INDOT Planning More Roundabouts

[mukade]

Indiana DOT plans 28 intersections for roundabouts (from Chicago Tribune)

"Safety concerns are driving the Indiana Department of Transportation to plan the installation of roundabouts at 28 more intersections across the state over the next five years..."

[tdindy88]

In case anyone was curious as to where these new roundabouts are located, since you can only buy or get a paid subscription to the Indianapolis Business Journal, where this article orginated from the article was a little misleading. Twelve are planned for Central Indiana, eight of them at the interchanges along the new U.S. 31 corridor being built in Hamilton County. Those roundabouts would be at Rangeline Road, 131st, 136th and 161st Streets. The others are at SR 32 and US 421 in Boone County, SR 144 and Kitchen Road in Morgan County and two along SR 267 at County Roads 300 South and 150 South in the Plainfield/Avon area. Plus, there are some more planned for throughout the state but the article wasn't that specific, only mentioning the planned roundabout at SR 25 to the east of I-65 along the new Hoosier Heartland corridor.

In addition, it seems that there are two new roundabouts planned along Indianapolis city streets on the south side that are slated for completion in 2013, making these the first since Monunment Circle, which the aritcle IMO incorrectly called a roundabout (I say it's a traffic circle, but oh well.) As well, a few more roundabouts are under consideration for other parts of the city.

[hbelkins]

You say traffic circle, I say roundabout
You say tomayto, I say tomahto
Let's blow every damn one of them up!

[NE2]

You say traffic circle, I say roundabout
You say tomayto, I say tomahto
Let's blow every damn one of them up!

Sure. Get FHWA to ban roundabouts in the MUTCD.

[hbelkins]

Sure. Get FHWA to ban roundabouts in the MUTCD.

Since a roundabout isn't a traffic control device, that wouldn't work.

i'd rather put political pressure on lawmakers to put political pressure on DOTs not to build them. 

[US71]

Sure. Get FHWA to ban roundabouts in the MUTCD.

Since a roundabout isn't a traffic control device, that wouldn't work.

i'd rather put political pressure on lawmakers to put political pressure on DOTs not to build them. 

What do you propose replacing them with?

[NE2]

Sure. Get FHWA to ban roundabouts in the MUTCD.

Since a roundabout isn't a traffic control device, that wouldn't work.

A roundabout is totally a traffic control device. It's being used by The Man to control us into going to the right of center.

[qguy]

...Monunment Circle, which the aritcle IMO incorrectly called a roundabout (I say it's a traffic circle, but oh well.)...

You say traffic circle, I say roundabout
You say tomayto, I say tomahto
Let's blow every damn one of them up!

The biggest difference between a circle and a roundabout is that in a circle vehicles entering have the right of way and in a roundabout vehicle leaving have the right of way. This is also the biggest reason why a roundabout has a much higher capacity than a circle of the same dimensions.

Not saying you have to like them, just saying they're very different.

[kphoger]

Everybody hates roundabouts right up until the point they're built and traffic flow improves.  Then people are curiously silent on the issue.  But, in a city where a poorly designed traffic circle of days gone by created mass chaos, hysteria, and carnage, it's very hard to convince people that a well designed roundabout can be safer and more efficient than a signalized intersection.  The first one's always the hardest.

You should have heard how people in Branson complained about the Branson Landing roundabout; now that it efficiently carries as much traffic daily as the Strip, the compalining has stopped and there are more being built; they even have a new diverging diamond interchange just up the street.

[NE2]

The biggest difference between a circle and a roundabout is that in a circle vehicles entering have the right of way and in a roundabout vehicle leaving have the right of way.

Please stop spreading this BS. American circle == British roundabout == New England rotary, which is just a circular intersection. Usually in all cases traffic already in the circle has the right of way. Recently the term 'modern roundabout' has come into use for a specific efficient design. Since Americans weren't using 'roundabout' already, the 'modern' is often dropped in the U.S.

[mobilene]

Wow, a roundabout at SR 32/US 421.  That is a 4-way stop right now, with SR 32 being four lanes with left-turn lanes.  I drive through there frequently and have repeatedly seen drivers on 32 blow right through that stop.  The roundabout will be welcome.

[english si]

Please stop spreading this BS. American circle == British roundabout == New England rotary, which is just a circular intersection.

As a Brit, American Circle doesn't not equal British Roundabout. Stop spreading this BS.

In UK English, a circular interchange where traffic circulating has to give way to traffic entering is a traffic circle, which - as they are so rare - is a loan word from US English and the days before SABRE (10-12 years ago) when the few online British roadgeeks were on m.t.r.. Such a junction is considered by no Brit (not even traffic engineers) to be a roundabout. Also, in UK English, a roundabout isn't necessarily circular (or even ovoid).

In the Aruba thread, froggie had the difference as being size - modern roundabouts were certain size, therefore all bigger ones were traffic circles and not roundabouts (in fact they seem to be a specific type of roundabout the Dutch use called turbo roundabouts).

Thus I've seen three differing definitions for the difference between traffic circles and roundabouts on this forum in the past week or so - size, UK/US English and priority. Where's our Academie Française to dictate which one is correct? Oh wait, English is a flexible language with definition defined by usage, rather than decreed by elites.

BTW, The Magic Roundabout was officially called 'County Islands' and the type of junction (for it's not unique) was officially a 'ring junction'. However common usage has meant that County Islands is now officially 'The Magic Roundabout' and the type of junction is officially a magic roundabout.

[NE2]

Please stop spreading this BS. American circle == British roundabout == New England rotary, which is just a circular intersection.

As a Brit, American Circle doesn't not equal British Roundabout. Stop spreading this BS.

In UK English, a circular interchange where traffic circulating has to give way to traffic entering is a traffic circle, which - as they are so rare - is a loan word from US English and the days before SABRE (10-12 years ago) when the few online British roadgeeks were on m.t.r.. Such a junction is considered by no Brit (not even traffic engineers) to be a roundabout. Also, in UK English, a roundabout isn't necessarily circular (or even ovoid).

You just said that this use of 'traffic circle' is "probably only used by British roadgeeks". Why, then, should I care about that usage?


But we're getting away from the main issue - that is, a traffic circle in the U.S. does not necessarily have yield-to-entering-traffic (and in fact, usually does not). Regardless of whether I was correct about Britland, qguy's statement was a load of BS.

[hbelkins]

What do you propose replacing them with?

Traffic lights or stop signs.

[english si]

You just said that this use of 'traffic circle' is "probably only used by British roadgeeks". Why, then, should I care about that usage?

Because qguy is not British: as qguy is a speaker of US English, then my points about definition being defined by usage, not diktat, stand. The word probably shows that if I put money on the side with the better odds, I would have lost. If I missed the word 'probably', then I'd have been wrong. You should care about that usage as US English speakers are using it, not just UK English speakers

It also shows that your treatment of 'traffic circle' and 'roundabout' as being synonymous terms in US/UK English respectively isn't true, which was actually my main point in mentioning the UK English definition of traffic circle.

Finally, that it's a US loan word suggests that it was considered, by the people of m.t.r. (or at least the Brits thought so and it wasn't challenged or refuted), that traffic going round gives way to that entering the junction was the main US arrangement for round intersections. If 'traffic circle' was normally the same priority as roundabouts, then it would have been a pointless word to use to distinguish the two different priorities.

[Jordanah1]

Everybody hates roundabouts right up until the point they're built and traffic flow improves.  Then people are curiously silent on the issue.  But, in a city where a poorly designed traffic circle of days gone by created mass chaos, hysteria, and carnage, it's very hard to convince people that a well designed roundabout can be safer and more efficient than a signalized intersection.  The first one's always the hardest.

You should have heard how people in Branson complained about the Branson Landing roundabout; now that it efficiently carries as much traffic daily as the Strip, the compalining has stopped and there are more being built; they even have a new diverging diamond interchange just up the street.

i would absoloutely come to the same conclusion as you, the first one is definitely the hardest....here in oshkosh WI. we had our first built at a buisy 4way intersection, a few years before we got 16 or so more allong the highway...polls showed that only like4% of people supported them....however its now well of 50% approval...probely closer to 70-80%...i personaly was a hater...but i absoloutely love them now...go through 1 at least twice a day

[qguy]

...a traffic circle in the U.S. does not necessarily have yield-to-entering-traffic (and in fact, usually does not). Regardless of whether I was correct about Britland, qguy's statement was a load of BS.

Perhaps in Florida. Throughout the northeast, however, there have been a lot of circles for a long, long time. Almost every one of them, larger or small, gave the right of way to traffic entering the circle. So don't be so quick to label every thing you disagree with as "a load of BS." A simple acknowledgement of regional differences would suffice.

Finally, that it's a US loan word suggests that it was considered ... that traffic going round gives way to that entering the junction was the main US arrangement for round intersections. If 'traffic circle' was normally the same priority as roundabouts, then it would have been a pointless word to use to distinguish the two different priorities.

Precisely. As a former PennDOT employee, I can definitively say that this is exactly why the word "roundabout" is now used–to *distinguish* it (ahem) from the usual arrangement in a circle. Or else we would just call them circles. (Duh.)

As I say, at least throughout the northeast US.

[PurdueBill]

Throughout the northeast, however, there have been a lot of circles for a long, long time. Almost every one of them, larger or small, gave the right of way to traffic entering the circle......As I say, at least throughout the northeast US.

Don't Massachusetts (and other New England) circles/rotaries give right of way to those in the circle, not those entering?  At least growing up there that's what I thought I remember. 

[qguy]

Throughout the northeast, however, there have been a lot of circles for a long, long time. Almost every one of them, larger or small, gave the right of way to traffic entering the circle......As I say, at least throughout the northeast US.

Don't Massachusetts (and other New England) circles/rotaries give right of way to those in the circle, not those entering?  At least growing up there that's what I thought I remember. 

You might be right, at least for some of them. Virtually all of the circles I've seen though in New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, etc. give or gave the right of way to traffic entering. Which isn't to say there aren't or weren't exceptions.

Interestingly, the FHWA's guide to roundabouts (PDF here: www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/00067/00067.pdf) identifies the entry/exit right of way feature the key design difference between the roundabout and the circle. A quick survey of DOT websites reveals that a regionally diverse group (New York, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Wisconsin, Kansas, Oregon, and Washington) feature information pages which identify the same entry/exit right of way difference. Independent engineering websites show the same.

Many information guides use the word "some" or "many" when describing circle as having exiting traffic yielding to entering traffic. In some areas, all circles may have been set up that way; in other areas, many or at least some. In still other areas, perhaps none were. The key difference is that ALL roundabouts feature entering traffic yielding to exiting traffic.

Look, I don't wish to flog a dead horse (probably too late for that at any rate ). It's just that no one can claim that there's no difference between circles and roundabouts. Entry/exit right of way is just the dominant difference. Others include entry deflection, slower operational speed, generally smaller size, and lack of pedestrian entry to the central hub, all of which may or may not have been present in any given circle but are present in every roundabout.

Love 'em, hate 'em, or somewhere in between, you simply can't shrug them off as the same thing, either by characteristic or traffic handling results.

(BTW, PennDOT's guide is here: ftp://ftp.dot.state.pa.us/public/Bureaus/design/PUB414/GuideToRoundabouts.pdf)

[NE2]

You might be right, at least for some of them. Virtually all of the circles I've seen though in New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, etc. give or gave the right of way to traffic entering. Which isn't to say there aren't or weren't exceptions.

I grew up in New Jersey and spent some time in New England. I know of no circle/rotary that gives right of way to entering traffic as a rule. There are definitely some that give right of way to traffic entering on some approaches, but that's probably still a minority. Perhaps you can name one or two where all entering traffic gets right of way?

Really, in U.S. usage, (modern) roundabout is a subset of circle/rotary. Something designed as a modern roundabout before the current fad would have been called a circle/rotary.

[qguy]

You say traffic circle, I say roundabout
You say tomayto, I say tomahto

Really, in U.S. usage, (modern) roundabout is a subset of circle/rotary.

I was just responding to your post that seemed to say that you thought a circle and a roundabout were the same thing. Here you say that a roundabout is a different kind of circle.

Well, yeah, OK, they are. Perhaps I was taking you wrong originally. In which case, my profuse apologies for the trip down Weedy Lane.

[nds76]

I avoid roundabouts like the plague. I want nothing to do with those monstrosities.

[kphoger]

I've been known to go out of my way just to USE a roundabout.  I love them.
To date, I've used roundabouts in....
Princeton, MN
Medord, MN
Columbia, MO
Olathe, KS
Fredonia, KS
Emporia, KS
Florence, KS
Branson, MO
Wichita, KS
...as well as the following circles that either aren't fully yield-upon-entry or are uncontrolled:
Jonesboro, IL
Benton, IL
Marion, IL
Belleville, IL
Parras de la Fuente, Coah
Puerto Vallarta, Jal
Tequila, Jal
Punta Mita, Nay
Maybe more, I'm sure I left one or two out.  The only ones I've had any issues with are those in the second list, specifically Benton and Belleville; both of those are single-lane uncontrolled circles with high traffic volumes.

[tradephoric]

I have an interest in roundabouts but wouldn't say i'm a roundabout lover.  I did, however, create a Google KML of over 1,700 roundabouts that have been constructed in the USA and Canada with the year of construction associated with every roundabout (you can use the slider within Google Earth to see how they have popped up like pimples since 1990).  I posted this on another thread but it didn't seem to get much interest. 

http://www.mediafire.com/?77yqodwcczt4fc8

[kphoger]

Alas, I am on a work computer, so clicking 'Download' is not something I'm wont to do...