Exactly!! My city has painted bike gutters. I’m fine with it because I’m use to riding my bike in traffic. However, there is no way that I would ever want my parents, siblings or nieces/nephews to ever ride it. It’s just not safe
@@Irishfan I think it already has them. It looked like Rob reached out to push a button to activate the lights before crossing, they just weren't visible on camera.
Having lived in Carmel, another benefit of the roundabout density is reducing phone use while driving. You aren’t waiting at red lights texting and missing the light turning green. Plus, you don’t finish the text while driving down the road simultaneously since you didn’t pick up the phone in the first place!
Carmel is such an interesting case study. It's encouraging to see motorists and people on bikes safely traveling together. Makes me a little jealous and wish my city would do this!
Another benefit to really good bike infrastructure is that every trip that switches from car to bicycle decreases the number of cars causing congestion. The worst part of driving is other cars being in the way, so getting people out of cars and onto public transit, bikes, or walking, helps drivers.
@m.r.6264 plus better air quality and less noise. Less space is needed for parking too, meaning more useful places can fit in the same space which shortens trip distances. And reducing carbon emissions helps slow global warming. The benefits are huge and apply to everyone, I was just starting with the things that directly impact drivers.
It has to be done intelligently though. I live in a city that has a bunch of hills and the buses are only in the last 10 years or so finally being rearranged to address the more modern traffic patterns and only because we're getting light rail. With minor exceptions, the routes were still being laid out the way they were in the '70s only a few years ago, which meant that going just about anywhere required a transfer and adding the better part of an hour to your commute. I was considering getting a scooter to augment my bus riding when I don't want to drive, but it turns out that I wouldn't be able to actually use it as they're not allowed on the sidewalks, roads with a speed limit over 25+ unless I went with a larger one, which defeats the purpose of getting one if I can't just bring it in with me wherever I go. This sort of thing is a major problem around here where they've opted to punish car drivers, but put as little thought into alternatives as possible.
It’s always a “war on cars” when we build transit, but never a war on transit riders when highways divide entire neighborhoods and transit is undermined or underfunded.
The difference is that the space comes from somewhere and often there isn't anywhere near enough consideration put into giving people alternatives to driving. It was that way around here where 50% of the bus routes in the entire county go through a small strip of land in the downtown corridor that easily bogs down during rush hour. They took a bunch of parking and lanes of traffic from cars to give to bikes, but they didn't even bother to think about whether or not it made any sense. There's streets that are too steep for bikes to be useful, and there's ones that are next to residential streets as well. And, then there's the buslanes where you have a block to change lanes if you want to turn, but the bus drivers won't let you in, if you don't slow way down to get behind them. Then the ever changing sets of signals and street marking every time there is a fatality to get the car drivers, even if it was the pedestrian or cyclist that caused the problem in the first place and nobody seems to be writing tickets for pedestrians and cyclists these days. So, clearly, it's unknowable why people feel like that.
@@Matty002 That's only because they carry traffic through cities. The interstate highway system is incredibly profitable in terms of the amount of commerce that depends on trucks going between places that don't have good rail infrastructure.
When you make a street narrower to add bike lanes, for every bike there's one car that isn't driving, which makes driving safer and more pleasant for the ones remaining.
@@garrettkajmowicz I want to say duh? Folks don't want to ride in the bare minimum bike lane which goes nowhere. It's like removing any sections of interstate that aren't immediately adjacent to a major downtown.
This is why traffic design is so counterintuitive, there's often cases where the long way around is more efficient and generally nicer even if you're going highway speeds cause of less stop-go problems.
I'm reminded of NJB's video on how driving in the Netherlands was great (for trips where driving made sense), though there it wasn't just the roundabouts, it was also the fact that fewer people are driving (because biking or transit are faster for many trips.)
My town has been adding round abouts.. I like them but boy some people are very vocal about how they dont like them ..mostly because it seems some people have the hardest time figuring them out ha
Gotta love having to stop inside a roundabout and getting rear-ended because someone zoomed into the round about right in front of you. Such tight space, not time to react. People trying to rush and the roundabout creating artificial chokepoints causing crashes and risky situations.
@@draugnaustaunikunhymnphoo6978 feels like you experienced a trauma. And it also feels like you didn't watch the video? It's statistically proven that roundabouts leads to a smoother driving experience (a red light is a real artificial chokepoint) and also a lot safer (-80% deaths compared to intersections).
We need new intersection building standards to default to well designed roundabouts. Right now I think they default to 4 way stop signs and stop lights
@@JasonWood100 Standard roundabouts do take more space than urban intersections often have, though you can build mini-roundabouts sometimes. New standards could also include bulb-outs, refuge islands, and other protective features.
Nationwide 65% of people in Netherlands drive to work most days, even flat and dense Netherlands which has little icy days (unlike Chicago or New York or DC). Sadly no way around it, westerners like cars. No solution has been found. Be honest, for February cold and wet any sane person wants a car so builds life around car. 65% is not a success if shows failure of bicycles vs car. It's hilarious this is skipped over and vid of downtown Netherlands claims to show success.
@@mostlyguesses8385 "Cycling is the second-most common mode of transport in the Netherlands, with 36% of Dutch people listing the bicycle as their most frequent way of getting around on a typical day[1][nb 1], as opposed to the car (45%) and public transport (11%). Cycling has a modal share of 27% of all trips (urban and rural) nationwide.[4]" wiki Cycling_in_the_Netherlands Another page: "In June, research demonstrated that for trips shy of 7.5 kilometers, the Dutch almost always cycle more than they drive."
@@mostlyguesses8385 Are you posting this nonsense for free? Because people get paid to spread misinformation like this, but I’d bet you’re doing it for nothing.
Almost all the Indy suburbs have followed Carmel's lead and have been building these paths. Also, the city of Indianapolis is doing several 'road diets' adding protected bike and walking lanes. Michigan and New York Streets for example.
It’s getting a lot better. Both cars and bikes need a bit more sense. Bikers take up way more space then they need often riding right on the furthest left side of the bike lane closest to the road. When I drive my car I don’t have my left tires on the center lane. I just don’t get it, I would appreciate protected bike lanes so these goobers can understand they are playing with heavy vehicles.
@@Yuckyuck1870 It may be because there's a lot of debris on the side of the bike lane or perhaps the side of said road is not very safe should they fall off it. I've rode on the side of the highway in the countryside and the amount of loose gravel along the edge of the road makes biking very uncomfortable. Even though like you said, it would make more sense for me to be on the far side of the lane, I find myself moving towards the rest of the road.
@@Yuckyuck1870 If you're driving along conventional bike lanes, painted to the left of parked cars, bicyclist may be trying to avoid being killed by someone opening their door. People usually do things for some reason that makes sense to them; if it doesn't make sense to you, you might be missing key information.
Good job Indy! Hopefully the rest of the midwest will follow suit. A lot of Chicago suburbs would seriously benefit from this and we already have some roundabouts and a lot of trails here
@@Yuckyuck1870Debris in roads tends to get pushed around by cars' tires until it builds up on the sides, so cyclists avoid going too close to the edge to avoid running over all that stuff. Also, it's not unusual in the US for bike lanes to be too narrow. And worst of all is parallel parking. People can and do *KILL* cyclists by opening car doors in front of them. It's dangerous. Really, bike lanes just aren't that good for bikes. They're often the choice of cities or counties that want to give people a place to ride bikes but don't want to commit to actually building infrastructure for bikes. More serious attempts at bike lanes are pretty wide and have buffer space between the car lanes and bike lanes, and between bike lanes and car parking.
imagine everyone in america suddenly realised that building cities like carmel is a good idea. america would become one of the most desireable places to move to in the western hemisphere!!!
Too bad the vast, vast majority of people who WANT to improve american cities dont want to build them like carmel, but instead just want to copy european city design...which just wont damn work here in america
@@Descriptor413 But it is uniquely americana, just look at the town. It doesnt look european, it doesnt try to be european. It's its own thing...OUR thing
Carmel is my favorite city when it comes to just how nice it looks and works (In the US). And it's not even about bikes, which are important to me, the whole place just feels better. I think instead of trying to turning NA cities into the Netherlands or Copenhagen, Carmel is actually a better and more feasible solution to strive towards. Take the step and get to Carmel first, which apart from putting roundabouts everywhere doesn't require total road reconstruction and massive change, it can get started with just some paint and moving some things around (Like all those grass medians, can easily be achieved by some planter boxes to begin with) .
Near where I live, they tried protected bike lanes and that went over like a led balloon. This video shows that round abouts need to come first to keep traffic moving, then you can narrow the roads.
I lived in that area growing up and watched all of that getting built. Some of their biggest projects started with them making the two main north-south arterials sunken freeways with roundabouts at every intersection on the ramps. At first people were kinda weirded out by the idea, but it worked so well that Carmel sort of went with it and was able to make a very walkable and livable city for pedestrians and everyone else.
I love seeing bike infrastructure get some love. You're absolutely right, a single little bike gutter (which is common where I live) never gets used because it's not useful. A full network becomes useful. I can't wait for your parking lot video!
Where I live, we have maybe two dedicated bike gutters but at least they cover a good distance (and also along two of the town's main arteries). One of which is a highway, where being separated from the actual car lanes is _definitely_ warranted. So they're not "great", but they're at least better than nothing (contrast the "sharrows" painted along various side streets).
a lot of drivers are willing to support urbanism if it isn't based on punishing them for not wanting to live in a high rise jungle. sensible ideas for non car centric downtowns are beneficial, as long as those who need to use a car to get there have a good option for switching from a car to transit and foot travel. but like he said about Portland - a lot of their changes are based on punishing use of cars, not on helping cars and bicycles coexist. and some of their bicycle infrastructure has fatal flaws - like having the only thing that differentiates a bike lane be a bit of paint that disappears if the road is wet. or an even better case in point: my town is wrapped around the main highway. there was a stretch where it bottlenecked to two lanes, causing daily traffic backups. so the town undertook a five year project to add bike lanes filled with drain grates that forced bicyclists to crowd traffic lanes. a wide planter filled with trees that would outgrow the planter width, and a sidewalk not quite wide enough to be a multiuse path. then they added a traffic light, and can't figure out why the daily traffic backups didn't go away. the only actual improvement to traffic flow was a turn lane for the industrial complex in the middle of it.
I think after covering road extension after extension that seemed to only be band-aids, he started looking into what else was out there as alternatives. Not to mention, varying your topics is how you keep up engagement.
He’s always been an urbanist. Neo-urbanists like NJB are just militant and so anti-car that they forget that their ideas aren’t feasible, practical, or possible. Real, useful urbanists keep in mind that cars and other vehicles will always be a part of the urban fabric and you need to have designs that work for them as well as other modes. Sorry you seem to be one of the brain-dead types that thinks you can only be an urbanist if you talk about bikes.
I live in the next town over, close enough to reap the benefits of Carmel's commitment to bike and pedestrian infrastructure. I've seen multiple videos about this town's great multiuse paths and their connectivity (which I enjoy!); Road Guy Rob does a great job also of communicating how the road infrastructure and traffic calming promotes a less stressful drive for when we choose to use a car for transportation. Finally, the amount of pedestrians and bike riders has been a great motivator for me to jump on my bike for errands and exercise more often, which in turn has made me more aware of them when I drive. It's not perfect, but a ton better than I've previously experienced in other US cities!
I like you gave an English name to a concept used everywhere in the Netherlands. Layered networking is a lot more memorable than "Hoofnets" and "Plusnets".
Pittsburgh says they are bike friendly, yet some stop signs on their bike infrastructure can’t be more than 6” wide and cars get their lanes repaved while the adjacent bollarded-off bike lane still is covered in rocks from a landslide due to recent flooding.
@@Ari--d But they do save money. For both the rider and the government. The infrastructure is cheaper, and petrol money doesn't get exported out of town, leaving more money for local businesses. Were I live the parking meters only generate enough money to cover the wages of the parking inspectors. If everyone rode than we wouldn't need parking inspectors.
The most durable way to get people to change their choices is to change their environment. Carmel, IN seems like they've designed the best environment to travel around American suburbia.
@@ColrathD that's not what they did, it is still built for cars. It is just built to be efficient and safe which allows for the bikes and pedestrians to also benefit.
I have always been amazed at the argument that pops up, when adding more modes of transport (like transit, bike paths or even footpaths) somehow encroaches on the American "freedom!" of taking the car. Which it doesn't. It just adds options, which, in my mind, is the opposite: It's *more* freedom. I mean, even drivers want fewer drivers on the road! As a Dutchie, having multiple modes of transportation available to me, means I am free to take the one best suited to me, my lifestyle, and my needs. I own a car, but I find myself taking the bike 80-90% of the time. Carmel sounds like the one place that went "a-ha!" and I hope the gospel of the roundabout and separate modals spreads :) Carmel seems like a nice place for a ride AND a drive.
Your first mistake is assuming when they say "freedom" they mean the dictionary definition. But actually, when a person on a certain side of the political spectrum uses the word "freedom" what they really mean is "being able to force my way of living and my viewpoint onto everyone else, regardless if it makes them sad or makes their life worse". In many ways, that is actually the opposite of freedom according to the dictionary.
@@Bremend We have something similar, but only for apartment buildings. There are also local city ordinances in the Netherlands and the "welstand" that determine (for instance) what color your house may be, or where you may build an extension. Dutch HOAs (VVe's) are usually a collective way of upkeep for the community's building, but they, too, can set certain ordinances (up to a point). But I'm not sure they are as powerful as some American HOAs seem to be.
Also, those "freedom" people will do everything to restrict other people's freedoms by fighting tooth and nail to oppose multi-family development, mixed use development nowhere near their HOA house.
@@studiolegenda Their power is a bit exaggerated in the US. People are in HOA's because they agreed, at some point, to be part of one (usually by buying property that was locked into one) and fortunately HOAs have no power over city infrastructure. Of course way too many new homes are locked into one as part of a new housing development, so one could argue that its not that much of a choice.
No joke, as I sat at multiple intersections in a row today with a flashing yellow arrow and platoon after platoon of cars coming and preventing me from turning… I couldn’t help but think how much better this all would be if we had roundabouts like Carmel. Thanks a lot, Rob. 😂
I commute on a street that’s partially Roundabouts, partially lights, and the difference is Night and day. You move so much quicker through the roundabouts part and it feels really good to know how much safer it is. I hope my city adds more roundabouts and starts to synchronize them with bikes like Carmel!
Flow. This is what matters for any vehicle type. Not more lanes and more bad drivers weaving from lane to lane cutting each over off only to come to a full stop at the end of every block. Then, as you work on improving flow, work on providing some alternative ways to get places or spend leisure time. One less person in a car driving downtown for brunch means one less car in my way, one less car circling endlessly looking for free parking, one more parking space right in front of the restaurant, etc. etc.
Carmel is like the dream American suburb. Its still a suburb and not as dense as it could be, but they took advantage of that and build roundabouts, nice outdoor areas and bike lanes.
Roundabouts kill bicycles, so not a silver bullet, I wish they were. """ 2008 study of 91 roundabouts in Flanders, Belgium showed that the installation of roundabouts led to a 27% increase in “bicyclist injury collisions” and an increase of more than 40% in the number of fatal or serious injury crashes involving cyclists. Meanwhile, a 2013 study of more than 300 roundabouts in Denmark found that the installation of roundabouts led to a 65% increase in bike crashes and a 40% increase in injuries.""''
One thing I’ve noticed about Carmel from your videos on it is that it’s just a beautiful city and looks pleasant to be in. It’s not just one pretty downtown street. It’s all nice.
Growing up in Carmel, it is all very nice. However, this city benefits from one of the highest incomes in the state (all of the wealth in Indy is concentrated near Carmel). They allocated the wealth efficiently I must say.
Hey Rob, discovered you a few months ago, and I am LOVING your videos! Your passion and interest in roads and infrastructure is contagious, and you have a really good approach to production and narration. Thanks for making these videos!
My city has bike lanes on nearly every street, but they're so narrow that I often wonder how it's really safe to ride in them. Luckily, we do have a lot of very good (and wide) trails every mile or so (what the midwest would call greenways), but the actual streets are a little bit sketchy to try to ride in on some parts of town.
If they are painted on it is often better to ignore the bike lane and treat the bike lane and lane next to it as an extra wide lane (or normal width lane if all they did was add paint to an existing lane). The best way I have seen it described is: "painted bike lanes are car infrastructure, not bike infrastructure."
Yup, gutter lanes...I actually prefer what they do on some roads and streets (zero consistency within any city) where they simply mark that a street or road is a bike path, maybe have bikes painted on the road (but no "special" gutter lanes, and signage expressing that bikes have the right to the whole lane and to share the road. With the bike gutters, drivers tend to be just as aggressive if not more and get really upset it a bike dares get out of the extremely dangerous broken up concrete of the gutter.
i used to think this channel was fully car centric and the average anti bikr anti transit driver but its changed in such a good way still ficusing on roads which are neccesary but also looking at bikes and transit
I don't ride a bike but this is absolutely fantastic for both those that do and those who still drive a car there. There are a lot of bike "paths" where I live and I'd be shitting bricks riding them, let alone with a kid or two in tow. They're mostly just barely passable shoulder lanes. While I appreciate the effort, they really serve no real purpose, you're riding on often a busy road. I hope more mayors come around to taking similar, non halfassed route.
I hate gutter lanes, but I also understand they are an incremental move toward protected bike lanes to allow the regular commuter to bike versus someone like me riding at full tilt in full kit who can navigate a gutter lane or more importantly take the full lane.
I live in a Danish city, one of those that has been here since practically the viking age, so it's old and narrow and there are places where roundabouts aren't possible, and as someone that bikes everywhere, I really hate going through those parts, but luckily most infrastructure built after WW2 has had bicycles in mind, so there is lots of separated lanes which also makes room for trees and greenery and helps the look of the city. In more modern times, after the 80s I'd say, maybe after the 90s, most new infrastructure is roundabout based, so I'll often find myself biking longer to use the outer roads instead of the inner (a lot of cities in Denmark are built like spider webs with the old city in the middle, and newer city in layers around it) just for the comfort.
I love everything except the multi lane roundabouts. In Boston those things are scary to cross. The second driver CANNOT see you due to the first stopped driver.
@@blakeh95...yes roundabouts are super super super bad for bicyclists, can't gaslight about this. """ 2008 study of 91 roundabouts in Flanders, Belgium showed that the installation of roundabouts led to a 27% increase in “bicyclist injury collisions” and an increase of more than 40% in the number of fatal or serious injury crashes involving cyclists. Meanwhile, a 2013 study of more than 300 roundabouts in Denmark found that the installation of roundabouts led to a 65% increase in bike crashes and a 40% increase in injuries.""'"
Really enjoying these urbanism-style videos from this perspective. I think doing more "city visits" like this Carmel series would be really interesting.
It makes intuitive sense...but you can see how much better the raised crosswalks are performing in terms of drivers actually slowing/stopping for pedestrians than on the non-raised crosswalks.
One way to judge how free a society actually is, is to measure how free versus how costly it is to have transportation in the region. That may not be the best way to judge a freedom index, but I do believe it should be an item on the list. Other items I believe should be on the list include the cost of groceries, land ownership, and utilities and internet access. Plus a society should be considered freer when there is less permitting and less licensing to start a business. It should also be considered freer if there is more on the job training, but only if none of that is funded by the government, instead being funded by the needs of the free market.
Freedom is not tied to how govt helps you with your bad choice to live far from work. In 1920 most walked under 1 mile to work. By 1940 60% had a car, and govt then became responsible for building paths 20 ft thick of asphalt, stone, sand, and dirt to support these 5000 pound monsters. Soon people demanded govt trains and trams chaffeur them as subsidized prices, and unions loved this. Just saying, freedom is not tied to transportation, helping people make dumb choices rhat make them rely on govt is opposite of freedom sorta. But I'm the same, but I don't blame govt for not making my dumb choice better.. . Frankly for green reasons we all should live in camper outside workplace, living 15 miles away is inherently energy intensive stupidity, it has to go. Or not?
Carmel looks like it is still VERY car dependent just like the rest of America, but its good to see progress with the roundabouts and safer roads for pedestrians and bicyclists.
Roundabouts are awful for bicyclists, so not a silver bullet. """ 2008 study of 91 roundabouts in Flanders, Belgium showed that the installation of roundabouts led to a 27% increase in “bicyclist injury collisions” and an increase of more than 40% in the number of fatal or serious injury crashes involving cyclists. Meanwhile, a 2013 study of more than 300 roundabouts in Denmark found that the installation of roundabouts led to a 65% increase in bike crashes and a 40% increase in injuries.
Tell me you don't have a basic grasp of the size and geography of the US without telling me you don't understand size or geography. The reason we have large suburbs is because we had much more mobility with horses and cars unlike European towns which were developed in years where everybody walked everywhere. Inherently, because we have the space and the mobility, we aren't going to be as densely populated. Catering to a EXTREME minority of transportation nut jobs (bikers) at the express expense of all other, more common, forms of transportation, for a seasonal and inefficient bike lane is the most out of touch thing possible. Your inability to understand geography doesn't make this a good idea.
Suburbia is not due to US is big. People wanted lawns and big houses and US once cars jumped from 0 to 60% of households 1920 to 1935 gave people what they wanted. Europe population was slower growing so less babies means less need for new houses and new areas. Even in Europe they love cars and they built roads, and 80% of French workers drive to work.. unless we ban lawns and mandate 4 story houses we will have suburbia, and we ain't doing that, though Europe basically bans lawns sorta .... Cars are stupid due to costliness, $10000 a year all costs, that for 250 work days is $40 a day for that 1 hour of use. I myself walk and bike and get exercise that way, and listen to cell phone, so I hope cell phones and exercise goals cause cars to decline...
@@mostlyguesses8385 Yeah but in suburban areas roundabouts are still better to reduce car collisions, since like I said America's existence is based on cars. Roundabouts may be awful for bicyclists, but the alternative which is crossing 5 lane stroads isnt much better either.
You jump to a "5 lane stroad", which is unfair argument. Clearly if going from a) 2 lane stop sign intersection to b) roundabout this increases bicycle deaths, so the video shouldnt have magically avoided this issue.... All studies say roundabouts kill more bicyclists than alternatives. Hmmmm... Maybe we can use money saved by using roundabout to build some bike flying pedestrian bridges on like a tenth of some roundabouts ....... BIGGER PROBLEM is roundabouts lead to maybe 20% longer path for bikers and walkers if facing 10 roundabouts over a mile., look at overhead shot and it's not just across the street one has to a) go around the circle PLUS b) the path has people cross way back for safety. Frankly when I'm walking I just enter the road to save the extra distance. Sigh. when not in car it's truly annoying to have path take extra distance cuz the planners put cars first. To skip all this and praise roundabouts as great for bikers in the video was dishonest. You didn't see in vid many people walking, almost like having to take longer curvy path is annoying more to walkers... Oh well, no perfect option is common.
I think here there's this unspoken rule that you don't simply drive past a car that has come to a stop in an adjacent lane, especially at a crosswalk. You usually slow down and check first. We also use the British "stopping" hand-signal to let other vehicles know "Conflict ahead, do not pass": hand outstretched, palm facing down, wave up and down (flag). As a pedestrian though, when the sidewalk-most car stops first, I would cross the first half of the road slowly, until I am able to see the second lane clearly. Only when I am sure the second driver is aware of my crossing would I continue.
in my state, it's a spoken rule. if you pass a car that is stopped for a pedestrian, it's an additional charge on top of failing to stop for a pedestrian.
❤It’s really nice to see wholesome original content. Road Guy Rob, you’ve become my comfort content! Thanks for your hard work out there. Never thought I’d be watching content about roads but I have driven millions of miles by now lol ❤
This is really good. I'm a crazy cyclist who hates tacked on bike lanes and also doesn't want the motorists to hate cyclists because some politician hates cars and "gave" that lane to us. Hey, in the US, there's no getting rid of cars. Almost every working adult needs one unless they live in the biggest of cities. So, anything that keeps the cars flowing and still allowing bikes to be safe. What isn't pointed out in this video is that the safer and more accepted walking and riding are, the more people will do it ...and they'll be healthier and live longer. So, it's not just fewer accidents, it's also lower cost due to almost all other health issues!
I've been rather down with the way they made roundabouts where I am as both a pedestrian or cyclist, but with the wide bike and pedestrian spaces, this is actually good.
I think I heard the mayor of Carmel went to Europe and enjoyed the roundabouts so much on his return he ordered them to be built everywhere. Now we have a much less expensive vacation to send mayor's on to see the light.
There’s a roundabout near my place I walk through to get to work. One of the legs comes off the freeway, and it’s very common that people will enter the roundabout going 25-30 mph and are absolutely not looking for pedestrians. The number of times I’ve been almost hit because of this is really annoying, and this is an instance I really would rather just have a stoplight with a dedicated pedestrian crossing. There are no perfect solutions, but sometimes the best way to accommodate for alternate modes of transportation is stop another mode for a brief time.
i have a video idea: someone unauthorized put an exit sign that wasnt there on the sr 110/ i 5 interchange in california that helped millions of drivers
I'm probably not the typical audience of this channel but this just goes to show how much excess capacity a lot of streets in the US have and how overbuilt our road infrastructure is even from the standard of only considering traffic flow.
FINALLY, a city that isnt hostile towards cars or bikes, i dont get why cities feel like they have to choose one of them only. having good car and bicycle infrastructure benefits both sides!!!
To be fair in a bigger city environment you may have 10x the number of people competing for the same space in these different modes. So these fixes and adjustments work well in this setting, but wouldn't be appropriate for a central city or urban neighborhood where fitting in the same number of cars means reducing safety, and space and desirability of some transportation modes.
@@matiasgrioni292 Yeah, Carmel's official population density is literally (I just checked) less than one tenth that of a typical good walkable neighborhood. I don't know if that reflects the effective density or is diluted by undeveloped land in the borders. Past a certain level it is physically impossible for everyone to be driving all the time, there is literally not enough space for them to get to work at the same time, for example.
Something unmentioned in this video was the raised crosswalk. They force cars to slow down even if they're otherwise not inclined to do it. Most US crosswalks, even so-called protected ones, are at road level, which encourages drivers to fly right through them. The Not Just Bikes channel published a video that covered that feature in part as I recall.
This is how to do it. It’s not about winning a war, or slipping into anti- or pro-car ideology. It’s about peacefully and safely coexisting on our roads.
I feel like the city planners where I live (Southern California) know all of this but simply don't care. They only care about punishing car drivers for existing. Other road users (pedestrians, bikes, scooters, etc.) aren't the reason for the anti-car projects they push they are the excuse. The net result is roads that are less safe for EVERYONE.
Building the full-width trail in as many places as possible instead of connecting to a skinny sidewalk or using painted bicycle gutters is super encouraging to see.
I was just in vacation in Anchorage Alaska. That town has a pretty good bike and pedestrian infrastucture. Not so much bike lanes on the side of busy roads and intersection but parks built throughout the city interconnected with it's own paved paths you can walk or ride a bike and get throughout the town without having to go onto roads for very long.
Well, you're supposed to, but a lot of drivers don't signal to exit, only when entering. It's probably not such a big deal when you're only dealing with other cars, but it can be a bother for pedestrians.
If Carmel, Indiana can do it, other cities in the United States can do this. I do have to say for a suburb of nearly 100.000 inhabitants, this is quite impressive with the absolute minimum number of traffic lights. Now.... imagine a whole country to be build like this..... Hmmmmm, what country could that be.
Even in Netherlands 70% nationwide bicycle to work, car is still king. Us westerners are lazy especially in cold Movement to April. Cars have won. I wish it weren't so. Netherlands had not solved this. Old people especially hate risking broken leg in February on bike, and that's just a fact, half won't bike in Feb for very sane reason. As Minnesotan I truly know this, bicycles can't replace cars as main mode of commute, it's silly to say otherwise, if commute is over 2 miles it'll be a car. Most people who bike are under 2 miles, showing forcing closeness is only real solution..
@@mostlyguesses8385 "Us westerners are lazy especially in cold Movement to April." Finnish children bike to school in the snowy Finnish winter. Helped by their cities plowing bike paths as quickly (or faster) than streets. "if commute is over 2 miles it'll be a car." Half of US car trips are under 3 miles, easily bikeable if biking were safe and direct.
... People can't admit, no, us people are lazy and soft and love cars. Yes some Finnlanders bike but not as many as depicted. A BBC article on this said """"Despite these harsh conditions, 12% of winter journeys are made by bicycle in the city of Oulu. Compare that with the milder climate of England, where year-round the proportion of trips made by bike is just 2%". 12% of winter trips in bike capital of world is impressive???? No it ain't, this shows yes it's probably 50% of trips in nice 6 months of year, but most people keep car ready at great expense for cold times...... Children WHO HAVE NO CHOICE THEY ARE KIDS , yes in Oulu the bike capital of Finland up to 50% bike in winter to school on nice paths which at great expense even go under roads and are plowed within minutes of snowfall...... I'm from Minnesota and know even when plowed there can be ice to slip on, and I'd expect 1 fall a week when i slowly turned on my 4 mile bike trip to college. I'd wear layers and was young, but it's silly to just ignore WINTER ICY BIKING IS DANGEROUS AND WILL HURT THE FRAILER PEOPLE. .. Old people don't wanna risk broken bones, not should they...Sigh.. In actual fact the level of car use is high in every place that can afford it, it's just propoganda to show vids of the like 10% who arent in cars.... Per Wikipedia if exclude kids and retirees there is about 1 car for every adult in W Europe and US, Finland included. Nonpoor people use cars mostly, including Europe and Finland. ...... In Finland I'd say 80% of workers drive to work, in a nation with dense cities and flat lands and anti car policies, and other 15% live near work, and it's 5% young hip people under 30 without kids doing a long bike ride, and they soon stop.... Finlanders lie and overstate our no car habits, but we will admit 60% of commuting is by car"""" 59 percent of Finnish respondents answer our survey on "Most common modes of transportation for commuting" with "Own / household car". The survey was conducted in 2024, among 1,734 consumers.""
. It's just unrealistic to expect people over 40 with frail bodies to endure the crashes from bike slipping on ice. Math is, ok 5 icy months, 5 crashes as guess from 10 years Minnesota winter biking (college and then grad school). Maybe as a guess for each crash : 94% no injury, 5% mild injury needing hospital, 1% broken bone. This is very risky, crashes are violent and frozen concrete and ice is hard as F. So over 50 years using math that's 250 crashes and 12.5 hospital trips and 2.5 broken bones over life of biking thru winters..... Be honest, this seems a dangerous way to get around vs a car. I maybe was wrong to call this lazy, no it's cautious to not use a bicycle except in perfect conditions.... Cars are safe and loved for a reason. P.S. Some activities have hi accident rates, skiing is worst, like 1% risk of hospital per day!!! Bicycling yes seems will need hospital every 1 of 3 years if do it full time, compare this to car when I've never had to go to hospital despite a few car crashes.. .. Isn't 1 of 3 years needing hospital just too dangerous a mode of travel full time? . .. I'm guessing at numbers but I know winter bikers and they have scars on legs and have had hospital visits. SO bicycling where there is ice is not feasible ? ( except on perfectly groomed paths by the young going short distance the winter half of year).
This channel is a valuable public service. This information not only saves time, money, and resources, but potentially will save lives too. Keep up the great work!
In the US, most people who cycle also drive. Cyclists aren't at war with drivers: we ARE drivers. And note how Carmel tends to have sidewalks _and_ bike paths. Bikes and pedestrians are as bad a mix as bikes and cars.
@@dennis2376 As a wheelchair user (manual, not motorized) I can't tell you the amount of people who walk around without paying attention. I've been walked into numerous times, even after trying to get their attention by yelling. Some motorized chair users are problematic, but in my lived experience, inattentive walkers are the bigger problem.
In my city (and I'm not in any way saying it's the roundabouts fault they're infinitly better then the alternative) many roundabouts back up into each other BUT they constantly move, just at .005mph
Thank you for covering Carmel! Having grown up near Carmel, I loved visiting the city for events because I could actually enjoy the spaces around the downtown area
I went to the Indy 500 in May, and because of your videos on Carmel, I went and drove around the town and yea, it was pretty fun to drive around with all the rotaries.
Great series!! I live in Fishers - a sister city between Indy and Carmel (and Noblesville) - which has adopted the roundabout life as well. It also extends the Monon Trail through the Nickel Plate district, for pedestrian and bike traffic. The biggest issues for roundabouts in the greater Indy metro and neighboring areas seem to be: poor driver education on usage / traffic guidelines, poor engineering (too small interiors / aprons, no islands / gore areas, inadequate approach tapers, etc), and poor signage and/or markings (especially for multiple thru / exit lanes). And maybe inadequate site distance for crossing pedestrian traffic (in part due to all the oversized vehicles). Generally, especially with the elevated circles along 37, traffic is SOOOOOO much better on the north side than it was with signalized intersections. I also like seeing roundabouts expanding to (if nowhere else) school zones / reduced speed zones and emergency service routes. Thanks for coming round this way and highlighting what the north metro area of Indy (and hopefully more) is getting right!
In our region we had a DDI installed 2 years ago and last year they finished it off with a roundabout with 2 slip lanes removing the traffic light. Some people still complain about it but it is smooth sailing through, cannot even compare the two.
I love roundabouts. I really don't care that much about cyclists but find these great for motorists. OK, if they are good for cyclists I'll go along. Sedona, AZ is a city that really uses them and it works. I live in Phoenix. There is no way I see the Valley of the Sun with its massive grid converting to this.
Roundabouts can slove practically every traffic jam and yet there is a huge traffic jam on these major roads every day because of those crappy traffic lights pulling a green on a road with no cars.
I live in Central Valley California, they are slowly putting these practices in place, but the heat here makes biking difficult, EV bike will help. Our society will be so much better once we move away from car-centric cities. 👍👍
7:50 except for the sidewalk that just ends, without any signage, along Westfield Blvd (just south of Orchard Park Dr S). Sidewalk abruptly ends and forces pedestrians onto a street, without any bike lanes, for a 1/4 mile. Carmel has done a great job, but there is still a lot of room for improvements.
Welcome to the future USA, finally slowly moving from second world country to a first one. Roundabouts are awesome when used in the right environment, no more stopping for red lights every 100 meters.
I am a redblooded American, born in Birmingham, Alabama. I also own a home in Italy. I’ve traveled to France and Spain, etc. Driving is fantastic over here because of roundabouts. We need more in America. People that say they can’t understand how roundabout works, probably shouldn’t be driving a car. They move traffic, Easier. Any crashes are at low speed so there are minimal fatalities.
At this rate, they should change the name of the city to Bikemel.
Your pun wins.
I'll buy that
Why not Roundaboumel?
@@MrMatteNWkbecause they didn’t replace the cars with roundabouts. The city would have to be “Four-leggedintersectionmel” for that.
took me too long to get it lol
Families are a key demographic. If you don't see families using your infrastructure, your infrastructure isn't safe. It isn't up to par.
Exactly!! My city has painted bike gutters. I’m fine with it because I’m use to riding my bike in traffic. However, there is no way that I would ever want my parents, siblings or nieces/nephews to ever ride it. It’s just not safe
YUP! I like to use the range of ages 8-80 should be able to use it without feeling endangered.
That paramedic was trying to drum up some business.
I noticed that. Next thing Carmel needs to do is add the flashing lights at all the pedestrian crosswalks.
@Irishfan It looks like there were
They must have lost so much business due to all the fewer crashes. Gotta make their own business
@@Irishfan I think it already has them. It looked like Rob reached out to push a button to activate the lights before crossing, they just weren't visible on camera.
@@Irishfan They've been adding quite a few lately both at roundabouts and at mid block crossings.
Having lived in Carmel, another benefit of the roundabout density is reducing phone use while driving. You aren’t waiting at red lights texting and missing the light turning green. Plus, you don’t finish the text while driving down the road simultaneously since you didn’t pick up the phone in the first place!
Carmel is such an interesting case study. It's encouraging to see motorists and people on bikes safely traveling together. Makes me a little jealous and wish my city would do this!
This city is informing a lot of people how to build in Cities: Skylines.
you can always contact your local officials and show them this video
9:50 the irony of him almost getting hit by a paramedic..
The summary of the entire video. Promoting dangerous circumstances by sugaring it with pretty language.
Another benefit to really good bike infrastructure is that every trip that switches from car to bicycle decreases the number of cars causing congestion. The worst part of driving is other cars being in the way, so getting people out of cars and onto public transit, bikes, or walking, helps drivers.
It also saves everyone have having to fill in potholes and re-paving projects
@m.r.6264 plus better air quality and less noise. Less space is needed for parking too, meaning more useful places can fit in the same space which shortens trip distances. And reducing carbon emissions helps slow global warming. The benefits are huge and apply to everyone, I was just starting with the things that directly impact drivers.
@@TheReykjavik yup! great for small business owners too! foot/bike traffic is significantly more profitable than through-traffic cars
It has to be done intelligently though. I live in a city that has a bunch of hills and the buses are only in the last 10 years or so finally being rearranged to address the more modern traffic patterns and only because we're getting light rail. With minor exceptions, the routes were still being laid out the way they were in the '70s only a few years ago, which meant that going just about anywhere required a transfer and adding the better part of an hour to your commute.
I was considering getting a scooter to augment my bus riding when I don't want to drive, but it turns out that I wouldn't be able to actually use it as they're not allowed on the sidewalks, roads with a speed limit over 25+ unless I went with a larger one, which defeats the purpose of getting one if I can't just bring it in with me wherever I go.
This sort of thing is a major problem around here where they've opted to punish car drivers, but put as little thought into alternatives as possible.
It’s always a “war on cars” when we build transit, but never a war on transit riders when highways divide entire neighborhoods and transit is undermined or underfunded.
Thank you for saying that.
@@idromano it’s all good, fren 🙂
or that transit 'isnt profitable' where as freeways are never profitable yet have no issue when wanting to build another lane
The difference is that the space comes from somewhere and often there isn't anywhere near enough consideration put into giving people alternatives to driving. It was that way around here where 50% of the bus routes in the entire county go through a small strip of land in the downtown corridor that easily bogs down during rush hour. They took a bunch of parking and lanes of traffic from cars to give to bikes, but they didn't even bother to think about whether or not it made any sense. There's streets that are too steep for bikes to be useful, and there's ones that are next to residential streets as well. And, then there's the buslanes where you have a block to change lanes if you want to turn, but the bus drivers won't let you in, if you don't slow way down to get behind them.
Then the ever changing sets of signals and street marking every time there is a fatality to get the car drivers, even if it was the pedestrian or cyclist that caused the problem in the first place and nobody seems to be writing tickets for pedestrians and cyclists these days.
So, clearly, it's unknowable why people feel like that.
@@Matty002 That's only because they carry traffic through cities. The interstate highway system is incredibly profitable in terms of the amount of commerce that depends on trucks going between places that don't have good rail infrastructure.
When you make a street narrower to add bike lanes, for every bike there's one car that isn't driving, which makes driving safer and more pleasant for the ones remaining.
That only helps if the number of bikes being used matches the previous numbers of cars which would have been driven. Which is almost never the case.
@@garrettkajmowiczThis is the case once a network of bike lanes has been established, but not for projects on their own
@@garrettkajmowicz I want to say duh? Folks don't want to ride in the bare minimum bike lane which goes nowhere. It's like removing any sections of interstate that aren't immediately adjacent to a major downtown.
That never works out that way. The population is increasing and so is the number of cars AND bikes.
This is why traffic design is so counterintuitive, there's often cases where the long way around is more efficient and generally nicer even if you're going highway speeds cause of less stop-go problems.
I'm reminded of NJB's video on how driving in the Netherlands was great (for trips where driving made sense), though there it wasn't just the roundabouts, it was also the fact that fewer people are driving (because biking or transit are faster for many trips.)
9:55 was the best argument for roundabouts. They work well, are more efficient and all that, EVEN in an environment with bad and egocentric drivers.
Maybe a change with less gentle geometry or raised crossings.
My town has been adding round abouts.. I like them but boy some people are very vocal about how they dont like them ..mostly because it seems some people have the hardest time figuring them out ha
Gotta love having to stop inside a roundabout and getting rear-ended because someone zoomed into the round about right in front of you. Such tight space, not time to react. People trying to rush and the roundabout creating artificial chokepoints causing crashes and risky situations.
@@draugnaustaunikunhymnphoo6978 feels like you experienced a trauma.
And it also feels like you didn't watch the video? It's statistically proven that roundabouts leads to a smoother driving experience (a red light is a real artificial chokepoint) and also a lot safer (-80% deaths compared to intersections).
@@Luddevige Off-papers and in reality, roundabouts are more dangerous.
Every mayor in the country should watch this video.
I think most Mayors would agree with everything going on in this video. It's the people who own Mayors that have to be convinced.
We need the Departments of Transportations to watch this. Afterall most cities are just going by the book.
We need new intersection building standards to default to well designed roundabouts. Right now I think they default to 4 way stop signs and stop lights
@@JasonWood100 Standard roundabouts do take more space than urban intersections often have, though you can build mini-roundabouts sometimes.
New standards could also include bulb-outs, refuge islands, and other protective features.
If anything the part at 7:56 needs to be seen
It's one of the reasons why the Netherlands is one of the best places to drive as well as bike
Nationwide 65% of people in Netherlands drive to work most days, even flat and dense Netherlands which has little icy days (unlike Chicago or New York or DC). Sadly no way around it, westerners like cars. No solution has been found. Be honest, for February cold and wet any sane person wants a car so builds life around car. 65% is not a success if shows failure of bicycles vs car. It's hilarious this is skipped over and vid of downtown Netherlands claims to show success.
@@mostlyguesses8385
"Cycling is the second-most common mode of transport in the Netherlands, with 36% of Dutch people listing the bicycle as their most frequent way of getting around on a typical day[1][nb 1], as opposed to the car (45%) and public transport (11%). Cycling has a modal share of 27% of all trips (urban and rural) nationwide.[4]"
wiki Cycling_in_the_Netherlands
Another page: "In June, research demonstrated that for trips shy of 7.5 kilometers, the Dutch almost always cycle more than they drive."
@@mostlyguesses8385 Are you posting this nonsense for free? Because people get paid to spread misinformation like this, but I’d bet you’re doing it for nothing.
@@mostlyguesses8385 Why does this sound like AI?
Almost all the Indy suburbs have followed Carmel's lead and have been building these paths. Also, the city of Indianapolis is doing several 'road diets' adding protected bike and walking lanes. Michigan and New York Streets for example.
It’s getting a lot better. Both cars and bikes need a bit more sense. Bikers take up way more space then they need often riding right on the furthest left side of the bike lane closest to the road.
When I drive my car I don’t have my left tires on the center lane. I just don’t get it, I would appreciate protected bike lanes so these goobers can understand they are playing with heavy vehicles.
@@Yuckyuck1870 It may be because there's a lot of debris on the side of the bike lane or perhaps the side of said road is not very safe should they fall off it. I've rode on the side of the highway in the countryside and the amount of loose gravel along the edge of the road makes biking very uncomfortable. Even though like you said, it would make more sense for me to be on the far side of the lane, I find myself moving towards the rest of the road.
@@Yuckyuck1870 If you're driving along conventional bike lanes, painted to the left of parked cars, bicyclist may be trying to avoid being killed by someone opening their door.
People usually do things for some reason that makes sense to them; if it doesn't make sense to you, you might be missing key information.
Good job Indy! Hopefully the rest of the midwest will follow suit. A lot of Chicago suburbs would seriously benefit from this and we already have some roundabouts and a lot of trails here
@@Yuckyuck1870Debris in roads tends to get pushed around by cars' tires until it builds up on the sides, so cyclists avoid going too close to the edge to avoid running over all that stuff. Also, it's not unusual in the US for bike lanes to be too narrow. And worst of all is parallel parking. People can and do *KILL* cyclists by opening car doors in front of them. It's dangerous.
Really, bike lanes just aren't that good for bikes. They're often the choice of cities or counties that want to give people a place to ride bikes but don't want to commit to actually building infrastructure for bikes.
More serious attempts at bike lanes are pretty wide and have buffer space between the car lanes and bike lanes, and between bike lanes and car parking.
imagine everyone in america suddenly realised that building cities like carmel is a good idea. america would become one of the most desireable places to move to in the western hemisphere!!!
Too bad the vast, vast majority of people who WANT to improve american cities dont want to build them like carmel, but instead just want to copy european city design...which just wont damn work here in america
@@Salamandra40k Just move the entirety of North America to Amsterdam!
@@samin90 Duh! Yes, thats the easiest solution!! Why didnt we think of that?!?!
@@Salamandra40k Most of what Carmel is doing is just a watered down form of European city design, though.
@@Descriptor413 But it is uniquely americana, just look at the town. It doesnt look european, it doesnt try to be european. It's its own thing...OUR thing
Carmel is my favorite city when it comes to just how nice it looks and works (In the US). And it's not even about bikes, which are important to me, the whole place just feels better. I think instead of trying to turning NA cities into the Netherlands or Copenhagen, Carmel is actually a better and more feasible solution to strive towards. Take the step and get to Carmel first, which apart from putting roundabouts everywhere doesn't require total road reconstruction and massive change, it can get started with just some paint and moving some things around (Like all those grass medians, can easily be achieved by some planter boxes to begin with) .
Near where I live, they tried protected bike lanes and that went over like a led balloon. This video shows that round abouts need to come first to keep traffic moving, then you can narrow the roads.
I lived in that area growing up and watched all of that getting built. Some of their biggest projects started with them making the two main north-south arterials sunken freeways with roundabouts at every intersection on the ramps. At first people were kinda weirded out by the idea, but it worked so well that Carmel sort of went with it and was able to make a very walkable and livable city for pedestrians and everyone else.
Whites
I love seeing bike infrastructure get some love. You're absolutely right, a single little bike gutter (which is common where I live) never gets used because it's not useful. A full network becomes useful. I can't wait for your parking lot video!
Where I live, we have maybe two dedicated bike gutters but at least they cover a good distance (and also along two of the town's main arteries). One of which is a highway, where being separated from the actual car lanes is _definitely_ warranted.
So they're not "great", but they're at least better than nothing (contrast the "sharrows" painted along various side streets).
@@Stratelier Sharrows don't do anything per se, but sometimes the side streets are the nicest place to bike...
Glad to see that Road Guy Rob has became an urbanism TH-camr lately lol!
a lot of drivers are willing to support urbanism if it isn't based on punishing them for not wanting to live in a high rise jungle. sensible ideas for non car centric downtowns are beneficial, as long as those who need to use a car to get there have a good option for switching from a car to transit and foot travel. but like he said about Portland - a lot of their changes are based on punishing use of cars, not on helping cars and bicycles coexist. and some of their bicycle infrastructure has fatal flaws - like having the only thing that differentiates a bike lane be a bit of paint that disappears if the road is wet. or an even better case in point: my town is wrapped around the main highway. there was a stretch where it bottlenecked to two lanes, causing daily traffic backups. so the town undertook a five year project to add bike lanes filled with drain grates that forced bicyclists to crowd traffic lanes. a wide planter filled with trees that would outgrow the planter width, and a sidewalk not quite wide enough to be a multiuse path. then they added a traffic light, and can't figure out why the daily traffic backups didn't go away. the only actual improvement to traffic flow was a turn lane for the industrial complex in the middle of it.
I think after covering road extension after extension that seemed to only be band-aids, he started looking into what else was out there as alternatives. Not to mention, varying your topics is how you keep up engagement.
He’s always been an urbanist. Neo-urbanists like NJB are just militant and so anti-car that they forget that their ideas aren’t feasible, practical, or possible. Real, useful urbanists keep in mind that cars and other vehicles will always be a part of the urban fabric and you need to have designs that work for them as well as other modes. Sorry you seem to be one of the brain-dead types that thinks you can only be an urbanist if you talk about bikes.
hey cars arent the only things on the road!
It always has been.
If you want to do roads well, understanding urbanism is necessary
I live in the next town over, close enough to reap the benefits of Carmel's commitment to bike and pedestrian infrastructure. I've seen multiple videos about this town's great multiuse paths and their connectivity (which I enjoy!); Road Guy Rob does a great job also of communicating how the road infrastructure and traffic calming promotes a less stressful drive for when we choose to use a car for transportation. Finally, the amount of pedestrians and bike riders has been a great motivator for me to jump on my bike for errands and exercise more often, which in turn has made me more aware of them when I drive. It's not perfect, but a ton better than I've previously experienced in other US cities!
I like you gave an English name to a concept used everywhere in the Netherlands. Layered networking is a lot more memorable than "Hoofnets" and "Plusnets".
Pittsburgh says they are bike friendly, yet some stop signs on their bike infrastructure can’t be more than 6” wide and cars get their lanes repaved while the adjacent bollarded-off bike lane still is covered in rocks from a landslide due to recent flooding.
bikes don't pay taxes bro
@@Ari--d cars don't, highways don't, and suburban houses don't either. The people pay for everything... Even bikes. (surprising right?)
not only that, but car infrastructure is one of the biggest negatives in city budgets, even *with* car registrations, gas taxes, and the like.
@@Ari--d bike don't kill people either, bro.
Or make noise or foul the air.
Cars are dirty, noisy, and deadly. And expensive.
@@Ari--d But they do save money. For both the rider and the government. The infrastructure is cheaper, and petrol money doesn't get exported out of town, leaving more money for local businesses. Were I live the parking meters only generate enough money to cover the wages of the parking inspectors. If everyone rode than we wouldn't need parking inspectors.
The most durable way to get people to change their choices is to change their environment. Carmel, IN seems like they've designed the best environment to travel around American suburbia.
It's a really strange concept, build spaces for humans, not cars, and suddenly everything feels very safe and inviting.
@@ColrathD that's not what they did, it is still built for cars. It is just built to be efficient and safe which allows for the bikes and pedestrians to also benefit.
@@evancombs5159that’s the future I see for many suburban developments.
I have always been amazed at the argument that pops up, when adding more modes of transport (like transit, bike paths or even footpaths) somehow encroaches on the American "freedom!" of taking the car. Which it doesn't. It just adds options, which, in my mind, is the opposite: It's *more* freedom. I mean, even drivers want fewer drivers on the road!
As a Dutchie, having multiple modes of transportation available to me, means I am free to take the one best suited to me, my lifestyle, and my needs. I own a car, but I find myself taking the bike 80-90% of the time. Carmel sounds like the one place that went "a-ha!" and I hope the gospel of the roundabout and separate modals spreads :) Carmel seems like a nice place for a ride AND a drive.
Your first mistake is assuming when they say "freedom" they mean the dictionary definition. But actually, when a person on a certain side of the political spectrum uses the word "freedom" what they really mean is "being able to force my way of living and my viewpoint onto everyone else, regardless if it makes them sad or makes their life worse". In many ways, that is actually the opposite of freedom according to the dictionary.
You do realize the US is also the land of HOAs, which literally restrict your freedoms, but somehow people are fine with that
@@Bremend We have something similar, but only for apartment buildings. There are also local city ordinances in the Netherlands and the "welstand" that determine (for instance) what color your house may be, or where you may build an extension. Dutch HOAs (VVe's) are usually a collective way of upkeep for the community's building, but they, too, can set certain ordinances (up to a point).
But I'm not sure they are as powerful as some American HOAs seem to be.
Also, those "freedom" people will do everything to restrict other people's freedoms by fighting tooth and nail to oppose multi-family development, mixed use development nowhere near their HOA house.
@@studiolegenda Their power is a bit exaggerated in the US. People are in HOA's because they agreed, at some point, to be part of one (usually by buying property that was locked into one) and fortunately HOAs have no power over city infrastructure. Of course way too many new homes are locked into one as part of a new housing development, so one could argue that its not that much of a choice.
No joke, as I sat at multiple intersections in a row today with a flashing yellow arrow and platoon after platoon of cars coming and preventing me from turning… I couldn’t help but think how much better this all would be if we had roundabouts like Carmel. Thanks a lot, Rob. 😂
Ah yes, having people drive right in front of you while you're in the roundabout cuz they want to be just a bit faster.
1:16 that animation is beautiful, I love it
My favorite part also - I rewatched it multiple times. Not sure there's any animation, though. Before and after transition skillfully edited.
@@ShelterDogs Definitely animated. Watch the road coming from the left, the apartment building is drawn on top of it.
Credit to the City of Carmel on that one.
@@doublex85 Thank you for correcting me. I honestly couldn't tell. It just looked like a masterful transition.
Rob is just so HAPPY in his videos and I just wish everyone felt the same way he does.
Roundabouts are safest when people get used to them, which the residents of Carmel must be.
I commute on a street that’s partially Roundabouts, partially lights, and the difference is Night and day. You move so much quicker through the roundabouts part and it feels really good to know how much safer it is. I hope my city adds more roundabouts and starts to synchronize them with bikes like Carmel!
As a Cobrastani, I'm proud of Arstotzka. They're always improving your freedom of movement.
Flow. This is what matters for any vehicle type. Not more lanes and more bad drivers weaving from lane to lane cutting each over off only to come to a full stop at the end of every block. Then, as you work on improving flow, work on providing some alternative ways to get places or spend leisure time. One less person in a car driving downtown for brunch means one less car in my way, one less car circling endlessly looking for free parking, one more parking space right in front of the restaurant, etc. etc.
Carmel is like the dream American suburb. Its still a suburb and not as dense as it could be, but they took advantage of that and build roundabouts, nice outdoor areas and bike lanes.
And whites.
Roundabouts kill bicycles, so not a silver bullet, I wish they were. """ 2008 study of 91 roundabouts in Flanders, Belgium showed that the installation of roundabouts led to a 27% increase in “bicyclist injury collisions” and an increase of more than 40% in the number of fatal or serious injury crashes involving cyclists. Meanwhile, a 2013 study of more than 300 roundabouts in Denmark found that the installation of roundabouts led to a 65% increase in bike crashes and a 40% increase in injuries.""''
One thing I’ve noticed about Carmel from your videos on it is that it’s just a beautiful city and looks pleasant to be in. It’s not just one pretty downtown street. It’s all nice.
Growing up in Carmel, it is all very nice. However, this city benefits from one of the highest incomes in the state (all of the wealth in Indy is concentrated near Carmel). They allocated the wealth efficiently I must say.
Hey Rob, discovered you a few months ago, and I am LOVING your videos! Your passion and interest in roads and infrastructure is contagious, and you have a really good approach to production and narration.
Thanks for making these videos!
I'm so happy to hear that, Kris. Thank you for your kind words!
My city has bike lanes on nearly every street, but they're so narrow that I often wonder how it's really safe to ride in them. Luckily, we do have a lot of very good (and wide) trails every mile or so (what the midwest would call greenways), but the actual streets are a little bit sketchy to try to ride in on some parts of town.
If they are painted on it is often better to ignore the bike lane and treat the bike lane and lane next to it as an extra wide lane (or normal width lane if all they did was add paint to an existing lane).
The best way I have seen it described is: "painted bike lanes are car infrastructure, not bike infrastructure."
Yup, gutter lanes...I actually prefer what they do on some roads and streets (zero consistency within any city) where they simply mark that a street or road is a bike path, maybe have bikes painted on the road (but no "special" gutter lanes, and signage expressing that bikes have the right to the whole lane and to share the road. With the bike gutters, drivers tend to be just as aggressive if not more and get really upset it a bike dares get out of the extremely dangerous broken up concrete of the gutter.
i used to think this channel was fully car centric and the average anti bikr anti transit driver but its changed in such a good way still ficusing on roads which are neccesary but also looking at bikes and transit
I don't ride a bike but this is absolutely fantastic for both those that do and those who still drive a car there. There are a lot of bike "paths" where I live and I'd be shitting bricks riding them, let alone with a kid or two in tow. They're mostly just barely passable shoulder lanes. While I appreciate the effort, they really serve no real purpose, you're riding on often a busy road. I hope more mayors come around to taking similar, non halfassed route.
I hate gutter lanes, but I also understand they are an incremental move toward protected bike lanes to allow the regular commuter to bike versus someone like me riding at full tilt in full kit who can navigate a gutter lane or more importantly take the full lane.
I live in a Danish city, one of those that has been here since practically the viking age, so it's old and narrow and there are places where roundabouts aren't possible, and as someone that bikes everywhere, I really hate going through those parts, but luckily most infrastructure built after WW2 has had bicycles in mind, so there is lots of separated lanes which also makes room for trees and greenery and helps the look of the city. In more modern times, after the 80s I'd say, maybe after the 90s, most new infrastructure is roundabout based, so I'll often find myself biking longer to use the outer roads instead of the inner (a lot of cities in Denmark are built like spider webs with the old city in the middle, and newer city in layers around it) just for the comfort.
I love everything except the multi lane roundabouts. In Boston those things are scary to cross. The second driver CANNOT see you due to the first stopped driver.
In fairness, this is precisely why the law says that if a vehicle is stopped at a crosswalk FOR ANY REASON, it is unlawful to pass them.
@@blakeh95...yes roundabouts are super super super bad for bicyclists, can't gaslight about this. """ 2008 study of 91 roundabouts in Flanders, Belgium showed that the installation of roundabouts led to a 27% increase in “bicyclist injury collisions” and an increase of more than 40% in the number of fatal or serious injury crashes involving cyclists. Meanwhile, a 2013 study of more than 300 roundabouts in Denmark found that the installation of roundabouts led to a 65% increase in bike crashes and a 40% increase in injuries.""'"
@@blakeh95unfortunately most Americans drivers don’t know this and couldn’t be bothered to follow it if they did.
Really enjoying these urbanism-style videos from this perspective. I think doing more "city visits" like this Carmel series would be really interesting.
It makes intuitive sense...but you can see how much better the raised crosswalks are performing in terms of drivers actually slowing/stopping for pedestrians than on the non-raised crosswalks.
One way to judge how free a society actually is, is to measure how free versus how costly it is to have transportation in the region.
That may not be the best way to judge a freedom index, but I do believe it should be an item on the list. Other items I believe should be on the list include the cost of groceries, land ownership, and utilities and internet access. Plus a society should be considered freer when there is less permitting and less licensing to start a business. It should also be considered freer if there is more on the job training, but only if none of that is funded by the government, instead being funded by the needs of the free market.
Freedom is not tied to how govt helps you with your bad choice to live far from work. In 1920 most walked under 1 mile to work. By 1940 60% had a car, and govt then became responsible for building paths 20 ft thick of asphalt, stone, sand, and dirt to support these 5000 pound monsters. Soon people demanded govt trains and trams chaffeur them as subsidized prices, and unions loved this. Just saying, freedom is not tied to transportation, helping people make dumb choices rhat make them rely on govt is opposite of freedom sorta. But I'm the same, but I don't blame govt for not making my dumb choice better.. . Frankly for green reasons we all should live in camper outside workplace, living 15 miles away is inherently energy intensive stupidity, it has to go. Or not?
@@mostlyguesses8385 American governments actively make it harder or impossible to live near work.
Carmel looks like it is still VERY car dependent just like the rest of America, but its good to see progress with the roundabouts and safer roads for pedestrians and bicyclists.
Roundabouts are awful for bicyclists, so not a silver bullet. """ 2008 study of 91 roundabouts in Flanders, Belgium showed that the installation of roundabouts led to a 27% increase in “bicyclist injury collisions” and an increase of more than 40% in the number of fatal or serious injury crashes involving cyclists. Meanwhile, a 2013 study of more than 300 roundabouts in Denmark found that the installation of roundabouts led to a 65% increase in bike crashes and a 40% increase in injuries.
Tell me you don't have a basic grasp of the size and geography of the US without telling me you don't understand size or geography.
The reason we have large suburbs is because we had much more mobility with horses and cars unlike European towns which were developed in years where everybody walked everywhere. Inherently, because we have the space and the mobility, we aren't going to be as densely populated.
Catering to a EXTREME minority of transportation nut jobs (bikers) at the express expense of all other, more common, forms of transportation, for a seasonal and inefficient bike lane is the most out of touch thing possible. Your inability to understand geography doesn't make this a good idea.
Suburbia is not due to US is big. People wanted lawns and big houses and US once cars jumped from 0 to 60% of households 1920 to 1935 gave people what they wanted. Europe population was slower growing so less babies means less need for new houses and new areas. Even in Europe they love cars and they built roads, and 80% of French workers drive to work.. unless we ban lawns and mandate 4 story houses we will have suburbia, and we ain't doing that, though Europe basically bans lawns sorta .... Cars are stupid due to costliness, $10000 a year all costs, that for 250 work days is $40 a day for that 1 hour of use. I myself walk and bike and get exercise that way, and listen to cell phone, so I hope cell phones and exercise goals cause cars to decline...
@@mostlyguesses8385 Yeah but in suburban areas roundabouts are still better to reduce car collisions, since like I said America's existence is based on cars. Roundabouts may be awful for bicyclists, but the alternative which is crossing 5 lane stroads isnt much better either.
You jump to a "5 lane stroad", which is unfair argument. Clearly if going from a) 2 lane stop sign intersection to b) roundabout this increases bicycle deaths, so the video shouldnt have magically avoided this issue.... All studies say roundabouts kill more bicyclists than alternatives. Hmmmm... Maybe we can use money saved by using roundabout to build some bike flying pedestrian bridges on like a tenth of some roundabouts .......
BIGGER PROBLEM is roundabouts lead to maybe 20% longer path for bikers and walkers if facing 10 roundabouts over a mile., look at overhead shot and it's not just across the street one has to a) go around the circle PLUS b) the path has people cross way back for safety. Frankly when I'm walking I just enter the road to save the extra distance.
Sigh. when not in car it's truly annoying to have path take extra distance cuz the planners put cars first. To skip all this and praise roundabouts as great for bikers in the video was dishonest. You didn't see in vid many people walking, almost like having to take longer curvy path is annoying more to walkers... Oh well, no perfect option is common.
I like to see more people riding bikes, it reduces the traffic when I drive my car!
I think here there's this unspoken rule that you don't simply drive past a car that has come to a stop in an adjacent lane, especially at a crosswalk. You usually slow down and check first.
We also use the British "stopping" hand-signal to let other vehicles know "Conflict ahead, do not pass": hand outstretched, palm facing down, wave up and down (flag).
As a pedestrian though, when the sidewalk-most car stops first, I would cross the first half of the road slowly, until I am able to see the second lane clearly. Only when I am sure the second driver is aware of my crossing would I continue.
in my state, it's a spoken rule. if you pass a car that is stopped for a pedestrian, it's an additional charge on top of failing to stop for a pedestrian.
The Netherlands got it right with separate bicycle infrastructure to keep cyclists safe.
That mayor is a blessing for that town. I hope they realize what they've got we need more people like him!
❤It’s really nice to see wholesome original content. Road Guy Rob, you’ve become my comfort content! Thanks for your hard work out there. Never thought I’d be watching content about roads but I have driven millions of miles by now lol ❤
This is really good. I'm a crazy cyclist who hates tacked on bike lanes and also doesn't want the motorists to hate cyclists because some politician hates cars and "gave" that lane to us.
Hey, in the US, there's no getting rid of cars. Almost every working adult needs one unless they live in the biggest of cities.
So, anything that keeps the cars flowing and still allowing bikes to be safe.
What isn't pointed out in this video is that the safer and more accepted walking and riding are, the more people will do it ...and they'll be healthier and live longer. So, it's not just fewer accidents, it's also lower cost due to almost all other health issues!
I've been rather down with the way they made roundabouts where I am as both a pedestrian or cyclist, but with the wide bike and pedestrian spaces, this is actually good.
That video got shared with half my contact list.... Great job!
When I see those beautiful plants and sidewalks everywhere, only one place comes in mind - Carmel, Indiana. Indeed it is.
I think I heard the mayor of Carmel went to Europe and enjoyed the roundabouts so much on his return he ordered them to be built everywhere.
Now we have a much less expensive vacation to send mayor's on to see the light.
There’s a roundabout near my place I walk through to get to work. One of the legs comes off the freeway, and it’s very common that people will enter the roundabout going 25-30 mph and are absolutely not looking for pedestrians. The number of times I’ve been almost hit because of this is really annoying, and this is an instance I really would rather just have a stoplight with a dedicated pedestrian crossing.
There are no perfect solutions, but sometimes the best way to accommodate for alternate modes of transportation is stop another mode for a brief time.
i have a video idea: someone unauthorized put an exit sign that wasnt there on the sr 110/ i 5 interchange in california that helped millions of drivers
I'd love to visit Carmel someday, it's just a shame they have no piblic transit whatsoever except for dial-a-ride
One day I'm young and vibrant, and the next day I'm explaining to someone that I like watching a YT channel about road technology.
I'm probably not the typical audience of this channel but this just goes to show how much excess capacity a lot of streets in the US have and how overbuilt our road infrastructure is even from the standard of only considering traffic flow.
FINALLY, a city that isnt hostile towards cars or bikes, i dont get why cities feel like they have to choose one of them only. having good car and bicycle infrastructure benefits both sides!!!
To be fair in a bigger city environment you may have 10x the number of people competing for the same space in these different modes. So these fixes and adjustments work well in this setting, but wouldn't be appropriate for a central city or urban neighborhood where fitting in the same number of cars means reducing safety, and space and desirability of some transportation modes.
@@matiasgrioni292 Yeah, Carmel's official population density is literally (I just checked) less than one tenth that of a typical good walkable neighborhood. I don't know if that reflects the effective density or is diluted by undeveloped land in the borders.
Past a certain level it is physically impossible for everyone to be driving all the time, there is literally not enough space for them to get to work at the same time, for example.
The land use surrounding the infrastructure is the issue
I've yet to experience a city that has been hostile toward cars. (Removing a lane is not being hostile).
@@matiasgrioni292 agree
Something unmentioned in this video was the raised crosswalk. They force cars to slow down even if they're otherwise not inclined to do it. Most US crosswalks, even so-called protected ones, are at road level, which encourages drivers to fly right through them. The Not Just Bikes channel published a video that covered that feature in part as I recall.
Rob, thanks for this. Carmel & your videos give me hope.
A lot of cars driving around without bumpers. I guess roundabouts were a hard learning curve :)
This is how to do it. It’s not about winning a war, or slipping into anti- or pro-car ideology. It’s about peacefully and safely coexisting on our roads.
I feel like the city planners where I live (Southern California) know all of this but simply don't care. They only care about punishing car drivers for existing. Other road users (pedestrians, bikes, scooters, etc.) aren't the reason for the anti-car projects they push they are the excuse. The net result is roads that are less safe for EVERYONE.
Do you have examples?
Your videos are drawing me to visit Indianapolis, in order to visit Carmel. This is not a thing I thought I would ever do.
Building the full-width trail in as many places as possible instead of connecting to a skinny sidewalk or using painted bicycle gutters is super encouraging to see.
I was just in vacation in Anchorage Alaska. That town has a pretty good bike and pedestrian infrastucture. Not so much bike lanes on the side of busy roads and intersection but parks built throughout the city interconnected with it's own paved paths you can walk or ride a bike and get throughout the town without having to go onto roads for very long.
it also has pretty good moose infrastructure 😂
I’m not American. It’s funny watching Americans catch up to the rest of the the world, even if it is 50 years late 😊
Thanks!
Friendly note from a European to all North Americans, before exiting the roundabout use your turn-signal.
Well, you're supposed to, but a lot of drivers don't signal to exit, only when entering. It's probably not such a big deal when you're only dealing with other cars, but it can be a bother for pedestrians.
I feel as if I'm the only American who uses my turn signal for any reason.
What's better than focusing on driving? Oh yes, being distracted during a notch nobody will notice.
You make me want to take a vacation to Carmel just to drive around the roads and leave lol
You should do that, you won't want to leave. The downside is high demand for homes in Carmel, and the cost to purchase is high.
If you do, make sure to bike around too to really get the full experience.
It was more fun to drive around than I had anticipated.
@@Irishfanthe monoracial aspect makes it costly
If Carmel, Indiana can do it, other cities in the United States can do this. I do have to say for a suburb of nearly 100.000 inhabitants, this is quite impressive with the absolute minimum number of traffic lights.
Now.... imagine a whole country to be build like this..... Hmmmmm, what country could that be.
Even in Netherlands 70% nationwide bicycle to work, car is still king. Us westerners are lazy especially in cold Movement to April. Cars have won. I wish it weren't so. Netherlands had not solved this. Old people especially hate risking broken leg in February on bike, and that's just a fact, half won't bike in Feb for very sane reason. As Minnesotan I truly know this, bicycles can't replace cars as main mode of commute, it's silly to say otherwise, if commute is over 2 miles it'll be a car. Most people who bike are under 2 miles, showing forcing closeness is only real solution..
@@mostlyguesses8385 "Us westerners are lazy especially in cold Movement to April."
Finnish children bike to school in the snowy Finnish winter. Helped by their cities plowing bike paths as quickly (or faster) than streets.
"if commute is over 2 miles it'll be a car."
Half of US car trips are under 3 miles, easily bikeable if biking were safe and direct.
... People can't admit, no, us people are lazy and soft and love cars. Yes some Finnlanders bike but not as many as depicted. A BBC article on this said """"Despite these harsh conditions, 12% of winter journeys are made by bicycle in the city of Oulu. Compare that with the milder climate of England, where year-round the proportion of trips made by bike is just 2%". 12% of winter trips in bike capital of world is impressive???? No it ain't, this shows yes it's probably 50% of trips in nice 6 months of year, but most people keep car ready at great expense for cold times...... Children WHO HAVE NO CHOICE THEY ARE KIDS , yes in Oulu the bike capital of Finland up to 50% bike in winter to school on nice paths which at great expense even go under roads and are plowed within minutes of snowfall...... I'm from Minnesota and know even when plowed there can be ice to slip on, and I'd expect 1 fall a week when i slowly turned on my 4 mile bike trip to college. I'd wear layers and was young, but it's silly to just ignore WINTER ICY BIKING IS DANGEROUS AND WILL HURT THE FRAILER PEOPLE. .. Old people don't wanna risk broken bones, not should they...Sigh.. In actual fact the level of car use is high in every place that can afford it, it's just propoganda to show vids of the like 10% who arent in cars.... Per Wikipedia if exclude kids and retirees there is about 1 car for every adult in W Europe and US, Finland included. Nonpoor people use cars mostly, including Europe and Finland. ...... In Finland I'd say 80% of workers drive to work, in a nation with dense cities and flat lands and anti car policies, and other 15% live near work, and it's 5% young hip people under 30 without kids doing a long bike ride, and they soon stop.... Finlanders lie and overstate our no car habits, but we will admit 60% of commuting is by car"""" 59 percent of Finnish respondents answer our survey on "Most common modes of transportation for commuting" with "Own / household car". The survey was conducted in 2024, among 1,734 consumers.""
Hm
. It's just unrealistic to expect people over 40 with frail bodies to endure the crashes from bike slipping on ice. Math is, ok 5 icy months, 5 crashes as guess from 10 years Minnesota winter biking (college and then grad school). Maybe as a guess for each crash : 94% no injury, 5% mild injury needing hospital, 1% broken bone. This is very risky, crashes are violent and frozen concrete and ice is hard as F. So over 50 years using math that's 250 crashes and 12.5 hospital trips and 2.5 broken bones over life of biking thru winters..... Be honest, this seems a dangerous way to get around vs a car. I maybe was wrong to call this lazy, no it's cautious to not use a bicycle except in perfect conditions.... Cars are safe and loved for a reason. P.S. Some activities have hi accident rates, skiing is worst, like 1% risk of hospital per day!!! Bicycling yes seems will need hospital every 1 of 3 years if do it full time, compare this to car when I've never had to go to hospital despite a few car crashes.. .. Isn't 1 of 3 years needing hospital just too dangerous a mode of travel full time? . .. I'm guessing at numbers but I know winter bikers and they have scars on legs and have had hospital visits. SO bicycling where there is ice is not feasible ? ( except on perfectly groomed paths by the young going short distance the winter half of year).
This channel is a valuable public service. This information not only saves time, money, and resources, but potentially will save lives too. Keep up the great work!
In the US, most people who cycle also drive. Cyclists aren't at war with drivers: we ARE drivers. And note how Carmel tends to have sidewalks _and_ bike paths. Bikes and pedestrians are as bad a mix as bikes and cars.
Yep, that was what I was thinking when was talking so positivity about multiuse paths. Bikes are dangerous, but worse them is motorized wheel chairs.
@@dennis2376 As a wheelchair user (manual, not motorized) I can't tell you the amount of people who walk around without paying attention. I've been walked into numerous times, even after trying to get their attention by yelling.
Some motorized chair users are problematic, but in my lived experience, inattentive walkers are the bigger problem.
@@davidp2888 I am sorry to hear that. I give wheelchairs all the room they need. Have a good day.
@@davidp2888 get a bike bell on your wheelchair and see if that helps
In my city (and I'm not in any way saying it's the roundabouts fault they're infinitly better then the alternative) many roundabouts back up into each other BUT they constantly move, just at .005mph
Thank you for covering Carmel! Having grown up near Carmel, I loved visiting the city for events because I could actually enjoy the spaces around the downtown area
I went to the Indy 500 in May, and because of your videos on Carmel, I went and drove around the town and yea, it was pretty fun to drive around with all the rotaries.
They’re roundbaouts
So you're saying driving in Carmel is like "left, left, left, left, left...."
As a dutchie I look up to Carmel Indiana. They're always biking uphill.
The fire department failing to yield to a pedestrian at a lighted crossing is American Car Culture in a nutshell. Yikes.
Paramedics get extra points if they hit you AND get to take you to the hospital! Then they charge you $5000 for the service.
your smugness is what draws people away from your ideals.
I grew up here during the roundabout construction in Carmel. @RoadGuyRob thank you for promoting a more sustainable city design.
Loved the video, makes me want to go back and watch the first Carmel video and think about how I can push for this kind of development in my city
One of the best videos I have seen so far. Well done. Wide stroads with traffic lights are truly the worst of all options.
3:59 honestly, I learned that if less people stop, it will make traffic flow perfectly.
You did not explain how cyclists pedal through those roundabouts. Do we have to dismount and walk twice at every intersection?
Roundabouts work in Carmel because the race car fans are so used to always turning left, left, left, left, left....
Great series!! I live in Fishers - a sister city between Indy and Carmel (and Noblesville) - which has adopted the roundabout life as well. It also extends the Monon Trail through the Nickel Plate district, for pedestrian and bike traffic. The biggest issues for roundabouts in the greater Indy metro and neighboring areas seem to be: poor driver education on usage / traffic guidelines, poor engineering (too small interiors / aprons, no islands / gore areas, inadequate approach tapers, etc), and poor signage and/or markings (especially for multiple thru / exit lanes). And maybe inadequate site distance for crossing pedestrian traffic (in part due to all the oversized vehicles). Generally, especially with the elevated circles along 37, traffic is SOOOOOO much better on the north side than it was with signalized intersections. I also like seeing roundabouts expanding to (if nowhere else) school zones / reduced speed zones and emergency service routes. Thanks for coming round this way and highlighting what the north metro area of Indy (and hopefully more) is getting right!
In our region we had a DDI installed 2 years ago and last year they finished it off with a roundabout with 2 slip lanes removing the traffic light.
Some people still complain about it but it is smooth sailing through, cannot even compare the two.
A delight as always
This is a dream town. Every town needs to institute this plan.!
I love roundabouts. I really don't care that much about cyclists but find these great for motorists. OK, if they are good for cyclists I'll go along. Sedona, AZ is a city that really uses them and it works. I live in Phoenix. There is no way I see the Valley of the Sun with its massive grid converting to this.
Roundabouts can slove practically every traffic jam and yet there is a huge traffic jam on these major roads every day because of those crappy traffic lights pulling a green on a road with no cars.
Another substantial plus Is that you don't need electricity at every single crosswalk for stoplights and all of the equipment that goes along with it
I live in Central Valley California, they are slowly putting these practices in place, but the heat here makes biking difficult, EV bike will help. Our society will be so much better once we move away from car-centric cities. 👍👍
Great meeting you yesterday! To everyone here, Road Guy Rob is just as cool in real life 🙌🏻
Likewise, good seeing you. Did you guys eat at Red Robin?
@@RoadGuyRob Halal Guys actually - if you like Greek food it’s definitely worth a try - make sure to get the white sauce on top
You should have a look at Milton Keynes in England
I like how you explain all this road engineering
3:55 car parked in the painted bicycle gutter
Thanks for explaining some of these new infrastructure I'm seeing in my area too. Wish more places adopt these fast!
7:50 except for the sidewalk that just ends, without any signage, along Westfield Blvd (just south of Orchard Park Dr S). Sidewalk abruptly ends and forces pedestrians onto a street, without any bike lanes, for a 1/4 mile. Carmel has done a great job, but there is still a lot of room for improvements.
Welcome to the future USA, finally slowly moving from second world country to a first one. Roundabouts are awesome when used in the right environment, no more stopping for red lights every 100 meters.
He was just a man before he put in the orange vest
I am a redblooded American, born in Birmingham, Alabama. I also own a home in Italy. I’ve traveled to France and Spain, etc. Driving is fantastic over here because of roundabouts. We need more in America. People that say they can’t understand how roundabout works, probably shouldn’t be driving a car. They move traffic, Easier. Any crashes are at low speed so there are minimal fatalities.