Crash prone 'modern roundabouts'

[kphoger]

Bottom line: no, people didn't forget how to drive in 2020; but they definitely got much less afraid of being pulled over.

Wasn't my question to begin with.  I asked "did people forget how to drive in 2019".

[jakeroot]

Bottom line: no, people didn't forget how to drive in 2020; but they definitely got much less afraid of being pulled over.

Wasn't my question to begin with.  I asked "did people forget how to drive in 2019".

You kind of said both...

Did people, like, forget how to drive in 2019 or something?   

I recall having heard multiple times that crashes went up during the early days of the pandemic, not down.

But you definitely didn't say anything about people forgetting to drive in 2020. Although you kind of implied that crashes went up in 2020.

[kalvado]

Bottom line: no, people didn't forget how to drive in 2020; but they definitely got much less afraid of being pulled over.

Wasn't my question to begin with.  I asked "did people forget how to drive in 2019".

You kind of said both...

Did people, like, forget how to drive in 2019 or something?   

I recall having heard multiple times that crashes went up during the early days of the pandemic, not down.

But you definitely didn't say anything about people forgetting to drive in 2020. Although you kind of implied that crashes went up in 2020.

And at least on fatal accident side, 2020 and 2021 are much worse than 2018 and 2019. 2022  started high as well.
I wonder if that is enforcement or something else...

[CtrlAltDel]

Bottom line: no, people didn't forget how to drive in 2020; but they definitely got much less afraid of being pulled over.

Wasn't my question to begin with.  I asked "did people forget how to drive in 2019".

You kind of said both...

Did people, like, forget how to drive in 2019 or something?   

I recall having heard multiple times that crashes went up during the early days of the pandemic, not down.

But you definitely didn't say anything about people forgetting to drive in 2020. Although you kind of implied that crashes went up in 2020.

And at least on fatal accident side, 2020 and 2021 are much worse than 2018 and 2019. 2022  started high as well.
I wonder if that is enforcement or something else...

I won't speak specifically for roundabouts but traffic fatalities did go up in 2020:

2019   36,355
2020   38,824   7.1%
2021   42,915   10.5%

[kalvado]

Bottom line: no, people didn't forget how to drive in 2020; but they definitely got much less afraid of being pulled over.

Wasn't my question to begin with.  I asked "did people forget how to drive in 2019".

You kind of said both...

Did people, like, forget how to drive in 2019 or something?   

I recall having heard multiple times that crashes went up during the early days of the pandemic, not down.

But you definitely didn't say anything about people forgetting to drive in 2020. Although you kind of implied that crashes went up in 2020.

And at least on fatal accident side, 2020 and 2021 are much worse than 2018 and 2019. 2022  started high as well.
I wonder if that is enforcement or something else...

I won't speak specifically for roundabouts but traffic fatalities did go up in 2020:

2019   36,355
2020   38,824   7.1%
2021   42,915   10.5%

That's the numbers I was referring to. I wonder if there was a similar increase in roundabouts out there...

[kphoger]

Yet, in the table posted, every single roundabout listed had crashes go down from 2019 to 2020...

[tradephoric]

Another fatal crash at the 96th & Westfield Blvd roundabout in Carmel.  This is now the 4th known fatality to occur at the roundabout since opening in 2005 and is one of the most deadly roundabouts in America. 

Coroner's Office investigating death of Carmel man in single-car crash
https://readthereporter.com/coroners-office-investigating-death-of-carmel-man-in-single-car-crash/

Police say two young men died early Monday morning at a roundabout in Carmel.  It happened around 3:00 am at Westfield Blvd. and 96th Street. Police found a Honda Accord in the center portion of the traffic roundabout. Police say the car crashed into the concrete retaining wall.
http://www.wthr.com/article/two-die-at-carmel-roundabout
https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/roundabouts/fhwasa15072.pdf

A Carmel resident died March 17 after crashing a vehicle into a concrete barrier in the middle of a roundabout.  Police said Lambert Doll was driving a black 2014 Toyota Scion southbound on Westfield Boulevard and failed to negotiate the roundabout at 96th Street. The driver was taken to St.Vincent Hospital in Indianapolis and died a short time later.
http://currentincarmel.com/carmel-driver-dies-after-crashing-into-roundabouts-concrete-barrier

[tradephoric]

The majority of  Carmel roundabout fatalities that have occurred throughout the years involve drivers hitting rigid fixed objects in the central island of the roundabout.  In November 2021 a 35-year old man died at the 106th Street and Ditch Road roundabout after his Ford pickup struck the fountain structure in the middle of the roundabout causing the truck to roll over on its roof. 

35-year-old man dies after rollover crash Saturday morning in Carmel
https://www.indystar.com/story/news/2021/11/07/35-year-old-man-dies-after-crash-saturday-morning-carmel/6329786001/

The FHWA cited "fixed objects" as a lead crash type in their review of fatal crashes in Washington and Wisconsin accounting for 85% of fatal crashes at roundabouts.

FIXED OBJECTS
Fixed-object crash types were the most common crash types among the Injury A and B crashes at roundabouts in Washington and Wisconsin and were involved in 85 percent of fatal crashes at roundabouts. Of the 39 fatal fixed object crashes at roundabouts, 35 involved vehicles striking the curb. In some cases, multiple fixed objects were involved in a single crash. For example, a vehicle may have struck the curb first and a sign post second. Given that roundabouts rely on effective channelization using raised features such as splitter islands and central islands, as well as on signing to communicate legal movements and right-ofway to users, some fixed objects are inherent in the design of roundabouts and must be present in the design. Other objects that were hit, such as boulders, retaining walls, trees, and landscaping, may be optional at many roundabout locations. Based on these observations, the following sections summarize recommendations made about fixed objects.

Rigid Fixed Objects
Thoughtful placement of fixed objects is a basic principle of proper roadside design. In 2011, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) published an updated Roadside Design Guide (RDG), and the revisions to Chapter 10 on Roadside Safety in Urban or Restricted Environments represented a new perspective on roadside design in lower
speed and urban contexts.(7) Roundabouts share many of the characteristics discussed in this chapter of the RDG, and hence the updated guidance may be of value for roundabout design as well. In particular, as described in the RDG, it could be worthwhile to consider what may be "high risk"  locations for fixed objects unique to roundabouts, given the movements of traffic approaching, circulating, and leaving the vicinity of a roundabout.

A Review of Fatal and Severe Injury Crashes at Roundabouts PUBLICATION NO. FHWA-SA-15-072
https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/roundabouts/fhwasa15072.pdf

[cjw2001]

Compared to national average traffic fatality rate of about 12 per 100,000 people, Carmel's fatality rate is at two per 100,000.   Nearby Indianapolis has a rate of over 11 per 100,000.   The difference is the roundabouts.  You should focus on the amazing improvement in the overall fatality rate and not the exception caused by an impaired speeding driver.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2022/09/22/we-couldnt-take-a-roundabout-out-if-we-wanted-to-an-interview-with-jim-brainerd-mayor-of-carmel-ind/

https://www.smartcitiesdive.com/news/roundabouts-carmel-in-mayor-jim-brainard-uscm/571074/

[kphoger]

The FHWA cited "fixed objects" as a lead crash type in their review of fatal crashes in Washington and Wisconsin accounting for 85% of fatal crashes at roundabouts.

Wow, that's a much higher percentage than I'd have expected!

You should focus on the amazing improvement in the overall fatality rate and not the exception caused by an impaired speeding driver.

Actually, we should focus on what makes some roundabouts safer than others.  That, I think, is the biggest thing this thread has going for it.  It took a while for some of us to believe there were significant differences that could be identified, but |tradephoric| stuck with it in the face of our snarkiness, and I think most of us have come around to believing some roundabout designs are suboptimal.

Multilane roundabouts seem to have poorer safety record than single-lane roundabouts, for example, and we've explored the reasons that might be.  My main takeaway from looking into that is that not all conflict points in a multilane roundabout are actually sideswipes, as has often been touted as one of the key benefits of roundabout design.

Also, fixed objects in the center island appear to have an outsized impact on fatality rates.  The increased visibility comes at the cost of serious possible damage.

Then there's the question of ICD.  Is a larger ICD or a smaller ICD preferable?  Each has its advantages and disadvantages.  Is there a happy medium?

These are all important questions to ask.  And it helps to look at the most crash-prone roundabouts in order to identify their commonalities.

[billpa]

The more recent crash is still under investigation. The one from last year noted the driver was travelling at a "high speed." My problem with the tone of this thread has been the cherry picking from news accounts. It's always the roundabout's fault.
Is there another thread on these boards about any other specific type of intersection that records every serious accident that take place in them?

Pixel 7

[kphoger]

The more recent crash is still under investigation. The one from last year noted the driver was travelling at a "high speed." My problem with the tone of this thread has been the cherry picking from news accounts. It's always the roundabout's fault.

In fairness, cherry-picking the most crash-prone of modern roundabouts should be expected in a thread titled "Crash prone 'modern roundabouts'".

Yes, there has been an overall tone in this thread of using the most dangerous roundabouts as a way to dismiss any safety claims of all roundabouts in general, but I think we've generally gotten past that point.

[Scott5114]

I mean, in the most recent instance, it's not guaranteed that having the roundabout replaced with a flat cross intersection would have had a better outcome. If the guy was, for whatever reason, not interested in stopping before hitting a non-moving object, there's no guarantee he'd be interested in stopping before hitting another car in the intersection. At least if he hits a fountain or whatever he doesn't hurt anyone else.

But we don't have a "man hits other car in intersection" thread, because dog bites man is not news.

[billpa]

I mean cherry picking 'out' the bit about the driver operating at high speed.  That just might've played a role in what happened. 
If someone drives at a high speed on a standard road, fails to negotiate a curve, and then crashes into a tree we don't start a thread about roads that curve.

[kalvado]

I mean cherry picking 'out' the bit about the driver operating at high speed.  That just might've played a role in what happened. 
If someone drives at a high speed on a standard road, fails to negotiate a curve, and then crashes into a tree we don't start a thread about roads that curve.

[tradephoric]

A study examines 20 years of fatal crash data from the NHTSA to determine the deadliest intersections in the United States.  Here is a list of the 20 deadliest intersections in America:


https://www.fanglawfirm.com/the-deadliest-intersections-in-the-united-states/

Consider this. There are about 15,812,406 intersections in the continental United States. Less than 1 percent saw even one fatal crash (147,000). Only 1,828 had three or more fatal crashes – less than .01 percent.  As a result of our analysis, we determined that any intersection where at least three fatal crashes occurred should be considered a deadly intersection. A total of 1,828 intersections in the U.S. fit this criterion.

The roundabout at 96th and Westfield Blvd in Carmel has only been open since 2005 and has already seen 3 fatal crashes resulting in 4 fatalities.  Roundabouts are suppose to reduce fatal crashes by 90% yet a roundabout ends up in the top 0.01 percent most deadly intersections.  It just sounds like an interesting probability and statistics exam question.

[kalvado]

Compared to national average traffic fatality rate of about 12 per 100,000 people, Carmel's fatality rate is at two per 100,000.   Nearby Indianapolis has a rate of over 11 per 100,000.   The difference is the roundabouts.  You should focus on the amazing improvement in the overall fatality rate and not the exception caused by an impaired speeding driver.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2022/09/22/we-couldnt-take-a-roundabout-out-if-we-wanted-to-an-interview-with-jim-brainerd-mayor-of-carmel-ind/

https://www.smartcitiesdive.com/news/roundabouts-carmel-in-mayor-jim-brainard-uscm/571074/

Per-capita fatality rate isn't a good metric, especially when a single suburb is concerned. Looks like it isn't a good one even on the state level.
Normalize per vehicle-miles traveled as it is commonly done; take urban-suburban-rural into account; compare with similar towns in the area - now we're talking. For one, Indianapolis isn't very similar as it has quite a bit of interstate mileage with a lot of through traffic, while Carmel has only a small stretch in town (and there may be further fine print, like town services don't respond to crashes on  that stretch, and they are excluded from statistics)

[algorerhythms]

I mean, in the most recent instance, it's not guaranteed that having the roundabout replaced with a flat cross intersection would have had a better outcome. If the guy was, for whatever reason, not interested in stopping before hitting a non-moving object, there's no guarantee he'd be interested in stopping before hitting another car in the intersection. At least if he hits a fountain or whatever he doesn't hurt anyone else.

But we don't have a "man hits other car in intersection" thread, because dog bites man is not news.

There isn't really a type of intersection that is safe for a drunk driver going 100 mph. It sounds callous, but I'd rather have that driver dying by hitting the concrete barrier in the middle of the roundabout than that driver killing an innocent person.

[tradephoric]

Here is a chart that lists the number of fatal crashes at the most deadly intersection in each state over a 20 year period (2000-2019).



The roundabout at 96th and Westfield Blvd in Carmel doesn't have 20 full years of crash data (opened in 2005) but already has been the site of 3 fatal crashes resulting in 4 fatalities.  It would be the most deadly intersection in a number of states including Maine, New Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Delaware, Virginia, South Dakota, Nebraska, Utah, Montana, Alaska, and Hawaii.  I think many would be surprised to hear that an innocuous looking single-lane roundabout in Carmel, Indiana (the poster-child for safe intersections) would be the site of so many fatal crashes.  Looking deeper into why people are dying here, every so often you get someone that fails to negotiate the roundabout and crashes straight into the retaining wall in the central island.  As long as that retaining wall exists, there will be more deaths at this roundabout in the future. 

[tradephoric]

I mean, in the most recent instance, it's not guaranteed that having the roundabout replaced with a flat cross intersection would have had a better outcome. If the guy was, for whatever reason, not interested in stopping before hitting a non-moving object, there's no guarantee he'd be interested in stopping before hitting another car in the intersection. At least if he hits a fountain or whatever he doesn't hurt anyone else.

But we don't have a "man hits other car in intersection" thread, because dog bites man is not news.

There isn't really a type of intersection that is safe for a drunk driver going 100 mph. It sounds callous, but I'd rather have that driver dying by hitting the concrete barrier in the middle of the roundabout than that driver killing an innocent person.

Roundabouts are an effective design that reduces fatal crashes by 90%, yet they are also effective at killing off drunk drivers?  That's an impressive design if they can manage to do both.

[Scott5114]

Here is a chart that lists the number of fatal crashes at the most deadly intersection in each state over a 20 year period (2000-2019).

Hey, let's all move to Wyoming, since it's so much safer there!

Wait, what do you mean it stopped being safe when everyone moved to Wyoming?

[tradephoric]

Massachusetts has a population of nearly 7 million people yet over a 20 year period its most deadly intersection (SR-41 & Dublin Rd in Richmond) has been the site of only 2 fatal crashes.  The point is fatal crashes at (a specific) intersection is rare and having multiple fatal crashes over a 20 year period is exceedingly rare.  Once you get 3 fatal crashes you start asking yourself "WTF is wrong here?".

[Scott5114]

Maybe once you get 3 fatal crashes you ask yourself WTF is wrong here.

I look at that map, see 5 fatal crashes in Oklahoma, and nod my head going, "Ah, yes, because all of the intersections here have Oklahomans driving through them. Makes sense."

[jeffandnicole]

Maybe once you get 3 fatal crashes you ask yourself WTF is wrong here.

I look at that map, see 5 fatal crashes in Oklahoma, and nod my head going, "Ah, yes, because all of the intersections here have Oklahomans driving through them. Makes sense."

When there's 1 fatal accident every 4 years, it's tough to say it's really dangerous. Especially if (for example) one occurs because a truck lost its brakes, another because a drunk drove thru a red light, another because a pedestrian jaywalked, etc. If there's consistency, that's one thing. If it's a situation like the example above, it's just happenstance.

[cjw2001]

Compared to national average traffic fatality rate of about 12 per 100,000 people, Carmel's fatality rate is at two per 100,000.   Nearby Indianapolis has a rate of over 11 per 100,000.   The difference is the roundabouts.  You should focus on the amazing improvement in the overall fatality rate and not the exception caused by an impaired speeding driver.

https://usa.streetsblog.org/2022/09/22/we-couldnt-take-a-roundabout-out-if-we-wanted-to-an-interview-with-jim-brainerd-mayor-of-carmel-ind/

https://www.smartcitiesdive.com/news/roundabouts-carmel-in-mayor-jim-brainard-uscm/571074/

Per-capita fatality rate isn't a good metric, especially when a single suburb is concerned. Looks like it isn't a good one even on the state level.
Normalize per vehicle-miles traveled as it is commonly done; take urban-suburban-rural into account; compare with similar towns in the area - now we're talking. For one, Indianapolis isn't very similar as it has quite a bit of interstate mileage with a lot of through traffic, while Carmel has only a small stretch in town (and there may be further fine print, like town services don't respond to crashes on  that stretch, and they are excluded from statistics)

For the record Carmel responds to accidents on I 465 many times each week, as part of I 465 is within Carmel's boundaries.  The US 31 freeway and Keystone Parkway are also inside Carmel's boundaries and generate their fair share of responses.