To the editor:

On “Saturday Night Live” years ago, Dana Carvey used to play a stubborn, ignorant old man who hated to the point of absurdity any and all change. His character reminds me of some of our local roundabout resisters.

The four-way stop (mistakenly regarded by some as divine) was indeed invented by humans circa 1900 and can and should be improved upon.

Those who have seriously considered the data (you know, like, the experts) believe that roundabouts are clearly superior to four-way stops for many (perhaps most) intersections. Among their advantages:

¢ They actually improve traffic flow. Thus, the Type A lead-foots should approve.

¢ They dramatically reduce the number and severity of accidents, including a 90 percent reduction in fatalities. Thus, the white-knuckled curb-huggers should approve.

¢ They are cost-effective in the long run. Thus, the taxpayers should approve.

Are they “too narrow”? A roundabout is as wide as any regular lane, and can easily accommodate most trucks and buses.

Do they impede traffic? Recall the blocks-long, bumper-to-bumper, stop-and-go morass that was once the norm on East 19th Street, and compare it to the improved situation there now.

Do they impede emergency vehicle? The fire department says they can handle the inconvenience.

I encourage our leaders to continue with roundabouts. Please ignore obnoxious, uninformed opponents whose best argument seems to be: “In my day, we had traffic jams and head-on collisions, and we liked it.”

Scott McDaniel,

Lawrence