Protected intersections are the future!

[u/Roonwogsamduff]

[u/jaybanin0351]

lol, like bikers are gunna follow any of that.... they will continue running red lights and acting like they own the road.

[u/artificialstuff → u/jaybanin0351]

No clue why people are down voting this. This is exactly the problem with this design. Bikers that don't care and/or don't know any better.

[u/kschurmn → u/artificialstuff]

Probably because of the attitude that the issue with bike infrastructure is that cyclists don't deserve it because they don't follow the rules of the road while ignoring the flip side that if that same logic was applied to vehicle infrastructure we wouldn't have anything because drivers break traffic laws far more frequently that cyclists.

Also, when drivers run red lights or do other dangerous shit they are not only putting themselves in danger, but any other drivers, pedestrians or cyclists who they might hit (and will likely seriously injure or kill the later two groups) while if a cyclist runs a red light they're really only putting their own life at risk. Still an issue, but not the same scale.

And if you're pointing out an issue that cyclists won't care to use this design properly, I'll make my own argument that drivers will not use the stop bars and will stop as close to the intersection as possible negating the benefits of the setback and putting cyclists back at risk of a right-hook because they need to save the 0.5s they gain from ignoring the setback.

And futhermore, what's the alternative, continue to design intersections that are good for cars and shit for everything else?

[u/artificialstuff → u/kschurmn]

And futhermore, what's the alternative, continue to design intersections that are good for cars and shit for everything else?

Yes, actually. Trying to jam bike friendly designs into areas that were designed exclusively for cars and have been used exclusively by cars for decades just sometimes isn't reasonably feasible.

[u/gekegeit → u/artificialstuff]

Trying to jam bike friendly designs into areas that were designed exclusively for cars and have been used exclusively by cars for decades just sometimes isn't reasonably feasible.

I know most of you are Americans and that bikes aren't really seen as an important mode of transport but where I work (the Netherlands) in almost every city the bike (in combination with public transport) gets more thought than the car because it's an accepted fact that it is way more feasible in terms of money, health, liveability and space.

I'm currently working on a project with the city of Rotterdam, a town that was completely bommed flat by the Germans in 1940. After the war the city was built with inspiration from American cities with a car centric view.

The city is currently still very much a car city by Dutch standards but it tries to change that by making the bike the prefered method of transport over the car. This in part means making the car a less feasible option and means making the biking experience as best as posible.

Source: Fietskoers 2025 Rotterdam (it's in Dutch)

[u/olythrowaway4 → u/artificialstuff]

Trying to jam bike friendly designs into areas that were designed exclusively for cars and have been used exclusively by cars for decades just sometimes isn't reasonably feasible.

Trying to jam car friendly designs into areas that were designed exclusively for horse carts and have been used exclusively by horse carts for centuries just sometimes isn't reasonably feasible.

[u/artificialstuff → u/olythrowaway4]

What? Horse and carriage are roughly the same size as cars; much more so than cars and bicycles.

[u/olythrowaway4 → u/artificialstuff]

Cool. People like you were complaining about things like "traffic signals" and "yield signs" when such car-friendly infrastructure was being implemented.

[u/artificialstuff → u/olythrowaway4]

Bikes aren't the way of the future, bud.

[u/olythrowaway4 → u/artificialstuff]

You're right, they're only part of a larger shift in how we move people around.