Quote:
Originally Posted by milomilo
I'm not sure if you're joking or not, but roundabouts are great, the more the better! I think the general happiness of the population will improve with less time spent waiting at endless 4 way signalised intersections.
|
I am. Roundabouts are great so long as they are put where they are great. It's the new found infatuation with roundabouts has befallen the city every which way, and it seems it's coming at fairly minimal understanding.
Multilane roundabouts are big structures that require a lot of right of way and make walking trips longer in distance, and possible in time (at least subjectively). Make no mistake about it, their primary function is to move more traffic faster (as you've eluded to) easier and faster. But I guess induced demand has somehow escaped the scrutiny of ardent multilane roundabout proponents. The value of temporal control (like signals) is apparently lost on these same proponents, as you can effectively say goodbye to prioritizing transit, or any other mode. Or heck, what about adjusting for quickly changing conditions for vehicles - like an event at COP for example. Cannot. Green wave? Nope. Increased safety at multilane roundabouts is still debatable unless you're a cyclist, then it's a clear loss.
But yes, they have inaccessible greenery in the middle, so obviously they are walkable.., and Europe has them so they must be good. My understanding is that Spain has effectively banned them from inner cities (confirm those that have lived there?), and if you do a quick high level survey you'll find that they are used sparingly in the inner areas of typical walkable European cities.
So no, I don't believe the more the better when it comes to multilane roundabouts, and their new found status as being the best solution should promptly be reevaluated.