Read on Twitter
This "Dutch-inspired" junction concerns me. What does Dutch inspired mean and should we be inspired? Quick thread... https://twitter.com/Cycling_Embassy/status/1310957728341340163
On approach, we can see that cycle traffic and both left turn and straight ahead motor traffic have simultaneous green phases. This might be ok with low speed & low volume left turning motor traffic but that doesn't look the case in the video. The ped has ignored the lights also.
The red car has cut across the cycle lane that has a green phase. If I am cycling and continuing straight through this junction, I hope left turning motor traffic sees me.
The shape and size of the 'island' means straight ahead cycle traffic veers left first, almost parallel to motor traffic, before quickly turning right into the path of motor traffic to continue straight.
By giving left turning motorists a full green, are they even expecting to encounter cycle traffic? Even though this conflict is being phased out by the Dutch, they at least provide a flashing warning light for motor traffic to expect and give way to cyclists.
In Vancouver Canada, a less advanced solution but used where ever cycle lanes continue through junctions. Not perfect but it's better than nothing (ie: Melbourne).
A key aspect of sustainable safety is predictability. This is critical for all junction users. If a motorist sees a cyclist turning left, will they predict this person is going left? Will they be prepared for the right 'shimmy' that brings the cyclist back into their path?
If cyclists stay in the right lane they, they will need to look back over their shoulder to see if motor traffic is approaching. At this point, I see little use in the corner 'island'. Due to ped crossing, the cycle stop/wait line is also not advanced enough.
Another unDutch feature is the inability for cycle traffic to avoid the signals to make a left turn. During pedestrian green phase, left turn cycle traffic will be held. Pedestrian crossing distance is also increased as they must now cross all lanes in a single manoeuvre.
Of course, space can be constrained and large corner islands and running the cycle lane behind the ped crossing may not be possible but that doesn't seem the case here. On the left, what was proposed, on the right, my version with a few mods.
Traffic conditions are everything so maybe cycle/motor traffic conflicts will be manageable but the directional change being made by cyclists so close to the conflict point with motor traffic doesn't sit well with me. What way are these people going? https://twitter.com/MelbourneWay/status/1258292172119400448?s=20
Here is more footage of the junction. The reason this is a problem is that this is what we could be getting in Ireland. There are a number of things I don't like about it but the late shimmy and full green for motorists are the ones that concerns me most.
Two layouts - on the left is the full Dutch. On the right, the Dutch inspired. In the Dutch, notice where peds wait to cross, how left turning cycles bypass the junction, the location of stop lines for cycles, the crossing distance for peds, the predictable movement...
If space was limited and left turning motor traffic volumes were very low, I think I would prefer to run a kerb up as close to the junction mouth as possible and allow cycles to continue straight. Also add a warning for motor traffic to expect and give way to cyclist on the left.
So the moral of the story is, it's important to understand what is good about the Dutch model and adapt what works for us. We cannot copy and paste everything but doing things half-arsed isn't advisable either.
