This is not an American invention, nor is it interchangeable with a roundabout.
The main priority of roundabouts is safe traffic flow for cars, but they can (sometimes) still be very hostile to pedestrians. This type of intersection is meant to prioritize pedestrians as much as possible. The narrow street slows vehicles, and the sidewalk bump outs make people trying to cross the street extra visible and minimize the time they need to be vulnerable in the middle of the road.
Which isn’t to say that roundabouts are necessarily bad, they just serve different purposes
Am I the only one who thinks that the design decision to eliminate the ability for cars to both cross Dexter or make left turns anywhere is a deliberate choice to create driver frustration and reduce favorable attitudes towards building more of these?
Normal protected intersections are terrific and allow automotive traffic to flow in all directions. What was the thought process here?
Dumb considering Michigan also mandates dedicated left turn lanes on every small intersection.
Like okay left allowed on any road but not if it's a split avenue. Instead of making a cheap and usable roundabout or ring road, let's make you play frogger against 3 lanes of traffic so you can do a massive U turn.
Just a guess (looking at the sharrows at the end of the other street) but it's probably a deliberate design to reduce the flow of car traffic on the street.
I’m confused about what is street level and what is curb level but I do like how it appears to prioritize safety of pedestrians and cyclists over everything
Where I live they rarely wait for one, or even pay any attention to traffic signals at all, for that matter. They seem to have an issue with the whole “sharing the road means we have to follow the same rules, otherwise I have no idea what you’re going to do or when you’re going to do it, and that’s how accidents happen” concept.
The shit Americans will create to avoid making a circle...
This is not an American invention, nor is it interchangeable with a roundabout.
The main priority of roundabouts is safe traffic flow for cars, but they can (sometimes) still be very hostile to pedestrians. This type of intersection is meant to prioritize pedestrians as much as possible. The narrow street slows vehicles, and the sidewalk bump outs make people trying to cross the street extra visible and minimize the time they need to be vulnerable in the middle of the road.
Which isn’t to say that roundabouts are necessarily bad, they just serve different purposes
It's also very hard to retrofit a roundabout in tight spaces.
Yep. I visited London for the first time last summer. They have protected pedestrian crossings everywhere and it's really nice. A very walkable city.
We have a lot of them though
Crop circles?
Am I the only one who thinks that the design decision to eliminate the ability for cars to both cross Dexter or make left turns anywhere is a deliberate choice to create driver frustration and reduce favorable attitudes towards building more of these?
Normal protected intersections are terrific and allow automotive traffic to flow in all directions. What was the thought process here?
I think the idea is to discourage drivers from using Thomas, and try to make it the main east-west bike corridor in the area.
Left turns are a fuck you to everyone behind you who knows it would be faster and safer for you to right and U-turn but yet you still hold us back.
We have found the Michigander.
Dumb considering Michigan also mandates dedicated left turn lanes on every small intersection.
Like okay left allowed on any road but not if it's a split avenue. Instead of making a cheap and usable roundabout or ring road, let's make you play frogger against 3 lanes of traffic so you can do a massive U turn.
Just a guess (looking at the sharrows at the end of the other street) but it's probably a deliberate design to reduce the flow of car traffic on the street.
Stopping people from driving directly to where they want to go reduces traffic apparently.
They use it very deliberately in larger cities to just make driving downtown a hassle.
If it's just a bit more annoying, people are less inclined to do it.
I’m confused about what is street level and what is curb level but I do like how it appears to prioritize safety of pedestrians and cyclists over everything
Here's a video that shows what it's like to bike through: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ox1g45ccoQ8
Bit annoying that bikes have to wait for two separate crossing signals to turn, but overall, it looks a lot safer.
Where I live they rarely wait for one, or even pay any attention to traffic signals at all, for that matter. They seem to have an issue with the whole “sharing the road means we have to follow the same rules, otherwise I have no idea what you’re going to do or when you’re going to do it, and that’s how accidents happen” concept.
Lol. Stupid ass take 🤣
Feel free to think so, I’ll be the one still walking after the accident lol
Cool story bro
Thanks! I think I was mostly confused at first because I’ve never seen an intersection of two-way streets that requires cars to turn before
The USA needs more traffic circles.
That weird camera thing that makes it look like the road carpet thing.
Is it not a render or a model? Maybe tilt shift photography?
Does look like the mat I used to have as a kid. Hot wheels go brrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
So... A turnabout, but with extra steps.
Time to buy stock in paint companies.
At least there is no space left for the city to sell ad space on the pavement.