I live just down the street from one of these "round-abouts". I was never notified of the installation. A couple of issues I have noticed in connection and addition to the concerns JS has brought up. The intersection being too small: I have both almost hit pedestrians and been hit as a pedestrian crossing these intersections at Amherst and Garfield and at Richmond and Garfield. The round about is large enough that the nose of a vehicle will and does cross the plane of the walkways between "ADA" curb-cuts accessing the side-walks.

This looks and feels to pose more of a danger to pedestrians than ever before! What are your thoughts?

There apparently has been a study completed by BernCo that indicated a "negative impact of traffic safety" regarding the installation of these round-abouts? I have not seen nor read this report however, it is not surprising since personal experience of using these intersections both in a vehicle and by foot has clearly felt far less secure than ever before the installation of the circles.

I also am struggling to see that the city/county or community has considered, for example, the negative impact these circles and speed bumps will have on emergency service response times. Seconds, and I mean seconds, count when your house is burning down around you, your pets and your family. A 10 -20 ton vehicle such as a fire truck will now have to navigate some of these obstacles prior to saving you, me, our families and members of our community.

Has there been any thought to this or other concerns? Maybe there has. Maybe this is a completely acceptable side effect. After all, the good of the many outweighs the good of the few or the one (as long as I'm not part of the few or the one). I am truly struggling to balance the "cost-benefit" here. Help me out.  

Just because we CAN do something doesn't mean we SHOULD. At least not without a proper and thorough understanding of the ENTIRE picture and sets of benefits and ramifications. This seems a half baked attempt to curb speeding without consideration of any further or additional issues what-so-ever. This feels like triage, not a cure.

When engineering societies and cities one must not obsess on a singular step to obtain a singular goal without thought to the potential multitude of issues that will arise from the proposed "solution";   but should consider multiple moves ahead, multiple combinations of those moves to obtain the best and most sustainable solutions with the least amount of ramifications associated with the proposed solutions, long and short term, for everybody.

I grow more concerned about the safety of our community every time I cross these intersections now. Is there a safety benefit that is hiding and that I cannot see? Because in the practical use of these intersections (both in vehicles and on foot) my overwhelming feeling is "this is far more dangerous (especially for pedestrians) now".

Please tell me what I'm missing since I cannot possibly be as thoughtful as our government, civil engineers nor community at large.