Dutch Roundabout

24

Comments

  • pitchshifter
    pitchshifter Posts: 1,476
    davmaggs wrote:

    What does the HGV at junctions problem have to do with this?


    You have failed to watch the video.
  • Ouija
    Ouija Posts: 1,386
    It ain't gonna work, is it? Unless you sit down every single car user in the UK and explain to them this new and wonderful design, 99.9% of drivers experiencing that roundabout for the first time will just plow over it as per normal. And when they invariably run over a cyclist there will be a cry of "but the idiot just road straight out in front of me".

    You'd have to pump vast amounts of money into a national campaign on the TV, newspapers and elsewhere just to get a decent percentage of the populace to realize what one of those was when they come up to it. And even then you'd still have a lot of the people who are aware still running people over and only realizing what they'd done in hindsight ("i'd forgotten it was one of those types of roundabout.... doh").
  • cookeeemonster
    cookeeemonster Posts: 1,991
    Ouija wrote:
    It ain't gonna work, is it? Unless you sit down every single car user in the UK and explain to them this new and wonderful design, 99.9% of drivers experiencing that roundabout for the first time will just plow over it as per normal. And when they invariably run over a cyclist there will be a cry of "but the idiot just road straight out in front of me".

    You'd have to pump vast amounts of money into a national campaign on the TV, newspapers and elsewhere just to get a decent percentage of the populace to realize what one of those was when they come up to it. And even then you'd still have a lot of the people who are aware still running people over and only realizing what they'd done in hindsight ("i'd forgotten it was one of those types of roundabout.... doh").

    the road markings quite clearly state that they have to give way to the cyclists so no, there wont be any excuse.

    seriously, its not that radical!!!

    And by the way, roundabouts from elephant and castle to parliament square to the little thing at lambeth they want to convert to this doesn't faze me at all. This solution is for the people it does faze, and I understand and accept that.
  • confused@BR
    confused@BR Posts: 295
    Without 'strict liability' being introduced in this country (Britain) I do not think it will be a success.
    'fool'
  • I'm from NL myself and I must say these roundabouts would be quite a sight in UK. For one because with these you gotta have bloody good confidence in them cars noticing you (from a distance and with speed) and yet beware of them turning without their indicator lights. The other thing that's bloody awful about them is the fact they primarily serve as a place to display (often) hideous public artworks in the middle. Don't get me wrong about the function of art, im an artist myself, but the motorway is just not a place to ponder the meaning of life, while in the mean time potentially ruining someones cycling carreer...
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,486
    edited April 2013
    Ouija wrote:
    It ain't gonna work, is it? Unless you sit down every single car user in the UK and explain to them this new and wonderful design, 99.9% of drivers experiencing that roundabout for the first time will just plow over it as per normal. And when they invariably run over a cyclist there will be a cry of "but the idiot just road straight out in front of me".

    You'd have to pump vast amounts of money into a national campaign on the TV, newspapers and elsewhere just to get a decent percentage of the populace to realize what one of those was when they come up to it. And even then you'd still have a lot of the people who are aware still running people over and only realizing what they'd done in hindsight ("i'd forgotten it was one of those types of roundabout.... doh").

    the road markings quite clearly state that they have to give way to the cyclists so no, there wont be any excuse.

    seriously, its not that radical!!!

    And by the way, roundabouts from elephant and castle to parliament square to the little thing at lambeth they want to convert to this doesn't faze me at all. This solution is for the people it does faze, and I understand and accept that.

    A couple of the roundabouts I use in Mitcham have give way markings too. They are regularly ignored. I've had to stop halfway round to 'give way' to people just barging their way on.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • Ouija
    Ouija Posts: 1,386

    the road markings quite clearly state that they have to give way to the cyclists so no, there wont be any excuse.

    .

    It may not be a valid excuse, but it won't stop people from doing it.
  • bails87
    bails87 Posts: 12,998
    I like it. Most people on here would be happy on a normal RAB of the same size. But most people aren't like us. Mrs Bails wouldn't want to ride around a RAB. She would use this. Same goes for my sister, mum, non-cycling friends, aunts and uncles.

    It doesn't solve the (non?) 'problem' of assertive, fast cyclists getting through RABs, it solves the problem of seperate bike lanes getting round RABs. Currently they give way every time they cross traffic. This is giving a small bit of priority to bike traffic, which is a nice change from the "Give way to cars AND pedestrians, you are the lowest of the low" attitude we've had so far.
    MTB/CX

    "As I said last time, it won't happen again."
  • pdw
    pdw Posts: 315
    I can't help but feel that this trial is missing the point. If you look at the video of the Dutch example, you can see that what it's doing is solving the problem of what you do with high quality, segregated cycle paths when you get to a roundabout. Do you force cyclists to give way at every entrance and exit around the roundabout? Put cyclists back in the road? Or give cyclists priority all the way round the roundabout?

    In the absence of decent segregated cycle paths, what you do with them at roundabouts is something of a moot point.

    There's also another telling difference between the two videos: even with this infrastructure, in the UK, cycling remains a deviant and dangerous activity that must only be attempted in hi-vis clothing.
  • EKE_38BPM
    EKE_38BPM Posts: 5,821
    And helmets. Don't forget the lack of helmets.
    This means all of the cyclists in the video were all killed to death whilst using that "DEATH CIRCLE"!
    FCN 3: Raleigh Record Ace fixie-to be resurrected sometime in the future
    FCN 4: Planet X Schmaffenschmack 2- workhorse
    FCN 9: B Twin Vitamin - winter commuter/loan bike for trainees

    I'm hungry. I'm always hungry!
  • anonymousblackfg
    anonymousblackfg Posts: 2,029
    As pointed out the test roundabout is missing british stop lines at present as it's still in development, it's going to take time for traffic to learn how to behave but new things must be given a chance as we all know the status quo does not work. i'm still staggard how the government can't add a cycling section to the driving theory test as this costs nothing and would start filtering into the driving population hopefully having even a minor effect.
    If I know you, and I like you, you can borrow my bike box for £30 a week. PM for details.
  • wgwarburton
    wgwarburton Posts: 1,863
    Hi,
    Some of the sceptics seem to be missing a human angle- when drivers are faced with something unfamiliar they slow down (eg when mini-roundabouts were introduced) and wake up, so there will be an initial safety benefit from the novelty.
    The layout is clear and the sightlines are good. The Zebra crossings by the bike lanes are familiar enough and will highlight the need to keep a look out. The seperation will encourage those nervous cyclists who are worried about mixing it up with traffic.

    So, as a piece of "cycling infrastructure" to encourage more people to ride it looks like progress to me.

    Downsides? Well, naturally! It takes up a lot of roadspace, so there may be plenty of places that could benefit but where they won't fit (or where there won't be the will to change the use of the space to accomodate) and, as others have said, it doesn't help the confident rider, who will either end up trying to maintain an inappropriate speed along the bike-bit or having to stop along with the cars on the road-bit.

    Cheers,
    W.
  • spen666
    spen666 Posts: 17,709
    As pointed out the test roundabout is missing british stop lines at present as it's still in development, it's going to take time for traffic to learn how to behave but new things must be given a chance as .... ......



    That will be a comfort to the families and friends of those who are killed in the meantime using this new facility
    Want to know the Spen666 behind the posts?
    Then read MY BLOG @ http://www.pebennett.com

    Twittering @spen_666
  • spen666
    spen666 Posts: 17,709
    Hi,
    Some of the sceptics seem to be missing a human angle- when drivers are faced with something unfamiliar they slow down (eg when mini-roundabouts were introduced) and wake up, so there will be an initial safety benefit from the novelty.....
    The drivers will see a roundabout- something they are familiar with and drive accordingly. Nothing novel in a roundabout
    Want to know the Spen666 behind the posts?
    Then read MY BLOG @ http://www.pebennett.com

    Twittering @spen_666
  • tailwindhome
    tailwindhome Posts: 18,878
    Haven't read the thread, so this may already be mentioned.

    IMHO that arrangement would be significantly improved by the cyclist having to give way to the car.
    “New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!
  • pangolin
    pangolin Posts: 6,283
    Haven't read the thread, so this may already be mentioned.

    IMHO that arrangement would be significantly improved by the cyclist having to give way to the car.

    Really? That's what already happens to a lot of cycle lanes around junctions, and is pretty universally agreed to be a bad thing.
    Some of the sceptics seem to be missing a human angle- when drivers are faced with something unfamiliar they slow down (eg when mini-roundabouts were introduced) and wake up, so there will be an initial safety benefit from the novelty.

    Not for long though. I am rarely more cautious than when approacing a mini roundabout, because of the amount of times a driver has come from my left and just ploughed straight over.
    - Genesis Croix de Fer
    - Dolan Tuono
  • cookeeemonster
    cookeeemonster Posts: 1,991
    Haven't read the thread, so this may already be mentioned.

    IMHO that arrangement would be significantly improved by the cyclist having to give way to the car.

    in that case a large proportion of cyclists wouldn't use it and you have a situation where there are cyclists in the cyclist bit and the non cyclist bit...PANDEMONIUM I TELLS YA!!!!!

    EDIT: You'll get that to a certain extent anyway but not as much
  • greg66_tri_v2.0
    greg66_tri_v2.0 Posts: 7,172
    Kurako wrote:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-22347184

    My first though is holy crap that is some scary sh**.

    "The layout gives cyclists priority and means they are in the clear line of sight of drivers when vehicles exit the roundabout."

    Great. So drivers *should not* plough into cyclists because they are in sight and as we know people are always giving full attention to the road ahead and are never distracted or make mistakes. Yeah, right.

    Enormous (pun - you'll get it in a moment) difficulty with this in an urban environment. It's huge. Enormous, in fact.

    Look at the shot at the beginning of the footage of the entire roundabout. We have things big enough to accommodate the additional lanes, but they're usually on two lane dual carriageways. Superimpose that image on a rdt a lot of London SCR'ers are familiar with: Lambeth Bridge on the north side. There is nothing like enough physical space to incorporate cycle lanes and lozenge-shaped islands.

    And that's going to be the case in the vast majority of urban situations. Outside big cities, who (apart from me) like riding on fast A roads into big two lane roundabouts?
    Swim. Bike. Run. Yeah. That's what I used to do.

    Bike 1
    Bike 2-A
  • tailwindhome
    tailwindhome Posts: 18,878
    pangolin wrote:
    Haven't read the thread, so this may already be mentioned.

    IMHO that arrangement would be significantly improved by the cyclist having to give way to the car.

    Really? That's what already happens to a lot of cycle lanes around junctions, and is pretty universally agreed to be a bad thing..


    My gut feeling is that the point where the cycle lane crosses the road is too close to the roundabout. In this scenario the driver's instinct will tell him that he has right away as he is coming from the cyclists right. Also you need to consider the flow of traffic around the RAB if drivers are giving way half on/ half off the roundabout.

    That said I'm offering an opinion more as a driver than a cyclist. Where I ride there are very few scenarios of this type, there are few urban cycle paths and I ride every RAB in the normal fashion. You may well be right.

    I seem to recall that the roundabout in Mallorca handle this pretty well.......though I can't remember the layout :?
    “New York has the haircuts, London has the trousers, but Belfast has the reason!
  • phy2sll2
    phy2sll2 Posts: 680
    Superimpose that image on a rdt a lot of London SCR'ers are familiar with: Lambeth Bridge on the north side.

    OK.

    picture-61.png?w=640&h=458
  • greg66_tri_v2.0
    greg66_tri_v2.0 Posts: 7,172
    edited May 2013
    phy2sll2 wrote:
    Superimpose that image on a rdt a lot of London SCR'ers are familiar with: Lambeth Bridge on the north side.

    OK.

    picture-61.png?w=640&h=458

    From here: http://aseasyasridingabike.wordpress.co ... oundabout/

    Yeah, that ain't gonna work.

    First, the author seems to overlook the fact that quite a few buses and coaches use that roundabout. Expecting them to negotiate it on the inside lane, hugging the island in the middle, is not workable.

    Secondly, the author claims that LBR is fed by single carriageways. Now strictly, that's true (a dual carriageway is a road where the opposing streams of traffic are separated by a physical divider), but not the point. At all four entrances there are two traffic lanes feeding onto the roundabout. And despite what he seems to think, side-by-side traffic enters the roundabout quite often.

    The real issue is point 1 though.

    TFL's solution is interesting (not in a good way): kick cyclists off at the zebras and onto a shared use pavement. Then have them rejoin the road at the zebra on their exit. I find it hard to imagine something less appealing.
    Swim. Bike. Run. Yeah. That's what I used to do.

    Bike 1
    Bike 2-A
  • phy2sll2
    phy2sll2 Posts: 680
    If you can't get a coach around this, you shouldn't be driving a coach.

    in_content.jpg
  • greg66_tri_v2.0
    greg66_tri_v2.0 Posts: 7,172
    I don't. But I'm pretty sure that the island there is larger than the one on LBR. And when I ride round LBR, the buses and coaches do not hug the island a la Michael Schmacher on a qualifying lap.

    Interesting to choose LBR as the place to trial and "prove" safety improvements. According to this http://www.citybeast.com/londoncyclists.html there has been one serious cycling injury there in the last nine years. One. Suggests it is already a very safe roundabout. What, exactly, will an absence of accidents post-changes prove?

    In any event, as I understand it TFP has decided to implement its ride-on-the-pavement solution. Oh joy.
    Swim. Bike. Run. Yeah. That's what I used to do.

    Bike 1
    Bike 2-A
  • pangolin
    pangolin Posts: 6,283
    There's a lot of "Cyclist serious** injury" there though. It's the only place I've seen a coach drive straight into the back of a cyclist who was pulling away right in front of him. Cyclist was knocked off but was fine.

    Interesting how much safer enbankment is than Kings Road!
    - Genesis Croix de Fer
    - Dolan Tuono
  • rjsterry
    rjsterry Posts: 27,486
    pangolin wrote:
    There's a lot of "Cyclist serious** injury" there though. It's the only place I've seen a coach drive straight into the back of a cyclist who was pulling away right in front of him. Cyclist was knocked off but was fine.

    Interesting how much safer enbankment is than Kings Road!

    Fewer junctions. What that map clearly shows is that accidents concentrate around junctions (as you'd expect). Interesting that LBR is relatively safe given how many kamikaze f***-giving-way-to-traffic-on-the-roundabout-I'm-invincible cyclists I see passing through there.
    1985 Mercian King of Mercia - work in progress (Hah! Who am I kidding?)
    Pinnacle Monzonite

    Part of the anti-growth coalition
  • pangolin
    pangolin Posts: 6,283
    Yeah that's true. Largely saved by good drivers I suspect.
    - Genesis Croix de Fer
    - Dolan Tuono
  • bails87
    bails87 Posts: 12,998
    TFL's solution is interesting (not in a good way): kick cyclists off at the zebras and onto a shared use pavement. Then have them rejoin the road at the zebra on their exit. I find it hard to imagine something less appealing.
    Are you saying that that is TfL's current solution, the solution proposed with this new 'Dutch' RAB, or is it your suggested improvement on their current solution? :?

    Because the proposed solution clearly doesn't "kick cyclists off" anything. It's a continuous seperated bike lane that keeps people on bikes* safe when they're going through the junction. You then don't rejoin the road, you just carry on on the bike lane. If the lanes that feed into the RAB are of a decent quality then there's no problem. I think a lot of hostility towards these things comes from the poor standard of infrastructure we have already.

    If British drivers really didn't know what the Belisha beacons (those stripy things with the orange lights on top) were for then every single zebra crossing in the country would be a graveyard. Are they ignored? Yes, sometimes, just like red lights and one way signs. But it's not the norm.

    To those against this (remembering that it comes with no obligation to use it, you're still free to use the road if you wish), what would you propose instead? What could be built/done to make 'non-cyclist' people feel safe enough to negotiate a junction like this on a bike with the kids in tow?

    *better than talking about 'cyclists' IMO.
    MTB/CX

    "As I said last time, it won't happen again."
  • greg66_tri_v2.0
    greg66_tri_v2.0 Posts: 7,172
    This was TFL's plan:

    picture-41.png

    The orange bits are mixed use - cyclists and peds. So to cross the rdbt, you hit the ramp before the zebra, peel onto the mixed use pavement, toddle to the next zebra, cross it, continue on the mixed use pavement to the next rdbt, and exit back onto the road.

    I had read earlier today that that has been adopted. But this: https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/street ... ridgenorth from TFL suggests it has not been adopted and instead TFL are looking at the trials of the Dutch rdbt in the OP's BBC link.

    This evidence-based approach: someone decides that the Dutch experience provides evidence that the Dutch designs of rdbts works. Where's the evidence that shows when you transplant to England an idea that works in the Netherlands, it will still work, I wonder.
    Swim. Bike. Run. Yeah. That's what I used to do.

    Bike 1
    Bike 2-A
  • pangolin
    pangolin Posts: 6,283
    This was TFL's plan:This evidence-based approach: someone decides that the Dutch experience provides evidence that the Dutch designs of rdbts works. Where's the evidence that shows when you transplant to England an idea that works in the Netherlands, it will still work, I wonder.

    Well surely that's why they're trying it on one roundabout first? To get evidence? I'm not saying it's ideal but what other way of testing it do you see?
    - Genesis Croix de Fer
    - Dolan Tuono
  • bails87
    bails87 Posts: 12,998
    Where's the evidence that shows when you transplant to England an idea that works in the Netherlands, it will still work, I wonder.

    That would be the rationale behind the TRL building the test RAB on behalf of TfL :wink:

    I misunderstood your earlier post btw, I thought that was criticism of the Dutch design, not a previous one. I see what you mean, and yes, that is rubbish.
    MTB/CX

    "As I said last time, it won't happen again."