Circular Reasoning

There have been several letters to the editor recently debating the value (or lack thereof) of traffic circles. Corvallis currently has three of these circles, and the public works department seems enamored of them as traffic calming devices.

According to an article titled "What are the Benefits of Traffic Circles" (PDF) from the July 2005 issue of the City Newsletter, traffic circles eliminate T-bone accidents and head-on collisions. In addition, since most people aren't required to stop, fuel efficiency is improved and pollution lessened. Finally, since the center of the traffic circles have landscaping, neighborhood livability is improved.

Odd, then, that the people who write in most frequently complaining about the traffic circles are the ones who live near them. They claim an increase in accidents and near-misses, difficult crossings for pedestrians and bicycles, and most say they originally wanted a 4-way stop in the first place.

I live not far from the circle at the intersection of Grant and Highland Avenues, and navigate the intersection several times per week. Unlike the lovely wide streets pictured in the newsletter (not sure which intersection that is, but it doesn't look like Corvallis at all), the traffic circle at Grant and Highland is sort of crammed into an intersection that was never designed for it. The plants in the middle are overgrown, making visibility awkward at best.

The biggest problem with them, however, is that nobody seems to know how to use them. If there was a massive education drive to teach people who actually has the right of way, maybe the situation would improve.

So, the basics, for those who don't have a clue: If you approach the intersection and someone is already in the traffic circle, you yield to that person. It doesn't matter which road you're on, if the person is on your left, or if you think your street is the main thoroughfare -- the vehicle in the traffic circle always has the right of way. If that person is driving around in circles, it's too bad for you... they still have the right of way. This does not mean hurry up and try to get through before they reach your side of the circle. This means stop. Wait. It won't wreck your day and better yet, it won't wreck your car. This is the main blunder I see at the traffic circle; people speed up and try to zoom through, despite another car already being in the middle of their turn.

If two cars are approaching the intersection, the person who gets there first has the right of way. This is not an invitation to gun the engine in order to beat the other car by a few seconds. If you approach the traffic circle at the same time as another driver, the vehicle on the right has the right of way. If you are coming from opposite directions, it is probably safe for both of you to enter the circle. If there is a bike in the intersection, the rules apply just as they do for cars. Bikes are considered vehicles in Oregon, which means a bike in the traffic circle has the right of way. If there is a pedestrian, have some pity and let the poor sot cross. They may not get another chance if it's rush hour.

I think traffic circles work well if streets are designed with them in mind, and they work well in larger cities where drivers are used to them. Or maybe not. At the Place Charles de Gaulle traffic circle in Paris, I've seen cars rounding L'Arc de Triomphe several times before successfully escaping onto a feeder road. So maybe the question should be, where's the love for the old-fashioned traffic light?