Crash prone 'modern roundabouts'

[Rothman]

I don't see a lack of engineering skill in the U.S.

Two recent R1 projects - Washington ave ext and  7-787  interchange were rebuilt to original lane layout, if not to original blueprints. Some lane realignment was pretty obvious thing to do.I guess all engineering genius from R1 was absorbed by Exit3 project?

You can confirm there was no political and/or financial influence on those decisions? What was the intent of the project pavement rehab or reconstruction? Money may not have been available for the desirable reconstruction.

those were not minor pavement rehab, those were deep reconstructions. Lane realignment within existing footprint would be pretty straightforward no extra cost task.
In at least one of these projects,  traffic improvement was an objective as NYSDOT even took up an unbearable task of synchronizing traffic lights.  All 3 of them. Apparently, they gave up after realizing this is too much of engineering work to do. 

As for structural engineering.. I can only pray it works better than traffic engineering.
On a grand scheme of things,  professional growth comes with practice. If lane realignment becomes too much of a task to do, then what do you expect in terms of professional growth?

I still don't know what you're getting at.  Both projects are fine as is.

They are just so-so, ignoring traffic pattern changes over the decades, failing to use a chance to improve at a minimal cost (if any additional cost at all), and failing to reach some of published objectives - like synchronizing traffic lights.
Yes, it is a passing grade - work was performed using 20+ blueprints. WHo cares?

The only issue I'm aware of along there was the intersection with New Karner and there was no funding to deal with that completely (i.e., the backup turning right onto New Karner from Wash. Ave. Ext. WB).

In terms of traffic signal synchronization, I wonder if that made it into the design approval document.  I imagine fiscal constraints came into play there as well, especially given the large share of local funds put on the project.

And I saw - with my own eyes - how intersection by wallmart was rebuilt without a slightest though. And I saw multiple iterations of synchronizations attempts along Washington - to the point I was ready to pull over to explain folks what is being done wrong...  That was an epic try, I should say.

You weren't on the design squad and therefore I doubt that you know that the project went forward without thought and given my experience, I find the idea of a project to be designed without thought to be ludicrous. 

The Walmart intersection operates like it did before.  I don't see an engineering issue there.

I don't know what went on regarding the synchronization if it happened as you described.  If it was required in the contract, then it would have been taken care of.  A contractor cannot "just give up" on implementing a contract.

All I can say is that I haven't come across any examples of engineering incompetence very often -- if at all -- during my career.  I have personally witnessed engineers having to design less than the preferred treatments due to fiscal constraints very often, though (I might even say constantly).  So, if an engineer not in the know comes along after a project and whines about the treatment being inadequate, I would place my bet on fiscal constraints rather than lack of skill.  In fact, you might even say that a higher level of skill is needed to do the best you can with the available funds (as opposed to thinking there was an unlimited pot to draw from).

(personal opinion emphasized)

[ScottRAB]

There have been at least 6 trucks that have tipped over at Worthington, MN roundabouts since 2015.  Now they are going to refine the curbing to try to prevent these truck tip-overs.  Hopefully whatever they do helps.

Roundabout redesign will improve Worthington's traffic circles
https://www.dglobe.com/business/transportation/4885702-Roundabout-redesign-will-improve-Worthingtons-traffic-circles

Since a recent study found a majority of truck drivers don't understand how to drive a modern roundabout, it stands to reason most drivers don't understand how a truck is supposed to drive a modern roundabout.

Modern roundabouts are designed for trucks, large vehicles, and trailer towing vehicles by including the center flat area around the circle.  It's not a sidewalk, it's called a truck apron, and it's for trucks to begin a sharp right or end a left or U-turn on.  But they should obey the warning speed and know their vehicle.

Roundabout Trucks Videos:
Million mile driver: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4jV5MxCwGY&feature=youtu.be
STAA, Porterville, CA: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zPsUisOz_c&t=6s
FHWA: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nVzsC2fOQw 
Washington County, WI: http://tinyurl.com/trucksRABwi
U-turn: http://tinyurl.com/rabtruckuturn 
Windsor-Essex Parkway, Canada: http://tinyurl.com/windsoressexRAB
Washington DOT simulation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JI0L2AolOCQ
Washington DOT US2/Rice Rd:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P3k65uS5-EE
Oregon DOT tests: Deschutes County Fairgrounds  https://tinyurl.com/y7yfpw5q
   Portland Meadows Parking lot  https://tinyurl.com/ycxpqf3u
   Medford: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kyenfyx_g0o
Opelika, AL: http://opelika-al.gov/CivicMedia?VID=3#player
Baker Road at Dan Hoey, Washtenaw County: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Re-uTDOoc3k&feature=youtu.be
Alaska DOT: http://dot.alaska.gov/nreg/danby-wembley/
Florida DOT: https://www.fdot.gov/agencyresources/roundabouts/index.shtm
Truck Apron how to: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jGM8UGfgeMg
Trucks in action, Green Bay: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jz54OFvaTMw

Trucks Use Both Lanes, just like at other intersections:
Anderson, CA: https://goo.gl/maps/kXoMwuF67GHAQqZa8

[DaBigE]

I don't see a lack of engineering skill in the U.S.

Two recent R1 projects - Washington ave ext and  7-787  interchange were rebuilt to original lane layout, if not to original blueprints. Some lane realignment was pretty obvious thing to do.I guess all engineering genius from R1 was absorbed by Exit3 project?

You can confirm there was no political and/or financial influence on those decisions? What was the intent of the project pavement rehab or reconstruction? Money may not have been available for the desirable reconstruction.

those were not minor pavement rehab, those were deep reconstructions. Lane realignment within existing footprint would be pretty straightforward no extra cost task.
In at least one of these projects,  traffic improvement was an objective as NYSDOT even took up an unbearable task of synchronizing traffic lights.  All 3 of them. Apparently, they gave up after realizing this is too much of engineering work to do. 

As for structural engineering.. I can only pray it works better than traffic engineering.
On a grand scheme of things,  professional growth comes with practice. If lane realignment becomes too much of a task to do, then what do you expect in terms of professional growth?

I still don't know what you're getting at.  Both projects are fine as is.

They are just so-so, ignoring traffic pattern changes over the decades, failing to use a chance to improve at a minimal cost (if any additional cost at all), and failing to reach some of published objectives - like synchronizing traffic lights.
Yes, it is a passing grade - work was performed using 20+ blueprints. WHo cares?

The only issue I'm aware of along there was the intersection with New Karner and there was no funding to deal with that completely (i.e., the backup turning right onto New Karner from Wash. Ave. Ext. WB).

In terms of traffic signal synchronization, I wonder if that made it into the design approval document.  I imagine fiscal constraints came into play there as well, especially given the large share of local funds put on the project.

And I saw - with my own eyes - how intersection by wallmart was rebuilt without a slightest though. And I saw multiple iterations of synchronizations attempts along Washington - to the point I was ready to pull over to explain folks what is being done wrong...  That was an epic try, I should say.

You weren't on the design squad and therefore I doubt that you know that the project went forward without thought and given my experience, I find the idea of a project to be designed without thought to be ludicrous. 

The Walmart intersection operates like it did before.  I don't see an engineering issue there.

I don't know what went on regarding the synchronization if it happened as you described.  If it was required in the contract, then it would have been taken care of.  A contractor cannot "just give up" on implementing a contract.

All I can say is that I haven't come across any examples of engineering incompetence very often -- if at all -- during my career.  I have personally witnessed engineers having to design less than the preferred treatments due to fiscal constraints very often, though (I might even say constantly).  So, if an engineer not in the know comes along after a project and whines about the treatment being inadequate, I would place my bet on fiscal constraints rather than lack of skill.  In fact, you might even say that a higher level of skill is needed to do the best you can with the available funds (as opposed to thinking there was an unlimited pot to draw from).

(personal opinion emphasized)

This is exactly why I asked about political and/or fiscal constraints earlier. Armchair engineers are about as bad as armchair quarterbacks. What looks stupid on the surface >90% of the time is not what the engineer wanted, but had to do because of the higher-ups. This is why I mentioned several pages ago about roadway design being a balancing act: safety, design standards, funding, and politics all play a role. I have yet to encounter a project that has ever gone 100% per the engineers' preferred design.

[Rothman]

I don't see a lack of engineering skill in the U.S.

Two recent R1 projects - Washington ave ext and  7-787  interchange were rebuilt to original lane layout, if not to original blueprints. Some lane realignment was pretty obvious thing to do.I guess all engineering genius from R1 was absorbed by Exit3 project?

You can confirm there was no political and/or financial influence on those decisions? What was the intent of the project pavement rehab or reconstruction? Money may not have been available for the desirable reconstruction.

those were not minor pavement rehab, those were deep reconstructions. Lane realignment within existing footprint would be pretty straightforward no extra cost task.
In at least one of these projects,  traffic improvement was an objective as NYSDOT even took up an unbearable task of synchronizing traffic lights.  All 3 of them. Apparently, they gave up after realizing this is too much of engineering work to do. 

As for structural engineering.. I can only pray it works better than traffic engineering.
On a grand scheme of things,  professional growth comes with practice. If lane realignment becomes too much of a task to do, then what do you expect in terms of professional growth?

I still don't know what you're getting at.  Both projects are fine as is.

They are just so-so, ignoring traffic pattern changes over the decades, failing to use a chance to improve at a minimal cost (if any additional cost at all), and failing to reach some of published objectives - like synchronizing traffic lights.
Yes, it is a passing grade - work was performed using 20+ blueprints. WHo cares?

The only issue I'm aware of along there was the intersection with New Karner and there was no funding to deal with that completely (i.e., the backup turning right onto New Karner from Wash. Ave. Ext. WB).

In terms of traffic signal synchronization, I wonder if that made it into the design approval document.  I imagine fiscal constraints came into play there as well, especially given the large share of local funds put on the project.

And I saw - with my own eyes - how intersection by wallmart was rebuilt without a slightest though. And I saw multiple iterations of synchronizations attempts along Washington - to the point I was ready to pull over to explain folks what is being done wrong...  That was an epic try, I should say.

You weren't on the design squad and therefore I doubt that you know that the project went forward without thought and given my experience, I find the idea of a project to be designed without thought to be ludicrous. 

The Walmart intersection operates like it did before.  I don't see an engineering issue there.

I don't know what went on regarding the synchronization if it happened as you described.  If it was required in the contract, then it would have been taken care of.  A contractor cannot "just give up" on implementing a contract.

All I can say is that I haven't come across any examples of engineering incompetence very often -- if at all -- during my career.  I have personally witnessed engineers having to design less than the preferred treatments due to fiscal constraints very often, though (I might even say constantly).  So, if an engineer not in the know comes along after a project and whines about the treatment being inadequate, I would place my bet on fiscal constraints rather than lack of skill.  In fact, you might even say that a higher level of skill is needed to do the best you can with the available funds (as opposed to thinking there was an unlimited pot to draw from).

(personal opinion emphasized)

This is exactly why I asked about political and/or fiscal constraints earlier. Armchair engineers are about as bad as armchair quarterbacks. What looks stupid on the surface >90% of the time is not what the engineer wanted, but had to do because of the higher-ups. This is why I mentioned several pages ago about roadway design being a balancing act: safety, design standards, funding, and politics all play a role. I have yet to encounter a project that has ever gone 100% per the engineers' preferred design.

Yep, I know we're on the same page.

[jakeroot]

You're thinking of a roundabout design as a one-size-fits-all design.  A roundabout in a rural area with little traffic may be able to obtain faster speeds than one in an urban area.

It has nothing to do with urban vs rural. It's a simple fact of physics. More velocity results in more force resulting in more injury. The point of conflict doesn't change just because you're in a rural setting.

Did you even bother to read my post? Because I get the feeling you didn't:

speed does not exist in a vacuum. It has to be weighed against other hazards. By increasing the ICD, you can get rid of the truck apron, which may have its own benefits (perhaps outweighing the benefits of tighter circles). Remember that speed alone is not dangerous; it's suddenly coming to a stop that gets you. If roundabouts can be designed for high speed operation, why not? It certainly makes sense along roads with existing high speeds.

My understanding with designing low-speed roundabouts is that the low speeds decrease braking distance and improve reaction time, but both of these things seem to be the result of classic American "everyone sucks so make it as easy as possible" design philosophy. I generally defend this philosophy, but how can we be sure that emergency stops and reaction time concerns aren't symptoms related to the tightness of many of these circles? How do we know that reactionary/emergency movements wouldn't be reduced at roundabouts with larger ICDs? How likely might it be that larger roundabouts would have fewer truck tip-overs? Would larger roundabouts reduce judgement errors? Would we see fewer property-damage collisions (a major issue at roundabouts)?

I'm not asking these questions as though anyone has answers, but I steadfastly refuse to accept any design standards as perfect, especially when there are totally different designs all across the planet for the same situation. As an example, in Germany (p 7), it's accepted that rural roundabouts do not need aprons. The UK also does not seem to use them.

[kphoger]

The skill of the American driver has decreased with ... less rigorous drivers ed ...

Drivers' ed is less rigorous now than it used to be?

[DaBigE]

You're thinking of a roundabout design as a one-size-fits-all design.  A roundabout in a rural area with little traffic may be able to obtain faster speeds than one in an urban area.

It has nothing to do with urban vs rural. It's a simple fact of physics. More velocity results in more force resulting in more injury. The point of conflict doesn't change just because you're in a rural setting.

Did you even bother to read my post? Because I get the feeling you didn't:

speed does not exist in a vacuum. It has to be weighed against other hazards. By increasing the ICD, you can get rid of the truck apron, which may have its own benefits (perhaps outweighing the benefits of tighter circles). Remember that speed alone is not dangerous; it's suddenly coming to a stop that gets you. If roundabouts can be designed for high speed operation, why not? It certainly makes sense along roads with existing high speeds.

My understanding with designing low-speed roundabouts is that the low speeds decrease braking distance and improve reaction time, but both of these things seem to be the result of classic American "everyone sucks so make it as easy as possible" design philosophy. I generally defend this philosophy, but how can we be sure that emergency stops and reaction time concerns aren't symptoms related to the tightness of many of these circles? How do we know that reactionary/emergency movements wouldn't be reduced at roundabouts with larger ICDs? How likely might it be that larger roundabouts would have fewer truck tip-overs? Would larger roundabouts reduce judgement errors? Would we see fewer property-damage collisions (a major issue at roundabouts)?

I'm not asking these questions as though anyone has answers, but I steadfastly refuse to accept any design standards as perfect, especially when there are totally different designs all across the planet for the same situation. As an example, in Germany (p 7), it's accepted that rural roundabouts do not need aprons. The UK also does not seem to use them.

Funny, cause I get the same feeling about you. Same principle as designing an urban 4-lane arterial at 35-mph vs a 4-lane arterial at 55-mph. Have the same intersection angle crash in both cases, and the one with the higher initial speed will have the greater injury severity. In both cases, the roadway was designed for the appropriate speed. In both cases, they have the same weak link at the intersection. Yes, the sudden stop is what gets you, but it's the initial speed that determines how bad the end-result is going to be.

[DaBigE]

My understanding with designing low-speed roundabouts is that the low speeds decrease braking distance and improve reaction time, but both of these things seem to be the result of classic American "everyone sucks so make it as easy as possible" design philosophy. I generally defend this philosophy, but how can we be sure that emergency stops and reaction time concerns aren't symptoms related to the tightness of many of these circles? How do we know that reactionary/emergency movements wouldn't be reduced at roundabouts with larger ICDs? How likely might it be that larger roundabouts would have fewer truck tip-overs? Would larger roundabouts reduce judgement errors? Would we see fewer property-damage collisions (a major issue at roundabouts)?

I'm not asking these questions as though anyone has answers, but I steadfastly refuse to accept any design standards as perfect, especially when there are totally different designs all across the planet for the same situation. As an example, in Germany (p 7), it's accepted that rural roundabouts do not need aprons. The UK also does not seem to use them.

My recollection of every post in the past 95+ pages isn't the sharpest, but I don't seem to recall anyone ever claiming any design standards were final, let alone perfect. Wisconsin is on their third iteration of their design guidelines. A fourth may not be too far down the line.

It isn't necessarily the presence of the truck apron that is causing the problems. A few of these incidents can be attributed to a poorly designed cross-slope of the circulatory roadway. As far as design standards go, there are varying opinions on how the circulatory roadway should be sloped. A combination of trucks entering too fast, load shift, and crown location contribute to the trucks tipping over. Truck aprons will likely be a fixture of single-lane roundabouts for the foreseeable future, as the circulatory roadway can only get so wide before people try to treat it as two lanes. With the appropriate truck laws, truck aprons could easily disappear from multilane roundabouts.

[DaBigE]

The skill of the American driver has decreased with ... less rigorous drivers ed ...

Drivers' ed is less rigorous now than it used to be?

That's a my-bad...I meant to edit that before finishing my post. That should have said "less rigorous drivers licensing" as in the knowledge tests have gotten easier even in just the 20-years I've had a license.

[kphoger]

The skill of the American driver has decreased with ... less rigorous drivers ed ...

Drivers' ed is less rigorous now than it used to be?

That's a my-bad...I meant to edit that before finishing my post. That should have said "less rigorous drivers licensing" as in the knowledge tests have gotten easier even in just the 20-years I've had a license.

That surprises me.  I expected the opposite to be true.

[tradephoric]

DaBigE were you able to track down crash data for the triple-lane roundabout at Taylor Street and Shawano Avenue near Green Bay?  It's a major roundabout just off Highway 41 that was constructed nearly 10 years ago yet I can't find crash data on it.  What am i doing wrong here where I can't find any data?  Should not be this difficult (of course maybe I'm just an idiot and don't know what resource to look up... more likely perhaps!).

[tradephoric]

OMG!  A truck tipped over at a Portage Wisconsin roundabout yesterday and crushed a car!  Ok maybe a slight fabrication as the truck was hauling salvaged cars, but with all these truck tip-overs you definitely wouldn't want one to tip over onto your vehicle.  That would end badly! 

Semi spills salvage cars after tipping over in Portage roundabout

https://www.nbc15.com/content/news/Semi-spills-salvage-cars-after-tipping-over-in-Portage-roundabout-567430951.html

[tradephoric]

Another roundabout crash that demonstrates how dangerous they can be when approaching them too quickly.  If roundabouts force drivers to slow down then a sharp curve along a roadway forces drivers to slow down too.  But how often are sharp curves along a roadway touted for their safety benefits by traffic safety engineers? 

Woman killed in single-car rollover at Kennewick roundabout identified
https://www.nbcrightnow.com/news/woman-killed-in-single-car-rollover-at-kennewick-roundabout-identified/article_36cf7194-4374-11ea-b2c9-4bcfe1f06a0f.html

At about 3 a.m. on Jan. 30, Bricia Villasenor-Botello, 29, was driving westbound on 10th Avenue. She failed to negotiate the roundabout at Steptoe Street and her car left the roadway to the west. It rolled several times and crashed through two backyard fences. 

[DaBigE]

The skill of the American driver has decreased with ... less rigorous drivers ed ...

Drivers' ed is less rigorous now than it used to be?

That's a my-bad...I meant to edit that before finishing my post. That should have said "less rigorous drivers licensing" as in the knowledge tests have gotten easier even in just the 20-years I've had a license.

That surprises me.  I expected the opposite to be true.

That makes two of us. Because of the way the local DMV office was arranged, you could watch people take their computerized exams while waiting in line. Some of the questions I think should have been an automatic failure if you got them wrong (basic sign and safety information). Luckily, I think there's a number of drivers' ed programs over-prepare their students, but then there's the law of averages. And not all states require a formal drivers' ed program to sit for a test. This report on drivers' ed around the US, while dated, may be surprising to some, especially Table 2.

[kphoger]

If roundabouts force drivers to slow down then a sharp curve along a roadway forces drivers to slow down too.  But how often are sharp curves along a roadway touted for their safety benefits by traffic safety engineers? 

Well put.

[kphoger]

Because of the way the local DMV office was arranged, you could watch people take their computerized exams while waiting in line. Some of the questions I think should have been an automatic failure if you got them wrong (basic sign and safety information).

When I got my DL back in the mid-90s, there was no such thing as an "automatic failure" question on the test.  It was 25 questions, as I recall, and you could get up to five wrong.  It didn't matter which questions you got wrong.

[DaBigE]

Because of the way the local DMV office was arranged, you could watch people take their computerized exams while waiting in line. Some of the questions I think should have been an automatic failure if you got them wrong (basic sign and safety information).

When I got my DL back in the mid-90s, there was no such thing as an "automatic failure" question on the test.  It was 25 questions, as I recall, and you could get up to five wrong.  It didn't matter which questions you got wrong.

To the best of my knowledge, I don't think we have automatic failure questions, but I think there should be some. If you have issues with a stop sign on the exam, you shouldn't be behind the wheel.

[jeffandnicole]

In at least one of these projects,  traffic improvement was an objective as NYSDOT even took up an unbearable task of synchronizing traffic lights.  All 3 of them. Apparently, they gave up after realizing this is too much of engineering work to do. 

If driving straight thru all 3 lights, how many do you normally get stopped at?

[kphoger]

Because of the way the local DMV office was arranged, you could watch people take their computerized exams while waiting in line. Some of the questions I think should have been an automatic failure if you got them wrong (basic sign and safety information).

When I got my DL back in the mid-90s, there was no such thing as an "automatic failure" question on the test.  It was 25 questions, as I recall, and you could get up to five wrong.  It didn't matter which questions you got wrong.

To the best of my knowledge, I don't think we have automatic failure questions, but I think there should be some. If you have issues with a stop sign on the exam, you shouldn't be behind the wheel.

OK, that may be, but that doesn't mean the tests have gotten easier.

[kalvado]

I don't see a lack of engineering skill in the U.S.

Two recent R1 projects - Washington ave ext and  7-787  interchange were rebuilt to original lane layout, if not to original blueprints. Some lane realignment was pretty obvious thing to do.I guess all engineering genius from R1 was absorbed by Exit3 project?

You can confirm there was no political and/or financial influence on those decisions? What was the intent of the project pavement rehab or reconstruction? Money may not have been available for the desirable reconstruction.

those were not minor pavement rehab, those were deep reconstructions. Lane realignment within existing footprint would be pretty straightforward no extra cost task.
In at least one of these projects,  traffic improvement was an objective as NYSDOT even took up an unbearable task of synchronizing traffic lights.  All 3 of them. Apparently, they gave up after realizing this is too much of engineering work to do. 

As for structural engineering.. I can only pray it works better than traffic engineering.
On a grand scheme of things,  professional growth comes with practice. If lane realignment becomes too much of a task to do, then what do you expect in terms of professional growth?

I still don't know what you're getting at.  Both projects are fine as is.

They are just so-so, ignoring traffic pattern changes over the decades, failing to use a chance to improve at a minimal cost (if any additional cost at all), and failing to reach some of published objectives - like synchronizing traffic lights.
Yes, it is a passing grade - work was performed using 20+ blueprints. WHo cares?

The only issue I'm aware of along there was the intersection with New Karner and there was no funding to deal with that completely (i.e., the backup turning right onto New Karner from Wash. Ave. Ext. WB).

In terms of traffic signal synchronization, I wonder if that made it into the design approval document.  I imagine fiscal constraints came into play there as well, especially given the large share of local funds put on the project.

And I saw - with my own eyes - how intersection by wallmart was rebuilt without a slightest though. And I saw multiple iterations of synchronizations attempts along Washington - to the point I was ready to pull over to explain folks what is being done wrong...  That was an epic try, I should say.

You weren't on the design squad and therefore I doubt that you know that the project went forward without thought and given my experience, I find the idea of a project to be designed without thought to be ludicrous. 

The Walmart intersection operates like it did before.  I don't see an engineering issue there.

I don't know what went on regarding the synchronization if it happened as you described.  If it was required in the contract, then it would have been taken care of.  A contractor cannot "just give up" on implementing a contract.

All I can say is that I haven't come across any examples of engineering incompetence very often -- if at all -- during my career.  I have personally witnessed engineers having to design less than the preferred treatments due to fiscal constraints very often, though (I might even say constantly).  So, if an engineer not in the know comes along after a project and whines about the treatment being inadequate, I would place my bet on fiscal constraints rather than lack of skill.  In fact, you might even say that a higher level of skill is needed to do the best you can with the available funds (as opposed to thinking there was an unlimited pot to draw from).

(personal opinion emphasized)

Welcome to upstate NY. You must be new here?

[kalvado]

In at least one of these projects,  traffic improvement was an objective as NYSDOT even took up an unbearable task of synchronizing traffic lights.  All 3 of them. Apparently, they gave up after realizing this is too much of engineering work to do. 

If driving straight thru all 3 lights, how many do you normally get stopped at?

all 3. I actually tried to look at the phase of a signal ahead and make it non-stop, but it _never_ worked for me.

[tradephoric]

Driver in California drives straight through a roundabout at high speed and sends a big bolder flying.

VIDEO: Car goes airborne after crashing into roundabout in California
https://abc7chicago.com/5930794/

Car goes airborne after smashing into a roundabout
https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2020/02/14/car-crash-airborne-long-beach-california-zw-orig.cnn

[jamess]

Driver in California drives straight through a roundabout at high speed and sends a big bolder flying.

VIDEO: Car goes airborne after crashing into roundabout in California
https://abc7chicago.com/5930794/

Car goes airborne after smashing into a roundabout
https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2020/02/14/car-crash-airborne-long-beach-california-zw-orig.cnn

Tweet allows you to see the video without ads:

https://twitter.com/ABC7/status/1228087101381439488

More of a traffic circle than an actual roundabout.

Another job well done in getting a dangerous driver off the road before they could kill someone.

[jakeroot]

Damn, they would have cleared the circle without those freakin' rocks!

It was built two years ago, according to Google Earth (can't find any online documents).

Another job well done in getting a dangerous driver off the road before they could kill someone.

Better no crashes at all.

[DaBigE]

Damn, they would have cleared the circle without those freakin' rocks!

It was built two years ago, according to Google Earth (can't find any online documents).

Another job well done in getting a dangerous driver off the road before they could kill someone.

Better no crashes at all.

Even better if no one drove recklessly. They were bound to hit something or someone eventually.