Re: Regional transport 'announcements'

[Roland Perry]

In message <0DI09M0L...@perry.uk>, at 05:17:15 on Sat, 23 Oct 2021,
Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> remarked:

>South Yorkshire (£570m): Starting a Supertram renewal project and
>installing a "Dutch-style" roundabout in Barnsley town centre

I use the "Dutch style" roundabout recently installed in Cambridge (late
and over budget of course) as a motorist, fairly frequently. It's
potentially very confusing, not least because of its uniqueness.

The main practical safety feature (assuming overall it *is* safer -
apparently some Dutch people heard about it and said "don't the Brits
realise we fell out of love with that sort of design years ago") is
probably the 20mph zone on the roundabout itself and 50yds along each of
the feeder roads.

Ironically I think if the feeder roads were also 20mph (and many roads
in Cambridge centre already are) the shock-factor of 20mph at that
particular roundabout would be significantly reduced.

https://goo.gl/maps/3zAXnCqkUCdzq1vbA

Although the full-house of pedestrian crossings (there are very few
pedestrians on the streets there) are also a bit of a shock-factor too.
The problem is the red cycle-circle gets lost in the extraordinarily
cluttered streetscape, especially viewed from a car's driving seat
(rather than a Streetview camera).
--
Roland Perry

[Roger Lynn]

On 23/10/2021 05:55, Roland Perry wrote:
> I use the "Dutch style" roundabout recently installed in Cambridge (late
> and over budget of course) as a motorist, fairly frequently. It's
> potentially very confusing, not least because of its uniqueness.
>
> The main practical safety feature (assuming overall it *is* safer -
> apparently some Dutch people heard about it and said "don't the Brits
> realise we fell out of love with that sort of design years ago") is
> probably the 20mph zone on the roundabout itself and 50yds along each of
> the feeder roads.
>
> Ironically I think if the feeder roads were also 20mph (and many roads
> in Cambridge centre already are) the shock-factor of 20mph at that
> particular roundabout would be significantly reduced.
>
> https://goo.gl/maps/3zAXnCqkUCdzq1vbA
>
> Although the full-house of pedestrian crossings (there are very few
> pedestrians on the streets there) are also a bit of a shock-factor too.
> The problem is the red cycle-circle gets lost in the extraordinarily
> cluttered streetscape, especially viewed from a car's driving seat
> (rather than a Streetview camera).

Only one of the cycle crossings has proper "give way" road markings.
Presumably the others are supposed to be part of the adjacent zebra
crossings, but I don't think that's very obvious. If I was cycling around
there I think I would prefer to stay on the road than mess about with the
fiddly cycle lanes.

[Certes]

Me too. What a shame the [motorised vehicle] lanes are now too narrow
for a cyclist to share safely.

[Roland Perry]

In message <sljpbf$p36$1...@dont-email.me>, at 16:45:51 on Sat, 30 Oct
2021, Certes <no...@nowhere.net> remarked:

It's supposed to be a copy of "Dutch style", what would they/did they do
differently?
--
Roland Perry

[Rolf Mantel]

Let's say it is better not to overtake on a one-lane roundabout, so
these narrow lanes yould be a safety bonus.

> It's supposed to be a copy of "Dutch style", what would they/did they do
> differently?

It is a fallacy to assue that "dutch-style" bicycle facilities are good
for anything other than make driving easier for motorists by moving
bicycles away from the main road.

The Dutch have decades of training how to use "dutch-style" bicycle
facilities, and despite this decades-long training, cyclist fatalities
per million miles are 50% higher than in Germany or Denmark.

Rolf

[Roland Perry]

In message <slo9td$9ap$1...@dont-email.me>, at 09:53:01 on Mon, 1 Nov 2021,
Rolf Mantel <ne...@hartig-mantel.de> remarked:

>Am 30.10.2021 um 17:55 schrieb Roland Perry:
>> In message <sljpbf$p36$1...@dont-email.me>, at 16:45:51 on Sat, 30 Oct
>>2021, Certes <no...@nowhere.net> remarked:
>>> On 30/10/2021 15:16, Roger Lynn wrote:
>>>> If I was cycling around there I think I would prefer to stay on
>>>>the road than mess about  with the fiddly cycle lanes.
>
>>> Me too.  What a shame the [motorised vehicle] lanes are now too narrow
>>> for a cyclist to share safely.
>
>Let's say it is better not to overtake on a one-lane roundabout, so
>these narrow lanes yould be a safety bonus.
>
>> It's supposed to be a copy of "Dutch style", what would they/did they
>>do differently?
>
>It is a fallacy to assue that "dutch-style" bicycle facilities are good
>for anything other than make driving easier for motorists by moving
>bicycles away from the main road.

It's an assumption the authorities appear to have made in Cambridge.
"The Dutch can do no wrong when it comes to bicycle provision, this is a
Dutch roundabout, we MUST do it (regardless of the cost or disruption)".

>The Dutch have decades of training how to use "dutch-style" bicycle
>facilities, and despite this decades-long training, cyclist fatalities
>per million miles are 50% higher than in Germany or Denmark.

Maybe that wasn't such a clever assumption after all?
--
Roland Perry

[Rolf Mantel]

Am 01.11.2021 um 10:03 schrieb Roland Perry:
> In message <slo9td$9ap$1...@dont-email.me>, at 09:53:01 on Mon, 1 Nov 2021,
> Rolf Mantel <ne...@hartig-mantel.de> remarked:
>> Am 30.10.2021 um 17:55 schrieb Roland Perry:
>>> In message <sljpbf$p36$1...@dont-email.me>, at 16:45:51 on Sat, 30 Oct
>>> 2021, Certes <no...@nowhere.net> remarked:
>>>> On 30/10/2021 15:16, Roger Lynn wrote:
>>>>> If I was cycling  around there I think I would prefer to stay on
>>>>> the road than mess  about  with the fiddly cycle lanes.
>>
>>>> Me too.  What a shame the [motorised vehicle] lanes are now too narrow
>>>> for a cyclist to share safely.
>>
>> Let's say it is better not to overtake on a one-lane roundabout, so
>> these narrow lanes yould be a safety bonus.
>>
>>> It's supposed to be a copy of "Dutch style", what would they/did they
>>> do  differently?
>>
>> It is a fallacy to assue that "dutch-style" bicycle facilities are
>> good for anything other than make driving easier for motorists by
>> moving bicycles away from the main road.
>
> It's an assumption the authorities appear to have made in Cambridge.
> "The Dutch can do no wrong when it comes to bicycle provision, this is a
> Dutch roundabout, we MUST do it (regardless of the cost or disruption)".

The Dutch are "known" to be *the* bicycle nation so everything they do
must be world class inrrespective of any track records.

>> The Dutch have decades of training how to use "dutch-style" bicycle
>> facilities, and despite this decades-long training, cyclist fatalities
>> per million miles are 50% higher than in Germany or Denmark.
>
> Maybe that wasn't such a clever assumption after all?

German bicycle campaigners keep wanting to introduce "Dutch-style"
bicycle facilities all the time as well (which is why I'm allergic to
that argument).

Rolf

[Rink]

Op 1-11-2021 om 9:53 schreef Rolf Mantel:

Per million miles of what?
Cars?

Rink

[Rink]

Op 23-10-2021 om 6:55 schreef Roland Perry:

What is "Dutch-style" about this roundabout?

Is that separate lanes for cyclists?

Rink

[Rolf Mantel]

> Per million miles of what?
> Cars?

Obviously per million miles of cycling.
https://udv.de/de/strasse/radverkehr/radverkehrssicherheit-im-drei-laender-vergleich

[Roland Perry]

In message <slosga$f9r$2...@dont-email.me>, at 15:10:19 on Mon, 1 Nov 2021,
Rink <rink.hof.ha...@planet.nl> remarked:

Yes, it's the funky concentric separate lane for cyclists, which
apparently comes with implied[1] right-of-way for cyclists in that
separate lane, versus the vehicular traffic. Even if the unfamiliarity
of that implication to the local drivers is eventually going to end in
tears.

[1] Much of the complaint seems to be the implication, rather than
explicit signage.
--
Roland Perry

[David Williams]

Cambridge now has a new style of junction segregating motorised
traffic, pedestrians and cyclists from each other. It's at the
junction of Histon Road, Gilbert Road and Warwick Road, delivered
as part of the year-long works on Histon Road. I don't know if it
has Dutch lineage. ;-)

I haven't found an overall photo online, but there is a textual
summary in the News section here:

<https://www.camcycle.org.uk/>

.. and a link to their blog with photos and animated diagrams.

It is a Circulating Cycle Stage Junction as defined in Local
Transport Note (LTN) 1/20, a PDF file of 188 pages. The three
examples already open around Manchester are nicknamed CYCLOPS
junctions. The LTN is here:

<https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cycle-infrastructure-design-ltn-120>

The junction opened officially on 21st October and looks
complete. It is still a crossroads junction for motorised
traffic but with cycle and pedestrian paths that link to
resemble [?] roundabout lanes [if you squint!].

-

Histon Road itself is open both ways but I wouldn't give it more
than 97% on the completion scale.

The main negative reaction locally seems to be that space has
been stolen from pedestrians.

The Histon Road scheme deserves its own thread. Later, perhaps ...

--
David

[Roland Perry]

In message <87zgqok...@yahoo.co.uk>, at 14:42:33 on Mon, 1 Nov 2021,
David Williams <davi...@yahoo.co.uk> remarked:

It was claimed to have, by those who spent huge sums of taxpayer's money
getting it installed.

>I haven't found an overall photo online, but there is a textual
>summary in the News section here:
>
> <https://www.camcycle.org.uk/>
>
>.. and a link to their blog with photos and animated diagrams.
>
>It is a Circulating Cycle Stage Junction as defined in Local
>Transport Note (LTN) 1/20, a PDF file of 188 pages. The three
>examples already open around Manchester are nicknamed CYCLOPS
>junctions. The LTN is here:
>
>
><https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/cycle-infrastructure-design-
>ltn-120>
>
>The junction opened officially on 21st October and looks
>complete. It is still a crossroads junction for motorised
>traffic but with cycle and pedestrian paths that link to
>resemble [?] roundabout lanes [if you squint!].

--
Roland Perry

[Tim Ward]

On 01/11/2021 14:42, David Williams wrote:
>
> The junction opened officially on 21st October and looks
> complete. It is still a crossroads junction for motorised
> traffic but with cycle and pedestrian paths that link to
> resemble [?] roundabout lanes [if you squint!].

You can certainly turn left out of Warwick Road legally without a green
light now, which is a definite improvement.

Travelling north up Histon Road and going straight on, I think I will
choose which path to take depending on what colour the lights are when I
reach them.

--
Tim Ward - 07801 703 600
www.brettward.co.uk

[Nobody]

>junction of Histon Road, Gilbert Road and Warwick Road.

And I'll guarantee that a fair percentage of my cycling brethren don't
give a fig about the circulation... and still terrorise as they
please!

[tony sayer]

In article <slo9td$9ap$1...@dont-email.me>, Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-
mantel.de> scribeth thus

Well i use that roundabout almost every day and it is amazing that there
aren't more accidents!, the number of times I've seen cyclists go across
their part of the crossing without a single glance to see if they have
been noticed going onto or on the roundabout.

It seems as if they think theres a magic force field surrounding them!.

Mind you, you can see similar on many light controlled pedestrian
crossings they stare at the lights opposite and the moment its Green
stride, or ride!, across nary a glance left and right to check that the
road traffic has actually seem them and stopped!...

--
Tony Sayer


Man is least himself when he talks in his own person.

Give him a keyboard, and he will reveal himself.

[Martin]

On Sat, 23 Oct 2021, Roland Perry wrote:

> The main practical safety feature (assuming overall it *is* safer -
> apparently some Dutch people heard about it and said "don't the Brits
> realise we fell out of love with that sort of design years ago")

No; the Dutch are continuing to build these, as it is a tried and tested
design.

The traditional British roundabout has a poorer safety record, which is
hardly surprising given that it has fundamental problems with its design,
namely encouragement of fast speeds and left hooks, both of which are
known to result in collisions.

> is probably the 20mph zone on the roundabout itself and 50yds along each
> of the feeder roads.

No; the three key safety features, based on decades of Dutch exerience,
are in fact:

1) The main carriageway is narrowed, and approached at a distinct angle.
This naturally regulates speed without the need for enforcement
mechanismis. Compare to the standard dangerous British design, which is
designed for people to be able to speed through with little deflection,
i.e. higher speed.

2) A cyclist using the annular ring are approached always at a right angle
by the driver. This means that they are naturally in the field of vision.
Given that a driver ends up crossing a cyclist going straight on, in a
similar location on the road to the annular ring not being there anyway,
this regulates that maneouvre in a more formalised and controlled manner.

3) When a driver leaves the main carriageway, there is a short waiting
area. This means that the two operations traditionally combined in the
old-fashioned British design, of both leaving the carriageway and checking
that there is then no-one crossing on foot, are separated, lowering the
cognitive load. The same applies with dutch-style crossings at sideroads -
you have a waiting area so that the two operations can be done
sequentially, not at the same time.

> Although the full-house of pedestrian crossings (there are very few
> pedestrians on the streets there) are also a bit of a shock-factor too.

Yes, it's quite a shock that for once, pedestrians actually get some
provision to enable them to cross the road safely, rather than chance it
amongst fast-moving traffic. A huge step forward.

> The problem is the red cycle-circle gets lost in the extraordinarily
> cluttered streetscape, especially viewed from a car's driving seat
> (rather than a Streetview camera).

There is not a single road marking in the whole roundabout that is in any
way non-standard. There are beacons, stop lines, etc., zebra crossings, as
seen in almost every road of this kind in the country.


Martin

[Martin]

On Mon, 1 Nov 2021, Roland Perry wrote:

> It's an assumption the authorities appear to have made in Cambridge.
> "The Dutch can do no wrong when it comes to bicycle provision, this is a
> Dutch roundabout, we MUST do it (regardless of the cost or disruption)".

No; the safety record of those roundabouts is higher than the British
design by virtue of fundamental safety features that lower speed and
changing angle of approach.

> > The Dutch have decades of training how to use "dutch-style" bicycle
> > facilities, and despite this decades-long training, cyclist fatalities per
> > million miles are 50% higher than in Germany or Denmark.
>
> Maybe that wasn't such a clever assumption after all?

It is, when compared to the British record, which is poorer than both.

I'm not sure that claim about the Dutch fatality rate is correct.
https://twitter.com/Cabaal/status/1461929207894790150
(see right-half of chart and source given.)

I'd be surprised if Germany had a lower fatality rate, given how much of
its cycling provision is quasi- shared-use pavements and poorer junction
design.


Martin

[Martin]

On Mon, 1 Nov 2021, Roland Perry wrote:

> Yes, it's the funky concentric separate lane for cyclists, which
> apparently comes with implied[1] right-of-way for cyclists in that
> separate lane, versus the vehicular traffic.

That right of way is the same as if the lane wasn't there. You don't
left-hook over a vehicle (in this case, a cyclist) going straight on.


Martin

[Martin]

On Mon, 1 Nov 2021, David Williams wrote:

> Cambridge now has a new style of junction segregating motorised traffic,
> pedestrians and cyclists from each other. It's at the junction of Histon
> Road, Gilbert Road and Warwick Road, delivered as part of the year-long
> works on Histon Road. I don't know if it has Dutch lineage. ;-)

Yes, it's called a 'Protected intersection' junction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_intersection
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protected_intersection#/media/File:Protected_intersection_features.png

Again, it's a well-established design (present in both Europe and North
America) that reduces collisions. In this case it's because:

- Again the interaction point with a crossing cyclist is at a right-angle,
reducing the problem of left-hooks.

- Reduced turn radius for the driver, again meaning that speeding through
the junction while making a turn becomes impossible.

- The crossing distance of the cyclist is significantly reduced, so far
lower canvas where a collision could occur.

- The light sequence is designed to minimise interaction, i.e. there is
segregation in both time and space.

While it turns a cyclist's right-turn into two distinct manoeuvres, taking
slightly longer, for left-turn movements there is no wait whatsoever, i.e.
the traffic lights are bypassed. In other words, there is no delay on
average, given a set of movements or indeed a sequence of such crossings.


Martin

[Tim Ward]

On 24/11/2021 16:44, Martin wrote:
>
> While it turns a cyclist's right-turn into two distinct manoeuvres, taking
> slightly longer, for left-turn movements there is no wait whatsoever, i.e.
> the traffic lights are bypassed. In other words, there is no delay on
> average, given a set of movements or indeed a sequence of such crossings.

It's going to be difficult bearing that in mind when going in the right
turn direction. Which one has done at that junction for several decades
with no problems whatsoever. I think I'll just stick to the road.