Wisconsin State Journal: Proposed bill would let towns veto roundabouts

[JREwing78]

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

[DaBigE]

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.

[silverback1065]

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!

[hbelkins]

Wish they'd give me veto power over roundabouts. 

[Pete from Boston]

We 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?   

[DaBigE]

We 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.

[SEWIGuy]

We 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. 

[hbelkins]

Well, I know what I would do if *I* was the Grand Unified Alan.

[Pete from Boston]

We 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.

[silverback1065]

We 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".

[SSOWorld]

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!!!

[Pete from Boston]

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".

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.   

[DaBigE]

We 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.

[triplemultiplex]

I'll be sure to thank those 'local officials' while I'm waiting for a damn left turn arrow in their town. 

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.

[jeffandnicole]

"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.

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???!!!"

[Zeffy]

"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.

[Pete from Boston]

NJ's a death trap to inexperienced drivers or out-of-staters.

FTFY

[SSOWorld]

"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!

[Alps]

"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.

[jeffandnicole]

"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.

[Zeffy]

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.

[hobsini2]

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.

[Big John]

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/

...

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. 

[ET21]

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

[Tarkus]

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.