Sometimes it seems like things work on paper and the idea is great, but we forget that people don't like change/can't handle it/cannot learn. Take the North American roundabout as an example. In theory it's great. It helps all traffic to move smoothly with no one direction getting held up for a longer period of time than another. It also helps to slow traffic and reduce accidents. Let's start putting them in. And you know what, why don't we change existing lights to roundabouts too. Then traffic congestion will be eased and the world will be a wonderful place...
But... That doesn't seem to be happening at some of the roundabouts I've used in Ancaster and Kitchener. With the exception of the single lane roundabouts in the suburbs (which still have some small traffic confusion), roundabouts seem like a hectic and stressful place. Take for example the roundabout at Homer Watson Boulevard and Block Line. I knew it was going to be trouble when coming up to the traffic circle and there were construction signs informing drivers that cars in the roundabout have the right of way. I was in the left lane and it is a two lane roundabouts. As far as I knew, vehicles in the left hand side of a roundabout could go left and straight, while those in the right lane could go straight and right. As a result, I stayed in the left lane and entered the roundabout to go straight. However, when I was in the roundabout there was a car that entered the roundabout from block line and attempted to drive "through me" and started honking when I kept going straight in his way.
I think this is an example of how ideas don't always work and it is probably due to poor education about roundabouts in general (I include myself in this). When a municipality has a great idea to introduce a new tool to promote better traffic flow, it doesn't help when the average person probably doesn't know what to do when faced with one and there is no effective way to communicate with these people. While the city has recognized that there is a problem, i.e. they put up the signs, I think it may be best to stop construction of all roundabouts that contain more than one lane until they can figure out how to better educate people on the rules.
For a starter on roundabout rules, here is a link to the transport Canada help guide: http://www.tc.gc.ca/eng/roadsafety/tp-tp14787-menu-179.htm
(Although I would like to point out that it does not address multi-lane roundabouts)
The Waterloo record has posted a guide of what the Regional Municipality of Waterloo recommends for driving in a roundabout. Finally, some guidance.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.therecord.com/news/local/article/752365--how-to-drive-walk-or-cycle-in-a-roundabout
The Region of Waterloo is in LOVE with roundabouts. In most every traffic environmental assessment, a roundabout is bound to be found as the recommendation. However, I am not so sure about this whole roundabout thing. Yes, I agree with them in principal. But, I read in one of the report drafted up by Stantec for the Region of Waterloo that they recommend roundabouts because they are safer for pedestrians because traffic is slower through roundabouts. I would like to respectfully disagree and request that someone please prove me wrong. I drive through a roundabout every day to work and traffic is not always slow. If I can see that I will have the right of way when approaching the roundabout, I will continue on through at the same speed I am approaching. While it is my responsibility to be on the lookout for pedestrians, from where I am entering the roundabout I cannot see the pedestrian walkways on the other side. Unfortunately, we cannot rely on people to enter slow. I myself am guilty of going through too fast because I can. I would think that a signal intersection would be safer in that there are clear signals that indicate a pedestrian has right of way. So I would say, if you are creating a roundabout for pedestrian safety, that is probably the wrong strategy until they can figure out a way to indicate that there is a pedestrian crossing the roundabout to drivers.
ReplyDelete