dutch floating roundabout

[buggi]

of all the mad cap ideas... Could this be the answer. I kinda like it.
http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Dutch-...sts-imported/story-20016144-detail/story.html

 

[Pat "5mph"]

I like it too!

 

[gavroche]

Knowing this country, they will be debating the cost/ effect on environment/ health and safety issue etc.... for the next 10 years before they come to a decision, and then someone will object and the whole process will start again.
Great idea though

 

[steveindenmark]

The Dutch know how to sort their cycle problems out.
Here is a clip of the roundabout. A great clip for all the pro helmet group. :0)

View: http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=fxN2atgF7tQ


Steve

 

[ColinJ]

Brilliant!

I would much prefer to use something like that than do battle with traffic at busy roundabouts.

It's lovely to see so many ordinary cyclists out and about, but I could see it becoming slightly frustrating if the slow speed of them and the way they meander across the path made it unsafe to ever ride quickly. I suppose if you were allowed to still use the road, you could, but you could see why motorists would be annoyed and expect you to be on the dedicated paths.

 

[theclaud]

When you've designed such horrible roads that you need this kind of barmy nonsense to get across and around them, it's time to start over. Might look cute and space-age in night-time photos. Here's the view from above...

 

[steveindenmark]

I think it looks great. We are all entitled to our opinions but someone from the UK criticizing the Dutch cycle system seems a bit ironic.

Colin, with regards to getting a little frustrated about them riding so slowly. Now is that not another factor to look at when it comes to cycle safety. I have never thought of it before.

There are so many clips on the Internet with cyclists belting through impossibly small gaps, with no views.

It is just a thought.

Steve

 

[theclaud]

We are all entitled to our opinions but someone from the UK criticizing the Dutch cycle system seems a bit ironic.

Oh really? I must have missed the bit where we all agreed that we'd love to move to Groningen. Those who want to go Dutch should be careful what they wish for...

Under the "sustainable safety" vision in the Netherlands roads for through traffic and distributer roads should have only one function: getting large quantities of traffic from A to B in a safe manner. These roads should have no other function like parking or access to private homes and other destinations. On roads like these there is a separation of types of traffic by mass, speed and direction. So naturally bicyclists have their own separate cycle paths.

 

[ColinJ]

Colin, with regards to getting a little frustrated about them riding so slowly. Now is that not another factor to look at when it comes to cycle safety. I have never thought of it before.

There are so many clips on the Internet with cyclists belting through impossibly small gaps, with no views.

It is just a thought.

Steve

I agree.

I like to ride quickly where I can and think it is safe to so, and on some local descents that could be at more than 80 kph/50 mph. I don't take stupid risks though, like overtaking streams of vehicles at those speeds. One friend had so many near misses doing that kind of thing that I became reluctant to cycle with him because I didn't want to witness his almost inevitable horrible death! (Fortunately for him, he survived long enough to give up cycling.)

I went out with another rider on a busy road and we got overtaken by a bus. He sprinted after it and drafted it to the next bus stop, then swerved round it when it stopped to drop off passengers. It wasn't long before the bus caught up with him again and squeezed its way past. I just couldn't see the point in taking the risks. I was riding further back at a good average speed, but easing off as the bus slowed so I did not have to overtake it, or it me again.

 

[steveindenmark]

Groningen is a great place to cycle round. I was there earlier in the year.

I am sure you would like your own cycle paths. At least cycle paths that worked correctly.

I must be honest but I didn't quite see what you were getting at.

Steve

 

[MontyVeda]

When you've designed such horrible roads that you need this kind of barmy nonsense to get across and around them, it's time to start over.
...

it's just a bridge... it's really not barmy.

 

[theclaud]

Groningen is a great place to cycle round. I was there earlier in the year.

I am sure you would like your own cycle paths. At least cycle paths that worked correctly.

I must be honest but I didn't quite see what you were getting at.

Steve

Where I live we have one very beautiful and mostly well-functioning one for about five miles along the seafront, and a couple of disused railway ones which are handy escape-chutes from the hills. For everything else, there is a network of existing routes going exactly where I want them to go. They are called roads. My point is that mono-functional roads are a vision of hell.

 

[ColinJ]

I think it makes perfect sense to keep fast-moving traffic and slow-moving cyclists apart. The problem is if that forces much faster cyclists and much slower cyclists together.

On the rare occasions that I used to commute by bike, I tried to average 20 mph. It was a 30 mile round trip so it used to take me about 1.5 hours a day. If I'd had to use cyclepaths where people were pottering about at (say) 7 mph, it would have taken me a very off-putting 4.3 hours!

 

[steveindenmark]

Claud, your the first cyclist that I have come across who does not advocate cycle paths. We have lots in Denmark and I love them. If I lived in London I think I would be pleased to have them as well.



But sometimes we don't and it does not make much difference,



Steve

 

[steve52]

thats it im going dutch