By John Gaffney

Other Voices

Has the Los Altos City Council been hijacked by the deep-pocketed Roundabout Lobby? As absurd as this tongue-in-cheek question sounds, I can only explain the Nov. 27 actions of the city council by referring to my Alice in Wonderland Field Guide.

At issue is a proposed “roundabout” at the location of Springer and Berry, under the auspices of the Loyola Safe Routes to School project. The city council has approved a plan including a roundabout, despite knowing and admitting that no data exists to support the contention that a roundabout would be safer for pedestrians or bicyclists than the existing four-way stop.

Even ardent proponents of roundabouts acknowledge that they are not appropriate in all circumstances or for all intersections. In a study of roundabouts by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, they cite one roundabout in the United States that replaced a four-way stop, and so far the data indicate it may be more dangerous than the previous configuration. The main point is that there is one example in the entire United States, and it is not demonstrably safer!

Despite this lack of data and experience with roundabouts, the city council is charging ahead with a plan that is unsupported by proven observation or facts. Los Altos will be the first community in the country to incorporate a roundabout in an attempt to “improve” the safety of child pedestrians. In fact, according to the staff report to the council, the roundabout will increase the traffic flow through the intersection - average wait times will be dramatically reduced. Given that Magdalena and Springer are already used by motorists trying to traverse from Highway 280 to 237, improved traffic flow at that intersection will likely make it a more desirable shortcut. More cars moving at higher average speed is difficult to reconcile with the safety of elementary schoolchildren walking to Loyola, and it doesn’t take a Ph.D. in roundabout science to recognize the contradiction.

Why does the city council have such confidence in a roundabout at this location? Consultants who recommended a roundabout admit that an “education” program for the elementary students would be necessary to teach them how to navigate the new intersection. So the Loyola curriculum will apparently need to be supplemented with “Learn How to Dodge the Cars Day.” Why is everyone apparently unconcerned about the potential liability to the city resulting from any accidents which may occur after the roundabout is installed?

After these objections were voiced at the meeting, the deliberations of the council got “curiouser and curiouser,” as Alice would say. Council member Lear commented that a driver was more likely to stop for a crosswalk while driving slowly than while driving fast. He was not impressed by the argument that it is easier to stop for a crosswalk when there is a stop sign right next to it. Council member Casto said she was skeptical of the roundabout until she read the staff report about how much traffic flow would improve. She also seems to think that moving cars are safer than stopped cars. Council member Moss said when he lived in New Jersey the rotaries and roundabouts were a near-universal disaster, but that experience didn’t seem to affect his current opinions on whether they were safe for kids. Councilmember Becker said he didn’t think the roundabout would contribute to safety, but that wasn’t enough to get him to vote against it. Mayor LaPoll didn’t have much to say, knowing that the fix was in.

I may be wrong on all of this. It may be that 30 other school districts in the country are someday going to build roundabouts near their elementary schools and they will work beautifully and safely. Until that time, though, I don’t see why Los Altos needs to lead the costly roundabout experiment parade using kids as guinea pigs.

Gaffney is a Los Altos resident.