Traffic Lights vs Roundabouts at busy urban junctions

MYOB wrote: »

There are massive volumes of crashes on turbo roundabouts, as well as many cases of people driving *over* the divider sections.

This is "horrifically dangerous", no matter how you try and redefine dangerous to suit your purpose at the time. No roundabout design is particularly prone to fatalties or serious injuries to motorists, this is blatantly clear so why you're trying to go down a pointless path of distraction I have no idea.

And, as is so often the case, a ten second google would find you info on how dangerous they are:
http://www.teachamerica.com/rab08/RAB08_Papers/RAB08S6BBrilon.pdf
"• no severe accidents
• safety needs carefull consideration
(damage-only accidents)"

http://www.rorise.com/blog/2010/09/turbo-roundabouts/
"although not as safe as a single lane roundabout (turbo roundabout: 20% to 40% greater accident rate)."

I could go on, seeing as these are out of the top 5 results on Google (and referenced), but I don't see why I *should*. You're going to ignore anything anyone provides that might show you up as wrong, as you've done in every other thread to date.

So Turbo Roundabouts are "horrifically dangerous" compared to what exactly?

Oh.

The conclusions from one of your own links above:

• Turbo-roundabout works
• is capable to treat large volumes of through-traffic under lower demand on the side approaches
• no cyclists should be allowed
• pedestrians ? (better not)
• no severe accidents
• safety needs carefull consideration (damage-only accidents)
• problem: too low crossing volumes
• just one case! more experience needed

MYOB wrote: »

And you claim that they're better for cyclists and pedestrians...

You refer to "massive volumes" of crashes on "horrifically dangerous" Turbo Roundabouts, yet the German report you link to makes no mention of such massive horrors.

I believe it to be the case that 'Continental' style roundabouts, including and perhaps especially the types used in the Netherlands, are safer and more convenient for cyclists than the high-speed muti-lane roundabouts typically seen in Ireland.

I believe there are a number of reasons for this, including lower entry speed, prioritisation of cyclists and/or routing away of cyclists from the motorised traffic movements. The separation of cyclists from motorised traffic is what the Dutch very often try to do, and IMO is also what the German report above is referring to. That's what makes the design better than Irish-style fcuk-the-cyclists-and-pedestrians roundabouts.

According to SWOV:
It may well be the case that Dutch cyclists are prepared to compromise somewhat on safety (actual and/or perceived) in order to maximise their mobility.

Getting back to the OP's starting point, as a motorist, cyclist, pedestrian and bus user I'd prefer decent traffic signals to brutal Irish-style roundabouts. And I'd certainly prefer Dutch-style roundabouts to Irish ones.

Cycling on such infrastructure in the Netherlands as opposed to Irish cycle "facilities" is like flying compared to going by ass and cart.

AugustusMinimus wrote: »

I must say, one issue I have with signalised junctions and cyclists is that the majority of cyclists from what I can tell have scant regard for a red light.

80% of them will go through a red light without any problem at all. Until such rash behaviour on the road is solved, I seriously doubt a signalised junction will be of any benefit to cyclists.

Ireland certainly seems like the Wild West when it comes to compliance with (and enforcement of) traffic law.

I frequently see Garda patrol cars obstructing footpaths and going through roundabouts without signaling, for example.

And I regularly see cyclists flouting the law and idiotically compromising their safety in different ways, eg breaking red lights (often by using the footpath as a high-speed bypass) and cycling unlit at night. Often these illegal and very annoying behaviours will be engaged in simutaneously, and under the nose of supposed law enforcers. I have heard Gardai saying they'd prefer to see unlit cyclists on the footpath rather than on the road at night, and once they're on the footpath they can safely ignore them. Perhaps that could be classed as a harm reduction or pragmatic approach, but in any case I think it's symptomatic of our Irish traffic cuture (which I alluded to earlier).

Even if it were true that 80% of cyclists break red lights, it remains the case that the law-abiding 20% (myself among them) deserve protection and a better level of service.

Perhaps it is the case that most cyclists ignore traffic lights because most traffic lights ignore cyclists. While cycling in the Netherlands and Copenhagen, for example, I routinely encountered cycle-priority signalised junctions and saw very very few instances of breaking the lights, despite there being hordes of cyclists on the streets.

As with Irish roads engineers and "planners" versus Danish and Dutch ones, so also with Irish road users perhaps?

Given the hostility within it and the reported posts that it has generated, I have reviewed this thread. The following posts are the most troublesome. I'll tell you why.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

I was considering a reply until I read the bilge in bold above. Then I lost the will to respond to such garbage.

An example of antagonistic and inflammatory language. Please use less hostile language when making points in the future. You're an eloquent poster; you can do better than that. The above post immediately heated up the thread.

MYOB wrote: »

I don't believe you. You have clearly never actually seen or driven through the "Dutch roundabouts" you're claiming are somehow safer for pedestrians and cyclists. You're fed by statistics, selective ones at that, and when anything is provided contrary to what you want to believe you make grand claims about there being too much data to read.

You really, really are not worth the time of day at this stage. One sided, anti-car campaigner and nothing more.

MYOB, you have been told before not to baldly claim that other people are lying. Choose your words more carefully please, and attack the post, not the poster. Also, telling someone that they are not worth the time of day is not OK.

niloc1951 wrote: »

MODERATOR where are you, I know of no other forum where such behavior towards other posters is tolerated. Is there a 'jail' facility on BOARDS ?

A poster with a similar attitude was permanently banned a couple of years ago from another forum I am active on.

I am not very interested in contributing to the topic of this thread as drawing from my own personal experience of extensive travel, which extends over 40 years, in the UK and mainland Europe much of the contributions appear very subjective and some of the contributors appear to have little actual experience of driving conditions and road infrastructure design in Europe.

This moderator was travelling for much of yesterday If you want to ask for moderator intervention, please report the post. When you report a post, we receive an instant email notification. When you post on a thread asking where the moderators are, we're not going to be notified that there is a problem. We simply do not have time to read every post on every thread in the forum. Also, more posts by users such as you will improve the forum by diversifying it, so please contribute.

MYOB wrote: »

I know of no other forum where a troll would be allowed last as long as IWH has on here.

MYOB, this is unacceptable. You cannot call another poster a troll. Period. (Iwannahurl's posts are the antithesis of trolling - they are well-written, make use of links and images, and are engaging. This is not the behaviour of a troll.) I am going to amend the charter to make it a bannable offence to call another user a troll.

veryangryman wrote: »

Im not a mod but i dont see anything wrong with the guy forming an opinion on you based on your posts.

See above.

MYOB wrote: »

You brought up "Dutch style roundabouts". Other roundabouts in the Netherlands are the same as here, so it was a fairly informed assumption to take it that you meant turbo roundabouts.

Also, most urban interchanges would not get a multi-lane roundabout due to sheer space issues, so trying to compare accident rates to them is irrelevant. If one is forced in, it becomes incredibly low speed and would, again, have accident rates well below a perceived "safer" turbo.

1. I think the specific safety question regarding Dutch Turbo versus 2-lane versus single-lane roundabouts (a) has already been answered and (b) is irrelevant in the Irish context anyway since they're not on offer here.

2. Are you claiming that standard Dutch roundabouts typically or often do not provide segregated and/or priority facilities for cyclists and pedestrians? Or are you claiming that Irish roundabouts typically or often do provide such facilities? In any case, can you back up/illustrate what you're stating with links, pics etc? I'd be very interested in seeing examples of Irish-style cycle-hostile multi-lane roundabouts in the Netherlands, or Dutch-style cycle-friendly roundabouts in Ireland. This issue is relevant in Ireland, and to the OP's original question, since what seems to be generally on offer in this country is either traffic signals, or (often multi-lane) roundabouts that fail to provide adequately for cyclists and pedestrians.

Iwannahurl wrote: »

2. Are you claiming that standard Dutch roundabouts typically or often do not provide segregated and/or priority facilities for cyclists and pedestrians? Or are you claiming that Irish roundabouts typically or often do provide such facilities? In any case, can you back up/illustrate what you're stating with links, pics etc? I'd be very interested in seeing examples of Irish-style cycle-hostile multi-lane roundabouts in the Netherlands, or Dutch-style cycle-friendly roundabouts in Ireland. This issue is relevant in Ireland, and to the OP's original question, since what seems to be generally on offer in this country is either traffic signals, or (often multi-lane) roundabouts that fail to provide adequately for cyclists and pedestrians.

I am Dutch myself and I don't agree that the non-'turbo' roundabouts (which are still found in plenty in Holland), are the same as the Irish ones in terms of cyclist safety. They're not the same. At least not in Galway, I don't drive around the rest of the country enough to comment on that.

In Galway whenever there is a cycle lane, it usually just 'ends' at the roundabout, leaving the cyclist either to run across with the bike in hand at the pedestrian crossing (having to run between the gaps in cars as they have no right of way), or to mingle with the cars. Some cyclists even take the inside lane, with the cars zooming past all around them.

I have never seen that in Holland, not on major roundabouts. Sure, you get the tiny slow one here and there inside the towns in residential zones where cars and bikes might be mixed, but not on major ones. On those the cycle lanes are always separate, either around the roundabout (and having right of way or lights to cross the access paths for the cars) or completely separate, having their own little crossroads a few hundred yards away from the roundabout. Those would usually have lights on demand so the cars can be stopped if necessary.

But asides from road provisions I think it's also an attitude thing. As another poster said, cyclists are safer from cars in Holland because they'll never get the blame. This is mainly due to insurance reasons (there is no cyclist insurance so nobody would pay for the damage in such a case) but it helps to get the drivers to watch out more. They also get right of way at most unsignalised roundabouts, which helps to slow down the car traffic and I personally believe it's fair to let the most fragile road users go first. Finally they're exposed to the weather so having to wait is more of an inconvenience to them than to a driver in their comfortable car.

Drivers in Holland are always mindful for bicycles, of course there's so many of them and as someone else said, they're not very good road users. They run red lights, cross from the wrong side, have people sitting on the back. And nobody wears helmets (you'd look like a tool wearing one, really). You see this especially in the major cities. In fact it's the generally preferred mode of transport when intoxicated so it's especially important to take care driving on friday and saturday nights. Basically the cyclists are the kings of the road. Here's a very funny analysis of Dutch cycling habits by a guy from San Francisco. Always makes me laugh how much he's amazed by it.

I personally don't even feel very safe driving on some of the Galway roundabouts due to the high speed and short distance margins that are usually observed on them. I think a roundabout only works well if the traffic is fairly even from all sides and the Galway ones usually have a very strong flow from one entrance to a certain exit during peak times, leaving drivers at the other entrances with few chances to enter, making them very eager to rush in when there's the tiniest gap. This is why I've always been in favour of replacing them with lights even though it would increase my driving time a bit.

I'd really love to cycle to work but I would have to cross five major roundabouts, and that's just too dangerous the way it is now.

GekkePrutser wrote: »

Drivers in Holland are always mindful for bicycles, of course there's so many of them and as someone else said, they're not very good road users. They run red lights, cross from the wrong side, have people sitting on the back. And nobody wears helmets (you'd look like a tool wearing one, really). You see this especially in the major cities. In fact it's the generally preferred mode of transport when intoxicated so it's especially important to take care driving on friday and saturday nights. Basically the cyclists are the kings of the road. Here's a very funny analysis of Dutch cycling habits by a guy from San Francisco. Always makes me laugh how much he's amazed by it.

That confirms my own impression: cyclists are "kings of the road" in the Netherlands. In my experience (obviously minimal compared to your own) cyclists have by far the best level of service, certainly compared to pedestrians anyway. Once when I was trying to find a way up some steps with a buggy in Zaandam, some Dutch people stopped and 'interviewed' me about my experience as a pedestrian. They wanted to know how pedestrian facilities compared to the (excellent) ones for cyclists. Not favourably, I told them, the lack of ramps being the most obvious omission.

I've seen that American webpage before. Hilarious the way he is so gobsmacked by what the Dutch take for granted. What!!!??? They're wearing ordinary clothes! They're carrying children! They're carrying, like, stuff! They have dynamos!

We're not far away from such incredulity and ignorance in Ireland, IMO. It's an inevitable consequence of our car culture, many aspects of which we have blindly and stupidly copied from the US and UK.

As a pedestrian, I find busy signal junctions with no filter left slips or traffic dividers a right pain in the backside. Through experience, slip roads allow most people to take traffic streams one at a time thereby saving time. Many of the new signal junctions in Galway seem to have no filter left slips - this is crazy and anti-pedestrian IMO. Pedestrian lights frequently take far too long and inhibit the freedom of both motorists and pedestrians (two extremely important considerations IMO) - I usually give way to motor traffic and then cross - sometimes I use the lights.

Regards!