I grew up in Connecticut where I never saw a rotary, and have lived in California for ages without seeing one either. The only place I've seen them is in Massachusetts. I truly do not understand how anyone thinks they are not a death trap.
I was in the Concord area awhile back and was truly terrified of a few of the rotaries in the area. Especially multi lane ones. Apparently this entire part of the state hates traffic lights because there were none. Cars attempting to go from an inner lane to an exit while people are trying to merge in, etc. I've never seen so many near accidents in all my life. (I believe this was the MA-2/119/111 circle).
In any area that is heavily trafficked it just seems like a nightmare. I like the idea of them in low traffic areas, instead of stop signs or lights that slow light traffic to a stop for no reason, but otherwise, no.
Anybody else agree or instead have strong POSITIVE feelings toward rotary/traffic circle usage? (I always forget the difference)
There's no difference.
Quote from: NE2 on January 20, 2012, 05:36:37 AM
There's no difference.
Sorry, I guess I was remembering this difference pointed out on Wikipedia related to 'roundabout':
In the U.S., traffic engineers use the term roundabout for intersections in which entering traffic must yield to traffic already in the circle, reserving the term traffic circle for those in which entering traffic is controlled by stop signs, traffic signals, or is not formally controlled.Anyway, scary.
I have a transportation professor who firmly believes that the lessened fatality rates in rotaries are caused by the fact that people are terrified to drive in them, and are thus more cautious.
Quote from: relaxok on January 20, 2012, 05:41:46 AM
Quote from: NE2 on January 20, 2012, 05:36:37 AM
There's no difference.
Sorry, I guess I was remembering this difference pointed out on Wikipedia related to 'roundabout':
In the U.S., traffic engineers use the term roundabout for intersections in which entering traffic must yield to traffic already in the circle, reserving the term traffic circle for those in which entering traffic is controlled by stop signs, traffic signals, or is not formally controlled.
Anyway, scary.
That's not even accurate. Most traffic circles have yield-on-entry for all approaches.
What's terrifying is drivers who can't handle driving around in a circle.
Rotaries are unique to New England, mostly Massachusetts, although there are some in the other states (Brattleboro, VT as an example). I'm sure they made some kind of sense at the time they were designed, when traffic volumes and commuting patterns were quite different.
The difference between a rotary and a traffic circle is the same as that between pop and soda; i.e., none, save for the region in which it's being used.
"Roundabout" is used in the U.S. to refer to a traffic circle with specific design characteristics. NYSDOT uses the phrase "modern roundabout" to imply that there are other kinds of roundabouts which are not modern; for example, rotaries. However, in U.S. dialects the term "roundabout" doesn't have much historical usage for these kinds of circles, any more so than the term "lorry" has when referring to trucks. One could imagine some new improved kind of truck being introduced in the U.S. and being called a "lorry", giving it a distinction from the kind of trucks we have now, which are also "lorries" to some people.
As per your question, I don't particularly mind rotaries, and I did live 3 1/2 years in Boston. Like any roadway, you yield when entering one, unless a sign tells you differently. No different that, say, in Pennsylvania, where a lot of 4-way intersections are only partially controlled by STOP signs, giving priority to the "thru" movements. You just have to look at what sign you have, versus what others have (that's why STOP and Yield signs have distinctive shapes), and drive accordingly.
I grew up and learned to drive in Massachusetts and rotaries don't faze me in the least; they are slowly disappearing, or at least no new ones are built, but they do have some good characteristics like keeping things moving when the volumes are moderate. When the volumes are very heavy, they start to fail as it gets hard to enter the circle and the approaches can back up, especially for the lower-volume legs.
How ubiquitous are rotaries in Mass? This video clip (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iIdiXhltm-s) of a WNEV-TV Boston promo from the 80s even includes the trademark Mass ROTARY sign, standing in the center and facing each approach of a rotary. (It's only a few seconds in to the clip.)
"Circle" is commonly used for rotaries in Mass, as there are rotaries with common names that live to this day even for former rotaries that have become partially signalized or become part of an interchange. Bell Circle, Cutler Circle, Alewife Circle, etc. come to mind off the bat.
I find it amusing that the primary route to Logan Airport from points north and northeast involves MA 60 to MA 1A, going through a few rotaries. Nothing like subjecting some unsuspecting out-of-towners in rental cars to something they've never experienced like a rotary! :D
I don't think "traditional" traffic circles (I don't use the term "rotary" except in reference to my RX-7's engine) are necessarily "terrifying" or problematic per se as a class of road junction, but I definitely think some traffic circles can be extremely problematic due to particular aspects that apply to them, such as traffic volumes or just flat-out dumb design. Many people here in the DC area have a particular dislike of Washington Circle in Northwest DC. It's a bad one for several reasons, one of which is that the entrance roads tend to cross over each other in ways that require lights to be placed just OUTSIDE the circle (so, for example, if you want to exit the circle to head to eastbound K Street, you may have to come to a stop just after you exit the circle itself). Dupont Circle has those peculiar inner roadways for thru traffic on Massachusetts Avenue, so it's not a matter of simply checking the sign to count which exit you need (DC doesn't post that sort of sign anyway). But Sheridan Circle (located not too far to the northwest of Dupont Circle) works fine in my experience, as does Westmoreland Circle (on the DC—Maryland line). The latter two are far less complex layouts, although they're still definitely higher-speed "circles" as opposed to "roundabouts."
The signage is really important. The signs need to give clear information to the driver about where to go, and which exit to take, BEFORE he enters the circle (or roundabout). Some older circles don't present that information until you're already on the circle, and that's a bad idea. It promotes last-minute swerving and the like.
I think that as a practical matter part of what makes "traffic circles" problematic in many cases–even though they need not necessarily be so–is that they don't necessarily operate in a consistent manner in terms of yield rules, signalization, reasonable expectation of what the lanes will do, etc. Put differently, if you encounter a roundabout, you should know what to do. It's the same every time with only minor variations in terms of number of lanes (since we don't have chained mini-roundabouts in the USA). If you encounter a traffic circle, there's a good chance that you won't necessarily know what to do, and that can indeed cause problems when local drivers who know the circle well come into conflict with out-of-area drivers who don't (Memorial Circle in DC is an example because, due to the predominant traffic flow being tangent to the circle, drivers already on the circle must yield to entering drivers, and many of those entering drivers do not intend to go around the circle and so are going pretty darn fast). So, to put it differently, people approaching the circle don't necessarily have a basis for knowing what to expect.
One of the things "relaxok" mentions–changing lanes to exit while people are merging onto the circle–is not an issue with a proper roundabout. I was amused when someone was complaining about the new roundabouts out at Gilberts Corner in Loudoun County, Virginia, because "people don't slow down to let you merge." They're not supposed to!!!
As much as I like roundabouts, the one thing that does frustrate me is the ignorance of some drivers as to proper signal protocol or the flat-out unwillingness of some drivers to signal. Roundabouts work best if you don't have to guess at what the other driver is going to do. If you fail to signal right to indicate you're exiting, it freezes the entering traffic because they can't know whether you're staying on the roundabout, whether you're ignorant, or whether you're an asshole who just doesn't signal. That slows the traffic down.
The problem with traffic circles, rotaries is that nobody follows the YIELD sign, they think it means speed up to beat the next guy.
I was in a rotary once and some guy blew his horn at me b/c I didn't stop. He had the YIELD one.
I don't understand how they can be safer, just on that fact alone, people don't YIELD when they are supposed to.
I drove in the UK for a month and a half through innumerable roundabouts, including some that pass for expressway interchanges. I don't think they're dangerous or scary at all. I think it's mainly a training problem. People over there know the rules and follow them.
Now I will say the roundabout at Étoile in Paris is scary as hell... 12 entry/exit points, a major national monument in the center, no lane markings, and LOTS of traffic. I never actually drove through it but was amazed at how anyone (including our taxi) managed to successfully navigate it.
Quote from: MrDisco99 on January 20, 2012, 02:32:25 PM
Now I will say the roundabout at Étoile in Paris is scary as hell... 12 entry/exit points, a major national monument in the center, no lane markings, and LOTS of traffic. I never actually drove through it but was amazed at how anyone (including our taxi) managed to successfully navigate it.
I was a passenger when Jeff Royston drove through there. he basically saw an opening and gunned it.
Paris traffic is something else. there's a good reason why every car is covered with large quantities of small dings.
I'll admit, I am one of the people that was in a rental car dealing with a significant number of them for the first time. However that in itself is sort of a problem already. I grew up in the next state over - I shouldn't have to deal with something unique to an area in terms of traffic flow. Blah blah, tradition blah blah :sleep: Standard practices are good. (and yes I know there are standards for them as well...not the point..)
I did say I thought they probably worked well for lightly trafficked areas. If you could see what I saw though, I doubt you'd be saying it was no big deal. Theoretically, yields are fine, but in rush hour usage of the circle, it's chaos.
It just seems like some of these areas have outgrown the usage of the traffic circles and people have probably voted against any change in the setup because, hey, New Englanders hate change.. (myself included, most of the time)
Quote from: MrDisco99 on January 20, 2012, 02:32:25 PM
I drove in the UK for a month and a half through innumerable roundabouts, including some that pass for expressway interchanges. I don't think they're dangerous or scary at all. I think it's mainly a training problem. People over there know the rules and follow them.
....
I agree with this (both in terms of my never having a problem at roundabouts in the UK and in terms of people there following the rules). I'd say the part about people knowing and following the rules is something that pervades the experience of driving there in general, though, and quite frankly I found it very refreshing. I think the general experience of driving in the UK is one where it is presumed that drivers will know the rules and will follow them, where as in the USA the assumption is either that nobody will know the rules unless they're told them constantly or that it's unacceptable to take a risk that someone might be injured by someone not following the rules. The primary example that comes to my mind is the use of stop signs in the USA at places where "Give Way" (i.e., "Yield") signs would be used in the UK–except that often in the UK they don't bother with the sign and instead they paint the marking on the road surface instead. I've found in European travel that drivers know who has the right of way and that they do not hesitate to take the right of way when it's their turn to do so, without worrying about whether the other driver will yield. In a lot of places in the USA the attitude seems to be "if we don't require you to stop, you might not stop when you're supposed to yield, so we'll require to to stop every time even when there's nobody else around." I hate that.
I will say that while I loved driving through the Magic Roundabout in Swindon (on both the inner and outer circulation), I have to think chained mini-roundabouts wouldn't work too well in the USA. Single mini-roundabouts, perhaps; I don't believe I've ever encountered one in North America, though. But the chained mini-roundabouts require a serious understanding of the principles of yielding the right-of-way that I think most North American drivers simply do not have and, without vastly improved driver education, are unlikely to develop. I felt like the chained mini-roundabouts, especially in urban areas (I recall a very busy set of two of them on Southmead Road between Filton and Bristol), require a far higher level of concentration than even a layout like the Magic Roundabout.
I've never been to Paris, but I've seen pictures of the Place de l'Etoile. Technically speaking it doesn't really function as a proper roundabout, especially insofar as the "priorite a droite" rule might apply (requiring traffic already on the circle to yield to entering traffic at every entrance)–I believe I read somewhere that while France had switched to "priorite a gauche" at most roundabouts, the Place de l'Etoile was an exception. Either way, I love seeing pictures like the one below, as long as I'm not one of the people driving since I tend to lose patience with stupidity. I imagine this sort of anarchy would ensue were a setup like the Magic Roundabout to be plopped down in the District of Columbia in place of one of the circles there!
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fcommons%2Fc%2Fcc%2FParis.etoile.arp.750pix.jpg&hash=48203fea776c8afe0ec2e3c9a4d0c8d9427f096c)
Love the picture. I could stand there for hours just watching the traffic. It's better than television.
Quote from: doofy103 on January 20, 2012, 02:07:04 PM
The problem with traffic circles, rotaries is that nobody follows the YIELD sign, they think it means speed up to beat the next guy.
I was in a rotary once and some guy blew his horn at me b/c I didn't stop. He had the YIELD one.
I don't understand how they can be safer, just on that fact alone, people don't YIELD when they are supposed to.
These examples are due to poor driving habits and not an flaw with a specific intersection type. That behavior is no different if it occurred at a roundabout or a T.
As a recent transplant to Massachusetts who has now driven over a quarter of the state highway system, I must say I love rotaries. I've found very few people who fail to yield (though no one uses their signals, which is annoying), and overall traffic flows quite smoothly (unless the surrounding roads are already gridlocked, like is often the case in Boston proper). The only trick to driving them is that you need to actually have some guts and go when you see an opening, else you will never get to go.
I feel like another issue is depending on sight-lines, it's sometimes hard to tell when you do have a space to come in (especially from a stop or near-stop). If i recall, one of the intersections in particular you couldn't see to the other side because the middle of the rotary was some kind of statue/pedestal setup. So theoretically you could have space but it was all contingent on how fast someone entering the opposite entrance was going. Some cars were slow, some were going twice that speed. You could only see a very short distance around the 'loop'. At some point, it's just having guts, as someone just said. In that sense, no different than exiting a blind driveway on a country road. Hope and pray.. :D The difference is, in the latter case, it's often barely traveled roads and not rush hour traffic circles.
Another rotary variant that seems to be a Massachusetts peculiarity is the rotary that forms part of an interchange. This one is a typical setup (http://g.co/maps/4q2ta) for such an interchange, and there are other specimens like US 1 and MA 60 (where the additional wrinkle of the divergence of I-95 toward Lynn would have been made, and the unused bridges still stand over 50 years later). Also I think I recall a thread on here once about an interesting interchange in Texas between what were otherwise surface streets, which I think was functionally similar to the interchange between 128/95 and US 20. It operates as a usual rotary but with two left exits (http://g.co/maps/a52bm) that do eliminate two of the weaves, so it's maybe something more than a rotary but still a rotary at heart because one could theoretically orbit around and around until one runs out of gas!
Connecticut used to have quite a few of the rotaries...US 6 and Conn 12 stand out in my mind as one that was replaced by a more conventional intersection over the last 25 years, as were most of them.
A few are back now, such as Conn 80 and Conn 81 in Killingworth....
Terrifying? Please. They're far from terrifying, they just take some getting used to. Remember: yield to traffic in the circle when entering and signal, signal, signal.
I grew up with them, being without them has been somewhat strange to be quite honest.
Florida has them sprinked around here and there. Being from Mississippi, I had never encountered a roundabout until LSU built one on campus, and I didn't encounter another until I went to Florida.
As long as people are paying attention (which we all know they do all the time /s) they'll usually see a big yield sign before they even get near the entrance to the roundabout. A big part of the roundabout's efficiency is keeping traffic moving. I can think of a plethora of 4-way stops that would immediately benefit from being converted to a roundabout - but then again, I'm no traffic engineer. However, if people are properly educated and are paying attention, they can be a great transportation tool.
Of course, this is all contingent on standardization. Of the few I've been on in Florida, a new shopping development decided to throw a few in, but with VERY non-standard configurations. At one particular roundabout, one entrance always has the right of way, while other entrances have to come to a complete stop before entering, or have to yield to vehicles already in the roundabout. It's a very awful setup and I just ignored whatever signage there was (whenever I knew no traffic was in the roundabout) and just went my merry way - as it should be!
Here in Hartford County, Connecticut, the only one I'm aware of is at the west end of the Whitehead-Conlon Highway in Hartford. The Brattleboro, VT rotary was mentioned. That's at the junction of US Route 5/VT Route 9 and I-91's Exit 3 on/off ramp. The west side takes you to I-91, while the east side take you a whole 1/3 mile onto VT Route 9 east and the New Hampshire state line (Seabees Memorial Bridge over the Connecticut River). There's also a rotary under I-91 at Exit 26 in Greenfield, MA for MA Route 2A East and MA Route 2 West (MA Route 2 East is concurrent from this rotary north along I-91 to Exit 27).
MA rotaries are like NJ circles minus most of the signs indicating traffic control.
I like roundabouts, as long as they're properly marked following MUTCD Chapter 3C. I was driving in Massachusetts in '10 and came upon a roundabout somewhere on Route 2 that I found rather hair-raising. I'm pretty sure it's a multilane roundabout, but there were no pavement markings in the circle at all, and traffic breezed through rather quickly.
How about this one?
(https://www.aaroads.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fimg577.imageshack.us%2Fimg577%2F5438%2Fturboplein.jpg&hash=b2ecebe851b2235f72f4b88fbe6586f49475c352)
Pijnacker, the Netherlands.
Looks like it was fun to draw in CAD. I'd probably have fun driving it, too, what with the thorough lane markings. And, you know, the traffic lights.
Connecticut is starting to implement rotaries more. Living on the MA border, and spending as many of my breathing hours as possible out on the Cape, rotaries are like second nature.
They just replaced the Five corners intersection w/ a rotary in Ellington CT (JCT CT 286, 74, Skinner Rd and Windsorville Rd). It's working too. The traffic used to back up a quarter mile in all directions for 5 way stop signs, now there's only about 10-12 cars at rush hour waiting to enter the rotary. This intersection was bad the way the roads were offset. The rotary here seems much safer because it's all 1 direction traffic movement, versus criss-crossing 5 points + people turning both directions, and no one being able to figure out who's turn it was to proceed from a stop sign.
This link shows how the intersection looked before the rotary. ZOOM OUT ONE level and the map overlay is updated to a rotary, but the satellite photo is still not updated. The Rotary was finished about 3 months ago.
http://maps.google.com/maps?q=windsorville+and+286+ellington+ct&hl=en&ll=41.867388,-72.492503&spn=0.00306,0.006968&sll=37.0625,-95.677068&sspn=52.77044,114.169922&vpsrc=6&hnear=Connecticut+286+%26+Windsorville+Rd,+Ellington,+Tolland,+Connecticut&t=h&z=18
So those of you from New England: are people still using the term "rotary" to refer to that new style of circle that everyone is building these days (the "modern roundabout")? Or is the word typically reserved for those large old circles that are so terrifying around Concord?
Quote from: KEVIN_224 on January 20, 2012, 09:38:40 PM
Here in Hartford County, Connecticut, the only one I'm aware of is at the west end of the Whitehead-Conlon Highway in Hartford. The Brattleboro, VT rotary was mentioned. That's at the junction of US Route 5/VT Route 9 and I-91's Exit 3 on/off ramp. The west side takes you to I-91, while the east side take you a whole 1/3 mile onto VT Route 9 east and the New Hampshire state line (Seabees Memorial Bridge over the Connecticut River). There's also a rotary under I-91 at Exit 26 in Greenfield, MA for MA Route 2A East and MA Route 2 West (MA Route 2 East is concurrent from this rotary north along I-91 to Exit 27).
I am pretty sure that I encountered a roundabout under construction somewhere on VT 15 back in the fall. I think it was at the VT 100 intersection near Hyde Park.
Quote from: Chris on January 21, 2012, 06:03:24 AM
How about this one?
[image]
I might be an odd one but Turbo roundabouts make a lot of sense to me. Bring 'em stateside!
Roundabouts are great if used in the correct circumstance. They only become deathtraps if traffic volumes are too high, causing an excessive amount of conflicts and need to yield. If traffic through the intersection is reasonably low, they're great because they allow traffic to freely flow.
The real sniff test is, with what frequency will a driver approaching the circle need to come to a near or complete stop before entering? If the intersection is good for a roundabout that should be the less common case, i.e. there should typically be more spaces to slip into than cars to dodge.
Also, if it has to be signalized, the entire purpose is defeated.
Quote from: vtk on January 21, 2012, 05:46:44 AM
I like roundabouts, as long as they're properly marked following MUTCD Chapter 3C. I was driving in Massachusetts in '10 and came upon a roundabout somewhere on Route 2 that I found rather hair-raising. I'm pretty sure it's a multilane roundabout, but there were no pavement markings in the circle at all, and traffic breezed through rather quickly.
Might have been the same one! The worst one I saw was also on route 2, and was exactly as described... I would dread it every rush hour if I lived there, or maybe even find a way to avoid it.
Quote from: relaxok on January 20, 2012, 05:41:46 AM
Quote from: NE2 on January 20, 2012, 05:36:37 AM
There's no difference.
Sorry, I guess I was remembering this difference pointed out on Wikipedia related to 'roundabout':
In the U.S., traffic engineers use the term roundabout for intersections in which entering traffic must yield to traffic already in the circle, reserving the term traffic circle for those in which entering traffic is controlled by stop signs, traffic signals, or is not formally controlled.
Anyway, scary.
I loved the rotaries in Massachusetts. You could just barrel into them without slowing down and then exit where you needed to. People in the circle are already going slow so they can easily yield to newcomers into the circle.
You have the many New Jersey Traffic Circles that are being eliminated one by one.
In Florida you have places like Windermere, FL who used them to get rid of four way stop intersections.
Quote from: on_wisconsin on January 21, 2012, 02:47:56 PM
Quote from: Chris on January 21, 2012, 06:03:24 AM
How about this one?
[image]
I might be an odd one but Turbo roundabouts make a lot of sense to me. Bring 'em stateside!
It's almost like a collapsed turbine interchange. Almost.
What exactly is the benefit of a turbo roundabout over a conventional roundabout? It separates traffic by destination more but it creates more conflict points.
(also removes the ability to make a U-turn)