You must log in or register to comment.
Yeah. It’s always a bit pathetic to watch or read about the efforts of cities to make things safer around here.
The scheme that is very popular here to “secure” intersections is to add an exclusive pedestrian phase (a scramble) to the traffic lights cycle. So everyone has to wait for everyone. No pedestrians are crossing while cars are moving through an intersection, and no cars are crossing the intersection while pedestrians are. But it’s tuned for cars and pedestrians have to wait an eternity to have their exclusive phase. So what happens? Pedestrians are eventually losing patience and cross traffic like chickens.
Exclusive phases are also encouraging car drivers never to yield to pedestrians or cyclists, because they never have to. So in some cities where they mainly have this type of crossing, car drivers are not stopping where there’s no traffic lights. Some cities even have to leave orange flags on the side of the road so that pedestrians can wave them in front or cars while crossing.
And don’t get me wrong, scrambles are wonderful for pedestrians when they are in the majority, and when they are configured for pedestrians first. It’s just that some cities here put them at every intersection as a way to separate cars and pedestrians, for safety, and it’s frustrating. And then they scold pedestrians for not waiting “their” turn.
As a pedestrian and cyclist, it’s one of the things I see when I change city. I really don’t like walking in Québec City for this because you have to let cars pass in all the directions first before you are allowed to cross. In Montréal everyone crosses at the same time but they put straight arrows on green lights for a few seconds at the beginning of the cycle, so pedestrians and cyclists have a few seconds to start crossing before cars can try to crush them. And I prefer this. A lot.
Even better: a “Dutch roundabout” with protected cycle lanes.
For any north American panicking at the idea of a roundabout, come in France. In a week you’ll have seen more roundabouts than in your entire life in the US.
Are bikes presumed to have right of way or do both cars and bikes slow down and wave each other on? Or is the concept of slower moving vehicles not always having right of way a uniquely Yank phenomena?
If you take this example, you see a line indicating that cars should cede way to bikes.
In this particular example, bikes have right if way. There are also roundabouts where they don’t, or where cars have right of way, but I think it’s usually bikes.
That looks like a great way to get hit by a car
Why? It’s made specifically so that cyclists and pedestrians can be at an angle where it’s easy to see them from a car. Motorists have a better view of cyclists and pedestrians than in a + intersection.
They are rare here in Montreal but we have a few like this on Nun’s Island and they work fine without any traffic lights.
Because cars will hit you if you cross their lane.
If you’re in their lane, they ride behind you and you don’t have to cross in front of them.
Spoken like somebody who has never actually been on one of these yet very confidently claiming things as if they had.
Not shown here. Usually the pedestrian and cyclists crossing is elevated. Along with the tiny island that narrows the access to the roundabout, they act as a speed reduction measures. Both intentional. It makes the drivers go slower, paying more attention and the traffic flow gets smoother. Coincidentally this makes this roundabout faster overall, as it prevents sudden brakes and full stops. Most drivers are in and out without noticing since they’re too focused.
Edit: the cycle path is usually a level above the asphalt, like sidewalks, all the way through.
That sucks. Then I would definitely ride in the road so I don’t have to climb.
Bicycles shouldn’t be second-class vehicles on the roads.
You misunderstood. The bicycles never encounter a road level change, cars do. This is actually an example of bicycles as first class vehicles. They only mingle with cars at the intersection and under very controlled and bicycle protecting circumstances.
Best I can do is a diverging diamond
As a pedestrian i HATE roundabouts. No lights, no stop signs, i just have to hope that maybe a car will see me and stop
Obligatory
I know this hasn’t been studied but I’d love to know if it’s effective.
I think people in cars would tend to accelerate away from a brick-waving pedestrian, rather than stop. Would be an interesting study, though!
There is a cool roundabout near me with stop lights that all turn red at the same time, stopping all vehicle traffic and letting pedestrians go.
I’ve heard that traffic circles (i.e. the circular intersections with traffic lights) are extremely dangerous, and that that’s part of why roundabouts have faced so many difficulties entering the US (because the US had traffic circles in the early 20th century and the cultural perception is that circle = dangerous).
I think they mean it’s normal roundabout rules until a signal is given that means “no entry.” It’s not a controlled entry typically until a pedestrian hits a button and it’s only “stop” at all entrances.
Yes, they clarified that that is indeed what they meant. It isn’t as good a solution as bridges or tunnels IMO, but I imagine it’s far cheaper and it’s certainly better than traffic circles.
This is a different thing. It’s still a roundabout with roundabout rules. It’s just sometimes illegal for anyone to enter
Oh, yeah, that’s good, then. I’d still prefer either pedestrian bridges or car tunnels, so that people could walk across any time and not have to worry about distracted drivers, but that existing solution seems cheaper and still decent.
I would like to add, that a roundabout where people who are trying to exit have to stop for pedestrians, make a very unsafe roundabout.
Sure, people entering should stop, but if cars exiting have to stop, it makes too many points of failure. Cars exiting already have to watch for bikes over their shoulder, while also looking ahead to make sure the car in front of them isn’t stoppinh for some other reason. If they also have to look for pedestrians crossing, their attention will simply be too divided in too many different directions.
Instead a pedestrian crossing needs to let cars exit, and cars entering need to give plenty room for pedestrians to cross.
This is very possible to make intuitive and easy through design, that puts to crosswalk about a cars length away from the entrence to the roundabout. That way, cars about to enter can focus on other bad driver incapable of signaling, and cars waiting in line can focus on pedestrians.
Unfortunately I have only seen about a handful roundabouts designed that way in my life here in Europe, but they make everything much better for pedestrians and cyclists.
It sounds like you have only found badly designed roundabouts to be honest. Not Just Bikes probably has a video dedicated on how a good one should look like, including priority signaling when appropriate
I actually love them. Roundabouts have zebra paths on the lanes just before the roundabout themselves.
Painted lines?
What do you mean? They are zebra pathes, yes.
I think they had written something to the effect of where they live, zebra stripes ensure that drivers give way to pedestrians. But that might have been a rhetorical mistake on their part because I see they’ve edited the comment since then to say that pedestrians can only cross at zebra stripes.
As a pedestrian I hate them because they prevent crossing the road anywhere but those zebra paths at the roundabout. In my city there are multiple roundabouts on a road with about a ten minute walk between them. Crossing that road is essentially impossible except at the roundabouts because the traffic flow never stops. It’s like trying to cross a freeway!
Same. They’re wonderful for auto throughput and auto safety, that’s about it. They don’t save much if any space over traditional intersections (Really their space and shape requirements make them fairly prohibitive in any place that isn’t already dominated exclusively by motor infrastructure), they create a lot more travel distance for pedestrians and cyclists who have to go around the outside, and they generally don’t have any signals for cars to stop for pedestrians and cyclists crossing as they make that long orbit. They’re about as effective a solution to our car-centric society as the electric car.
And when there are lights it takes so long to pass through them because you have to take a huge detour around the cars and wait at multiple lights.
Americans simply can’t roundabouts. They’re to complicated.
Just make it analogy with a gun barrel or something that kills kids and they’ll understand.
We have plenty of roundabouts, but we also have other alternatives, and many that work better.
And then of course there’s monstrosities like this
What the fuck is that?
Are roundabouts safer for pedestrians?
Yes. From the IIHS:
Studies in Europe indicate that, on average, converting conventional intersections to roundabouts can reduce pedestrian crashes by about 75% (Brilon et al., 1993; Schoon & van Minnen, 1994).
Well, good. I live in the sticks and have never crossed at one.
They build roundabouts pretty regularly in my area of Iowa, its just that we have a lot of fucking idiots that can’t bother to try to figure them out, so even though I know how to drive through one, I tend to avoid them so I don’t risk getting hit.
Yeah Ohio has been slowly switching to roundabouts for over a decade. Then i moved to the PNW where they’re definitely slower to making the switch but still doing it.
Major intersections it’s still rare, but I’ve lived in a small town where the primary intersection was a roundabout
Its funny you mention the PNW, I lived in WA for most of my life and the shitshow that went down at the new at the time roundabout the next town over is 100% responsible for my avoidance of them today. I saw an older driver turning left into it and drove against traffic despite very clear signage and a clear flow of traffic.
Roundabouts are very safe for drivers - they suck for pedestrians and cyclists tho. Especially pedestrians have to cover longer distances.
They’re neat for areas with high car volumes, really bad for everywhere else
It depends what we are talking about.
That’s not necessarily the case, and depends on a lot of factors. They’re generally great for cyclists. For pedestrians it varies.
Roundabouts are still quite dangerous for cyclists. Ban cars in populated areas.
north america:
safer means removing all public transut, all bike lanes, and all sidewalks. if there are no pedestrians, its safer
<.<
Get RAMmed!
he didn’t say more efficient AND safer. Just making an intersection that currently exists, only …safer.
![[meme] A North America Classic](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/dd70eb83-5160-4e9a-93f6-f2457e181541.png){kind=link}