occur.

However, imagine if someone had fainted or passed out while approaching the roundabout, with the same result. Then we would only be talking about the intersection design, and not the larger issue of whatever caused the person to be in the state they were in.
Long story short: both problems need to be addressed. But depending on the specifics of why the driver couldn't navigate properly, the intersection design could very well be the bigger problem at hand.

If you will, traffic control generally operates at amazing efficiency. accident count at regular intersection is something 1 crash in a million, no question about that.
Most of crashes are one-off events: drunk, tired, sleepy, lapse of attention, doing something stupid, mechanical failure...  And hence need to accommodate those, even if that looks excessive

[tradephoric]

For those who defend retaining walls in the central islands of roundabouts, I'm waiting for you to comment on my retractable bollard traffic signal design.  Any drunk driver who attempts to blow through a red light would be stopped "dead" in their tracks and be prevented from t-boning another vehicle within the intersection.  It would actually be more effective than a retaining wall in the central island of a roundabout as the bollards would protect both near-side and far-side vehicles from being t-boned (whereas the central island retaining wall would only protect far-side drivers at the roundabout).  My retractable bollard traffic signal design would be much safer than a conventional traffic signal, as the bollards would 'force' drivers to come to a stop at red lights!

[jamess]

Had the roundabout not been there, that driver could have t-boned a innocent car going across a standard intersection.

Im glad that roundabout was there to save innocent lives.

[kphoger]

For those who defend retaining walls in the central islands of roundabouts,

I don't think anyone is defending them.

Had the roundabout not been there, that driver could have t-boned a innocent car going across a standard intersection.

Im glad that roundabout was there to save innocent lives.

OK, scratch that...

[kalvado]

Had the roundabout not been there, that driver could have t-boned a innocent car going across a standard intersection.

Im glad that roundabout was there to save innocent lives.

This is a good logic... at a first glance. Moral implication of such social Darwinism tend to become dire, though.
Just think that at some point you may become a target of such elimination process. For example, you get some infection - and instead of qualified medical help, you get euthanized to avoid infecting people around you.

[sparker]

Had the roundabout not been there, that driver could have t-boned a innocent car going across a standard intersection.

Im glad that roundabout was there to save innocent lives.

This is a good logic... at a first glance. Moral implication of such social Darwinism tend to become dire, though.
Just think that at some point you may become a target of such elimination process. For example, you get some infection - and instead of qualified medical help, you get euthanized to avoid infecting people around you.

Whole shitload of '70's films (mostly of the B or B+ grade variety) exploring (exploiting?) this concept (e.g. 1977's Cassandra Crossing).  Nothing like sending a whole trainload of probable infected persons off a trestle to the bottom of a canyon somewhere in Poland!

[tradephoric]

Had the roundabout not been there, that driver could have t-boned a innocent car going across a standard intersection.

Im glad that roundabout was there to save innocent lives.

The argument wasn't whether the roundabout should be there or not but rather should retaining walls be included in the central islands of rural and suburban roundabouts.    A retaining wall does help protect innocent drivers who are circulating the roundabout on the far-side of the retaining wall from being struck when a driver blows straight through the middle of a roundabout.  The downside is any out of control driver who strikes the retaining wall in the central island at high speed is likely to die. 

The reality is fatal crashes at roundabouts involving 2 or more vehicles is rare despite the fact that there are thousands of roundabouts in this country without retaining walls in the central island to "˜intercept' out of control vehicles.  Of the 46 known fatal crashes at roundabouts that occurred from 2005 to 2013 reviewed by the FHWA, only 8 included multiple vehicles (and 5 of the 8 involved vulnerable road users riding motorcycles, bicycles, or golf carts).   https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/innovative/roundabouts/docs/fhwasa15072.pdf  Here is one of the only news report I could find where an innocent driver who was correctly navigating through the roundabout was struck and killed by another vehicle.  In this case a retaining wall in the central island wouldn't have saved the innocent driver, as the 'out of control' driver was driving the wrong way through the roundabout.
 
Wrong-way crash kills woman in Shiloh-Grand roundabout
https://billingsgazette.com/news/local/wrong-way-crash-kills-woman-in-shiloh-grand-roundabout/article_fce09623-e051-549d-af83-de7dfd4e28ad.html

[tradephoric]

On April 2, 2006 during the morning daylight, a fatal crash occurred at the Douglas Ave/Sycamore St roundabout just outside of downtown Wichita when a driver struck the central island retaining wall.  The surrounding streets have low speed limits and there is on-street parking near by.  I'm not opposed to seeing this massive clock tower in the central island of this roundabout (if the city feels like this beautifies the area, go for it!).  This is an example of how you can't prevent all fatal crashes.  But this is a much different example than having a retaining wall at the Highways 12/113 roundabout in California that took the lives of an elderly couple a few weeks ago.

[kphoger]

On April 2, 2006 during the morning daylight, a fatal crash occurred at the Douglas Ave/Sycamore St roundabout just outside of downtown Wichita when a driver struck the central island retaining wall.  The surrounding streets have low speed limits and there is on-street parking near by.  I'm not opposed to seeing this massive clock tower in the central island of this roundabout (if the city feels like this beautifies the area, go for it!).  This is an example of how you can't prevent all fatal crashes.  But this is a much different example than having a retaining wall at the Highways 12/113 roundabout in California that took the lives of an elderly couple a few weeks ago.

That roundabout is my stomping grounds.  My church is one block away.  A person would have to be drunk to hit that central island.  Not only are the speed limits low, but the north-south street has very little traffic and practically nobody who isn't already familiar with the area, while the east-west street is a popular shopping/dining street with heavy foot traffic.  Furthermore, the giant clock tower and small diameter are huge cues to slow your speed way down, not to mention the fact that there's a pretty steady flow of traffic through the roundabout to watch out for too.

[tradephoric]

Pretty insane video of a driver crashing and rolling their vehicle after flying over a roundabout in Dundee, Scottland:

Car flies over a roundabout and smashes to the ground before rolling three times in horror crash
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7613113/Car-flies-roundabout-smashes-ground-rolling-three-times-horror-crash.html

[kalvado]

Pretty insane video of a driver crashing and rolling their vehicle after flying over a roundabout in Dundee, Scottland:

Car flies over a roundabout and smashes to the ground before rolling three times in horror crash
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7613113/Car-flies-roundabout-smashes-ground-rolling-three-times-horror-crash.html

Looking at the video and at the spot on google maps... Littered with 40 km/h speed limits and camera enforcement threats...
Are we sure this is an actual thing and not a stunt?

[jakeroot]

Statues are being added to the WA-14 Washougal Roundabouts. Both are now open, and nearly complete.

This photo is from The Columbian newspaper:

[tradephoric]

Quite an interesting roundabout design included as part of the new I-10 / Loop 1604 interchange in San Antonio, Texas:

[jakeroot]

I'm not usually one to get all riled up about path overlap. But, if I were, this proposed design would have me shaking in me boots!

OT: Only Texas would propose such a mind-boggling rebuild of a simple cloverleaf. Holy shit!