|
Entropist posted:https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2015/10/13/explaining-the-dutch-roundabout-abroad/ Oh for sure, I've read that one. But that depends on 1) Dutch road law which places the onus on drivers not to hit pedestrians and cyclists and 2) actually designing both the roundabout and the surrounding infrastructure to Dutch standard. I'd love for both to be the case, but in the North American context a roundabout is just giving drivers greater opportunity to scream through a crosswalk at high speed without checking if there's anyone in it.
|
#
¿
Mar 12, 2021 17:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 04:58 |
|
|
Sage Grimm posted:Speaking of roundabouts in places where they shouldn't be.. FWIW, I don't think it even counts as a roundabout if two of the arms go straight through it. It's just a weird and overly-convoluted freeway interchange cargo-culting a roundabout. It also looks extremely dangerous for everyone involved -- cyclists, pedestrians and motorists. It's a bit like the "before" picture for an intersection in Vancouver that was drastically realigned seven years ago to improve safety. Before:  After:  https://goo.gl/maps/7nWGDpLGw9BGq8JW7 (Note the new bike off-street bike lanes in dark grey, and improved pedestrian paths in light grey.)
|
|
#
¿
Apr 12, 2021 19:04
|
|
|
Carbon dioxide posted:That new situation looks quite decent. How are the traffic light phases? Do cyclists get their own phase/shared with pedestrians? And does it last long enough to safely cross from southeast to northwest in one go if necessary? If I recall right, it's three-phase: a. Cars, bikes and peds going straight north-south b. Cars going east turning right as well as cars going south turning right, plus bikes and peds going east-west. c. A much shorter phase just for cars going north turning left (which is one of the least common manoeuvres), with the bike/ped crossings red. So although there's no dedicated bike/ped phase, you're never in the crosswalk/bike crossing at a time when motor traffic is trying to cross it. And it's not a long wait between phases if you do need to cross diagonally on a bike (or on foot). But also, because of the way the connections work with the bridge (one-way bike lanes on either side, two-way pedestrian sidewalk on either side), most people on bikes or on foot only need to cross one arm to get where they're going. It's a very elegant bit of engineering, but a bit of a unicorn situation that allowed them to do that.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2021 03:15
|
|
|
Carbon dioxide posted:Sounds like b gives a conflict here? Oh yeah pretty sure that turn happens as part of phase c not b. It's basically the parallel of the other turn. As I said, I'm going by memory - it's been a little while since I biked that way. And it would be great if our local traffic engineers (and legislators) would follow the Dutch example. Most intersections there's no accommodation at all other than some green paint.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 13, 2021 08:19
|
|
|
Kaal posted:Separated bike lanes should be the goal of every municipality. Bike Bros that want to fight trucks for their morning commute do not represent community interest. Yeah this. Vehicular cycling as a movement has done almost as much as the car lobby to prevent good bike infrastructure being built in North America. And I'll take a well-designed parking-protected bike lane over some paint on the road squeezed between traffic and parked cars any day. I'd take a good, fully-separated bike lane over either.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2021 21:21
|
|
|
VictualSquid posted:Who builds those setups? I mean cars|parked cars| bicycles | greenery | pedestrians. Vancouver has a bunch. I get the impression it might even be where they were pioneered. Here are some examples: https://goo.gl/maps/piQVB1Z3kkoNuGzG8 https://goo.gl/maps/dMC3iarpZqygrQqe6 They're not the ideal solution, but in general that white painted area is enough to keep doors mostly out of the bike lane, and the City does sweep the things. And I'd take them over cars|bicycles|parked cars any day. Also, they tend to alternate between having greenery and having lines between the bike lane and cars. But yeah, they need to be part of an integrated network. When I was in Guadalajara five years ago, the locals pointed out one block of one busy street that had a bike lane like this on it. Apparently the designers intentionally mimicked the Vancouver infrastructure. But before and after that block, it was just a four-lane busy street, so the bike lane was worse than useless. I'm almost convinced the local government built it as a way of pointing at some bike infrastructure and saying "look, it's a waste of money".
|
|
#
¿
Apr 16, 2021 00:37
|
|
|
Oh, this was deleted, but it got saved: https://mobile.twitter.com/notjustbikes/status/1390669033318535174/photo/1 And, yeah, we have similar stuff in BC. https://goo.gl/maps/c4qfBkjpN4gwfD3o7 Yeah, that's a "bike route" that's basically just the shoulder of a freeway with 80-90km/h speed limits. A local university did a whole study on how poo poo that is. I believe there's a masters thesis that came of it and everything. http://www.sfu.ca/geog/stsbikesafe/index.html (Nothing has been done to improve the bike infrastructure.)
|
|
#
¿
May 12, 2021 23:13
|
|
|
Chris Knight posted:Like I've ridden out to Horseshoe Bay, but we sure as hell didn't take the Sea to Sky lol Yeah I've biked to Horseshoe Bay on the Sea to Sky exactly once, and wouldn't choose to repeat it. The alternate route is hilly, but so much prettier and safer. On the other hand, if you wanted to bike to Whistler, there is literally no other way. And it just gets sketchier as you go.
|
|
#
¿
May 14, 2021 19:15
|
|
|
Jasper Tin Neck posted:Ja, ich weiß, that's why they have pretty good public transportation to begin with. Yeah exactly.  is still that they're in a one-storey office building in a giant parking lot, and anywhere that builds like that has transit that ranges from bad to completely useless.Javid posted:Transit in the US exists only coincidentally, when it can generate grift for the city implementing it. A month pass for just the city of Portland is like $100 at this point; it's like they intentionally want to be a worse price than insuring and fueling any decently efficient car. What car can you fuel, maintain, insure, and cover depreciation/loan payments on for less than $100 a month? (Or even $200 or $300 a month?) Happy Noodle Boy posted:Now you get to join the multi use / bike lane gang. Don’t forget road diets! The local cycling advocacy org that I'm involved with recently had a presentation on the new NACTO guidelines, and they are all about road diets. NACTO posted:Design streets using target speed, the speed you intend for drivers to go, rather than operating speed. The 85th percentile of observed target speeds should fall between 10–30 mph on most urban streets. 
|
|
#
¿
Jul 15, 2022 18:37
|
|
|
devicenull posted:Their masterpiece is now complete Yeah RIP. That painted "median" might work if it were actually solid, but paint will do nothing. Here are the recent NACTO guidelines for speed reduction mechanisms, in case you're interested: https://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/design-controls/design-speed/speed-reduction-mechanisms/ Edit: devicenull posted:They expanded the road by about 5 ft, cut down all the large trees that used to be near the sides of the road, added sidewalks and curbs, and repaved fixing all the potholes. When asked about it, they swore that adding curbs was somehow going to slow people down. Lol, this is literally all the exact opposite of what's in the guidelines.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2022 22:32
|
|
|
nielsm posted:On the other hand, parked cars also makes crossing the road much more dangerous for pedestrians. They're also pretty hazardous to cyclists if your infrastructure sucks.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2022 05:51
|
|
|
Strategic Tea posted:I cycle in London and we have recently started putting in some bike lanes like that with pavement on one side and parking on the other. I'm no expert but I do feel very protected! If the lane is wide enough then doors opening isn't the threat that it could be. Yeah fully separated are the gold standard, but parking-protected lanes are about the next-best, as long as they're done right. Like, I was in Guadalajara for a community bike shop conference a few years back, and they had one single block of parking-protected bike lane on a super-busy street, with basically no lane at all before or after. Apparently it was inspired by infrastructure in Vancouver, but it was worse than useless, and all the locals thought it was a joke. Devor posted:Edit: And this is a bad crossing, you'd restrict parking near a pedestrian crossing to enhance visibility. Or ideally not have a mid-block crossing at all if it's an urban setting. Yeah not an engineer, but these were my first thoughts too.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2022 18:57
|
|
|
Entropist posted:I cycle in Amsterdam and it's very rare to have to cycle close to cars parked beyond the bike lane, except maybe in a case like this where cycling takes place on a smaller parallel road where you would not be pushed close to the parked cars by traffic: https://goo.gl/maps/YJZcsLAoDsmSxT4eA Yeah IIRC, getting rid of street parking was an explicit aim of Stop der Kindermoerd, and one which they largely achieved.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2022 03:25
|
|
|
Varance posted:This is extremely misleading. Capital is always included in your budget as an expense. Wouldn't be surprised if this chart is leaving off debt service as well. I mean, in Vancouver, at least for subway lines, somewhere around 60-70% of the capital expenses come from outside the transit authority. e.g. for the last line to open, the Evergreen Line: https://www.canada.ca/en/transport-canada/news/2016/11/evergreen-line-project.html quote:Funding for the Evergreen Line Project is a partnership between the Government of Canada, the Government of B.C. and TransLink. The project cost is $1.43 billion, with the Government of Canada contributing $424 million ($350 million from the Building Canada Fund, $67 million from the Public Transit Capital Trust Fund, and $7 million from the P3 Canada Fund), the Government of B.C. contributing $586 million, and other partners contributing $21 million. TransLink is contributing the remaining $400 million and will operate the system when it opens on December 2, 2016. TransLink, the transit authority, is part of the provincial government, but they make a clear distinction here between the $400M coming from TransLink itself (ie mostly out of fares) and the other $586M coming from "Government of B.C." The previous line, the Canada Line, had similar numbers, except with the addition of a private partner. I couldn't find as detailed a breakdown for the Broadway Line currently under construction, but it looks pretty similar too. https://www.broadwaysubway.ca/about/partners/ So yeah, at least here, the construction portion of capital costs is heavily subsidised from outside the transit authority. In terms of farebox contribution, they actually break things down in the article below. With capital included, it actually only covers 33% of the annual budget (but 52% of operating costs as shown in that figure). https://buzzer.translink.ca/2020/05/how-is-translink-funded/ (We should still be throwing more money at it if we want to actually address emissions in Metro Vancouver, but at least it isn't expected to operate at a profit.)
|
|
#
¿
Sep 26, 2022 20:11
|
|
|
nielsm posted:Plant roadside trees. If you read further back, apparently they cut down the roadside trees. As a "traffic calming" measure.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 14, 2022 08:17
|
|
|
Crankit posted:What are the best ways places can reduce car trips for dropping kids off at school? Urban planning that puts schools within walking distance of where kids live. At least, that's how it is in Vancouver -- we have two elementary schools within three blocks of our house. Well, except for the part where downtown has densified massively over the past 20 years, and is now full of kids, but they've barely built any new schools... https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/vancouver-waitlist-schools-2022-1.6372360
|
|
#
¿
Oct 28, 2022 18:20
|
|
|
Mr. Fall Down Terror posted:you can see a similar effect of car-based depopulation in the residential areas of near inner detroit - all these gaps between houses were houses that ended up abandoned and torn down. prime opportunity to rebuild in the near future, which is happening at a growing pace Lol IIRC the City started a program to tear down abandoned houses at the City's expense, because otherwise kids would set them on fire for fun. Detroit has some pretty neat bike infrastructure going in though.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 29, 2022 22:53
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Why twenty-four minutes? It all goes back to the Sumerians...
|
|
#
¿
Dec 7, 2022 21:05
|
|
|
Can you find a single city in North America with better cycling infrastructure than Amsterdam?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2023 22:03
|
|
|
Saukkis posted:Some good and bad rail news from Finland. This doesn't seem like quite the right thread, but it's the best match I know in the forums. I'd be curious about whether they're fully factoring in the negative externalities of driving in their analysis. Also whether they're just doing a per-trip calculation for the cars it would replace, or if they're factoring in life cycle costs of those cars (manufacturing, transport, maintenance, etc). And could it allow people to do things like take the train to the coast, then take a ferry to Sweden/Germany/Poland/Denmark etc instead of flying there?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2023 22:11
|
|
|
Hippie Hedgehog posted:TBF the per-passenger-mile carbon emissions are higher on those ferries than for flying commercial. In theory, passenger shipping could be better, but in practice those boats take mostly vehicles and cargo (and a floating disco and three restaurants etc etc) so they're extremely inefficient. For sure -- as you say, you're not taking your car with you on the commercial flight. But somebody taking the train to the ferry isn't carrying the extra ton or two of weight with them. If you connect ferries with decent public transit, I'm pretty sure you can greatly improve on those inefficiencies. (At least, looking at the ferry system in southern/coastal British Columbia.)
|
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2023 23:21
|
|
|
Hippie Hedgehog posted:Eh, they're in hi-vis yellow, that should be plenty in terms of marking. Maybe add reflectors? Yeah they're pretty new in Vancouver, where this happened. My understanding from the City planners/engineers is that they're piloting new forms of traffic calming. The current default is for residents to request speed humps on their street, but that isn't the most effective or efficient means. (They were also all-in on small roundabouts at intersections as a calming measure until a local group published a study showing that those were massively hazardous, especially for cyclists.) They're also in principle trying to reduce all side streets to 30km/h, but obviously just putting up signs doesn't work, so they're not even bothering, and are instead setting up streets so that drivers just don't speed. These are part of the new toolkit for that, and people aren't used to them, but should be soon.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 1, 2023 20:46
|
|
|
pkells posted:I was driving with my dad the other day and I gave him poo poo for stopping more than a car length behind the stop bar in a left turn lane. He went on to tell me that the detector is one car length back, and if he stops there instead of at the stop bar, he’ll get a dedicated left turn phase as opposed to an unprotected phase. They're pretty much all like that here. Sometimes they have two induction loops in the left turn lane - one at the front and one three to four cars back. I haven't seen any radar/camera based systems, but I haven't looked too closely at any of the more recently-redone intersections. (There aren't many.)
|
|
#
¿
Aug 25, 2023 02:52
|
|
|
Armacham posted:That's part of it. Most places have switched to traffic cameras since they offer more utility. Yeah curious about why they're still using them over here. Like, here's an intersection that was completely rebuilt in 2014, still using induction loops: https://goo.gl/maps/t1487ashVUgyLHRe6
|
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2023 01:06
|
|
|
Devor posted:A separated bike lane without cars is a Shared Use Path Nah a separated bike lane without cars is still separation from pedestrians. Shared use paths are something else, and not great in terms of causing accidents.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 25, 2023 07:57
|
|
|
Devor posted:This was in the context of a separated bike lane and 'what if no cars' so if you're talking about a car road that's not really the scope of what was being discussed Nah, as a few other people have posted, the current best practice is separation. There was even a study here in 2011, which showed that MUPs are some of the most dangerous infrastructure, causing more injuries than almost all other places people can bike, including main roads. Since then, any new separated infrastructure includes cyclist/pedestrian separation, and separation has been steadily retrofitted onto as many MUPs as possible.  https://cyclingincities.spph.ubc.ca/injuries/the-bice-study/ https://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/17/5/e6.abstract
|
|
#
¿
Dec 8, 2023 20:53
|
|
|
Over here the provincial traffic laws just require lights after dark. But the city has a bylaw requiring bells. To be honest, I don't know anyone who has actually been fined for not having a bell, but I do know the cops were using bike bylaws to harass homeless people at one point.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2023 02:30
|
|
|
Not Wolverine posted:
Yeah 100% this for how to handle a mup on a bike. Unfortunately they're still ubiquitous, and a lot of cyclists don't know how to ride defensively on them. But I also subscribe to the position that it is a failure of infrastructure to create conflicts like that in the first place. Infrastructure can and should be designed to minimize injury.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 9, 2023 19:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 13, 2024 04:58 |
|
|
Yeah the Dutch design standard is bike lanes that are wide enough to pass in. You could call that "multilane", but it's not like they stripe within that. This should really be the standard everywhere.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 22, 2024 16:46
|
|