Center for Transportation Research and Training

NEW ROUNDABOUT NEWS

Date sent: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 13:27:09 -0500
From: John Freeman freemanj@city.bloomington.in.us
Organization: City of Bloomington
To: geno@ce.ksu.edu
Subject: Roundabout in Bloomington Indiana

Gene,

I am John Freeman, Public Works Director for the City of Bloomington, Indiana.

In 1997 we were looking at design options for a poorly designed, high accident rate intersection. We took our design options to the public for input and a design for a roundabout (the first for Bloomington) was the choice of our residents.

The roundabout was constructed and the accidents have decreased significantly. The residents seem to really like the roundabout concept and our landscaping department designed and planted the circular area as a basketball (being located in the home of the Indiana Hoosiers that makes perfect sense-- we can provide an aerial photo if you would like).

If you would like details of the project, photos, etc., please let me know.[see photos here and more comments here]

Thanks,

John Freeman
Public Works Director
City of Bloomington
P.O. Box 100
Bloomington, IN 47402-0100
(812) 349-3410

Gene Russell wrote:

John: One more thing. How did you get the citizens to "vote" for a roundabout. Around here the citizens are so against them it is both exasperating and funny. I have written a paper on the "irrational" opposition. In Hutchinson, a group formed CAR (citizens against roundabouts) and spread billboards and lawn signs all over town. In letters to the editor they predict 20 mile backups, students will be killed because they don't know how to drive them, parents will send their kids to other schools if we have roundabouts, fans will quit coming to ball games, etc. etc. And those are some of the more "rational" people. Suggestions on what to put in the circle (Hutchinson Council wanted some artwork) were both sad and hilarious, e.g., put a police station to cover all the crashes that will occur, you won't need anything in the circle as there will be so many car parts from crashes there won't be any room, why do they want "goofy" art to go with the "goofy" circle, and on and on and on. Even editorials (aren't editors supposed to be rational?) like, It's (the roundabout) the most asinine thing the council has ever proposed, bar none. It can't work. How can it possibly work? It will be the mother of all bad intersections [see pictures of this roundabout here]. I gave a paper at a roundabout conference in seattle about these things, quoting these sorts of comments from local newspapers, and had the audience falling out of their chairs laughing. But it is not a laughing matter. Our council opted to spend $430,000 MORE (than a roundabout) to reconstruct and put signals at a dangerous intersection against the recommendations of the city engineer, a local consultant and a nationally prominent roundabout expert. The 3 "no" votes that killed the roundabout conceded it "may" be safer but their constituents were not ready for a roundabout. Sorry to get carried away but you can see why I am impressed that you citizens actually wanted the roundabout. Congratulations. Outstanding PR -- or something.
Gene Russell

Eugene R.(Gene) Russell,Mark and Margaret Hulings Professor, Department of Civil Engineering, 211
8 Fiedler Hall, Manhattan, KS
66506-29
05

Date sent: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 17:15:36 -0500
From: John Freeman freemanj@city.bloomington.in.us
Organization: City of Bloomington
To: geno@ksu.edu
Subject: Re: Roundabout in Bloomington Indiana

Gene,
I wish I could take credit for putting together a fantastic PR program for the roundabout design, but I can't. We had a few public meetings, had conceptual designs for a more "conventional" intersection w/traffic signals and we presented the conceptual drawing of the roundabout. We listened to the groups, gave them the information we could give on the various design options, (we were somewhat limited on roundabout information, other than it will move traffic -- it is safe -- no congestion -- and we promised to make it look good.

We did a bond issue for $ to do several needed road improvement projects $22.5 Million. We had estimated $1.2 Million for designing and constructing a signalized intersection at this site. We spent $497 Thousand for the roundabout, and were able to design and construct another major project with the funds we were able to save.

Accident counts for the three years prior to constructing the roundabout were 30. The three years after the roundabout, we have had 3 accidents. Average traffic counts through the roundabout (coming in off of three roads) is 28,000 vehicles per day.

We will put together a packet to send you including plans.

I am attaching 3 photos, hope you receive them. [see photos here more comments above]

John

From: Baranowski, Bill Bill.Baranowski@searbrown.com
To: 'geno@ce.ksu.edu' geno@ce.ksu.edu
Copies to: 'bill@roundaboutsusa.com'" bill@roundaboutsusa.com
Subject: New Utah and New York Roundabouts
Date sent: Tue, 29 May 2001 15:36:39 -0400

Gene,

We have designed about 11 roundabouts over the last 6 months:

1. Single Lane 130' ICD in Draper, Utah at new post office intersection on 300 East (under construction) on new road.
2. Two lane 160' ICD in Draper, Utah (construction this summer replaces 4-way stop)
3. Kilby Road Park City, Utah 130' ICD, on Interstate 80 frontage road. (under construction)
4. Main ST. and Tabernacle in St. George ,Ut, 120' ICD. Replaces 4-way stop in historic district (design-build this summer)
5&6. I-15 interchange St. George ,Ut 300' 3-lane, 160' raindrop 2-lane with bypass at new super Walmart (under construction)
7&8. Riverdale Utah, two 2-lane 170' ICD on Riverwood drive as part of Super Walmart.
9. 140' ICD single lane at main entrance to Rochester Institute of Technology, Roch NY (under construction)
10&11. two 2-lane 170' ICD (one with rt turn bypass lane) on Robert Dann Drive in Corning NY replacing stops and rural left turn channels. (under construction).

See photos at: www.roundaboutsusa.com [or through the links above]

Bill

Bill Baranowski
Sear-Brown RoundaboutsUSA.com
151 South Regent Street
Salt Lake City, Utah 84111
Phone: (801) 323-0887
Fax: (801) 323-0770
Email: Bill@RoundaboutsUSA.com

From: "Michael Wallwork" wallwork@mediaone.net
To: geno@ksu.edu
Subject: RE: (Fwd) itesafety safety at roundabouts or traffic circles
Date sent: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 19:37:15 -0400

Gene

The issue is simple:

1. Traffic calming circles are used in local streets only with no splitter islands and no yield signs.
2. Roundabouts range from local street to interchanges, from 12 feet diameter to 2000 feet diameter have yield signs, splitter islands and operate at low speeds.
3. Traffic circles go from 300 to 600 feet diameter, with merge, or stop control, no splitter islands, and operate at very high speeds.
[see photos]

From: "Mark Lutjeharms" mlutj@schemmer.com
To: geno@ce.ksu.edu
Subject: roundabouts
Date sent: Thu, 12 Apr 2001 07:37:38 -0500

There are a few roundabouts in the planning stages in Lincoln, Nebraska.

One of them (33rd Street/Sheridan Boulevard) is through the design phase and is scheduled for construction to begin later this Spring.

Our company is currently in the design phase of two others (49th/Francis, West Fletcher Avenue). If you want further information, a gentleman by the name of Virendra Singh (City of Lincoln Public Works Department, Engineering Services Division) is involved with all of them. His number is (402) 441-7835.

Mark E. Lutjeharms, P.E.
Manager, Traffic Engineering

The Schemmer Associates Inc.
Architects-Engineers

1919 South 40th Street, Suite 302
Lincoln, NE 68506-5248
402-488-2500
402-488-3221 (fax)

From: Jennifer Kennedy jkennedy@BonarGroup.com
To: "'geno@ce.ksu.edu'" geno@ce.ksu.edu
Subject: Roundabout in Indiana
Date sent: Mon, 11 Jun 2001 09:51:45 -0500

I recently read about your web site in the Indiana "Pothole Gazette" put out by the Local Technical Assistance Program. The article stated that you were looking for additional stories, pictures, links, etc. Our firm did a roundabout in Allen County, Indiana. Read more on the link provided. [or click here for photos] http://www.bonargroup.com/roundabout.htm, Please contact me to get additional information to post on your site.

This project also won a Merit Award through the Consulting Engineers of Indiana 1997 Engineering Excellence Awards Competition.

Jennifer Kennedy
Marketing Administrator
Bonar Group
219.424.0320, ext. 251
fax: 219.424.0410
jkennedy@bonargroup.com
www.bonargroup.com

616 South Harrison Street
Fort Wayne, IN 46802

From: "Walsh, Brian" WALSHB@WSDOT.WA.GOV
To: "'geno@ce.ksu.edu'" geno@ce.ksu.edu
Subject: NCHRP Question
Date sent: Tue, 19 Jun 2001 16:22:58 -0700

Gene,

If I haven't formally accepted your inquiry as a contact person for the Washington State Roundabout Inventory, I would be happy to update you periodically with new construction of roundabouts. I was counting and listing roundabouts the other day and noted that as of today, we have 20 modern roundabouts, most on the local street network with 3 being operated by WSDOT. WSDOT does have at least 5 in design stage including a few ramp terminals and more and more defacto signal locations are being evaluated against alternatives.....

Hope this summer is treating you well....

Brian

From: "Doug A. Valmore" dougv@clark-dietz.com
To: geno@ce.ksu.edu
Subject: Roundabout Information
Date sent: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 08:53:41 -0500

Sir:

I recently became aware that you are involved in research involving roundabouts across the country, and are in need of additional case study areas. I read this in an article in a local transportation department-focused newsletter for Indiana agencies.

Hamilton County, a county immediately north of Indianapolis, has been experimenting with roundabouts for the last few years, as has the City of Carmel, which is a City within that County. Carmel has aerial shots of their roundabouts. Here are contact names for individuals who may be able to provide you with useful information and pictures:

Les Locke, P.E.
County Engineer
Hamilton County
1717 E. Pleasant Street
Noblesville, Indiana 46060
Phone (317) 773-7770
LKL@co.Hamilton.in.us

Kate Weese, P.E.
City Engineer
One Civic Square
Carmel, Indiana 46032
Phone (317) 571-2441

I hope they can provide you with helpful information. There are currently only two or three roundabouts in Indianapolis, and I am interested in finding out how effective they have proven to be.

Doug Valmore, P.E.
Clark Dietz, Inc.
8445 Keystone Crossing, Suite 105
Indianapolis, IN 46240

From: Phil.Demosthenes@dot.state.co.us
To: jgattis@engr.uark.edu, joe.bared@fhwa.dot.gov, geno@ce.ksu.edu
Copies to: AEisdorfer@cpm.dot.state.nj.us, Bryan.Allery@dot.state.co.us
Subject: another semi, sort of, and partial, roundabout
Date sent: Tue, 24 Jul 2001 13:38:45 -0600

another partial roundabout, perhaps semi-roundabout, perhaps not a roundabout.[see Avon, CO or Eagle, CO photos here]

Since tear drops have different operational issues I am beginning to officially refer to them as partial roundabouts, or not as roundabouts. And, do we call them raindrops or teardrops? Teardrops seem to becoming the most widely used. After all Colorado is a semi-arid state.

I would recommend that they are not casually referred to as roundabouts.

They are not round, yet do employ some aspects of roundabouts on about 180 degrees of the intersection.

They are getting so prevalent in interchange ramp design that I believe they warrant new research.

Given the difficulties arising due to their use on the Federal Interstate System, and that FHWA approval is required in writing for new interstate access points, and that in Colorado alone we have 3 tears with 2 more in proposal stages, I would recommend that FHWA be very careful when considering approve of such access requests since tear drops are insufficiently tested, and not adequately researched. I believe local Div FHWA will be denying a local request for a double tear drop since the design in not proven, and the developer is able to achieve a proper roundabout design with a little more effort.

I think the Roundabout Guide has some good observations and cautions regarding teardrops, but I think it underestimates, or at least inadequately discusses or underestimates the potential problems. Design details are not provided. Guide discussion at 6.3.4 mentions key issues but overall lacks details. The repeated pointing to Avon and Vail as operating teardrop seems to lend credibility to their use, yet these locations are not entirely satisfactory and would probably work better if the issues raised in 6.3.4 and 8.4.3 were implemented.

I guess I disagree with page 223 of the Rbt guide that presumes very little difference.

The relative straight shot across the ramp means the ramp is yield controlled to a continuous flow at a relatively higher speed and should be analyzed that way rather than as a roundabout - which means the ramp capacity is significantly reduced. (the problem in Arizona was extreme but the same sort of issue). In addition there is less gaping, during higher volume periods (no reason to yield or consideration of a yield prior to crossing in front of the ramp).

What do you guys think? Do you know if any state has done research on "teardrop shapes?

Philip Demosthenes
Access Program Administrator
Safety and Traffic Engineering Branch
Colorado DOT
4201 East Arkansas Ave, EP 770
Denver CO 80222-3400

Phone 303-757-9844
FAX 303 757 9219
mailto:phil.demosthenes@dot.state.co.us
Colorado Access Mgmt Web page
http://www.dot.state.co.us/BusinessCenter/Permits/Access/index.htm

From: "Walsh, Brian"
To: "Gene Russell (E-mail)"
Subject: New Multi-lane Roundabout
Date sent: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 09:54:06 -0700

Gene,
Some news to report that I thought you might find informative and interesting...

Our state DOT opened up a multi-lane roundabout at Tester Road/164th Street/SR 522 in the City of Monroe on Monday. It is a 5 leg (two lane circulating) roundabout at a ramp terminal where they needed to attach a frontage road that serves a fairly large high school (1900 students). I've attached a photo that someone sent me yesterday and will take other photo's sometime in August that will be wide angle and show the layout from an elevation standpoint.[see photo here]

Also, I attached an email announcing that John Conrad (who had officially retired to work for a consultant back in January) is back in a similar capacity with our DOT here in Olympia....

Finally,
I have not heard word on who was selected for that NCHRP Roundabout panel and suspect it is getting pretty late to hold out much more hope.....I've been told there were alot of qualified people vying for a spot.......Had you heard anything (I remember you had mentioned you were hoping to apply to do the research rather than the panel)?

Have a great weekend!

Brian Walsh
WSDOT

From: Phil.Demosthenes@dot.state.co.us
To: wallwork@mediaone.net, geno@ksu.edu, Church@ksdot.org
Copies to: Joe.Bared@fhwa.dot.gov
Subject: RE: Rice Rd Roundabout/reply
Date sent: Mon, 30 Jul 2001 09:11:08 -0600

We want the motorist approaching to look left as they approach. The sign on the right is important, we owe it to the driver. (and for police purposes). Don't forget the other signs on the approach leg letting motorists know of an impending change to prepare for. The circle directly in front of them should be a good indication of change. I can not buy into the necessity of a left side yield sign until there is more research to indicate the accident and operation influence. The failure to use correct roundabout design elements increases the need to compensate with signage.

That said, I think left hand yield signs and pavement markings are very helpful as we try to emphasize the need to yield. But I think the approach design, the curves in the approach itself, the visibility of the center island and the splitter island, and the sight visibility of vehicles already in the circle, are the real keys to achieving slower entering speeds and the need to yield. State laws also vary as to what a yield sign means. Does it mean 15 mph as in some states?

A new one in Eagle Colorado. No left side yield or pavement markings.

Philip Demosthenes

From: "Walsh, Brian" WALSHB@WSDOT.WA.GOV
To: "'geno@ksu.edu'" geno@ksu.edu
Subject: RE: FW: Familiar Face Returns to WSDOT
Date sent: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 16:47:06 -0700

Your website is looking great and thanks for the other email on comments about your website....For a Washington State start to your Photo webpage, here is a photo at Port Orchard,WA, We call it the Bethel Avenue Roundabout. I took this photo and it has a yellow watermark in it that is awkward however it is a good ground level shot...

From: Phil.Demosthenes@dot.state.co.us
To: slw5236@ksu.edu
Copies to: geno@ce.ksu.edu
Subject: RE: another semi, sort of, and partial, roundabout (fwd)
Date sent: Fri, 3 Aug 2001 16:59:01 -0600

here is a good one in Vail at I-70. Stitched together with a bit of distortion, but shows most all the elements. Including the slip ramps to and from the interstate ramps. This was taken in the fall of 2000.

Philip Demosthenes

Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2001 17:55:30 -0500
From: Gene Russell geno@ce.ksu.edu
Reply-To: geno@ksu.edu
To: Sheila L Willms slw5236@ksu.edu
Cc: Phil.Demosthenes@dot.state.co.us
Subject: Last 2

Phil: This is the one with a large service station in one quadrant and a McDonalds accross the street. the entrances/exits are about at the end of a long splitter island. Handles all kinds of tourist traffic with cars and trucks hauling campers, trailers and boats. Not far from Brunswick and Harpers ferry .Note it has a truck apron on one tight right turn. I think this is the best designed one in MD. maybe they are learning. They have some I think should be rebuilt.

gene

Date sent: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 13:01:04 -0500
From: "David Church" Church@ksdot.org
To: geno@ksu.edu
Subject: Re: CJ Online story sent by a friend
Gene,

Thanks for the article on sign mounting heights. I think 20 ft is fine (yeah - right). I will pass this along to our signing folks.

A new roundabout opened up yesterday in Topeka at 29th & Urish. It is actually a Shawnee County project, as it is outside the city limits of Topeka. I went out and took a couple of photos last night and I thought I would pass them along to you. Feel free to publish them on the web-page.

Some comments about the roundabout. The signing better be temporary as it is pretty bad (mixture of construction orange and I have never seen a black / white roundabout ahead sign). Also, there is no lighting at the intersection, so traveling through it at night is pretty hard. I have put a call into the County to point a few things out.

Talk to you later,

David Church
KDOT, B.T.E.

The following story was published by CJ Online, the internet edition of The Topeka Capital-Journal.
gene geno@ksu.edu has sent you an article
gene says: we can put sign as high as we want? 20- feet OK ? I have a 20-foot post and don't want to cut it=20

**********************************************

Q AND A: ROAD SIGNS ARE GETTING TALLER
Question: It appeared to me as I drove by that the street sign on the corner of S.E. Shawnee Heights Road and Ward Road was awfully high in the air. I went back to measure it and found the bottom edge of the lower sign is 11 feet off the ground. Why is it so high? --H.L., Topeka.

Answer: The county is mounting such street signs in rural areas differently than in the past and they are higher in the air, said Mike Welch, Shawnee County engineer.

"We are bolting the l0-foot posts on a three-foot stub driven into the ground," he said. "The actual street sign is bolted to the stub about a foot off the ground so it does put the sign high in the air. Formerly, the 10-foot post was driven into the ground, making the top of signs about eight feet above ground."

For the complete text of the story above, visit CJ Online:
http://www.cjonline.com/stories/070101/com_roadsigns.shtml=20 [no longer available on-line]

From: RSLcrown@aol.com
Date sent: Wed, 15 Aug 2001 08:52:36 EDT
Subject: Re: (Fwd) itetraffic roundabout interchange quick que
To: geno@ksu.edu

Hello Gene

The three JPGs are NOT traffic circles, but high capacity modern roundabouts. [see photos here]

The largest is at the intersection of two freeways. This roundabout (A50 / D Road) carries 72,000 vehicles per day and has an average of 6 slight injury accidents / year The crash rate is 0.25 slight injuries / million vehicles.

This large high capacity roundabout has circulating speeds of about 30-35 mph

The two A50 / Heron Cross Roundabouts have medium volumes. The total crashes (for both roundabouts) are 2.8 slight injuries / year.

The design speed is 30 mph.

The Longton Dumbbell has a had an average of 1.9 slight injury crashes / year. The volumes are high as it connects a large housing area to a sub regional centre. There are consequently quite significant pedestrian volumes. The staggered signalised pedestrian crossings can be seen in the JPG.

The speeds on these roundabouts are low - 20-25 mph.

Barry

Date: Fri, 7 Sep 2001 17:23:20 +0200
From: Ignacio Perez Perez "perez@iccp.udc.es"
To: slw5236@ksu.edu
Subject: Roundabouts from Galicia (Spain)
Parts/Attachments:

These roundabouts are from Galicia: A Coru�a y Pontevedra-Vigo. Galicia is my region. I hope you like them.

Ignacio Perez Perez

Escuela T�cnica Superior de Ingenieros de Caminos, Canales y Puertos

Campus de Elvi�a, s/n
15172 A Coru�a
Spain

perez@iccp.udc.es
http://caminos.udc.es/
http://www.xunta.es/index_i.htm

Date sent: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 10:17:10-0500
From: "David Church"
To: geno@ce.ksu.edu
Subject: Roundabout Photos in Dominca (South of U.S. Virgin Islands)

Gene,

I thought I would send you some photos I took of a poorly designed roundabout during my recent trip to the island of Dominica. They drive on the left in Dominica, so things are a little backwards. However, it was interested to see the signing and the splitter islands. There is little to no deflection on several approaches. I watched it for a time and people drove it pretty well, but I certainly wouldn't approve of this design in the U.S. [see photos here]

Thanks,

David Church
KDOT, Traffic

From: Douville, Donna - PW Transportation [mailto:DouviDL@ci.denver.co.us]
Sent: Wednesday, November 28, 2001 11:35 AM
To: itetraffic
Subject: itetraffic 3 lane roundabouts

Hello - We currently have a proposal on the table to approve and construct a 3 - lane roundabout in an area of new development (at the junction of two proposed arterials, total volume about 75,000 weekday). Although there appears to be information available regarding the design and performance of single and double lane roundabouts, information on 3 lane roundabouts is harder to come by. Does anyone have any feedback they could provide on the pros and cons of such an installation, especially, with regard to drivers here in the US. Any reference I could refer to???

Donna Douville, PE
Senior Engineer
City and Countyof Denver

From: "Lindskov, Robert T."
To: "Douville, Donna - PW Transportation","itetraffic"
Subject: RE: itetraffic 3 lane roundabouts
Date sent: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 15:38:40 -0800

Try this website:

http://roundabouts.kittelson.com/resources.html

This site has an inventory of every (most) Roundabouts in the country. It has a search feature that involves multi-lanes too. A pretty good place to start if you ask me.

Bob Lindskov
WSDOT
Traffic Ops
206.440.4382

Date sent: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 15:42:17-0800
From: Jim Hanks
Organization: JRH Transportation Engineering
To: "Douville, Donna - PW Transportation"
Copies to: "'itetraffic'"
Subject: Re: itetraffic 3 lane roundabouts

You might want to check out this six-lane, two-way, five-loop roundabout that is located in Swindon, England. This link was sent to me by Gene Quinn. It actually exists and from what I've heard, works well.

[see the pics locally here or for more info...]
http://www.swindonweb.com/life/lifemagi0.htm

Jim Hanks

From: Phil.Demosthenes@dot.state.co.us
To: geno@ksu.edu
Subject: RE: itetraffic 3 lane roundabouts
Date sent: Thu, 29 Nov 2001 09:33:55-0700

Gene. Thanks for keeping me in the Roundabout information loop. At Colorado DOT we once again have a green light to develop a guidance document for roundabouts on Colorado state highways. I will be preparing it - probably nothing new, but I hope to incorporate a few original ideas from the DOT perspective. We have at least 5 new RBTs in progress at this time. Two at I-70 ramps, three along secondary highways. I have attached Sept 2001 photos of the roundabout in Grand Junction on Horizon Drive. [see photos here] The City had just finished adjusting the splitter islands due to complaints and problems. The close-up photo helps show the changes to each of the islands. I have no information on the details of the selected 'solution'.

The City of Denver proposed 3 lane RBT is in the old Stapleton Airport redeveloping (residential/business) area. Kind of a new city within a city. For those that track such things, the proposal is the future intersection of Martin Luther King Boulevard and Central Park Boulevard (Yosemite). It is in the early assessment stages.

Philip Demosthenes
Safety and Traffic Engineering Branch
Colorado DOT
4201 East Arkansas Ave, EP 770
Denver CO 80222-3400
Phone 303-757-9844
mailto:phil.demosthenes@dot.state.co.us

Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2001 17:36:49 -0500
From: James H. Dunlop
To: roundabt@ksu.edu
Subject: North Carolina Roundabouts

Dr. Russell,

My name is Jim Dunlop, Congestion Management Engineer for the North Carolina DOT. One of my tasks is serving as the Department's roundabout expert. I have been very impressed with your roundabout web site, and hope you don't mind that I have "borrowed" some of the photos from your site for presentations.

I've been lax in sending photos of our NCDOT installed roundabouts, especially since I've "borrowed" so many from you. I see you have a couple of photos from Jon Mack, who is one of our most persistent roundabout proponents among our traveling public. Let me add to the photos he's provided, and give you a little more information.

The site you have in Winston-Salem was built by the City, and the only information I have is basically the photos you already have.

The site in Lewisville (just outside W-S) was actually our second State built roundabout. The first one was in Clemmons (also just outside W-S). The Clemmons site was built because of the construction of the Clemmons Middle School. The school driveway was a fourth leg to an awkward intersection, and our Division (field office) personnel wanted to try a roundabout because of the skews. It was opened to traffic in Dec. 1998, and final paving and marking was done in the Spring '99. The photos I am sending you in the attached Zip file are from after the final paving and marking. (The names of the jpg's start with "Clemmons")

Our second roundabout, in Lewisville, which Mr. Mack has already sent you some photos, was installed in the beginning of 2000. It solved a significant left turn problem (SB on Williams to head onto US 421SB (signed SB, it actually heads east in this area) to Winston-Salem). We have over 900 vehicles making that left in the AM peak hour. There is a two-lane bridge over the freeway which did not need to be replaced structurally, but would have needed turn lanes added because of the turning vehicles. The roundabout eliminated the need for the bridge widening. The SB lefts now have very little delay and queuing, and the previous problem (with delay and queues) did not significantly transfer to the northbound movement (which didn't previously have to yield.) This was so successful that the Division is installing a matching roundabout at the NB ramp intersection, which should be completed in the next few months. (These photos are named "Lewisville", naturally.) I've also included a GIF file with a map showing these two locations.

One problem we've seen with these two is that the center truck apron is simply stamped, colored asphalt, and they really don't restrict or discourage smaller vehicles from "cheating" in the middle, and driving faster. In some of the Lewisville pictures, you'll see some concrete "dots" that were installed to try and discourage this practice. The Division assures me that they will built all others with a better, raised truck apron.

The Department has built two other roundabouts for which I do not yet have pictures. The first is in Durham, in a residential area. This one really is more of a modified traffic island "mess" leftover from the fifties, when the neighborhood was built. We modified it because we were detouring traffic through this area because of a highway widening (I-85). It was designed and built in a period of about two weeks, as the detour was a late modification to our traffic control plans. I would probably classify this one as more of a traffic calming device at this point (now that the detour has been ended.)

We also have just built one in New Bern (coastal area), where we removed a bridge over the Neuse River. I was down there about three weeks ago, and they had just opened it for traffic, but the paving, markings and signs were not finished.

in addition to these, we have quite a few in the works. In the immediate future, we hope to have two more in Durham, and one in the western rural area of the state, in Wilkes County. Longer term (as part of larger construction projects) we have one more in design in the old Salem area of Winston-Salem, which will be our first multi-lane roundabout. We have a pair at an interchange on I-485 outside of Charlotte, and one in the mountain area of the state in Waynesville. I have a few more that are in the planning/decision stages. (I haven't had a chance to sit down and develop a list, once I do I'll forward it to you.)

If you have any questions (or if the attachment doesn't make it), please do hesitate to contact me at 919-250-4151 or via e-mail (usually best) at jdunlop@dot.state.nc.us. Thanks for maintaining such an interesting and important site, and I look forward to hearing your presentation at TRB on Monday 1/14.

Jim Dunlop
Congestion Management Engineer
North Carolina Department of Transportation
Raleigh, NC
919-250-4151
jdunlop@dot.state.nc.us

From the St. Petersburg Times, published August 2, 2001

[For this original online article, click here. To see photos of this roundabout, click here. Also read more information about this roundabout from the Florida Technology Transfer Center website.]

LETTERS TO THE EDITORS

Roundabout rouses many views

I've read so many letters about the Clearwater Beach roundabout that I just had to join in.

I think most people have missed the point regarding the fountain obstructing the view of traffic on the other side of the roundabout.

I've used the roundabout, without incident, dozens of times since its completion and want to make this point: You don't need to see the traffic on the other side of the fountain, just the traffic approaching your entrance. Maybe the reason people are getting into accidents is that they are not looking at the cars approaching them.

The decision to enter the roundabout is based on whether the approaching cars have exited the roundabout, leaving a space to enter, not what the cars are doing on the other side of the fountain!

I would hate to spend so much of our taxpayer money to remove the fountain unnecessarily.

-- Kent Golden, Clearwater

The British point of view

I was telling my friend about all the problems the people are having with the infamous Clearwater Beach roundabout. As she grew up in England and therefore with roundabouts, she was curious to know what was causing all the trouble.

We weren't there 20 seconds before she saw the problem. Her first words were, "No one is indicating (using their turn signals)." You have to signal your intentions to keep the traffic flowing as well as let others know what you intend to do.

Another of her observations is that when you are in the left lane and want to exit, you have to move to the right lane safely or go around again until you can. Sometimes on the English roundabouts you go around several times.

We don't need more engineers, wider lanes or changes to exits, or to remove the fountain. We need to be educated on how to drive on a roundabout.

-- Virginia Sheare, Clearwater and Ontario

Needs reconfiguration

I have been following all the commentary on the roundabout. I drive the roundabout daily and can clearly see cars approaching.

The problem is, I have no idea whether those cars will turn off or continue around the circle until the last minute. My entrance is just a few feet from where the approaching car will either exit or continue around. When traffic is heavy and you don't want to wait all day, you must make your best guess and gun it.

That is why you see cars in the fountain or taking out benches adjacent to the fountain. There are too many entrances and exits and they are too close to each other. The fountain needs to go, since its spray creates a hazard, not to mention a bath if you have the top down.

And the entrances and exits need to be reduced and spaced properly. This may require a major reconfiguration and rerouting of traffic, but better to do it right once than waste money (again) on a fix that doesn't work.

If you want to keep developing the beach, you need a much more effective way to get people to it. Neither the current configuration nor the proposed one will support today's traffic needs, much less the development currently proposed.

-- Ed Marchiselli Jr., Clearwater

It's an improvement

Re: Visibility is crucial to roundabout, so fountain should go, letter, July 25.

There is no fountain spray making windshield wipers necessary when going around the roundabout. This is because the fountain has been working improperly or not at all for several months.

As residents of Clearwater Beach, we know that the roundabout has improved the flow of traffic a great deal.

Hopefully, with expected changes, it will improve even more. However, the "beauty" of the fountain and gateway to the beach is now a constant eyesore.

-- Harriet and Clyde Hall, Clearwater

It's easy and nice-looking

Re: The beautiful roundabout -- and it is just that, a beautiful entrance to Clearwater Beach.

It can be enjoyed by just reading and following the simple signs. Quit griping about change. It is so much easier than the old intersection. Read the signs and obey them. It helps us enjoy even more beauty at our beach.

-- Virginia Young, Clearwater