Wisconsin lawmakers are weighing a proposal that would give local governments more say on that European import that's becoming more familiar to the state's drivers: the roundabout.
Right now the state Department of Transportation or county officials decide when and where to build the traffic circles. The proposal would require municipal officials to sign off before project managers could move ahead.
http://host.madison.com/news/local/govt-and-politics/proposed-bill-would-let-towns-veto-roundabouts/article_debe92d5-6111-54be-a54e-6d21e4e03299.html
Huh, I thought this issue had died. The Milwaukee JournalSentinel had a story about this when the idea was first raised about a year ago. At least it's been changed a bit...IIRC, the old bill would put it to a public referendum.
The bill is a waste of time, as the local officials already get to weigh-in on the intersection proposals. The only thing missing is their signature. We already have too many armchair traffic engineers; adding more politics isn't going to help--it will only delay progress.
Quote from: DaBigE on February 25, 2014, 10:06:15 AM
Huh, I thought this issue had died. The Milwaukee JournalSentinel had a story about this when the idea was first raised about a year ago. At least it's been changed a bit...IIRC, the old bill would put it to a public referendum.
The bill is a waste of time, as the local officials already get to weigh-in on the intersection proposals. The only thing missing is their signature. We already have too many armchair traffic engineers; adding more politics isn't going to help--it will only delay progress.
O arm chair traffic engineers, they know everything!
Wish they'd give me veto power over roundabouts. :bigass:
Quote from: DaBigE on February 25, 2014, 10:06:15 AMWe already have too many armchair traffic engineers; adding more politics isn't going to help--it will only delay progress.
Democracy's a bitch, ain't it? Everyone thinks they're entitled to weigh in on their government's business. Don't they know that's what experts are for?
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 25, 2014, 05:10:03 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on February 25, 2014, 10:06:15 AMWe already have too many armchair traffic engineers; adding more politics isn't going to help--it will only delay progress.
Democracy's a bitch, ain't it? Everyone thinks they're entitled to weigh in on their government's business. Don't they know that's what experts are for?
Democracy is fine but we're a federal republic, which elects leaders to exercise political power.
In any case, this what public comment periods and meetings are for. Why else have a DOT if you're going to have the public make every decision? Do you put your surgery decisions up to your doctors, or do you poll your neighborhood? They're not constructing roundabouts cause they're cool and European, they're going in because they're statistically safer and usually more cost-effective. Are they a perfect fit everywhere?
No. But there is a process that WisDOT already uses to determine where they would be a better fit than other control types. I've seen roundabouts ruled out on a regular basis for other control types around Wisconsin. The projects haven't been built yet, but there are a couple DDIs and single-points in the works.
Quote from: DaBigE on February 25, 2014, 06:02:56 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 25, 2014, 05:10:03 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on February 25, 2014, 10:06:15 AMWe already have too many armchair traffic engineers; adding more politics isn't going to help--it will only delay progress.
Democracy's a bitch, ain't it? Everyone thinks they're entitled to weigh in on their government's business. Don't they know that's what experts are for?
Democracy is fine but we're a federal republic, which elects leaders to exercise political power.
And puts boundaries on how they use this power.
Well, I know what I would do if *I* was the Grand Unified Alan.
Quote from: DaBigE on February 25, 2014, 06:02:56 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 25, 2014, 05:10:03 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on February 25, 2014, 10:06:15 AMWe already have too many armchair traffic engineers; adding more politics isn't going to help--it will only delay progress.
Democracy's a bitch, ain't it? Everyone thinks they're entitled to weigh in on their government's business. Don't they know that's what experts are for?
Democracy is fine but we're a federal republic, which elects leaders to exercise political power.
In any case, this what public comment periods and meetings are for. Why else have a DOT if you're going to have the public make every decision? Do you put your surgery decisions up to your doctors, or do you poll your neighborhood? They're not constructing roundabouts cause they're cool and European, they're going in because they're statistically safer and usually more cost-effective. Are they a perfect fit everywhere? No. But there is a process that WisDOT already uses to determine where they would be a better fit than other control types. I've seen roundabouts ruled out on a regular basis for other control types around Wisconsin. The projects haven't been built yet, but there are a couple DDIs and single-points in the works.
One person's "armchair engineer" is another's check and balance. We elect and appoint folks in this republic, then continue to make sure they're doing what we sent them to do. It's like any other job where you don't stop answering to your employer once you're hired.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 25, 2014, 09:16:15 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on February 25, 2014, 06:02:56 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 25, 2014, 05:10:03 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on February 25, 2014, 10:06:15 AMWe already have too many armchair traffic engineers; adding more politics isn't going to help--it will only delay progress.
Democracy's a bitch, ain't it? Everyone thinks they're entitled to weigh in on their government's business. Don't they know that's what experts are for?
Democracy is fine but we're a federal republic, which elects leaders to exercise political power.
In any case, this what public comment periods and meetings are for. Why else have a DOT if you're going to have the public make every decision? Do you put your surgery decisions up to your doctors, or do you poll your neighborhood? They're not constructing roundabouts cause they're cool and European, they're going in because they're statistically safer and usually more cost-effective. Are they a perfect fit everywhere? No. But there is a process that WisDOT already uses to determine where they would be a better fit than other control types. I've seen roundabouts ruled out on a regular basis for other control types around Wisconsin. The projects haven't been built yet, but there are a couple DDIs and single-points in the works.
One person's "armchair engineer" is another's check and balance. We elect and appoint folks in this republic, then continue to make sure they're doing what we sent them to do. It's like any other job where you don't stop answering to your employer once you're hired.
They are referring to people who oppose highway changes like roundabouts just because they don't like it, not because they have any real reason to be against it. Most people oppose highway changes for 3 reasons: 1 irrational hatred, 2 it involves their property, 3 money. How is that a check? It's an annoyance! Now if you have an educated and well researched point, that is something completely different, most "arm chair traffic engineers" have no idea what they're talking about. By the way, I don't think anyone here on this site is an "arm chair traffic engineer".
I'm not, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night.
The number one reason <insert no name here> hates roundabouts... THEY'RE UN-AMERICAN!!! :pan:
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 25, 2014, 10:03:22 PMThey are referring to people who oppose highway changes like roundabouts just because they don't like it, not because they have any real reason to be against it. Most people oppose highway changes for 3 reasons: 1 irrational hatred, 2 it involves their property, 3 money. How is that a check? It's an annoyance! Now if you have an educated and well researched point, that is something completely different, most "arm chair traffic engineers" have no idea what they're talking about. By the way, I don't think anyone here on this site is an "arm chair traffic engineer".
Money is a legitimate concern, as is real property. I've been to a lot of public hearings, and true irrational hatred accounts for a very small segment of opinions in my experience (though it borders on entertaining when it truly occurs).
Sure, there are obstructionists everywhere, but to cite an old example, the tobacco industry has long treated legal actions against it as nuisance suits. I've been witness to protracted public processes where government professionals treated people with extensively-researched arguments as "annoyances" and "armchair engineers" just because they'd rather get on with the project already. In some cases they answered ultimately to politicos who had a very clearly mapped out outcome. For anyone who think politicians don't meddle at that level, I have a bridge with an enormous artificial traffic jam to sell you.
Quote from: silverback1065 on February 25, 2014, 10:03:22 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 25, 2014, 09:16:15 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on February 25, 2014, 06:02:56 PM
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 25, 2014, 05:10:03 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on February 25, 2014, 10:06:15 AMWe already have too many armchair traffic engineers; adding more politics isn't going to help--it will only delay progress.
Democracy's a bitch, ain't it? Everyone thinks they're entitled to weigh in on their government's business. Don't they know that's what experts are for?
Democracy is fine but we're a federal republic, which elects leaders to exercise political power.
In any case, this what public comment periods and meetings are for. Why else have a DOT if you're going to have the public make every decision? Do you put your surgery decisions up to your doctors, or do you poll your neighborhood? They're not constructing roundabouts cause they're cool and European, they're going in because they're statistically safer and usually more cost-effective. Are they a perfect fit everywhere? No. But there is a process that WisDOT already uses to determine where they would be a better fit than other control types. I've seen roundabouts ruled out on a regular basis for other control types around Wisconsin. The projects haven't been built yet, but there are a couple DDIs and single-points in the works.
One person's "armchair engineer" is another's check and balance. We elect and appoint folks in this republic, then continue to make sure they're doing what we sent them to do. It's like any other job where you don't stop answering to your employer once you're hired.
They are referring to people who oppose highway changes like roundabouts just because they don't like it, not because they have any real reason to be against it. Most people oppose highway changes for 3 reasons: 1 irrational hatred, 2 it involves their property, 3 money. How is that a check? It's an annoyance! Now if you have an educated and well researched point, that is something completely different, most "arm chair traffic engineers" have no idea what they're talking about. By the way, I don't think anyone here on this site is an "arm chair traffic engineer".
Agreed. If there are any armchair engineers here, it's probably <1%.
The point I have been trying to make is that [in Wisconsin] local officials are already part of the process. The public is already a part of the process. Roundabouts aren't the only traffic control device considered in projects. There is an intersection control evaluation process (otherwise known as an ICE Report, as I have discussed earlier on the forums) already in place. These projects don't occur in a vacuum. I am all for checks and balances, but how many more checks do we need? Keep voting until the minority wins?
At every public meeting I have been involved with where a roundabout was being proposed as part of the project, not one person has come up with a well-educated or researched point. It's all been shades of "I hate 'em, they don't work"..."they're un-American"..."they're ripping them out on the East Coast"..."trucks can't fit without riding up on the reddish part" (um, that's what the
truck apron is there for). And the types that make those point come with their minds already made up...no amount of proven evidence will alter their opinion.
Are there corrupt politicians? Yes. Are there corrupt engineers? Yep.
Every profession has them. But no matter how many checks, balances, filters, etc. you place, you're never going to catch them all. Just like having 5 antivirus programs doesn't necessarily make you any safer than if you just had one, but it sure will slow your computer down from productive work.
I'll be sure to thank those 'local officials' while I'm waiting for a damn left turn arrow in their town. :pan:
I have never heard a rational argument against roundabouts, so this late in the game it seems unlikely that there is one.
Get over it old people! Roundabouts are here and they kick ass.
"They're ripping them out on the East Coast"...I'm sure they're referring to NJ's traffic circles.
Yes, it's true NJ is converting many of them to regular instructions (over a period of, oh, 50 years), but they are also converting regular intersections to roundabouts! And I have to admit, after being weary of roundabouts, they do tend to work well. The biggest exception around here is people are a bit used to NJ's rules of navagating circles, so you see people tend to stop within the roundabout, along with entering the roundabout without yielding, more often than you'll find elsewhere. But overall, people are getting used to them when they nagivate them often.
Quote from: Pete from Boston on February 25, 2014, 09:16:15 PM
Quote
One person's "armchair engineer" is another's check and balance. We elect and appoint folks in this republic, then continue to make sure they're doing what we sent them to do. It's like any other job where you don't stop answering to your employer once you're hired.
In most cases (generally), the general public would elect a Governor, who then chooses a transportation commissioner. Neither one of them would/should be directly involved in a minor intersection reconstruction. It's fine that local officials can sign off on projects, but more times than not all it does is stall a project for years until traffic is unbearable. When the project is finally built, the often-heard sigh of relief includes "Why didn't they do this years ago???!!!"
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 26, 2014, 12:05:42 PM
"They're ripping them out on the East Coast"...I'm sure they're referring to NJ's traffic circles.
Yes, it's true NJ is converting many of them to regular instructions (over a period of, oh, 50 years), but they are also converting regular intersections to roundabouts! And I have to admit, after being weary of roundabouts, they do tend to work well. The biggest exception around here is people are a bit used to NJ's rules of navagating circles, so you see people tend to stop within the roundabout, along with entering the roundabout without yielding, more often than you'll find elsewhere. But overall, people are getting used to them when they nagivate them often.
NJ's traffic circles are death traps to inexperienced drivers or out-of-staters. Roundabouts work much better. It's even better watching people swerve in between lanes in a circle because the lanes aren't painted. Then those same people almost veer into you because they didn't know that the circle actually had lanes.
Quote from: Zeffy on February 26, 2014, 12:19:37 PMNJ's a death trap to inexperienced drivers or out-of-staters.
FTFY
Quote from: Zeffy on February 26, 2014, 12:19:37 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 26, 2014, 12:05:42 PM
"They're ripping them out on the East Coast"...I'm sure they're referring to NJ's traffic circles.
Yes, it's true NJ is converting many of them to regular instructions (over a period of, oh, 50 years), but they are also converting regular intersections to roundabouts! And I have to admit, after being weary of roundabouts, they do tend to work well. The biggest exception around here is people are a bit used to NJ's rules of navagating circles, so you see people tend to stop within the roundabout, along with entering the roundabout without yielding, more often than you'll find elsewhere. But overall, people are getting used to them when they nagivate them often.
NJ's traffic circles are death traps to inexperienced drivers or out-of-staters. Roundabouts work much better. It's even better watching people swerve in between lanes in a circle because the lanes aren't painted. Then those same people almost veer into you because they didn't know that the circle actually had lanes.
Those aren't traffic circles or roundabouts, they're Jersey jughandles! And yes, they are nightmares!
Quote from: SSOWorld on February 26, 2014, 06:59:15 PM
Quote from: Zeffy on February 26, 2014, 12:19:37 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 26, 2014, 12:05:42 PM
"They're ripping them out on the East Coast"...I'm sure they're referring to NJ's traffic circles.
Yes, it's true NJ is converting many of them to regular instructions (over a period of, oh, 50 years), but they are also converting regular intersections to roundabouts! And I have to admit, after being weary of roundabouts, they do tend to work well. The biggest exception around here is people are a bit used to NJ's rules of navagating circles, so you see people tend to stop within the roundabout, along with entering the roundabout without yielding, more often than you'll find elsewhere. But overall, people are getting used to them when they nagivate them often.
NJ's traffic circles are death traps to inexperienced drivers or out-of-staters. Roundabouts work much better. It's even better watching people swerve in between lanes in a circle because the lanes aren't painted. Then those same people almost veer into you because they didn't know that the circle actually had lanes.
Those aren't traffic circles or roundabouts, they're Jersey jughandles! And yes, they are nightmares!
No, these are circles. 95% of people know how to travel through each circle. The other 5% had better follow along.
Quote from: Alps on February 27, 2014, 12:22:00 AM
Quote from: SSOWorld on February 26, 2014, 06:59:15 PM
Quote from: Zeffy on February 26, 2014, 12:19:37 PM
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 26, 2014, 12:05:42 PM
"They're ripping them out on the East Coast"...I'm sure they're referring to NJ's traffic circles.
Yes, it's true NJ is converting many of them to regular instructions (over a period of, oh, 50 years), but they are also converting regular intersections to roundabouts! And I have to admit, after being weary of roundabouts, they do tend to work well. The biggest exception around here is people are a bit used to NJ's rules of navagating circles, so you see people tend to stop within the roundabout, along with entering the roundabout without yielding, more often than you'll find elsewhere. But overall, people are getting used to them when they nagivate them often.
NJ's traffic circles are death traps to inexperienced drivers or out-of-staters. Roundabouts work much better. It's even better watching people swerve in between lanes in a circle because the lanes aren't painted. Then those same people almost veer into you because they didn't know that the circle actually had lanes.
Those aren't traffic circles or roundabouts, they're Jersey jughandles! And yes, they are nightmares!
No, these are circles. 95% of people know how to travel through each circle. The other 5% had better follow along.
Many out-of-state residents don't have an issue with travelling within a Jersey Jughandle because they completely avoid them, making the left as they ignore the 'No Left Turn' signs.
Quote from: jeffandnicole on February 27, 2014, 08:35:25 AM
Many out-of-state residents don't have an issue with travelling within a Jersey Jughandle because they completely avoid them, making the left as they ignore the 'No Left Turn' signs.
This happened the other day near an intersection close to my house. The irony for the driver is that you know that black and white car going the same way you were trying to go? That was a police car. Sucks to suck.
The only reason I can see not to have a roundabout at some places is if there really isn't the room to build it within a city limit. Prime example of what I am talking about is where Wis 23/73 go from Fulton St and turn west on to Main St in Princeton. There really is not enough room for that 270 degree turn for semis on a roundabout.
Sorry for the necro, but the proposal is getting more traction: http://wtaq.com/news/articles/2013/jul/18/bill-would-put-the-brakes-on-roundabouts/
Quote...
The bill being circulated by state Representative David Craig (R-Big Bend) would require the Department of Transportation to get local government approval before it could add traffic circles to state highway projects inside a municipality.
...
The bill is being circulated at the Capitol for cosponsors and has already picked up bipartisan support.
edit: The article diagram shows a roundabout for a nation where they drive on the left. :spin:
Right now, they're "ok" on Trunk 26/59 JCT heading to Whitewater. Just wait till traffic increases and they'll become extremely unpopular.
Leave them for the EU
Honestly, I'd like to see this bill in Oregon right about now. ODOT is trying to sneak through a couple multi-lane rural roundabouts near me. I don't have an issue with roundabouts if they're built properly, aren't ridiculously expensive, and placed in sensible locations, but that's not the case here. The engineering costs alone cost more than 3 times the price of signalization (with construction, we're looking at 8 figures, which is approaching the price of the grade separation they really ought to be doing), and they've entrusted their design to a county engineer who thinks sidewalks are meant to be driven upon. :spin:
roundabouts are great, they are safer than traffic lights, and are better than 4way stops. They are here to stay and people need to get used to them, rather than complain about them all the time.
Quote from: silverback1065 on July 22, 2014, 06:41:04 PM
roundabouts are great, they are safer than traffic lights, and are better than 4way stops. They are here to stay and people need to get used to them, rather than complain about them all the time.
Ehh... It depends on location. But yeah, as much as we want to see some of the existing roundabouts go (I'm looking at you, Valpo), there's nothing we can do about them.
(Don't get me wrong, I think a roundabout used efficiently in a good location, like the northeast side of Bettendorf, IA, is a wonderful thing)
iPhone
I like roundabouts, but I worry more about other drivers who don't know how to use them. Like the time a saw a college student talking on her cellphone go the wrong way through one, coming directly at me in the wrong lanes. Since when do you ever "keep left"?
Quote from: silverback1065 on July 22, 2014, 06:41:04 PM
roundabouts are great, they are safer than traffic lights, and are better than 4way stops. They are here to stay and people need to get used to them, rather than complain about them all the time.
I agree to an extent, however, roundabouts are not a silver bullet. There are some intersections where they don't belong. "Right tool for the right job," as my middle school shop teacher would say.
Quote from: tchafe1978 on July 23, 2014, 08:03:45 AM
I like roundabouts, but I worry more about other drivers who don't know how to use them. Like the time a saw a college student talking on her cellphone go the wrong way through one, coming directly at me in the wrong lanes. Since when do you ever "keep left"?
Diverging Diamond?
Exactly what I was saying. I just hate it when people think the ones they add are bad and unnecessary. All the intersections I've seen them at where I live (indy) were warrented. I really hate it when armchair engineers try to dictate what real engineers do
Quote from: silverback1065 on July 23, 2014, 09:22:59 AM
Exactly what I was saying. I just hate it when people think the ones they add are bad and unnecessary. All the intersections I've seen them at where I live (indy) were warrented. I really hate it when armchair engineers try to dictate what real engineers do
But the problem is that in Wisconsin they have bordered on overuse IMO. An example is the new Highway 59 routing in Milton that has roundabouts at the bottom of both WI-26 exit ramps, and well as just east where it intersects with Rock County M.
I have yet to see traffic at any of these intersections that couldn't have been handled by a simple stop sign.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 23, 2014, 12:05:16 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on July 23, 2014, 09:22:59 AM
Exactly what I was saying. I just hate it when people think the ones they add are bad and unnecessary. All the intersections I've seen them at where I live (indy) were warrented. I really hate it when armchair engineers try to dictate what real engineers do
I have yet to see traffic at any of these intersections that couldn't have been handled by a simple stop sign.
That may be true today, but before an intersection is built or redesigned, they look at how it's going to work with 20-year traffic projections.
Quote from: DaBigE on July 23, 2014, 01:18:56 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 23, 2014, 12:05:16 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on July 23, 2014, 09:22:59 AM
Exactly what I was saying. I just hate it when people think the ones they add are bad and unnecessary. All the intersections I've seen them at where I live (indy) were warrented. I really hate it when armchair engineers try to dictate what real engineers do
I have yet to see traffic at any of these intersections that couldn't have been handled by a simple stop sign.
That may be true today, but before an intersection is built or redesigned, they look at how it's going to work with 20-year traffic projections.
So you are going to go through the expense of installing something completely unnecessary today because of something that *might* be needed 20 years from now? You would never install stoplights at an intersection now because of traffic projections 20 years out. Why do this now?
So you suggest doing nothing? How do you know its unessessary? Literally every construction project is done using projections for the future so if we follow by your logic we wouldn't have any of the freeway upgrades we have now because when the interstates were first built you could argue they werent necessary but that is completely different now.
Quote from: silverback1065 on July 23, 2014, 01:47:10 PM
So you suggest doing nothing? How do you know its unessessary? Literally every construction project is done using projections for the future so if we follow by your logic we wouldn't have any of the freeway upgrades we have now because when the interstates were first built you could argue they werent necessary but that is completely different now.
Strawman argument. Intersection control devices are easier to "upgrade" than entire freeways.
If you obtain the ROW, you can easily install a roundabout if projections turn out to be accurate.
So if we follow your logic we would be waiting 20 years for something that could have been done on day one with a projection. My arguement isnt a strawman you're just perpetuating the same bs arguement that all of these armchair engineers have.
Row isn't easy to aquire either
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 23, 2014, 01:43:28 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on July 23, 2014, 01:18:56 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 23, 2014, 12:05:16 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on July 23, 2014, 09:22:59 AM
Exactly what I was saying. I just hate it when people think the ones they add are bad and unnecessary. All the intersections I've seen them at where I live (indy) were warrented. I really hate it when armchair engineers try to dictate what real engineers do
I have yet to see traffic at any of these intersections that couldn't have been handled by a simple stop sign.
That may be true today, but before an intersection is built or redesigned, they look at how it's going to work with 20-year traffic projections.
So you are going to go through the expense of installing something completely unnecessary today because of something that *might* be needed 20 years from now? You would never install stoplights at an intersection now because of traffic projections 20 years out. Why do this now?
I never said it was the right or wrong way of doing things. Regardless, those are the rules we have to work with when completing an ICE report. Twenty-year traffic forecasts aren't much better than a long-range weather forecast, IMO. I even question 5-year projections, especially for new developments. The W Main Street corridor in Sun Prairie (https://www.google.com/maps?ll=43.176437,-89.258659&spn=0.007597,0.016512&t=h&z=17) is a prime example (west of US 151). Three multi-lane roundabouts were installed ~7 years ago because that was supposed to support a lot of new commercial growth in that corridor. Today, except for a fire/police station and a paint store,
nothing has developed along the corridor. Everything has happened around CTH C @ US 151 and CTH C and WIS 19.
If diverging diamonds prove successful, expect to see more of those at freeway ramp terminals, as they are much more friendly for OSOW vehicles than a roundabout.
Fair enough what I'm saying is I'm sick of people coming up with all of these reasons to hate roundabouts they don't put them in to punish us! They work well in a lot of places!
Quote from: silverback1065 on July 23, 2014, 02:00:49 PM
So if we follow your logic we would be waiting 20 years for something that could have been done on day one with a projection. My arguement isnt a strawman you're just perpetuating the same bs arguement that all of these armchair engineers have.
No...we *could* be waiting 20 years to do something. Traffic projections aren't written in stone.
Quote from: silverback1065 on July 23, 2014, 02:05:51 PM
Fair enough what I'm saying is I'm sick of people coming up with all of these reasons to hate roundabouts they don't put them in to punish us! They work well in a lot of places!
Agree completely. But then they should be used in those places.
Ya 20 yr projections arent at all perfect but I really don't see anything better
Quote from: DaBigE on July 23, 2014, 02:03:22 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 23, 2014, 01:43:28 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on July 23, 2014, 01:18:56 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 23, 2014, 12:05:16 PM
Quote from: silverback1065 on July 23, 2014, 09:22:59 AM
Exactly what I was saying. I just hate it when people think the ones they add are bad and unnecessary. All the intersections I've seen them at where I live (indy) were warrented. I really hate it when armchair engineers try to dictate what real engineers do
I have yet to see traffic at any of these intersections that couldn't have been handled by a simple stop sign.
That may be true today, but before an intersection is built or redesigned, they look at how it's going to work with 20-year traffic projections.
So you are going to go through the expense of installing something completely unnecessary today because of something that *might* be needed 20 years from now? You would never install stoplights at an intersection now because of traffic projections 20 years out. Why do this now?
I never said it was the right or wrong way of doing things. Regardless, those are the rules we have to work with when completing an ICE report. Twenty-year traffic forecasts aren't much better than a long-range weather forecast, IMO. I even question 5-year projections, especially for new developments. The W Main Street corridor in Sun Prairie (https://www.google.com/maps?ll=43.176437,-89.258659&spn=0.007597,0.016512&t=h&z=17) is a prime example (west of US 151). Three multi-lane roundabouts were installed ~7 years ago because that was supposed to support a lot of new commercial growth in that corridor. Today, except for a fire/police station and a paint store, nothing has developed along the corridor. Everything has happened around CTH C @ US 151 and CTH C and WIS 19.
If diverging diamonds prove successful, expect to see more of those at freeway ramp terminals, as they are much more friendly for OSOW vehicles than a roundabout.
That makes sense and I understand where you are coming from.
I hate roundabouts or traffic circles or circles from hell or whatever you want to call them. They don't improve traffic flow from what I've seen and they are like Arkansas drivers in the snow: they just can't figure out how to drive in them without wrecking someone.
iPhone
Roundabounts used in the right situation do indeed improve traffic flow. For instance, they have been used as part of the US-41 upgrades in Oshkosh and have loosened up traffic considerably.
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 23, 2014, 03:48:56 PM
Roundabounts used in the right situation do indeed improve traffic flow. For instance, they have been used as part of the US-41 upgrades in Oshkosh and have loosened up traffic considerably.
Ditto in Neenah (US(I)-41/Breezewood-Bell - interchange 129 and in the Winneconne Ave (WI 114)/Green Bay Rd area) and in Appleton (east end of College Ave Fox River bridge).
:nod:
Mike
Quote from: mgk920 on July 23, 2014, 09:57:12 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 23, 2014, 03:48:56 PM
Roundabounts used in the right situation do indeed improve traffic flow. For instance, they have been used as part of the US-41 upgrades in Oshkosh and have loosened up traffic considerably.
Ditto in Neenah (US(I)-41/Breezewood-Bell - interchange 129 and in the Winneconne Ave (WI 114)/Green Bay Rd area) and in Appleton (east end of College Ave Fox River bridge).
:nod:
Mike
Except for the last one, I had a small part in each of those intersections you listed. For those that despise roundabouts can feel comfort in the fact you will probably never see that many go in as part of one project ever again, (IIRC, the total number of roundabouts associated with the 41 project is in the low-mid 40s). You also will probably not see another roundabout with a 3-lane entry constructed in the state of Wisconsin for a
long time (except for a couple still currently in the design phase--Appleton will be home to one of the last ones).
Quote from: DaBigE on July 23, 2014, 10:11:25 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on July 23, 2014, 09:57:12 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 23, 2014, 03:48:56 PM
Roundabounts used in the right situation do indeed improve traffic flow. For instance, they have been used as part of the US-41 upgrades in Oshkosh and have loosened up traffic considerably.
Ditto in Neenah (US(I)-41/Breezewood-Bell - interchange 129 and in the Winneconne Ave (WI 114)/Green Bay Rd area) and in Appleton (east end of College Ave Fox River bridge).
:nod:
Mike
Except for the last one, I had a small part in each of those intersections you listed. For those that despise roundabouts can feel comfort in the fact you will probably never see that many go in as part of one project ever again, (IIRC, the total number of roundabouts associated with the 41 project is in the low-mid 40s). You also will probably not see another roundabout with a 3-lane entry constructed in the state of Wisconsin for a long time (except for a couple still currently in the design phase--Appleton will be home to one of the last ones).
Is this because DDIs are now part of the mix of design options?
Mike
Quote from: Arkansastravelguy on July 23, 2014, 02:34:58 PM
I hate roundabouts or traffic circles or circles from hell or whatever you want to call them. They don't improve traffic flow from what I've seen and they are like Arkansas drivers in the snow: they just can't figure out how to drive in them without wrecking someone.
iPhone
They don't improve traffic where you live because the people don't know how to use them, it was like this in my area too. Once people get used to them, things will get better. Roundabouts really are safer and better where the data says they are warranted. 4 way stops are awful.
Quote from: mgk920 on July 23, 2014, 10:14:35 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on July 23, 2014, 10:11:25 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on July 23, 2014, 09:57:12 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 23, 2014, 03:48:56 PM
Roundabounts used in the right situation do indeed improve traffic flow. For instance, they have been used as part of the US-41 upgrades in Oshkosh and have loosened up traffic considerably.
Ditto in Neenah (US(I)-41/Breezewood-Bell - interchange 129 and in the Winneconne Ave (WI 114)/Green Bay Rd area) and in Appleton (east end of College Ave Fox River bridge).
:nod:
Mike
Except for the last one, I had a small part in each of those intersections you listed. For those that despise roundabouts can feel comfort in the fact you will probably never see that many go in as part of one project ever again, (IIRC, the total number of roundabouts associated with the 41 project is in the low-mid 40s). You also will probably not see another roundabout with a 3-lane entry constructed in the state of Wisconsin for a long time (except for a couple still currently in the design phase--Appleton will be home to one of the last ones).
Is this because DDIs are now part of the mix of design options?
Mike
Regarding three-laners: Not directly, at least outside of OSOW routes. The latest trends still show an upward trend in the number of crashes as the number of lanes increases. Granted, while they're fender-benders and not severe injury/fatalities, it still a number the state is not exactly thrilled about. The Winneconne Ave/Green Bay Rd intersection in Neenah has seen its share of crashes since it opened, which has prompted many an editorial in the local papers. That said, an overwhelming majority of the crashes were/are due to failure to yield and not following the proper lanes. Three-laners won't really be considered again until the trend reverses.
IF drivers would just follow the rules of the road, roundabouts would gain a much better reputation, much faster. However, that's not to say that there aren't bad roundabout designs out there.
Regarding the total number of roundabouts as part of one project, I doubt we'll see another project on the scale of the 41 project for a
long time.
'OSOW'?
Mike
Quote from: DaBigE on July 23, 2014, 10:31:40 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on July 23, 2014, 10:14:35 PM
Quote from: DaBigE on July 23, 2014, 10:11:25 PM
Quote from: mgk920 on July 23, 2014, 09:57:12 PM
Quote from: SEWIGuy on July 23, 2014, 03:48:56 PM
Roundabounts used in the right situation do indeed improve traffic flow. For instance, they have been used as part of the US-41 upgrades in Oshkosh and have loosened up traffic considerably.
Ditto in Neenah (US(I)-41/Breezewood-Bell - interchange 129 and in the Winneconne Ave (WI 114)/Green Bay Rd area) and in Appleton (east end of College Ave Fox River bridge).
:nod:
Mike
Except for the last one, I had a small part in each of those intersections you listed. For those that despise roundabouts can feel comfort in the fact you will probably never see that many go in as part of one project ever again, (IIRC, the total number of roundabouts associated with the 41 project is in the low-mid 40s). You also will probably not see another roundabout with a 3-lane entry constructed in the state of Wisconsin for a long time (except for a couple still currently in the design phase--Appleton will be home to one of the last ones).
Is this because DDIs are now part of the mix of design options?
Mike
Regarding three-laners: Not directly, at least outside of OSOW routes. The latest trends still show an upward trend in the number of crashes as the number of lanes increases. Granted, while they're fender-benders and not severe injury/fatalities, it still a number the state is not exactly thrilled about. The Winneconne Ave/Green Bay Rd intersection in Neenah has seen its share of crashes since it opened, which has prompted many an editorial in the local papers. That said, an overwhelming majority of the crashes were/are due to failure to yield and not following the proper lanes. Three-laners won't really be considered again until the trend reverses.
IF drivers would just follow the rules of the road, roundabouts would gain a much better reputation, much faster. However, that's not to say that there aren't bad roundabout designs out there.
Regarding the total number of roundabouts as part of one project, I doubt we'll see another project on the scale of the 41 project for a long time.
I have never seen a 3 lane roundabout, those I can see being confusing and dangerous to new users
Quote from: Arkansastravelguy on July 23, 2014, 02:34:58 PM
I hate roundabouts or traffic circles or circles from hell or whatever you want to call them. They don't improve traffic flow from what I've seen and they are like Arkansas drivers in the snow: they just can't figure out how to drive in them without wrecking someone.
iPhone
Does this give you nightmares? :)
Before:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.tapatalk.com%2Fd%2F14%2F07%2F26%2Fevuhahuz.jpg&hash=70a44bd69ba545f1326d7ff209f9dc2e1a97a91b)
After:
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.tapatalk.com%2Fd%2F14%2F07%2F26%2Fzyvevyma.jpg&hash=c2c9b08e82708109ea417f2bdfc24eef44f93b9c)
To give you an idea of what's in that area, the large, somewhat fan-shaped building in the middle is a
sixth grade school. There are a total of four schools right there along with all the other usual suburban downtown stuff. Traffic does back up at peak hours but it is always moving. In my everyday experience this has been a night and day difference to the area.
Off-topic: are those sidewalks in the middle of the roundabouts?
Yes they are. I know that's atypical for a lot of roundabouts, but with so many schools nearby they wanted kids to be able to stack up in the middle if necessary and cross in bunches.
They did study a single roundabout alternative and....yeah.
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.tapatalk.com%2Fd%2F14%2F07%2F27%2Fa4yga5er.jpg&hash=b30cba7c8c5057463d4adcc2853adab690dd81a9)
Edit: here's what it actually looks like
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg.tapatalk.com%2Fd%2F14%2F07%2F27%2Fquba3a3a.jpg&hash=d05c97724f0a6a08b481a451c4f149dcb1957b3d)
^^ Looks like the red lines are where the roadway centerlines would be if the roads went straight through the intersections.
Yep, there are crosswalks marked off around the perimeter of the circles, but "I'll just walk around the outside" is a thing said by no kid, ever. People usually run from the sidewalk, wait in that little arrowhead shaped space on the left center of the last pic I posted, then dash across.
Edit: this was in reply to a post that is now gone.