Top Comments recognizes the previous day's Top Mojo and strives to promote each day's outstanding comments through nominations made by Kossacks like you. Please send comments (before 9:30pm ET) by email to topcomments@gmail.com or by our KosMail message board.
In case you’re wondering if this diary is going to be about literal road intersections...yes...why yes, it is. But I’ve got you here now, so you have to stay! (Unless, you know, you click the “back” button or just scroll to the bottom.)
I know this sounds weird, but I’ve always been kind of a geek about road intersections. This is probably strongly related to my childhood (and adulthood) obsession with road maps, which I previously wrote about here (although, all of the images are gone now, sorry). At first, my obsession was purely aesthetic, and I was particularly obsessed with highway interchanges with lots of overpasses. I was raised in a very rural area, but when we went to the nearest “big city” (Erie, Pennsylvania), I remember being amazed by the intersection of I-79 and 26th Street, which was the most “complicated” interchange I’d seen. Now that I’m in Houston, that one actually seems pretty pathetic. They just revamped the major freeway interchange near my apartment complex (I-610 and TX-288), which now features one of the highest overpasses I’ve ever been on—I get a kind of weird rush on it. But not as big a rush (of awe? fear? both?) as I get when I look at this Chinese interchange:
As I got older and started developing my road and urban planning geekdom a little more (I played a lot of Sim City on our old Windows 95 computer), I started to appreciate intersection efficiency in addition to the aesthetics. On a trip to Indianapolis, I was introduced to my first roundabout, which became my favorite kind of intersection.
Roundabouts can be a little scary and maybe a bit of a pain at times (as demonstrated by Clark Griswold). Maybe they can also get a little out of hand sometimes:
But, in addition to usually being more aesthetically pleasing, they also have a number of other benefits:
The more roundabouts that are built in the United States, the more popular they become. Why? Because people can see the benefits of a safer, less congested, lower cost, more attractive and more environmentally friendly intersection. A survey conducted in 2001 questioned drivers in three communities before and after roundabouts were built. Those favoring the new intersection jumped from 31 percent before construction to 63 percent after [source: Insurance Institute for Highway Safety].
Roundabouts are safer than traditional intersections for one big reason: Fewer conflict points. Think about how many places traffic can cross paths at a signaled intersection. There are a lot — 32 to be exact. In a roundabout there are only eight such places, greatly reducing the potential for collisions[source: Nevada Department of Transportation, "Roundabout Benefits"]. What's more, their design, with one-way traffic and angled entry lanes, reduces the chance of dangerous T-bone or head-on collisions to zero. Roundabouts also have a slowing effect, forcing drivers to brake as they navigate around the central island and eliminating the impulse to speed up and beat a traffic light [source: Washington State Department of Transportation, "Roundabout Benefits"].
All these features can produce dramatic safety improvements. A 2000 study that looked at 24 newly constructed roundabouts across the United States revealed a 76 percent decrease in injury crashes, a 90 percent decrease in fatal or incapacitating crashes and a 39 percent reduction in overall crashes [source: FHWA, "Roundabouts"].
In Houston, the main roundabout I’ve dealt with is the intersection of Main Street and Montrose Boulevard, which features the beautiful Mecom Fountain:
When I first drove around this roundabout, I was kind of like a deer in headlights, but I’ve gotten used to it and can’t imagine how chaotic and dangerous the intersection would be without it.
The main reason I’m thinking about road intersections and roundabouts is because of an interesting (to me, at least) conversation going on in my hometown of Warren, Pennsylvania. It’s a small city of less than 10,000 people, so you wouldn’t think there would be many traffic issues to worry about, but there is a certain intersection that is more than a little in need of a revamp. It is the intersection of two major streets, Pennsylvania Avenue (Warren’s main street) and Market Street—but that’s not all, because there’s also Water Street, a little brick street that is also part of this intersection.
It’s kind of a bizarre intersection. Because of Water Street, you can’t make a right turn on red onto Pennsylvania Avenue. And for people not used to it, I can imagine that it would be a little confusing, because “straight” means either continuing on Pennsylvania Avenue or getting on Water Street. Speaking from experience, this is not a fun intersection to cross as a pedestrian, either.
One might even say that this would be a great place for...you guessed it...a roundabout. From the Warren Times-Observer:
To roundabout or not roundabout? That is the question.
PennDOT has prepared two conceptual designs for improvements to the intersection of Market Street and Pennsylvania Avenue in downtown Warren, Pa.
Option one would replace the existing traffic signal and improve the turning radii. Option two would bring a roundabout to the intersection.
The decision rests with the Warren City Council. But a public meeting on the options is set for Aug. 22 from 6-7:30 p.m. at the Warren Public Library’s Slater Room.
Of course, there are pros and cons to each option. The roundabout option, as you can tell by the map above, would require property acquisition, not to mention cause a major disruption during construction. The roundabout is also more expensive upfront, costing about $1.7 million, compared to $1.2 million for the traffic light. But PennDOT notes some important benefits:
¯ Maintenance costs of a roundabout would be lower than traffic lights.
¯ “Intersection operation” was given a grade of “A” with a roundabout but a “C” with a traffic light.
¯ And, perhaps most importantly, safety improvements were rated “moderate” with a traffic light but “high” with a roundabout.
I know most people are probably yawning by now—if they’re even still reading. But I’m salivating over this roundabout option. So is the Times-Observer:
We’re pro-roundabout.
We’re not afraid… of change.
[...]
First off, it’s cool.
No, seriously, they are more aesthetically pleasing. If we are truly interested in sprucing up the downtown, then let’s spruce it up. A hotel, a parking garage, new facades on businesses, new buildings, a new-and-improved Struthers Library Theatre, parks, fountains… all of these have happened or are happening. Let’s continue with a roundabout.
YES YES YES! But, as they also note in the editorial, a roundabout is less expensive in the long term when it comes to maintenance (despite being more expensive initially) and will undoubtedly be more efficient—and safer.
But seriously, those aesthetics tho.
For a depressed Rust Belt city that has tried to rebuild and revitalize its downtown (and made some real progress—downtown Warren is really pleasing on the eyes in some parts), a roundabout would be so effing cool. Yes, safety and efficiency and cost-cutting and all of that. BUT SO COOL!
The public meeting is next week, and I guess it will be in the hands of Warren City Council after that. I’ll definitely be keeping an eye on any developments, but consider me pro-roundabout.
And consider yourselves bored and ready for the tops…
Top Comments (August 17, 2018):
From jwinIL14:
Major Kong's wonderful way with words strikes yet again in his comment in Kerry Eleveld’s front-page story.
Top Mojo (August 16, 2018):
Top Mojo is courtesy of mik! Click here for more on how Top Mojo works.
Top Pictures (August 16, 2018):
Tonight’s photo quilt is courtesy of jotter!