Metro Vancouver Bike/Pedestrian Discussion

[Porfiry]

Oh ok, I guess you're right then. I'm not too sure why that aspect would create more problems than a 4-way stop, though. Most people understand that rule. Too bad the article doesn't provide a reference to the actual study.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by agrant

Obviously, but when people arrive at the same time... which I think is what the article was referring to.

If you arrive at the same time, you both enter the traffic circle at the same time and it doesn't matter. Because you're always moving towards parallel and are travelling at approximately the same speed, there is little risk of a T-Bone collision. If a driver isn't sure, they yield to the left.

This is the same thing that happens at a four-way stop sign, except that if you both go at the same time the risk of a T-bone collision is quite high.

[agrant]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

If you arrive at the same time, you both enter the traffic circle at the same time and it doesn't matter. Because you're always moving towards parallel and are travelling at approximately the same speed, there is little risk of a T-Bone collision. If a driver isn't sure, they yield to the left.

This is the same thing that happens at a four-way stop sign, except that if you both go at the same time the risk of a T-bone collision is quite high.

I think we're talking about two different types of traffic circles here. The only ones you tend to see in the city of Vancouver are former four way intersections with an island in the middle. So one lane all the way around. They're very tight, so you can't treat them the same. If you enter one of these at the same time as a vehicle perpendicular to you, you risk colliding into each other. Also, if you look up the rights of way for a four way... you'll see that you have to yield to the right, not left.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Porfiry

You are supposed to yield to any traffic that's already in the circle, which means yielding to traffic on the left. Once you're in the circle, everyone else must yield to you.

Can you substantiate that? I was under the impression that only applied to full-sized traffic circles with lane markings.

This is a pretty clear example of why there's confusion about them. Having said that, as I cyclist I like them because they slow traffic down. My rule is pretty simple - if there's a car that looks like it's going to conflict with my path, let him go through unless he's obviously stopping for me. No matter where the car's coming from. It's pretty much the rule I use no matter where I'm riding, and it's never caused any problems so far.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Porfiry

You are supposed to yield to any traffic that's already in the circle, which means yielding to traffic on the left. Once you're in the circle, everyone else must yield to you.

OK, I found what I think is an authoritative source on this - the ICBC "Learn to Drive Smart" guide, which can be downloaded from: http://www.icbc.com/driver-licensing...river-full.pdf

There are two types of "circle" used for traffic control - the "traffic circle" which is the one you see replacing 4-way stops, and the "roundabout" which are the larger versions with lane markings, such as the one at UBC at 16th Ave and Westbrook Mall.

For "traffic circles" (the smaller type used on residential streets) the rule is "yield to the traffic on the right". For "roundabouts" the rule is "yield to traffic already in the roundabout". See pages 46 through 48 of the above-referenced guide.

[Porfiry]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

For "traffic circles" (the smaller type used on residential streets) the rule is "yield to the traffic on the right". For "roundabouts" the rule is "yield to traffic already in the roundabout". See pages 46 through 48 of the above-referenced guide.

Page 46 says "Yield to any traffic in the traffic circle. If another vehicle arrives at the traffic circle at the same time as you do, yield to the vehicle on the right." This is what I said, so I'm not sure what's in contention.

The yield to the right is a tie-breaking rule, the rest of the time you yield to traffic in the circle.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Porfiry

Page 46 says "Yield to any traffic in the traffic circle. If another vehicle arrives at the traffic circle at the same time as you do, yield to the vehicle on the right." This is what I said, so I'm not sure what's in contention.

The difference is that in a roundabout you never have to yield to vehicles on the right. If two drivers traveling at right angles arrive at a roundabout at the same time, they can both proceed because the larger roundabout gives them both room to enter simultaneously (in the absence of other traffic).

With a traffic circle, if you've both arrived at the circle at the same time you have to yield to a vehicle on the right.

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by officedweller

Couple articles from The Sun - i.e. focus on bikes this week due to the conference:Vancouver’s traffic circles, narrow paths create dangers for cyclists
http://www.vancouversun.com/health/V...725/story.html

I went hunting for the original material on which this news was reported. What I found was this: http://www.ehjournal.net/content/8/1/47/

This study cites ROUNDABOUTS as being safety concerns, not TRAFFIC CIRCLES. So reporting that "traffic circles" are a problem is very misleading.

My own sense as a cyclist is that traffic circles are safer than uncontrolled intersections because they force vehicles to slow down, which gives everyone more time to see each other and take evasive action. I'd be quite surprised if they turn out to be less safe than uncontrolled intersections.

[Porfiry]

Originally Posted by aberdeen5698

I went hunting for the original material on which this news was reported. What I found was this: http://www.ehjournal.net/content/8/1/47/

This study cites ROUNDABOUTS as being safety concerns, not TRAFFIC CIRCLES. So reporting that "traffic circles" are a problem is very misleading.

Huh, that review is from 2009. Either the Vancouver Sun is digging up an old document that barely even mentions Vancouver, or they're using some mysterious data that they won't point us to. Either way, that's just poor journalism by the Vancouver Sun (hardly a surprise).

[aberdeen5698]

Originally Posted by Porfiry

Huh, that review is from 2009. Either the Vancouver Sun is digging up an old document that barely even mentions Vancouver, or they're using some mysterious data that they won't point us to. Either way, that's just poor journalism by the Vancouver Sun (hardly a surprise).

Well the media are basically just repeating a UBC press release: http://www.publicaffairs.ubc.ca/2012...-for-cyclists/

Unfortunately the press release doesn't cite anything except for comments by one of their professors, Kay Teschke. So I Googled the professor and came up with the study.

So the big question is why is this professor suddenly coming out with this statement? Is there new evidence? If so, I haven't been able to find it. So for me, two things stand out:

1) Without any reference as to the source of her conclusions, this is really no more authoritative than some anonymous Internet post.

2) The implication that residential traffic circles are dangerous is very misleading, at least based on the evidence I could dig up.

[SFUVancouver]

I noticed that as part of the reconstruction of Heather Street beside Westbank's 700 West 8th, the original painted bike lane on the Heather Street bike route has been replaced with the safer buffered style of painted bike lane. The buffer improves vehicle passing conditions for cyclists. These are the preferred approach for building in greater spatial separation for cyclists on lower-volume routes that don't warrant full physical separation. This is also the style that New York is using for its enlarged network of cycle tracks, though they are finding that the lack of full physical separation results in their new bike lanes being routinely blocked by parked vehicles.


Taken by SFUVancouver, June 27th, 2012.

For the sake of comparison, here's a stretch of unbuffered painted bike lanes Smithe, just after the Cambie Street Bridge. A little ways ahead of this photo the west-bound Smithe street bike lane ends altogether after intersecting with Beatty Streety where there are north-south unbuffered painted bike lanes between the travel lane and parked cars.

Taken by SFUVancouver, June 25th, 2012.

[officedweller]

I think the bike route intersects with Beatty St. at the next block and Beatty has the same unbuffered painted bike lanes.

[sacrifice333]

A couple of pics I snapped last night as the Velocity2012 delegates rode by The Village on their Montreal Bixi, Capital Bike Share, and Melbourne Bike Share bikes:


Untitled by sacrifice333, on Flickr


Untitled by sacrifice333, on Flickr

VPD Bike Squad was stopping traffic for the group to keep them flowing. Pretty cool seeing some 1200 bixi's cruise by!

Can't wait for a Public Bike Share to be implemented next year!

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by sacrifice333

Can't wait for a Public Bike Share to be implemented next year!

I have heard this is a done deal, but does anyone know where I can see detailed maps of where the bike stations will be located?

[sacrifice333]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I have heard this is a done deal, but does anyone know where I can see detailed maps of where the bike stations will be located?

I believe at this point RFPs have been requested, and potentially submitted, by several groups including Public Bike Share (local), Bixi (montreal), and some others.

You won't find any maps or finite details yet.

Implementation is supposed to be (FINGERS CROSSED) Spring 2013.

[jlousa]

Stations haven't been announced they aren't that far along yet, but the details of amount of stations and bike have been, beleive I posted them here a couple of weeks back.

[tybuilding]

Separated Paths and Round abouts in Netherlands

How the larger round abouts are done overseas. I rode the round about for the Golden Ears way at 113 Ave and that one is poorly done. Cyclists have to merge with traffic. From separated paths merge in, merge back out later.

Google Maps

[Porfiry]

Wow...

Seawall proposed to link Kitsilano and Jericho beaches
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/met...625/story.html

The Vancouver park board is considering completing a gap in the city’s seawall between Kitsilano and Jericho beaches after a private donor has offered to kick in tens of millions for the project.

The donor, who wishes to remain anonymous for now, has made a very serious — though not unlimited — offer to finance the project, mayor’s staff said Wednesday.

The donor is a longtime city resident and philanthropist who loves the seawall, which the city has contemplated extending for years.

Though Mayor Gregor Robertson has lent his support to the concept, it is sure to generate controversy as it may require altering the shoreline in front of some of Vancouver’s most expensive real estate.

Vancouver park board chairwoman Sarah Blyth said Wednesday the project would be put through a public consultation process.

“The first part is speaking to the community [in the proposed seawall area] and the people of Vancouver because we can’t do anything without knowing if that’s what they want,” she said.

...

[golog]

Over and above any project in the city, I would love for the seawall to be completed with that gap from Kits to Jericho. It would also facilitate a lot of marathons and such; cheaper/better route/fewer road closures.

[jlousa]

This a proposal I could support, I don't know if the city has the funds to do it but it's something that would be a positive all round.