Gawd this would be nice.

  • Humanius@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    Turbo-roundabouts aren’t really urban infrastructure though, nor are they are one size fits all solution to traffic.

    They take significantly more space than an intersection would, and are generally used to improve traffic flow for cars, not bikes. Even in the Netherlands they are generally only used outside of cities on main routes for cars, with segregated bike infrastructure to keep cyclists out of the roundabout.

    It’s car infrastructure, not bike infrastructure.

    Edit: I also feel the need to point out that this intersection is not reinventing any wheels.
    Protected intersections for cyclists like this are common all over the Netherlands, and are a proven piece of infrastructure when used in the appropriate way.

    • Frezik@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      They also get bad when placed on truck routes. Mankato, MN put a bunch in and didn’t think about how semis would get around them.

      And yes, they’re for cars, not bikes.

      • Humanius@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        If the roundabout is properly designed, and the space needed for turning trucks is taken into account, then a truck should be fully capable of navigating a turbo roundabout as well.

        Those turbo-roundabouts that are common in the Netherlands are also commonly used by trucks without problem.

    • Nouveau_Burnswick@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      All bike infrastructure is car infrastructure.

      We wouldn’t need any bike infrastructure if we just limited all roads to 30kph.