I saw the following article in Slate on roundabouts (and the cultural
aversion to them in the US) which may provide some starting points for
you; the hyperlinks are very good as well.
http://www.slate.com/id/2223035/
"roundabouts are safer than traditional intersections for a simple
reason: By dint of geometry and traffic rules, they reduce the number
of places where one vehicle can strike another by a factor of four.
They also eliminate the left turn against oncoming traffic—itself one
of the main reasons for intersection danger—as well as the prospect of
vehicles running a red light or speeding up as they approach an
intersection to "beat the light." The fact that roundabouts may "feel"
more dangerous to the average driver is a good thing: It increases
vigilance."
On 21-Jul-09, at 11:28 AM, Rob Epstein wrote:
On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 1:39 PM, Christopher Monnier
<monn0...@umn.edu>wrote:
Here's an example from Minneapolis where the two terminals at MSP
airport (as well as the signs directing freeway traffic to the
airport) are being relabeled (at tremendous cost) because the current
labels are uninformative. Currently the airport's two terminals are
labeled "Lindberg" and "Humphrey," but those names don't mean
anything to most travelers. So the terminals are being relabeled as
"Terminal 1" and "Terminal 2," respectively. Additionally, the
signs will indicate which airlines are associated with which
terminal.
Some up-front usability testing would have revealed the hubris of
using cryptic terminal labels when it would have been cheap to make
changes and could have saved the airport and whoever's paying for
the freeway signs a lot of money.
________________________________________________________________
Welcome to the Interaction Design Association (IxDA)!
To post to this list ....... disc...@ixda.org
Unsubscribe ................ http://www.ixda.org/unsubscribe
List Guidelines ............ http://www.ixda.org/guidelines
List Help .................. http://www.ixda.org/help
