Safety of roundabouts debated in Hilliard | The Columbus Dispatch

The only reason officials in Hilliard want roundabouts is becuase they think it makes the community look more expensive. Everyone knows that Hilliard people are just a bunch of Dublin want-to-bes!

Regular cross raods don't need landscaper to upkeep the center of the road,... hmmm

Dublin wanna-be's? Talk about setting your sights low.

I'm a big fan of roundabouts as a mechanism for facilitating traffic flow. But I'd have to agree that roundabouts and pedestrian traffic don't mix very well. In Europe, roundabouts are often constructed with pedestrial 'subways,' which are walkways that go beneath the roundabouts. It seems to me that this would be a much safer way to do things at this busy intersection - especially since it is so close to two K-6 schools.

The only problem with roundabouts is the same with any traffic situation: The people that won't drive safely, and use common sense. Roundabouts are much safer than signal-operated intersections. Studies throughout the world have proven this. I use the Hilliard roundabouts everyday, and I see people that simply are not using thier heads when they enter one of them. Many people in this area are affluent, and believe the world should either stop for them, or get out of thier way. They pull out in front of people, don't use turn signals, talk on thier phones and disregard traffic signs, sinals, pedestrians, and bicylists. It's one of the more dangerous areas in the columbus area to drive in because of thier "entitled" mentality. And they do it in thier Mercedes, Lexus, Land Rover, or BMW.

They had rounabouts in Canada for years and got rid of them because they were much more difficult to navigate.

If it is such a concern, why not create the underground walkways under them? Not an option? too expensive? I really wonder how well these roundabouts will work when they are SO close together too. Will it really improve the traffic flow that much? With the amount of traffic through there, I can easily see those traffic circles getting clogged.

Just because people around here are ignorant to roundabouts doesn't mean they are dangerous. It's these idiot that can't comprehend how they function that are dangerous.

They work well in Europe and they make the drive between Hilliard and Dublin faster and safer.

Now the Dublin "roundabouts" on Rings Road - what in the world were they thinking????

Agreed on the pedestrian issue. I think roundabouts are great for cars (when they aren't ruined with stop signs) but trying to mix pedestrian traffic in with them is just asking for trouble. Muirfield-Brand is extraordinarily dangerous for pedestrians.

buckeyetodd wrote:

They had rounabouts in Canada for years and got rid of them because they were much more difficult to navigate.

Putting something in print doesn't make it true. Canada has (and continues to have) limited numbers of roundabout that work just fine. The are not a panacea. Your comment sounds like the healthcare argument that Canadians hate their public option healthcare. The only problem with that is research shows the great majority love it. As with roundabout- they work great in some places.

There are two discussions on this topic, so I'm posting this message twice.

I thank Dean Narciso for writing about the problems for pedestrians in multilane roundabouts.
This article did not include the details of the data which I have found on roundabouts in Gahanna, Hilliard and Dublin. During my walking study of the Davidson/Britton Parkway roundabout, 8 motorists yielded (13% of total) and 53 did not at the entrance lanes. Zero motorists yielded and 41 did not at the exit lanes. I had similar experiences at the other roundabouts. I believe that this problem of failure to yield is much worse at multilane roundabouts than it is at intersections with pedestrian signals.
The safety data for roundabouts includes single lane roundabouts and it is difficult to find safety data for multilane roundabouts. So, I looked into the crash numbers available from the Ohio Department of Public Safety (from crash reports). The Morse/62 roundabout had 11 crashes in 2005 (the year before roundabout construction) and 49 crashes in 2008 (after the roundabout was completed). There were 3 injury crashes in 2005 and 4 injury crashes in 2008. So far in 2009, there have been 37 crashes reported of which 4 involved injuries. The Davidson/Britton Parkway roundabout has had 31 crashes reported to date in 2009 with 5 injuries.
This article did not address the main concern I have about roundabouts. How can a roundabout meet the requirements of the American with Disabilities Act? How can a pedestrian who is blind (or a child for that matter) use a roundabout? The US Access Board has recommended that all multilane roundabouts have pedestrian-activated signals. The Federal Highway Administration has recommended their use as best practice. I pray that the US Departments of Justice and Transportation will adopt and enforce these recommendations. I suggest to anyone who thinks multilane roundabouts are safe for pedestrians to try to walk one and see for your self. Here's a YouTube video of one of my attempts:
http://www.youtube.com/watch ...
I have been sharing my data and accessibility information with Central Ohio engineers and planners. I hope that others who feel as I do will attend public meetings to voice your concerns.
Tricia Kovacs
Gahanna, Ohio

These things are known as 'rotaries' where they are common in New England and are nothing but trouble.

At least New England had the excuse that they became necessary once vehicular travel, unforeseen to several earlier generations, began to intrude upon long-established cities and neighborhoods there.

For instance, since Massachusetts was fully settled by the beginning of the 18th century, the road from Natick to Worchester for example simply went to the center of each town and there was no need for any type of interchange until motor vehicles came along 2 centuries later.

And because it would have been unrealistice at the time to tear down homes, buildings, businesses and entire neighborhoods, they simply improvised and created 'rotaries', which were fine in the '20's and '30's, but which are a nightmare today.

There is no excuse for the rotaries now being considered in central Ohio, as they are a direct result of the failure over the past 2 decades to require developers to first provide for a future infrastructure which they knew their developments were going to require and which they now require. Indeed, is it any surprise that this story focuses on Hilliard, a nice village 30 years ago whose beautiful corn fields are now the epitome of suburban sprawl?

No, it's not.

Book it. These rotaries are nothing but trouble and are the fault of irresponsible developers and those in local government who failed to require a provision for future infrastructure at the time of development.

As such, they should be a warning sign as current development extends to future suburbs.

After reading through this article it is apparent that each side has valid concerns regrarding safety. The Hilliard Engineering Office & the Hilliard PD need to work together to educate people about the law regarding the assignment of Right-of-way at pedestrian cross walks (Ohio Revised Code 4511.06 (included below). The education effort needs to include both "teaching" (reminding everyone of the law) followed by enforcement.(Yes that would mean issuing tickets to offending drivers, offending cyclists & offending pedestrians.)

I'd like to offer an open question to all of the people involved in this article: What do you do when you are driving down the road and approach an intersection? Do you look for pedestrians & bicyclists? Or do you just travel through only looking at the roadway? Remember in this instance you're talking about the proposed Hilliard roundabouts, so are your concerns based on facts or perceptions caused by the way you drive?

You see, the irony here is the fact that when it comes to intersections drivers no longer want to take time to obey stop and yield signs, believe that the law is right turn on red without stop (when in fact its right turn on red AFTER stop), the yellow signal means to go faster and a dark traffic signal means I can continue going and the other guy (who believes the same thing while approaching on the cross street) is just going to have to watch for me. Similarly, they believe that the concept of ticketing by either a police office or via enforcement cameras are just revenue generators and forms of harassment as opposed to an educational reminder that you've broken a law, that is there to protect everyone using the roadway.

If you haven't done so in awhile, I would suggest that you check out Section 4511 of the Ohio Revised Code and see what you have agreed to do when you got your Ohio Driver's license. Here's the section dealing with pedestrians at crosswalks:

4511.46 Right-of-way of pedestrian within crosswalk.
(A) When traffic control signals are not in place, not in operation, or are not clearly assigning the right-of-way, the driver of a vehicle, trackless trolley, or streetcar shall yield the right of way, slowing down or stopping if need be to so yield or if required by section 4511.132 of the Revised Code, to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within a crosswalk when the pedestrian is upon the half of the roadway upon which the vehicle is traveling, or when the pedestrian is approaching so closely from the opposite half of the roadway as to be in danger.

(B) No pedestrian shall suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle, trackless trolley, or streetcar which is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard.

(C) Division (A) of this section does not apply under the conditions stated in division (B) of section 4511.48 of the Revised Code.

(D) Whenever any vehicle, trackless trolley, or streetcar is stopped at a marked crosswalk or at any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection to permit a pedestrian to cross the roadway, the driver of any other vehicle, trackless trolley, or streetcar approaching from the rear shall not overtake and pass the stopped vehicle.

(E) Except as otherwise provided in this division, whoever violates this section is guilty of a minor misdemeanor. If, within one year of the offense, the offender previously has been convicted of or pleaded guilty to one predicate motor vehicle or traffic offense, whoever violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor of the fourth degree. If, within one year of the offense, the offender previously has been convicted of two or more predicate motor vehicle or traffic offenses, whoever violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor of the third degree.

Effective Date: 01-01-2004

Buckeye wrote:

If it is such a concern, why not create the underground walkways under them? Not an option? too expensive? I really wonder how well these roundabouts will work when they are SO close together too. Will it really improve the traffic flow that much? With the amount of traffic through there, I can easily see those traffic circles getting clogged.

Then you get into the perceived safety concern about children being attacked down there.

I have no problem with roundabouts in low-pedestrian-traffic intersections.

However - the area of the proposed roundabouts is packed with inexperienced teenage drivers at precisely the same times that the area is flooded with foot traffic from the middle and elementary schools in the area. As those of you who live in the area are aware - driving in the area in the morning and mid-afternoon is akin to navigating a bumper-car rink.

If an experienced dump truck driver can't be expected to observe a crosswalk zone in a straight section of street in broad daylight, can we really expect a 16-year-old to navigate a curving roundabout in the half-light of morning with cars zipping into the interection at 30-foot-intervals?

A child will die in such an intersection within a year of completion - and much of the blame will (and should) be placed at the foot of the City of Hilliard when this takes place.

Be it because of a lack of understanding how to use or because it is unsafe, I can't tell you the number of times I have seen or been involved in near miss traffic accidents at the two roundabouts (especailly the one on Davidson)I have to go through daily. Add in pedestrians, and good grief I worry. The multilane roundabout on Davidson has very cryptic navigation signs with strange symbols on it that you can't just look at and understand what to do. I can't tell you the number of people I've seen just stop and try to figure out what the sign is telling them. Bad design I think.

The Morse/62 roundabout had 11 crashes in 2005 (the year before roundabout construction) and 49 crashes in 2008 (after the roundabout was completed). There were 3 injury crashes in 2005 and 4 injury crashes in 2008. So far in 2009, there have been 37 crashes reported

Excellent point. I avoid the Morse/62 roundabout whenever possible. No one seems to have any idea how it works and you have to be a defensive driver to the utmost. If anyone thinks that roundabouts are a good idea, they should personally try the Morse/62 fiasco and then reflect.

I will never understand why they don't just make one big roundabout out of the triangle instead of two small roundabouts with a stop light at one corner. The current plan looks like a disaster waiting to happen when the light backs up traffic into the one roundabout - then it will back up into the other. Add all the drivers, teen and parent, the young pedestrians, and yes - someone will die.

But I think the underground crossings could help prevent the problems.

Overall there are too many bad and distracted drivers for this to work well, and I see too many people that can't correctly navigate the current roundabouts. These will be unavoidable for too many people.

I don't think it is the roundabouts that are unsafe, it is the idiots who don't know how to drive that make them unsafe!

Motorists barely yield to other traffic let along pedestrians. This is more about bad driver behavior and insufficient education than what kind of roads people navigate. Selfish and distracted drivers who don't know or don't care about the rules of the road are the issue.

Roundabouts are safer alternatives to signaled intersections plus the flow of traffic is better. If people would only take the time to do a little research these points are clear. I would much rather navigate a roundabout and keep moving (or stop momentarily for a pedestrian) than stop at traffic lights

If someone just walks back and forth across the street during rush hour you are bound to almost get hit lots of times. It does not matter what kind of intersection it is.

Once people learn how to use them I am sure they will work fine. People are just scared of change.