Next part of the transportation equation: developing a solution

The traffic circle didn't cause the collision. The truck going the wrong direction in the traffic circle caused the collision. It isn't a matter of "obeying the sign" it is a matter of knowing how to drive. Read your driver's manual (Section 4: Intersections) and you won't have these kinds of problems.

David Dean The traffic circle didn't cause the collision.
JK: Actually the circle did, because it was designed without regard to humans. There are numerous examples of such bad designs, in the private sector, being sued off of the market place. One must design products, taking into account of how people typically behave. This design ignored that at least on these points:

1) The sign expects the driver to conduct an unfamiliar and difficult maneuver in order to perform an otherwise simple task, a left turn.

2) It makes a simple task un-necessarily complex and dangerous.

3) The design, by the addition of vegetation, intentionally blocks the view of potential and actual hazzards.

4) The addition of vegetation ignored well established rules of traffic design - allowing an adequate sight line of possible hazzards.

5) The design is particularly difficult, or impossible, for larger vehicles such as trucks.

6) The obstacle also slows fire trucks to the point that more lives are probably lost than saved by the allegedly slowing of traffic.

7) The obstacle is difficult to maneuver around while marinating the permitted legal speed. The driver may be concentrating on maneuvering around the obstacle at the expense of watching for bikes and peds.

8) It is impossible to see peds behind the obstacle, creating a hazzard.

(Note to Sam & you r legal guy: you have been warned of the hazzard, so you may loose your next suit)

David Dean The truck going the wrong direction in the traffic circle caused the collision.
JK: That is the natural result of placing a hazzard in the street, requiring a difficult maneuver AND blocking the view of oncoming hazzards.

David Dean It isn't a matter of "obeying the sign" it is a matter of knowing how to drive.
JK: The sign is complex and non-intutative.

David Dean Read your driver's manual (Section 4: Intersections) and you won't have these kinds of problems.
JK: Got a reference for that? Is that sign really in the book? How about national standards?

Thanks
JK

JK, were you driving that truck? Given that you are presenting the situation from the perspective of the truck driver, I'm going to assume you were. But if otherwise, please let me know.

It is universally true that if you can't see ahead then it is not safe to proceed. If you believed the traffic circle to be an obstacle then you should have parked your truck and investigated it, the same way you would treat any obstacle which obstructs your view. The fact that you decided to proceed despite safety concerns, is entirely your own fault. Scapegoating is dangerous because it prevents you from learning from your mistakes.

As for the traffic circle reference: 2004 Oregon Driver's Manual, Section 4, Intersections, Page 50.

It seems ironic that you have a website dedicated to transportation advocacy but you don't understand traffic circles. As an aspiring automobile aficionado, maybe you should start by reading your driver's manual.

Scapegoating is dangerous because it prevents you from learning from your mistakes.
Then don't do it, starting with knocking off the accusations.

You appear incapable of understanding the moist basic of safety measures - taking into human nature into account. Instead you think, like a typical planner, that you can just change human nature. You are destined to a life of failure. The sad part is the number of people you will get hurt before you eventually learn about the real world.

Thanks
JK

It isn't human nature to go the wrong way through traffic circles. The only aspect of human nature that your story demonstrates is that we generally lack the humility and self-awareness to take responsibility for our own mistakes.

Sorry, good planing recognizes human nature and designs with it in mind. Good planning does not try to change human nature.

Expecting people to take a long. sometimes difficult (or impossible if you have a commerical sized truck) path in place of a simple direct one is a typical planner mistake.

Thanks
JK

You could blame every mistake on not accounting for human nature. It is a general catch-all and has to be one of the worst imaginable excuses.

There are ample cases where the safest and most efficient route are not the most direct. In the context of auto traffic, cloverleaf interchanges, one-way roads, arterial thoroughfares, and traffic circles are prime examples.

As for commercial trucks: it was a residential road. You can tell by all the houses.

Hazard only has one z, unless you're talking about Bo and Luke Duke.

It's a traffic circle... as with almost every other street , divided highway, dirt road, bridge, parking lot, etc., in the US: you stay to the right. It is not that hard to figure out. My hat is off to the creative excuses.

Traffic circles don't hurt people, (dumbass) people hurt people.

So let me get this straight, you couldn't understand that sign? Did you need a flagger? Looked pretty obvious to me, and in broad daylight! I think the more likely explanation is that you broke the law and plowed into someone while doing it. It's OK to be embarrassed about that Jim, but to come on a blog, post pictures and generally draw attention to it is a little self abusive if you ask me.

Or maybe Sam could take some of the $74,804,051 taxes collected, every year in urban renewal districts that currently goes to provide the fancy new streets, parks and toy trains to the Pearl, SoWhat and the rest of the tax freeloading urban renewal districts. They get to keep big chunks of their property tax money in their own neighborhoods, while the rest of us have to pay for most of their basic services. Portland’s share would be about ½ of that, the rest going to Multnomah county.

Isn’t it time to capture that $75 million for basic services instead of toys for the rich? (Except Lents)

Thanks

So none of those folks are motorists? I would fall into about three of those categories in addition to being a motorist.

Oh but Ron, Ron...you are no doubt part of the stacked deck of special interests who have passed the secret litmus test for inclusion in these fun filled groups. They probably eat the finest in vegetarian cuisine while they conspire to drive a stake through the automobile. LMAO.

Terry, thanks for the continued entertainment. Maybe people won't let you onto one of these groups because you talk too much, only say one thing and are kind of mean and aggressive? Just my opinion, but that's how it comes across.