6 ms·

I used to love topics like this, just as I vigorously defended the construction of roundabouts. Now I have a roundabout right in front of my child's daycare. D

by hkwerf 3y ago

I used to love topics like this, just as I vigorously defended the construction of roundabouts. Now I have a roundabout right in front of my child's daycare. Due to the traffic rules surrounding that roundabout (Germany), it'll be impossible for him to cross that safely without me being very hands-on. All these systems are completely made to get another 2 % of efficiency for cars, while massively sacrificing walkability and bikeability. I am not a fan anymore.

foepys 3y ago
What rules do you mean? I have several roundabouts near me and most have prioritized pedestrian crosswalks on all exits (Zebrastreifen), some with extra room for cars to break when they notice pedestrians. The ones lacking pedestrian prioritization are outside the city or in industrial zones.
- hkwerf 3y ago
  See my other comment. There are no Zebrastreifen on my roundabout. It's tight, heavily frequented by cars (and all sizes of trucks, due to being next to an industrial zone). Zebrastreifen would be a nice thing. However, around here it's either canonical rules for all roundabouts or even yield signs for non-car traffic. (I suppose they're only really valid for bikes which share the sidewalk, though? No idea, I just yield anyhow.) Zebrastreifen would certainly be safer than nothing. My experience, though, is, that a sufficient number of drivers is already confused or overwhelmed by basic roundabout rules and don't even see them. A traffic light simplifies everything at the cost of a bit less efficiency for cars.
_cenw 3y ago
I'm not sure what you mean by "traffic rules", I have a roundabout in front of my home in the middle of a major german city that's surrounded by crosswalks, with a daycare and two schools next to it.
- hkwerf 3y ago
  It's pretty annoying: Cars have to yield to pedestrians while exiting the roundabout, they don't yield while entering. (Though luckily, many are nice enough to do anyhow.) In order to have any chance of crossing the roundabout in rush-hour traffic, I have to accept cars yielding and cross onto the middle island between exit and entry. The alternative to not crossing for yielding cars would be to wait until the roundabout is empty, which essentially never happens. However, the island is tiny. My son's bike just about fits, mine does not even fit remotely. Thus I now have to teach him to stop exactly on that island (Which, admittedly, he does very well. I don't have the confidence, though, that he'll be able to 100 % of the time. Driving past once while a car also goes by has a significant chance of causing an accident, as there is no space to evade for anybody.) This whole ordeal we have to do twice every day. It's not totally unmanagable, but a crossing with traffic lights is so much safer than these maneuvers, that include communicating and trusting cars that they know the rules as well and understand what you're about to do.
eru 3y ago
Not sure the roundabout is the problem? What alternative would be better? I mean adding zebra-crossing would be better, but you can combine them with a roundabout, can't you? I do agree that cars are a big problem. I wonder if we should tax them higher to properly price in their negative externalities. (And Germany already has a lot higher taxes on driving than eg the US.)
- Dalewyn 3y ago
  >Not sure the roundabout is the problem? What alternative would be better? A simple cross intersection controlled by traffic signals. Yeah, I know I'm gonna get an imperial shit-ton of downvotes for daring to suggest traffic signals, but they are simple and involve traffic coming to a complete stop at the intersection. Simplicity is a virtue, and it's why traffic signals still reign supreme at least here in the USA.
  - omeid2 3y ago
    Roundabouts with "Raised Pedestrian Crossing" (or wombat-crossings as they're called in downunder) are pretty safe without forcing drives to wait for nothing at 3 AM. Example: https://hdp-au-prod-app-shel-letschatshellharbour-files.s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/5916/6623/5713/4610-Shellharbour-LU-Scene_1.jpg https://hdp-au-prod-app-shel-letschatshellharbour-files.s3.a...
    - adolph 3y ago
      The only thing forcing a driver to “wait for nothing at 3am” is their own lack of pragmatic judgement. Maybe the light enforced meditation time would assist drivers like that in reëvaluating their life choices.
      - omeid2 3y ago
        In Australia, there is speed and light cameras everywhere. Crossing a red light, sometimes even to make way for emergency cars, will earn you 3 demerit points, which gets you over 23% to 13 points and losing your license. Now it might not seem so dumb to wait 30 seconds, even if it is 3 AM and the road --seems empty.
leoedin 3y ago
In London there's been a big move over the last decade to remove big urban roundabouts for precisely that reason. They make sense for vehicles, but they make mixed use areas much more dangerous. Roundabouts are slowly being converted to C shaped junctions with dedicated cycle routes and lanes in both direction. I imagine they're probably a lot less efficient for cars, but they also don't tend to kill people at the same rate. I still think roundabouts are a great idea for more rural road junctions. They're much safer, and I suspect more efficient, than cross roads controlled by traffic lights. I was driving around Toronto last year and the amount of stopping and starting at traffic lights you have to do is infuriating.
- jozvolskyef 3y ago
  I wonder if the distance of a pedestrian crossing from the centre of the roundabout relates to pedestrian safety. Subjectively, I feel like safety could be improved by moving the crossings farther from the centre.
  - NeoTar 3y ago
    Maybe I'm misinterpreting, but it's frustrating as a pedestrian if you ever are walking along a road and have to take a walk of even only a few metres in a perpendicular direction to find a crossing, cross, and then walk back to the original road.
    - jozvolskyef 3y ago
      It could be just five or ten meters in each direction. For example this crossing always felt unsafe to me. The original crossing has been obstructed to prevent crossings and moved about 5 meters out, and it feels much safer now: https://goo.gl/maps/ipe8RXkdSgpZz72r6 https://goo.gl/maps/ipe8RXkdSgpZz72r6
      - Ekaros 3y ago
        I wonder about this specific setup for cyclist. The yield sings when coming in are after the cross walk so here in Finland in those cases the cyclist would need to yield. And even more weirdly as car is turning when going out they would need to yield on that side to cyclists. Is that same or different in Czech.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
PartiallyTyped 3y ago
In Denmark, pedestrians can walk in the same direction as the main flow of the road, and people who need to turn / cross the path of pedestrians yield. The priority is pedestrian > bike > car.
alistairSH 3y ago
Do diverging diamonds get built anyplace a person would want to walk? Around here (suburban DC,USA) they’re exclusively used where two massive highways intersect. Usually one 6+ lane interstate with a 4+ lane state highway. And the interchange itself is enormous - long, wide, noisy, stinky with fumes. Any pedestrian traffic is carried by a physically separate walking path. Not “local” sidewalks. It’s a very car-centric design. But where the highways already existed, it’s at least a traffic improvement with no reduction in pedestrian access (which was usually nil before the interchange, and improved by addition of separate walkway during construction).
- themodelplumber 3y ago
  I usually see some not-terrible walking infrastructure around these. Though, having lived in Utah and having dined on I-5 up and down the west coast, the idea of finding oneself walking right over one, as if a car, isn't as far out there as some may believe.
- epage 3y ago
  In Austin they are putting in diverging diamonds where regular roads intersect the interstate going through town. One of those roads in particular (Parmer Lane), they've been building out its sidewalk on the east side. So it is meant to for local pedestrian traffic except at the diverging diamond.
  - Bluestrike2 3y ago
    I was curious and looked it up on Google Maps[0] and that's definitely not a road; it's a six-lane stroad[1] optimized solely for traffic flow. Those are really good at killing pedestrians because people perceive them as being wide open, all but inviting drivers to speed up. I'm guessing the diverging diamond replaced a bridge with two intersections? In which case, the oddity of the diverging diamond might at least serve as a traffic calming measure. Even when you get used to it, switching travel directions is uncomfortable for drivers which can force them to be a bit more cautious. That said, the new sidewalks in the satellite photos are probably a big improvement over the old ones (if there were any). They at least have some small curbs and ~2-4 feet of separation from the cars traveling at high speeds along the stroad. If you look at the sidewalks to the west, where there's no separation from the stroad, they're...well, at least not that? But for the most part, sidewalks alongside stroads are just an afterthought. 0. https://goo.gl/maps/ZytZNN7TumnHqozU9 https://goo.gl/maps/ZytZNN7TumnHqozU9 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroad https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroad
kibwen 3y ago
Thank you. Every time the roundabout discussion comes up here on HN I get dismissed when I tell people that, as a cyclist and pedestrian who does not own a car, I do everything in my power to avoid roundabouts. Please just let me cross at a junction where I can see that all cross traffic has come to a complete stop, and can make full eye contact with the drivers whose lanes I am crossing (implying nothing less than a full 90 degree intersection).
tigeba 3y ago
We have something that has been dubbed a "divergeabout" which is a hybrid diverging diamond intersection with roundabouts chucked on both ends. I'm pretty sure these work based entirely on fear and confusion. Fortunately this particular intersection is not really in a pedestrian area. We have roundabouts in our neighborhood and I had the same concerns about crossing when my kids were younger and walking to school.
rented_mule 3y ago
California's first Diverging Diamond opened a couple of years ago with a separated bicyclist/pedestrian path through the interchange[0]. It's a busy road that crosses over a busy freeway, so that path is only needed for the busy road (pedestrians and bicyclists are not supposed to use the freeway). In reality there are very few pedestrians in this area because things are _so_ spread out, but there are bicyclists. [0] https://google.com/maps/@37.783523,-121.2341659,569m/data=!3m1!1e3 https://google.com/maps/@37.783523,-121.2341659,569m/data=!3...

by hkwerf 3y ago

foepys 3y ago

What rules do you mean? I have several roundabouts near me and most have prioritized pedestrian crosswalks on all exits (Zebrastreifen), some with extra room for cars to break when they notice pedestrians. The ones lacking pedestrian prioritization are outside the city or in industrial zones.

hkwerf 3y ago
See my other comment. There are no Zebrastreifen on my roundabout. It's tight, heavily frequented by cars (and all sizes of trucks, due to being next to an industrial zone). Zebrastreifen would be a nice thing. However, around here it's either canonical rules for all roundabouts or even yield signs for non-car traffic. (I suppose they're only really valid for bikes which share the sidewalk, though? No idea, I just yield anyhow.) Zebrastreifen would certainly be safer than nothing. My experience, though, is, that a sufficient number of drivers is already confused or overwhelmed by basic roundabout rules and don't even see them. A traffic light simplifies everything at the cost of a bit less efficiency for cars.

_cenw 3y ago

I'm not sure what you mean by "traffic rules", I have a roundabout in front of my home in the middle of a major german city that's surrounded by crosswalks, with a daycare and two schools next to it.

hkwerf 3y ago
It's pretty annoying: Cars have to yield to pedestrians while exiting the roundabout, they don't yield while entering. (Though luckily, many are nice enough to do anyhow.) In order to have any chance of crossing the roundabout in rush-hour traffic, I have to accept cars yielding and cross onto the middle island between exit and entry. The alternative to not crossing for yielding cars would be to wait until the roundabout is empty, which essentially never happens. However, the island is tiny. My son's bike just about fits, mine does not even fit remotely. Thus I now have to teach him to stop exactly on that island (Which, admittedly, he does very well. I don't have the confidence, though, that he'll be able to 100 % of the time. Driving past once while a car also goes by has a significant chance of causing an accident, as there is no space to evade for anybody.) This whole ordeal we have to do twice every day. It's not totally unmanagable, but a crossing with traffic lights is so much safer than these maneuvers, that include communicating and trusting cars that they know the rules as well and understand what you're about to do.

eru 3y ago

Not sure the roundabout is the problem? What alternative would be better? I mean adding zebra-crossing would be better, but you can combine them with a roundabout, can't you? I do agree that cars are a big problem. I wonder if we should tax them higher to properly price in their negative externalities. (And Germany already has a lot higher taxes on driving than eg the US.)

Dalewyn 3y ago
>Not sure the roundabout is the problem? What alternative would be better? A simple cross intersection controlled by traffic signals. Yeah, I know I'm gonna get an imperial shit-ton of downvotes for daring to suggest traffic signals, but they are simple and involve traffic coming to a complete stop at the intersection. Simplicity is a virtue, and it's why traffic signals still reign supreme at least here in the USA.
- omeid2 3y ago
  Roundabouts with "Raised Pedestrian Crossing" (or wombat-crossings as they're called in downunder) are pretty safe without forcing drives to wait for nothing at 3 AM. Example: https://hdp-au-prod-app-shel-letschatshellharbour-files.s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/5916/6623/5713/4610-Shellharbour-LU-Scene_1.jpg https://hdp-au-prod-app-shel-letschatshellharbour-files.s3.a...
  - adolph 3y ago
    The only thing forcing a driver to “wait for nothing at 3am” is their own lack of pragmatic judgement. Maybe the light enforced meditation time would assist drivers like that in reëvaluating their life choices.
    - omeid2 3y ago
      In Australia, there is speed and light cameras everywhere. Crossing a red light, sometimes even to make way for emergency cars, will earn you 3 demerit points, which gets you over 23% to 13 points and losing your license. Now it might not seem so dumb to wait 30 seconds, even if it is 3 AM and the road --seems empty.

leoedin 3y ago

In London there's been a big move over the last decade to remove big urban roundabouts for precisely that reason. They make sense for vehicles, but they make mixed use areas much more dangerous. Roundabouts are slowly being converted to C shaped junctions with dedicated cycle routes and lanes in both direction. I imagine they're probably a lot less efficient for cars, but they also don't tend to kill people at the same rate. I still think roundabouts are a great idea for more rural road junctions. They're much safer, and I suspect more efficient, than cross roads controlled by traffic lights. I was driving around Toronto last year and the amount of stopping and starting at traffic lights you have to do is infuriating.

jozvolskyef 3y ago
I wonder if the distance of a pedestrian crossing from the centre of the roundabout relates to pedestrian safety. Subjectively, I feel like safety could be improved by moving the crossings farther from the centre.
- NeoTar 3y ago
  Maybe I'm misinterpreting, but it's frustrating as a pedestrian if you ever are walking along a road and have to take a walk of even only a few metres in a perpendicular direction to find a crossing, cross, and then walk back to the original road.
  - jozvolskyef 3y ago
    It could be just five or ten meters in each direction. For example this crossing always felt unsafe to me. The original crossing has been obstructed to prevent crossings and moved about 5 meters out, and it feels much safer now: https://goo.gl/maps/ipe8RXkdSgpZz72r6 https://goo.gl/maps/ipe8RXkdSgpZz72r6
    - Ekaros 3y ago
      I wonder about this specific setup for cyclist. The yield sings when coming in are after the cross walk so here in Finland in those cases the cyclist would need to yield. And even more weirdly as car is turning when going out they would need to yield on that side to cyclists. Is that same or different in Czech.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

PartiallyTyped 3y ago

In Denmark, pedestrians can walk in the same direction as the main flow of the road, and people who need to turn / cross the path of pedestrians yield. The priority is pedestrian > bike > car.

alistairSH 3y ago

Do diverging diamonds get built anyplace a person would want to walk? Around here (suburban DC,USA) they’re exclusively used where two massive highways intersect. Usually one 6+ lane interstate with a 4+ lane state highway. And the interchange itself is enormous - long, wide, noisy, stinky with fumes. Any pedestrian traffic is carried by a physically separate walking path. Not “local” sidewalks. It’s a very car-centric design. But where the highways already existed, it’s at least a traffic improvement with no reduction in pedestrian access (which was usually nil before the interchange, and improved by addition of separate walkway during construction).

themodelplumber 3y ago
I usually see some not-terrible walking infrastructure around these. Though, having lived in Utah and having dined on I-5 up and down the west coast, the idea of finding oneself walking right over one, as if a car, isn't as far out there as some may believe.
epage 3y ago
In Austin they are putting in diverging diamonds where regular roads intersect the interstate going through town. One of those roads in particular (Parmer Lane), they've been building out its sidewalk on the east side. So it is meant to for local pedestrian traffic except at the diverging diamond.
- Bluestrike2 3y ago
  I was curious and looked it up on Google Maps[0] and that's definitely not a road; it's a six-lane stroad[1] optimized solely for traffic flow. Those are really good at killing pedestrians because people perceive them as being wide open, all but inviting drivers to speed up. I'm guessing the diverging diamond replaced a bridge with two intersections? In which case, the oddity of the diverging diamond might at least serve as a traffic calming measure. Even when you get used to it, switching travel directions is uncomfortable for drivers which can force them to be a bit more cautious. That said, the new sidewalks in the satellite photos are probably a big improvement over the old ones (if there were any). They at least have some small curbs and ~2-4 feet of separation from the cars traveling at high speeds along the stroad. If you look at the sidewalks to the west, where there's no separation from the stroad, they're...well, at least not that? But for the most part, sidewalks alongside stroads are just an afterthought. 0. https://goo.gl/maps/ZytZNN7TumnHqozU9 https://goo.gl/maps/ZytZNN7TumnHqozU9 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroad https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroad

kibwen 3y ago

Thank you. Every time the roundabout discussion comes up here on HN I get dismissed when I tell people that, as a cyclist and pedestrian who does not own a car, I do everything in my power to avoid roundabouts. Please just let me cross at a junction where I can see that all cross traffic has come to a complete stop, and can make full eye contact with the drivers whose lanes I am crossing (implying nothing less than a full 90 degree intersection).

tigeba 3y ago

We have something that has been dubbed a "divergeabout" which is a hybrid diverging diamond intersection with roundabouts chucked on both ends. I'm pretty sure these work based entirely on fear and confusion. Fortunately this particular intersection is not really in a pedestrian area. We have roundabouts in our neighborhood and I had the same concerns about crossing when my kids were younger and walking to school.

rented_mule 3y ago

California's first Diverging Diamond opened a couple of years ago with a separated bicyclist/pedestrian path through the interchange[0]. It's a busy road that crosses over a busy freeway, so that path is only needed for the busy road (pedestrians and bicyclists are not supposed to use the freeway). In reality there are very few pedestrians in this area because things are _so_ spread out, but there are bicyclists. [0] https://google.com/maps/@37.783523,-121.2341659,569m/data=!3m1!1e3 https://google.com/maps/@37.783523,-121.2341659,569m/data=!3...