No, no, no, no! Roundabouts are NOT safer!
The space of that intersection is NOT large enough to accommodate several trucks (some of them two-part trucks) AND buses AND cars AND motorcycles AND bicycles.

The person who suggested the roundabout--has he/she ever tried to use those roundabouts in Europe? Rome, Paris, London, etc???? People too often get stuck in the innermost circle lane and can't get out for half an hour or more!!! Cars dart desperately trying to exit to the street they want, but have to circle a zillion times before getting close enough to an outside lane to do it.

Pedestrian safety? Ha! With Roundabouts, drivers zip into the street they want regardless of pedestrians. They're so exasperated from circling over and over and over that all they see is the street they want, not pedestrians.

I really have to disagree. I spent several years living in Europe and I think the "stuck in the roundabout" thing is a complete myth. It is true that you have to learn how to use a roundabout, and if you don't know how, they are a little daunting, But they work, quite well.

In the UK, for example, I don't think I ever encountered a stop sign in two years of driving there. They are unnecessary because of roundabouts. And I lived on the continent as well and did a great deal of driving in Italy, France, Germany, and Spain (plus several others) and never experienced any problem at all.

I still don't think they could work on upper Market due to the Muni trains, but there are other places in the city they might be ideal.

Hi Daviator,

It was many years ago that I spent six months driving through Europe-- London, Paris, Madrid, Rome, and other major European cities. Getting stuck in the inside lane circling a Roundabout is NOT a myth.

I still remember the anguish and exasperation of wondering if I would EVER get into the next lane to my right, then finally into the outer one so I could turn onto the street I wanted.

Yes, European Roundabouts may have improved over time to make traffic a little smoother than I remember. I do agree with you that this particular intersection is not a good candidate for a Roundabout.

Drivers are used to going into the Streetcar lane to make left turns off Market St. They'll continue to do so.

While you were living in Europe, you said you never saw a stop sign. Did pedestrians FLY across the streets at the corners? Stop signs remind drivers that pedestrians have the right-of way at the crosswalk, so the drivers wait for them to cross.

It's clear that you're an alert and careful driver, but not everyone is.
Good luck wherever you happen to be driving.

On the general case for roundabouts, the only argument against them in general is that they are intimidating when drivers are not used to them. However once there are enough of them that drivers can get used to them, they are superior for cars in regards to safety, fuel efficiency, and traffic flow. (I speak as someone who has driven extensively in both Europe and the U.S.)

However for these particular 6-way intersections, there have been some good points raised below that raise some questions. I agree that possibly there is not enough room to create a roundabout big enough for large trucks to pass. Also it would might be problematic to accomodate the tracks and overhead wires for MUNI.

In addition I have some concerns that two-lane roundabouts might make these intersections a little less appealing for pedestrian traffic. It would be nice if there was some way to turn these intersections into more of a welcoming plaza with a central pedestrian zone with just a single-lane circular traffic lane around it in which the traffic would go quite slowly -- but that would likely reduce the traffic flow.

Another possibility would be to turn each of these six-way intersections into two-way intersections. So for example all the East-West streets (14th, 15th, and 16th) could be blocked at Market and traffic could only cross Market on the North-South streets. That could allow nice little pedestrian plazas at the end of the blocked-off street in the same way as was done at 17th and Market.
__
Eamonn

Hi Fran,

I wasn't advocating for getting rid of stop signs in SF; just saying that roundabouts (both those that are signal-controlled, and the small ones which aren't) are very efficient and allow cars to traverse intersections often without having to stop when there's no other traffic.

I don't think they are inherently less pedestrian-friendly, but they are different; pedestrian crossings are well marked and usually NOT right in the intersection. I don't think it's less convenient for pedestrians, but it IS different. It's a whole different paradigm and I think this conversation is a little academic, because I'd be shocked to see anything like this actually be implemented here at any major intersection. On the plus side, the roundabouts are often nicely landscaped and can be beautiful.

I think the problem you had in Europe was probably a combination of inexperience (roundabouts ARE daunting to the uninitiated, I had to learn the rules (written and unwritten) of how they function) too, and the fact that European drivers, especially in places like Rome, are just plain aggressive and you almost have to adopt a similar driving attitude to survive there. As bad as drivers in SF can be (and since we have basically zero traffic enforcement here, they are pretty bad) they are still a lot less aggressive than drivers in Paris or Rome. Anyway, people here have enough trouble following today's rules, I have little confidence they would do well at learning a new and foreign way of traversing intersections. So while it's an interesting discussion, I think it's a pipe dream.

Eamonn, I see the appeal of blocking some of the streets, but I fear the law of unintended consequences. Many of the east-west streets are major thoroughfares, and I suspect those living on Sanchez, Noe, Church etc. would not appreciate a doubling of traffic on their streets.

I don't know what the answer is, but I personally believe that more traffic enforcement (on cars, bikes and pedestrians) would help. I honestly think that most SF drivers have forgotten some of the most basic traffic laws as they are never expected to actually obey them.

How about this: on the corner of Market-Sanchez-15: When you are heading south on Sanchez St and trying to make a left onto Market: no one understands if you turn a sharp left so as to head towards the Walgreens or if you are supposed to do a more shallow left and onto Market so as to stop behind the limit line that is on Market at that intersection. Often people do one or the other, or some combination of the two. Can you at least put up a sign to make it clear what people are supposed to do? I think they are supposed to make the sharp left towards the crosswalk but they often will go towards the limit line and then continue, which basically means they are crossing the intersection at a 90 degree angle against a red light which could cause an accident...

I agree that it confuses some people, though it shouldn't. That red light is not for turning traffic, it's for the traffic waiting to continue straight on Market St. If you think about it, ANY time you turn left at a traffic light, you will turn to face a red light as you complete the turn, and you don't come to a screeching halt in an attempt to obey it (because it isn't applicable to you.) This situation is a little more confusing here because of the extreme angle required for the turn.

I often turn left from southbound 15th onto Market and have a related problem with people that are turning left from northbound 15th and don't realize that when you have a divided road with a median (e.g. Market St.) the turning vehicles should pass each other before commencing the turn. If one person tries to turn in front of the oncoming turning car, and that other car expects to pass before turning, it creates a nasty conflict.

I agree that there could be changes to improve things, maybe some striping or dotted lines or something to clarify things a bit.

My bigger pet peeve at this intersection comes as a pedestrian. Because of the slope of the street, and the way the "Walk/Don't Walk" lights are positioned, it's almost impossible to see the "walk" light go on (especially on a sunny day) when you're standing by the 76 station waiting to cross Market. And because the walk light initially comes on while the auto signal is red, people often continue to wait until the auto signal turns green (because they can't really see the walk signal.) But waiting doesn't give them time to actually make it across the intersection because they've missed the first half of the crossing time. The walk signals need to be angled down a bit so that you can see them from the opposite side of the street, which is lower.