‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

The Beauty of Roundabouts

100 points · 222 comments · ngruhn

  1. propter_hoc · · focus · HN ↗
    My best friend is a highly experienced civil engineer, specialized in designing intersections. His take on roundabouts:

    - They are adored by urban planners because they look nice and you can put a statue or fountain in the middle

    - They reduce T-bone collisions

    However:

    - Small fender benders and sideswipes are much more frequent

    - They use way more area

    - They work where each direction has an approximately equal amount of traffic. However, usually, one direction (north/south, say) has a larger share of the traffic. In those cases, the bulk of traffic all needs to slow down, downshift, turn a bit in one direction and then turn a bit in the other direction for the minority of traffic that's bleeding on or off the main artery. In those cases, a traffic light is better because the timing can be adjusted to the proportion of traffic from each direction (and more flexible since it can be adjusted over time).

    - Finally, they're also (mostly) worse for cyclists and pedestrians.

    Essentially, they have use cases, especially in small towns, and they're pretty, but they're usually not the right engineering solution.

    1. kawsper · · focus · HN ↗
      As a bicyclist and pedestrian (in Denmark) what is it that’s worse about roundabouts for me? I think they work really well.
      1. embedding-shape · · focus · HN ↗
        I think to an American, a roundabout is this thing that only works for cars and don't take pedestrians or bicyclists into account, with no paths or crosswalks or anything, so hence "Worse for pedestrians". I don't blame them, both roundabouts and care for pedestrians seems uncommon over there, so of course their experience will point towards roundabouts being worse overall.
Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.