[saltharp]

I’m an Australian who has spent a number of years living in the US, and to be honest I’m not sure roundabouts are that great anymore.

Roundabouts might be more efficient for pushing cars through an intersection, but they’re less pedestrian-friendly. Yes that’s right, in this specific case, American cities are more pedestrian friendly than Australian and European cities. At best, a pedestrian has to take an awkward circular detour with a roundabout, and most Australian roundabouts DON’T have a zebra crossing like the picture in the article - so unlike a four way stop, pedestrians don’t have the right of way. If they did, it would likely destroy a lot of the (car-only) efficiency gains in busy areas.

The other benefit of the four way stop is that every American just knows what to do when the traffic lights fail, since the rules fall back to the four way stop rules. In Australia, this can be a very dangerous situation until the cops arrive to direct traffic.

(For the Australians who don’t know how to navigate a four way stop: you arrive at an intersection where all four entrances have a stop sign, so you stop, and then go through in the order that you arrived)

[bogantech]

> most Australian roundabouts DON’T have a zebra crossing like the picture in the article

This is a planning issue not a roundabout issue

[vladvasiliu]

> If they did, it would likely destroy a lot of the (car-only) efficiency gains in busy areas.

Have you been to Paris? Not only do pedestrians here have to take detours, but it's a royal PITA for the car traffic, too! Who says you can't have it all?

There seemingly are roundabouts all over the place. But, on closer inspection, those actually aren't roundabouts, but "circular intersections". Cars inside in the circle must yield to those coming in. Combine this brain-dead rule with the fact that nobody honors the "don't block the intersection" rule, and you get gridlocks all over the place even with light traffic.