What do you think of the intersection? Where else do you think needs something like this? Do you think this would improve your safety as a cyclist or pedestrian?
This is great. The only thing I don't like is that we still rely on drivers following "no turn on red," but that's a nationwide problem rather than this particular intersection. 😅
@@DaigoroToyama we really gotta push it citywide as well, people live all over this city and where there are people living, we need to block right on red. i wish super important signs like that were in the like top 3 languages of the area too..
For me it's more about a preview of things to come (I hope). I don't ride near this specific intersection very often at all, but there are a lot of other intersections that I do ride through that would be perfect for this, and I'm thrilled that this option is now (hopefully!!) on the table!
Every intersection across America should look like this! We need more people on bikes, not less. We must allow safe travel for cyclists. It's ridiculous, our politicians talk about "global warming," give subsidies and tax cuts to corporations and yet cyclists get severe pushback from local municipalities.
This!! It's really hard to be in the comments section on UA-cam as someone who rides their bike occasionally, because supporting biking in cities means you get ridiculed, told you have no brain cells, belittled and battered by every person ever for some reason. Let's get at least SOME people out of their cars, doesn't less traffic benefit everyone?
@@BestSideCycling i havent heard of NYC getting protected intersections but i believe theres at least a city in Colorado that has at least one.. uh and its common in Ottawa in Ontario Canada
Yeah, right. Might as well ban all cars . This intersection is so inefficient. It took the rider 70 seconds to navigate a simple intersection. Installing these everywhere would cause total gridlock.
Please! Some people just want to bike and not have to drive all the time. Let's hope that this design will spread, at least in other places on the west coast.
Big fan of this. Vision Zero. I rode through there the other week when it was still taped off and not quite complete and I'll be making regular use of it in the future. One thing I'm also happy about is how much better the Seattle Center is connected to points east since completion of the 99 tunnel. There used to be no way continuing west from here (Thomas and Dexter), blocked by Aurora. You used to have to go south to Denny or brave the Broad street tunnel - yikes. Harrison, Thomas, and John are all reconnected across the 99 tunnel now so Seattle Center and South Lake Union are much more unified and the area is reasonable on bike or on foot again. (I'm guess one might have to go back to the 1932 opening of the Aurora bridge for a time when these connections existed.)
You got to the intersection at 0:59 and finally got out at 2:09, that's 70 seconds to get through the intersection. I appreciate the focus on safety in the intersection but making it so bikes have to wait for the signal to turn twice before getting through the intersection turning left will inevitably cause impatience. This is still a step in the right direction for sure, but I think more can be done to not only ensure the safety of cyclists but also how quickly they can get through town.
I’ve seen videos about Dutch traffic signals (“Not Just Bikes” of course) and they would not make the bike and pedestrian wait so long just in case a car might want to go through.
@adamanderson9107 So, traffic should just go when they see a gap right? that's all traffic? or just pedestrians and bikes? or just cars? where is the line. 0:59 - 1:33 there's cross traffic of 4 cars + bike that you'd have to jack rabbit between them? what happens when you scale this up and traffic becomes more dense? it becomes a free for all? 1:42 - 2:09 there are vehicles turning and the same principal applies, he should just jack rabbit in between vehicles? so now vehicles are forced to wait? You're short term thinking leads to issues when these designs scale with traffic and usage. Just like with no right hand turns on a red, the extra few seconds waiting leads to less deaths because statistically. We all (you included) can't safely navigate the intersections and people die.
Great to see an intersection safe for peds in Seattle. Will the City start doing this proactively, or only in response to SPD murdering a pedestrian? Rest in peace to Jaahnavi Kandula.
I agree that it's important to note that this is the same intersection where Kandula was needlessly killed by that reckless SPD officer, but also, the plans for this improved intersection had already been made and scheduled before that incident took place.
that is so awesome!!! I am loving SDOT recently, they have all the power and their are showing up for safe and pleasant Seattle. So many of these smart changes popping up.
the geometry and the modal diverter for cars are great! it seems as though having a signal is overkill though. this intersection somewhere in the netherlands for example would likely just have yield lines for traffic control. this would greatly speed up the two stage left hand turn for bikes and prevent needless delay. at protected intersections, bikes should be able to stop at the forward-most stop bar and make free right hand turns, so having to stop at the nearside stop bar whenever there is a red light doesn't make too much sense. but again the layout looks great, and because of that, all the safety measures are already in place to just turn off the signal in the future :)
Thanks for explaining! Makes sense, to be honest I'm not even 100% what the intention with bicycle right turns are with this current design. I think people will ultimately treat it like a yield just by regular use and adaptation until there's heavier cycling / pedestrian traffic but we'll wait and see!
Washington drivers still hate cyclists and motorcyclist. Filtering and splitting is illegal for motorcycles. It will all pass but it’s taking too long :/
This is incredible, glad to see these popping up in US cities! Look at how carefully those cars are driving through the intersection. It’s incredible that the lights respond to cyclists without having to dismount, awkwardly reposition your bike, find the button, press it, reorient your bike, get back on, wait 3-6 minutes for the light to turn, and then have 20 seconds to cross while the crosswalk sounds an alarm that makes you feel like you just robbed a jewelry store and oncoming cars edge their noses into your crosswalk while you attempt to get moving while hoping beyond all hope that they won’t hit you.
It's nice, but I have two main complaints: 1. The pedestrian traffic light and button should be on the island between bike path and road imo, to minimize crossing distance. 2. I don't really think this particular intersection needs traffic lights at all
The traffic light masts on the pedestrian island are equipped with pedestrian buttons. They didn't take advantage of the pedestrian improvements incorporated into this intersection design, so you have to look for it in the video.
I assume it’s a big improvement, but to make it a dutch intersection the lights ought to be placed further out towards the curbs. Super weird where they are now and I guess more expensive. Then there should be an island in between lanes and a second pedestrians phase for the strech where pedestrians cross trafic coming from the right!
Probably worth to note (based on Google Street view) that Thomas has been right turn only before this improvement. This is interesting indeed. However, seeing that Dexter is 1 travel lane each direction with a shared center turn I have to wonder if a roundabout would have been a cheaper and smoother solution.
I wouldn't call this just a protected intersection. It's more of a hybrid between a filtered crossing & protected intersection. This is important to note, because safety doesn't stop at the intersection; it continues onto the restricted axis as well. If designed properly - low speeds, hardly any cars - that axis probably wouldn't need a cycletrack, or could be used for buses with a busgate modal filter. At the very least tho, it makes crossing the road much safer and easier (up to a few hundred metres up or even more). If you want to know more about this type of stuff, here are some keywords: Low Traffic Neighborhood (LTN), busgate, modal filter, APNR modal filter, filtered crossing, 'Disentangling car/bike/transit routes', greenway (New Zealand context), cycling street, 'Dutch road hierarchy', Ontvlechten, 'The Bike Lanes You Can't See - Ontvlechten', hoofdnetten, plusnetten, 'circulation plan', 'Gnent circulation plan', Access For Everyone (A4E, in a NZ context)
I took this intersection for the first time riding home from work this week, and I was so impressed with how safe and seamless it was! Taking a right turn without worry about cars? It feels good!
Albuquerque, NM. We have a good number of mixed used paths, and it's not hard to hook up these paths and cut through residential areas to get to where you need to go on a bike, but the infrastructure at intersections and for shared car/bike lanes is pretty terrifying!
More of this please! I ride to work every day through downtown and I am guessing bike commuting has quadrupled in the last 12 months. It will be amazing to see what happens in the next several years as more people adapt to using protected lanes to get around.
Although the Netherlands tends to use separate traffic lights so when bicyclists and pedestrians get a green light, all turning traffic will get a red arrow, banning turns.
I regret not filming more of the North / South path! It felt just fine on my Brompton and all those I observed during my hour there filming. I'm just hoping for no issues with moreso less confident riders running into it for the first time on the downhill side
@@BestSideCycling I was traveling north on Dexter on Sunday when I came across it and I was startled by the curb protection forcing me to swerve slightly. At first I thought "who thought this was a good idea", but after a moment I realized the benefit in safety and protection from cars.
A proper Dutch Junction - that's awesome! I do think the City should put out big signs with a QR code on them for the first week or two, that will link to instructions on how to navigate Dutch Junctions - For both cars and bikes. Instead of hoping people will just figure it out eventually. Because people (especially in cars) _WILL_ complain loudly at first b/c they don't know what to do. EPO: Education and Public Outreach is important and should be implemented into these great plans!
Isn't it a bit dangerous putting out signs with QR codes, as that will encourage drivers to use their phones to grab a pic when they should be thinking about driving?
@@jimpatterson5333 There may be a point there wrt to the new centre median. more generally a junction with a cycle / pedestrian path round the outside makes little difference to a motor vehicle driver - all that is needed is to follow the signals. In Seattle they wouldhave had media coverage and information campaigns as a normal intervention? The contrast on QRs aimed at drivers is interesting. In the UK firm policy for many years, based on resulting risks, is that using a handheld phone whilst driving (including whilst stationary in traffic) is as unacceptable as drink-driving.
Probably not long but I didn't capture enough of the North South direction to show the narrowing and long islands on the side with trees. They'll have to be very committed.
This just seems complicated? I get you have the room and are able to do something like this at the intersection vs. a roundabout or larger scale operation. But I feel like humanizing all forms of travel to one streamlined mode through the intersection is the way to go rather than trying to create a separate pedestrian path, bike lane AND car divider all going through the intersection in each of the four cardinal directions. Having to wait for potentially 3-4 signal phases just to be able to complete a passage through this intersection seems really bad given the first thought of an updated layout like this would be for more streamlined throughput and instead it looks like it was done for safety.
You mentioned a tiny bit at the end about the context but that is a huge deal. What are the traffic patterns & rates in this intersection? Was it a high injury area? Seems like it could be a low risk way to introduce the type in a place that didn’t need it before implementing it where it is needed.
This intersection was famously deadly. There was a tragic story just last year of a young woman who was killed by a cop speeding through the intersection in response to an emergency.
Well, that didn't take long. Was biking north-bound through this intersection and encountered a driver making a left turn when 1) they had a red light and 2) the bike and pedestrian crossing signals were go. Goes to show that it doesn't matter how well you design an intersection if the drivers are too stupid or reckless to read.
Did the driver stop once they realized there were pedestriants crossing? If so, the intersection design still helped. It's not just about enforcing traffic signals, protected intersections are also designed to improve sightlines when turning.
@limitedward they braked HARD when when I blared my air horn at them and pointed at the green cycling light and the white pedestrian crossing light. Those two are easily visible from the stop line, as is the "No turn on red" sign and my own approaching bike. There was no indication they would have stopped if I didn't make my presence clear as loudly as possible. I understand what you mean about rhe sight lines. It's just that the sight lines are effectively unchanged from before. There were no obstructions before, and there are no obstructions now. This is purely the case of an incompetent driver not bothering to follow the rules and not bothering to check if they're endangering others by doing so.
2:53 Non-American here, can someone explain to me how pedestrian lights work? So they turn green, and then the go blinking red with a timer? I assume he is not illegaly crossing for this video, so red blinking means you can go? Is it like a warning, that the light will turn truely red once the timer hits zero? Am I allowed to still go onto the intersection once it started blinking? Is it a thing where can basically go, as long as I make sure that I have finished crossing before the timer hits zero?
Okay, now that I have typed it out I feel like I answered my own question. At first I thought it was counter intuitive, but it kinda makes sense. Are things like traffic light different on a state to basis or is it a federal thing. I feel like I was traffic lights with timers, but they had a timer on the green phase, which basically counted to zero and then it flipped to red. The red timer would then basically tell you how long it is going to stay red. That would be different from this pedestrian light. But I am also not sure, if I saw that in a video about the USA or if it was in Japan
The pattern here is generally the walking person lights up for you to cross. When it turns to the orange hand or flashing it's generally understood as don't start crossing but finish crossing if you're in the intersection. Some of the newer intersections have a timer like this one so you can plan exactly!
I bike through here every day to get to work. It took them forever to complete, but I was plesantly surprised that the outcome was more bike and pedestrian oriented. I didn't realize it was this big of a deal, though. That's cool.
This is SDOT, traffic safety isn't something that they really care that much about, unless it's pedestrians and cyclists. This appears to be an abnormally well-thought out design, but they have a history of pushing these sorts of BS things over things that actually make the system work more effectively. Safety and efficiency are not priorities and you'll se a bunch of illegal traffic control devices, like those bicycle shaped lights, which just add to the confusion. There needs to be a whole lot more enforcement of rules in general, but especially on cyclists and pedestrians that don't appear to know what their rights and responsibilities are. It shouldn't be on the car, and motorcycle, drivers to keep up with a lot of the completely intuitive things being added to the streets. The intersection between 15th ave NE and Pinehurst is a particularly jarring example. Rather than do the obvious thing of make north bound 15th take a 90 right turn before continuing. That continues to go straight, it's the south bound 15th continuing that is being made to turn 90 degrees to continue. There is a bike lane, and one that's actually used, that goes through that intersection and with the new change, you still have the issue of north bound traffic having to crane necks to see cyclists, but the south bound traffic that never had any issues seeing the cyclists has to stop. It's absolute madness. I don't think most people are going to be opposed to things like delaying the green phase a bit to allow pedestrians to get out further where they can see, and be seen, but a lot of this is just mindless BS for the purpose of chasing car drivers out of their cars without any real thought put into it.
I was laughing so hard sseing you waiting in the middle of the crossing lane in the 3rd scene at 0:12 I think it's a nice step in a good direction, cant wait till bikes and pedestrians have a green light all the time and cars having to wait after getting registered by this blue sign thing
Not convinced about that orange right turn. If the car is incoming and the light is already orange, they'll just to rush through without stopping anyways. Just make it dedicated full length green for peds and cyclists. Since there are sensors for cyclists, it won't be holding up traffic periodically anyways.
@@Pystro Right turn on red is also “go but give right of way”, with complete stop required. And yet there are hundreds of accidents every year caused by these right turns. Flashing orange will not be better. Now the car incoming doesn’t even have to stop before turning.
This is great, but honestly I'm not a fan of the 2-stage left turn this demands of the cyclist. Yes, it prioritizes safety, but it takes what used to be a quick maneuver pre-improvement (turning left on a green light if you're in the one travel lane w/cars, or a more dangerous but still quick left turn from the bike lane after checking for safety) and turns it into possibly minutes of waiting. That's so annoying that I will not be surprised if a ton of ppl just refuse to follow those rules and go whenever there's a gap
Nice video! That seems to be a major improvement from the situation before: No right turns on reds, leading lights for cyclists and pedestrians as well as the protected waiting areas is the way to go. However, this make cycling saver by the expense of needing more time for a left turn (two traffic light cycles for a bike rider instead of one for cars). So, there is still some room for improvement.
It's shocking how easy the bike traffic lights are able to be confused with car traffic lights. All it really takes is low enough visual resolution to not be able to read the "bicycle light" sign from across the intersection and you're also guaranteed to not be able to resolve that the green shape is a bicycle. Obviously in real life someone with healthy eyes would be easily be able to see both of these, but people with worse than normal eye sight do exist. Also, in this situation it's just the difference between being given a reminder that cyclists and pedestrians have priority, and having to remember it (if you start going on the cycle light turning green). But in other intersections, this might actually create serious risk. Maybe the border around the cycle traffic lights should be a different color, like "cycle lane green" instead of orange. Then you'd have to be color blind _and_ have bad eye sight in order for the only hints to what's a cycle traffic light versus motor vehicle traffic light to be the positioning and the very very very slightly smaller size. In Germany, cycle traffic lights are roughly half as wide as the motor vehicle traffic lights (but we also use the "near side of the intersection" traffic light placement, which makes very small traffic lights for slower traffic more feasible).
If you lack the visual acuity required to resolve a bike symbol from that distance, then you need corrective lenses to legally drive. I think the light seems harder to distinguish in video than in person. These types of bicycle lights appear all over Seattle, and I've never seen a driver get confused by them.
@@LimitedWard Indeed, you _would_ need lenses. But how many countries require regular eye exams as a prerequisite for keeping your license? And yes, the lights are certainly harder to distinguish on video than in person. Which is why I used my inability to do so from the video to deduce that there isn't a problem for the average diver, but for a person with _some (unknown)_ lack of visual acuity.
I like the design from an aspect of pedestrian/cyclist safety, but it seems so tech heavy. I don't know if this intersection looks different in rush hour but I believe a roundabout would have worked good here instead of all these sensors and traffic lights. Roundabouts can be quiet small and still allow trucks to move through!.
Only thing that annoys me about all kinds of intersection rebuilds like this is that they usually make the traffic signal farther away than it used to be, which allows cars to pull into the crosswalk. There's easily enough room there to put it in the median without blocking emergency services. Looks like there's also room to put in a refuge island, but that's a little too advanced for America. Apart from that, this is cool to see. Would love to visit this neighborhood someday on my bike.
Yup... it's Seattle's goal to kill the car. Has been for quite awhile now. Personally, I can't stand it. Bike lanes have ruined the traffic flow in many neighborhoods around the city. What one was two lanes in both directions, turning into one with bike lanes and a usless center median.... most of which area see a very low amount of bike traffic anyways. As for this protected intersection... I can see bikes blowing the lights or hardly stopping at all as per the norm in this city.
Just rode this Southbound yesterday. I love seeing more infrastructure and testing out what works for bikes and pedestrians! I don' t love having to swerve around the indentations. However, I'm genuinely concerned about riding it Northbound at speed. I think commuters will run into the "loaves" and get hurt. I very much hope I'm wrong about that.
Yeah it's a legitimate concern. I think the confident and speedy riders will adapt most likely by using the road or alternate routes. In terms of beginners picking up too much speed and colliding, I didn't film enough of the lead in but there are some cues so I'm also hopeful it won't be an issue but let's wait and see how it goes
I think the curves are intended to have cyclists slow down slightly, not swerve, since there is a potential conflict with drivers turning right. It's an extra safety redundancy, which I think is worth the 5 second slowdown.
I think a protected roundabout would’ve been more efficient. From what I can see the speeds are very low so a roundabout should work. The roundabout would also increase efficiency (especially if you have to wait 2 light cycles). From what I can tell there may not have been enough space to build this but you know, better something than nothing.
This is awesome, not quite at Dutch level but pretty damn close. Some elements fell just a bit overdesigned but maybe we do need that in America. Also I feel like on one of the streets, the landscape should be between the cycle lane and car lane instead of between the cycle lane and sidewalk - but I see why it's the former, because of power lines. In any case those should be moved underground.
I agree with some of the commenters that the design feels a bit overengineered. I don't really see the point of having cyclists wait at the outer stop line... in fact that actually defeats some of the benefits of a protected intersection. The whole reason behind the raised bump-outs is to give cyclists a safe space to wait that's in front of the cars so they are more visible. The outer stop line should have been a yield with sharksteeth. My other complaint is in regard to the light timing. The current timing requires cyclists and pedestrians to wait 2 phases to turn left. This will inevitably result in cyclists illegally rolling through the red to save time. It would have been way better to make the bike/pedestrian lights turn green in all directions simultaneously. Something like: - Phase 1: All pedestrians and bikes cross - Phase 2: North/South bound drivers cross - Phase 3: East/West bound drivers cross Lastly, it would have been better if the car signals were placed on the same side as the traffic. By having the signals on the opposite side, it encourages drivers to stop in the crosswalk rather than at the stop line. Overall, I think it's still a massive improvement, but it does demonstrate SDOT's lack of experience building designs like this.
Personally, I think that center median and the corner medians need some reflective or brightly colored delineators. I’ve noticed while driving larger vehicles it’s difficult to see curbs and I consider myself a pretty good driver. Don’t even get me started on idiot drivers
I added to add more context here. Even before these changes, this intersection didn't have cars being able to cross or make left turns as this whole cross-street is being built as a walking/cycling corridor so round-about wouldn't quite fit that here.
Sure, a roundabout can be used but you really need to ask: What is possible for the least amount spent. Roundabouts are used when space isn't a limiting factor. Same holds true when a roundabout is used without a bike path, just with a patch of different coloured asphalt. Plenty of them are used, in NL. Money is always a limiting factor in any infrastructure project. What surprises me is the width, as it gets used more, the paths will be too narrow.
Design looks good, except for WAY too much visual clutter. I think Dutch protected intersections usually have a much cleaner design language that isnt distracting.
You could've improved this video a lot by taking drone footage while the cars were turning and you were crossing, Or drone footage of the bike going through. You already had the drone there from what I could tell.
Yea I'm confused, why is there a barrier in the middle of Thomas St, what if a car wants to continue straight or take a left turn? To be honest, as a biker I would head straight for that center barrier and take the left turn as soon as there was a gap instead of waiting through 2 lights. I live in Philly where you have to ride more aggressively :)
i don't know...this all looks so complicated to me. for these places that aren't too busy maybe they should just have traffic circles instead of four-way lights.
I was super-excited to discover a new, innovative & safer intersection design... but was unwilling to endure the assault of the soundtrack! Self-preservation wins out over curiosity in the hierarchy of needs.
I feel like this make smore sense for a much busier intersection. This intersection is in a real quiet area with low traffic. What this is really though is just another part of Seattle's plans to make driving in the city so miserable that people just won't drive at all
Looks great! But, does it protect citizens crossing legally from our wonderful Seattle police who want to speed through going 74 mph in a 25 because they feel like it? Destroying an entire family in the process as they murder their daughter for no conceivable reason and then laugh about it on the radio later saying that she had no value as a person? Because, this definitely looks like a step in the right direction, except for you know, the last person Seattle PD murdered at a crosswalk. Wouldn't have saved her. Probably won't save you. Maybe from other citizens driving cars, definitely not from Seattle PD.
It's a good vid. Could I be greedy and ask for an even wider slow, high shot of the whole thing next time so I can see all of it at once + how it works? Commenting from a Brit viewpoint, we call these CYCLOPS Junctions (Cycle Optimised Protected Signalised). We call them "outies" or "innies" if the cycle track is on the outside or inside of the walking path. I don't like calling something "Dutch", as car-brained traffic engineers will build something missing out a lot of safety features that would exist in NL, and still call it Dutch when it is completely different ! We also find here that the first one build in any city gets a lot of detail below-best and may need to be adjusted, because they don't want advice from other cities. The 2nd one is better of they are listening, Here can I point to a few details? I think in the USA they like to try and treat bicycles like cars, when they are very different. I have seen all these problems in the UK from time to time. - IMO the cycle tracks are too narrow - 2 people eg mon and kid should be able to cycle side by side comfortably on a one-way lane. We have this problem in the UK, except in a few places. Still education to be done. - The SUV size curbs on the tracks make the useable lanes a foot narrower, since pedals can't go above them. In NL the cycle track curbs would be 50mm high and sloped to avoid pedal strike. - The light sequencing is strange. Why does a cycle have to stop 2 or 3 times? The best I have seen is to have a third period when all the ped/cycle lights go green, so a ped can cross one or two streets, and a cycle can go all round at one time. That is especially true with a one way circulation; you will have cycles wanting to go back the way they came crossing one road the wrong way, rather than three the right way. A problem if it is busy. - Lastly, I don't understand why lights stop cycles from going straight around to the right, or stop cycles when they reach the pedestrian path. IMO that's treating cycles like cars again - when pedestrians and cycles mix fine where sightlines are good, as here. It's extra cost that is not needed imo. And congratulations on having a Brompton. They are great.
It's the "first in Seattle", but what about the country? This is the first I've heard of this. The only other time I saw something outstanding was in Cupertino, CA. They had these bike separation blocks.
Since this reflects better overall safety, and since we're talking about normalized cycling and Dutch style engineering, then you probably ought to be entirely normalized yourself without the bike helmet on. Personally I wear riding caps and go capless when it's dimmer and with heavy clouds.
Yeah this is dumb. This is a horrible setup and you accidentally showed it with your left turn. You blocked anyone behind you from going straight, and you’re only 1 bike. The turning left lane is just to shallow. It only works if you’re the only cyclist on the road. Another Seattle fail. Please be more critical in your reviews, let’s not praise bad design.
@@drivers99 No. On my routes, the perpendicular bike lane is not marked at all and is completely blocked by cars, making it a nightmare to try to find it. This new design is so clear where to start your left turn. Look up diagrams for a "Hook Left" or "Copenhagen Left" and you'll see what I mean.
@@bradybrother100 oh ok, yeah, I get you. We have those in my city too. It's so slow though. You have to wait for the light to cycle one direction and then you have to wait for the light to change again for the other direction.
Protected intersections need to be everywhere two high traffic streets and roads meet where bike lanes are involved. There's a roundabout in downtown Chico, CA where the bike lanes are pulled up to sidewalk level, and the city is reworking a major urban road soon to feature half protection. This needs to come to my city
What do you think of the intersection? Where else do you think needs something like this? Do you think this would improve your safety as a cyclist or pedestrian?
this is a dream come true, a protected intersection in seattle ;w; just needs.. a few.. bollardsssssss
This is great. The only thing I don't like is that we still rely on drivers following "no turn on red," but that's a nationwide problem rather than this particular intersection. 😅
@@DaigoroToyama we really gotta push it citywide as well, people live all over this city and where there are people living, we need to block right on red.
i wish super important signs like that were in the like top 3 languages of the area too..
I find it confusing from a bike perspective. But think that is just being unfamiliar with the system. Certainly seems safer for bikes and pedestrians.
just use roundabouts
My partner doesn't understand how excited I am about this intersection. I'm glad others do though 😆
Hahaha yes just call this channel Best Side Concrete XD
For me it's more about a preview of things to come (I hope). I don't ride near this specific intersection very often at all, but there are a lot of other intersections that I do ride through that would be perfect for this, and I'm thrilled that this option is now (hopefully!!) on the table!
Every intersection across America should look like this! We need more people on bikes, not less. We must allow safe travel for cyclists. It's ridiculous, our politicians talk about "global warming," give subsidies and tax cuts to corporations and yet cyclists get severe pushback from local municipalities.
This!! It's really hard to be in the comments section on UA-cam as someone who rides their bike occasionally, because supporting biking in cities means you get ridiculed, told you have no brain cells, belittled and battered by every person ever for some reason. Let's get at least SOME people out of their cars, doesn't less traffic benefit everyone?
Haha what's it like in New York are there similar intersections?
@@BestSideCycling i havent heard of NYC getting protected intersections but i believe theres at least a city in Colorado that has at least one.. uh and its common in Ottawa in Ontario Canada
that's because cyclist ride around like entitled assholes, that only think laws apply and not physics.
Yeah, right. Might as well ban all cars . This intersection is so inefficient. It took the rider 70 seconds to navigate a simple intersection. Installing these everywhere would cause total gridlock.
This is amazing! A dream come true and I hope these intersections spread far and wide across the whole country. Good job Seattle!
Please! Some people just want to bike and not have to drive all the time. Let's hope that this design will spread, at least in other places on the west coast.
Big fan of this. Vision Zero. I rode through there the other week when it was still taped off and not quite complete and I'll be making regular use of it in the future.
One thing I'm also happy about is how much better the Seattle Center is connected to points east since completion of the 99 tunnel. There used to be no way continuing west from here (Thomas and Dexter), blocked by Aurora. You used to have to go south to Denny or brave the Broad street tunnel - yikes. Harrison, Thomas, and John are all reconnected across the 99 tunnel now so Seattle Center and South Lake Union are much more unified and the area is reasonable on bike or on foot again. (I'm guess one might have to go back to the 1932 opening of the Aurora bridge for a time when these connections existed.)
You got to the intersection at 0:59 and finally got out at 2:09, that's 70 seconds to get through the intersection. I appreciate the focus on safety in the intersection but making it so bikes have to wait for the signal to turn twice before getting through the intersection turning left will inevitably cause impatience. This is still a step in the right direction for sure, but I think more can be done to not only ensure the safety of cyclists but also how quickly they can get through town.
Total inefficiency. In a few weeks I bet everyone will just ignore the poorly timed signals. Another government boondoggle project.
@@colinwinogradoff6794I know I would be "jaywalking" on my second bike ride through this intersection
I’ve seen videos about Dutch traffic signals (“Not Just Bikes” of course) and they would not make the bike and pedestrian wait so long just in case a car might want to go through.
@adamanderson9107 So, traffic should just go when they see a gap right? that's all traffic? or just pedestrians and bikes? or just cars? where is the line. 0:59 - 1:33 there's cross traffic of 4 cars + bike that you'd have to jack rabbit between them? what happens when you scale this up and traffic becomes more dense? it becomes a free for all? 1:42 - 2:09 there are vehicles turning and the same principal applies, he should just jack rabbit in between vehicles? so now vehicles are forced to wait?
You're short term thinking leads to issues when these designs scale with traffic and usage. Just like with no right hand turns on a red, the extra few seconds waiting leads to less deaths because statistically. We all (you included) can't safely navigate the intersections and people die.
Great to see an intersection safe for peds in Seattle. Will the City start doing this proactively, or only in response to SPD murdering a pedestrian? Rest in peace to Jaahnavi Kandula.
I agree that it's important to note that this is the same intersection where Kandula was needlessly killed by that reckless SPD officer, but also, the plans for this improved intersection had already been made and scheduled before that incident took place.
It's weird to be excited about an intersection in a city, but here I am and I think this rocks.
Haha 🤣 same
that is so awesome!!! I am loving SDOT recently, they have all the power and their are showing up for safe and pleasant Seattle. So many of these smart changes popping up.
Haha indeed! Thank all the cities in King County that make a channel like mine possible and engaging :) I always have stuff to show off
the geometry and the modal diverter for cars are great! it seems as though having a signal is overkill though. this intersection somewhere in the netherlands for example would likely just have yield lines for traffic control. this would greatly speed up the two stage left hand turn for bikes and prevent needless delay. at protected intersections, bikes should be able to stop at the forward-most stop bar and make free right hand turns, so having to stop at the nearside stop bar whenever there is a red light doesn't make too much sense. but again the layout looks great, and because of that, all the safety measures are already in place to just turn off the signal in the future :)
Thanks for explaining! Makes sense, to be honest I'm not even 100% what the intention with bicycle right turns are with this current design.
I think people will ultimately treat it like a yield just by regular use and adaptation until there's heavier cycling / pedestrian traffic but we'll wait and see!
Washington drivers still hate cyclists and motorcyclist. Filtering and splitting is illegal for motorcycles. It will all pass but it’s taking too long :/
This is incredible, glad to see these popping up in US cities!
Look at how carefully those cars are driving through the intersection. It’s incredible that the lights respond to cyclists without having to dismount, awkwardly reposition your bike, find the button, press it, reorient your bike, get back on, wait 3-6 minutes for the light to turn, and then have 20 seconds to cross while the crosswalk sounds an alarm that makes you feel like you just robbed a jewelry store and oncoming cars edge their noses into your crosswalk while you attempt to get moving while hoping beyond all hope that they won’t hit you.
It's nice, but I have two main complaints:
1. The pedestrian traffic light and button should be on the island between bike path and road imo, to minimize crossing distance.
2. I don't really think this particular intersection needs traffic lights at all
The traffic light masts on the pedestrian island are equipped with pedestrian buttons. They didn't take advantage of the pedestrian improvements incorporated into this intersection design, so you have to look for it in the video.
I assume it’s a big improvement, but to make it a dutch intersection the lights ought to be placed further out towards the curbs. Super weird where they are now and I guess more expensive. Then there should be an island in between lanes and a second pedestrians phase for the strech where pedestrians cross trafic coming from the right!
the bike sensor on both the inner and outer part is so cool
Probably worth to note (based on Google Street view) that Thomas has been right turn only before this improvement.
This is interesting indeed. However, seeing that Dexter is 1 travel lane each direction with a shared center turn I have to wonder if a roundabout would have been a cheaper and smoother solution.
I wouldn't call this just a protected intersection. It's more of a hybrid between a filtered crossing & protected intersection. This is important to note, because safety doesn't stop at the intersection; it continues onto the restricted axis as well. If designed properly - low speeds, hardly any cars - that axis probably wouldn't need a cycletrack, or could be used for buses with a busgate modal filter. At the very least tho, it makes crossing the road much safer and easier (up to a few hundred metres up or even more).
If you want to know more about this type of stuff, here are some keywords: Low Traffic Neighborhood (LTN), busgate, modal filter, APNR modal filter, filtered crossing, 'Disentangling car/bike/transit routes', greenway (New Zealand context), cycling street, 'Dutch road hierarchy', Ontvlechten, 'The Bike Lanes You Can't See - Ontvlechten', hoofdnetten, plusnetten, 'circulation plan', 'Gnent circulation plan', Access For Everyone (A4E, in a NZ context)
I always found 4th Ave., North coming up from the Fremont bridge heading south towards Seattle to be challenging.
I took this intersection for the first time riding home from work this week, and I was so impressed with how safe and seamless it was! Taking a right turn without worry about cars? It feels good!
This is awesome! I would love to see these types of intersections in my city.
Where do you ride?
Albuquerque, NM. We have a good number of mixed used paths, and it's not hard to hook up these paths and cut through residential areas to get to where you need to go on a bike, but the infrastructure at intersections and for shared car/bike lanes is pretty terrifying!
I live near that area. I'll have to check that out.
Sounds good! Don't miss our Brompton meetup this weekend
More of this please! I ride to work every day through downtown and I am guessing bike commuting has quadrupled in the last 12 months. It will be amazing to see what happens in the next several years as more people adapt to using protected lanes to get around.
I… I… I never thought this could happen! Seattle is finally CHANGING! I hope that this is a pattern for the future.
cool intersection but great production quality! loving the infrastructure coverage
Thanks man! Stay tuned for more.
Although the Netherlands tends to use separate traffic lights so when bicyclists and pedestrians get a green light, all turning traffic will get a red arrow, banning turns.
this is so awesome, here's to more of these!
They did such a great job!!! Ahh I love it. Greetings from Denver! 😄
Love it. Saw a lot of people complaining about how it forces bikes to curve, instead of having straight lines, but it looks fine.
I regret not filming more of the North / South path! It felt just fine on my Brompton and all those I observed during my hour there filming. I'm just hoping for no issues with moreso less confident riders running into it for the first time on the downhill side
@@BestSideCycling I was traveling north on Dexter on Sunday when I came across it and I was startled by the curb protection forcing me to swerve slightly. At first I thought "who thought this was a good idea", but after a moment I realized the benefit in safety and protection from cars.
A proper Dutch Junction - that's awesome! I do think the City should put out big signs with a QR code on them for the first week or two, that will link to instructions on how to navigate Dutch Junctions - For both cars and bikes. Instead of hoping people will just figure it out eventually. Because people (especially in cars) _WILL_ complain loudly at first b/c they don't know what to do. EPO: Education and Public Outreach is important and should be implemented into these great plans!
PS: A Brompton! How bloody civilized!
Isn't it a bit dangerous putting out signs with QR codes, as that will encourage drivers to use their phones to grab a pic when they should be thinking about driving?
@@mattwardman Well, something. People don't know what to do when one morning the whole intersection has changed!
@@jimpatterson5333 There may be a point there wrt to the new centre median. more generally a junction with a cycle / pedestrian path round the outside makes little difference to a motor vehicle driver - all that is needed is to follow the signals.
In Seattle they wouldhave had media coverage and information campaigns as a normal intervention?
The contrast on QRs aimed at drivers is interesting. In the UK firm policy for many years, based on resulting risks, is that using a handheld phone whilst driving (including whilst stationary in traffic) is as unacceptable as drink-driving.
great idea, but that would require Seattle drivers to PAY ATTENTION to the road, and we all know that the majority of them are incapable of that.
I love it! I just wonder how many hours it will take for the first driver to mistaken the bike lane for a turn lane.
Probably not long but I didn't capture enough of the North South direction to show the narrowing and long islands on the side with trees. They'll have to be very committed.
This just seems complicated? I get you have the room and are able to do something like this at the intersection vs. a roundabout or larger scale operation. But I feel like humanizing all forms of travel to one streamlined mode through the intersection is the way to go rather than trying to create a separate pedestrian path, bike lane AND car divider all going through the intersection in each of the four cardinal directions.
Having to wait for potentially 3-4 signal phases just to be able to complete a passage through this intersection seems really bad given the first thought of an updated layout like this would be for more streamlined throughput and instead it looks like it was done for safety.
You mentioned a tiny bit at the end about the context but that is a huge deal. What are the traffic patterns & rates in this intersection? Was it a high injury area? Seems like it could be a low risk way to introduce the type in a place that didn’t need it before implementing it where it is needed.
This intersection was famously deadly. There was a tragic story just last year of a young woman who was killed by a cop speeding through the intersection in response to an emergency.
Well, that didn't take long. Was biking north-bound through this intersection and encountered a driver making a left turn when 1) they had a red light and 2) the bike and pedestrian crossing signals were go. Goes to show that it doesn't matter how well you design an intersection if the drivers are too stupid or reckless to read.
Did the driver stop once they realized there were pedestriants crossing? If so, the intersection design still helped. It's not just about enforcing traffic signals, protected intersections are also designed to improve sightlines when turning.
@limitedward they braked HARD when when I blared my air horn at them and pointed at the green cycling light and the white pedestrian crossing light. Those two are easily visible from the stop line, as is the "No turn on red" sign and my own approaching bike. There was no indication they would have stopped if I didn't make my presence clear as loudly as possible.
I understand what you mean about rhe sight lines. It's just that the sight lines are effectively unchanged from before. There were no obstructions before, and there are no obstructions now.
This is purely the case of an incompetent driver not bothering to follow the rules and not bothering to check if they're endangering others by doing so.
2:53 Non-American here, can someone explain to me how pedestrian lights work? So they turn green, and then the go blinking red with a timer? I assume he is not illegaly crossing for this video, so red blinking means you can go? Is it like a warning, that the light will turn truely red once the timer hits zero? Am I allowed to still go onto the intersection once it started blinking? Is it a thing where can basically go, as long as I make sure that I have finished crossing before the timer hits zero?
Okay, now that I have typed it out I feel like I answered my own question. At first I thought it was counter intuitive, but it kinda makes sense. Are things like traffic light different on a state to basis or is it a federal thing. I feel like I was traffic lights with timers, but they had a timer on the green phase, which basically counted to zero and then it flipped to red. The red timer would then basically tell you how long it is going to stay red. That would be different from this pedestrian light.
But I am also not sure, if I saw that in a video about the USA or if it was in Japan
The pattern here is generally the walking person lights up for you to cross. When it turns to the orange hand or flashing it's generally understood as don't start crossing but finish crossing if you're in the intersection. Some of the newer intersections have a timer like this one so you can plan exactly!
I bike through here every day to get to work. It took them forever to complete, but I was plesantly surprised that the outcome was more bike and pedestrian oriented. I didn't realize it was this big of a deal, though. That's cool.
I did the electrical work on this intersection.
How did it compare to other intersections?
@@BestSideCycling shitty
They need to install object marker signing in the center island to help prevent cars from accidentally going straight through the intersection.
This is SDOT, traffic safety isn't something that they really care that much about, unless it's pedestrians and cyclists. This appears to be an abnormally well-thought out design, but they have a history of pushing these sorts of BS things over things that actually make the system work more effectively. Safety and efficiency are not priorities and you'll se a bunch of illegal traffic control devices, like those bicycle shaped lights, which just add to the confusion.
There needs to be a whole lot more enforcement of rules in general, but especially on cyclists and pedestrians that don't appear to know what their rights and responsibilities are. It shouldn't be on the car, and motorcycle, drivers to keep up with a lot of the completely intuitive things being added to the streets. The intersection between 15th ave NE and Pinehurst is a particularly jarring example. Rather than do the obvious thing of make north bound 15th take a 90 right turn before continuing. That continues to go straight, it's the south bound 15th continuing that is being made to turn 90 degrees to continue. There is a bike lane, and one that's actually used, that goes through that intersection and with the new change, you still have the issue of north bound traffic having to crane necks to see cyclists, but the south bound traffic that never had any issues seeing the cyclists has to stop.
It's absolute madness. I don't think most people are going to be opposed to things like delaying the green phase a bit to allow pedestrians to get out further where they can see, and be seen, but a lot of this is just mindless BS for the purpose of chasing car drivers out of their cars without any real thought put into it.
I wonder how well the bike detector works at night. pretty exciting development either way
Should just work as well! It's based off inductive loops and the sign lights up when you're detected.
We came for Seattle, but we stay for BANANAFASHION 🥰🥰🥰
Amazon gives out free bananas here on weekday. Excited to ride with you soon
I was laughing so hard sseing you waiting in the middle of the crossing lane in the 3rd scene at 0:12
I think it's a nice step in a good direction, cant wait till bikes and pedestrians have a green light all the time and cars having to wait after getting registered by this blue sign thing
Not convinced about that orange right turn. If the car is incoming and the light is already orange, they'll just to rush through without stopping anyways. Just make it dedicated full length green for peds and cyclists. Since there are sensors for cyclists, it won't be holding up traffic periodically anyways.
If you notice the curbs they require a sharp turn. I think the design here prevents them from rushing through.
The "go" signal from the side street directions is a flashing orange (go, but give way) signal, not a solid orange (about to turn red) signal.
@@Pystro Right turn on red is also “go but give right of way”, with complete stop required. And yet there are hundreds of accidents every year caused by these right turns. Flashing orange will not be better. Now the car incoming doesn’t even have to stop before turning.
Not really an intersecting if cars can't drive through it, this is a solution for a very niche double t junction
Amazing intersection!
How come you are not riding your T1?
maybe in 500 years they will build enough of these to get around the city
This is great, but honestly I'm not a fan of the 2-stage left turn this demands of the cyclist. Yes, it prioritizes safety, but it takes what used to be a quick maneuver pre-improvement (turning left on a green light if you're in the one travel lane w/cars, or a more dangerous but still quick left turn from the bike lane after checking for safety) and turns it into possibly minutes of waiting. That's so annoying that I will not be surprised if a ton of ppl just refuse to follow those rules and go whenever there's a gap
It's so pretty, It looks like flower petals 🌹🥀🌻🌷 *or leaves 🍃🌿🍂
This is awesome, now do every intersection like this!
Nice video! That seems to be a major improvement from the situation before: No right turns on reds, leading lights for cyclists and pedestrians as well as the protected waiting areas is the way to go. However, this make cycling saver by the expense of needing more time for a left turn (two traffic light cycles for a bike rider instead of one for cars). So, there is still some room for improvement.
This is awesome
This is awesome! Can’t wait to see more cycling infrastructure in the USA
Can the cars not go straight though?
Does this intersection really need signalization at this point?
In The Netherlands we ignore lights 😂
Haha, this is the first protected intersection I've ever seen and ridden :)
It's shocking how easy the bike traffic lights are able to be confused with car traffic lights. All it really takes is low enough visual resolution to not be able to read the "bicycle light" sign from across the intersection and you're also guaranteed to not be able to resolve that the green shape is a bicycle. Obviously in real life someone with healthy eyes would be easily be able to see both of these, but people with worse than normal eye sight do exist.
Also, in this situation it's just the difference between being given a reminder that cyclists and pedestrians have priority, and having to remember it (if you start going on the cycle light turning green). But in other intersections, this might actually create serious risk.
Maybe the border around the cycle traffic lights should be a different color, like "cycle lane green" instead of orange.
Then you'd have to be color blind _and_ have bad eye sight in order for the only hints to what's a cycle traffic light versus motor vehicle traffic light to be the positioning and the very very very slightly smaller size. In Germany, cycle traffic lights are roughly half as wide as the motor vehicle traffic lights (but we also use the "near side of the intersection" traffic light placement, which makes very small traffic lights for slower traffic more feasible).
If you lack the visual acuity required to resolve a bike symbol from that distance, then you need corrective lenses to legally drive. I think the light seems harder to distinguish in video than in person. These types of bicycle lights appear all over Seattle, and I've never seen a driver get confused by them.
@@LimitedWard Indeed, you _would_ need lenses. But how many countries require regular eye exams as a prerequisite for keeping your license?
And yes, the lights are certainly harder to distinguish on video than in person. Which is why I used my inability to do so from the video to deduce that there isn't a problem for the average diver, but for a person with _some (unknown)_ lack of visual acuity.
I like the design from an aspect of pedestrian/cyclist safety, but it seems so tech heavy. I don't know if this intersection looks different in rush hour but I believe a roundabout would have worked good here instead of all these sensors and traffic lights. Roundabouts can be quiet small and still allow trucks to move through!.
Only thing that annoys me about all kinds of intersection rebuilds like this is that they usually make the traffic signal farther away than it used to be, which allows cars to pull into the crosswalk. There's easily enough room there to put it in the median without blocking emergency services. Looks like there's also room to put in a refuge island, but that's a little too advanced for America.
Apart from that, this is cool to see. Would love to visit this neighborhood someday on my bike.
Seattle is WINNING
It's a nice city to bike in!
Andddd prepare for huge traffic backups here.
Yup... it's Seattle's goal to kill the car. Has been for quite awhile now. Personally, I can't stand it. Bike lanes have ruined the traffic flow in many neighborhoods around the city. What one was two lanes in both directions, turning into one with bike lanes and a usless center median.... most of which area see a very low amount of bike traffic anyways.
As for this protected intersection... I can see bikes blowing the lights or hardly stopping at all as per the norm in this city.
Just rode this Southbound yesterday. I love seeing more infrastructure and testing out what works for bikes and pedestrians! I don' t love having to swerve around the indentations. However, I'm genuinely concerned about riding it Northbound at speed. I think commuters will run into the "loaves" and get hurt. I very much hope I'm wrong about that.
Yeah it's a legitimate concern. I think the confident and speedy riders will adapt most likely by using the road or alternate routes. In terms of beginners picking up too much speed and colliding, I didn't film enough of the lead in but there are some cues so I'm also hopeful it won't be an issue but let's wait and see how it goes
I think the curves are intended to have cyclists slow down slightly, not swerve, since there is a potential conflict with drivers turning right. It's an extra safety redundancy, which I think is worth the 5 second slowdown.
I think a protected roundabout would’ve been more efficient. From what I can see the speeds are very low so a roundabout should work. The roundabout would also increase efficiency (especially if you have to wait 2 light cycles). From what I can tell there may not have been enough space to build this but you know, better something than nothing.
I'll come up from Vancouver!!
Vancouver Washington? XD
This is awesome, not quite at Dutch level but pretty damn close. Some elements fell just a bit overdesigned but maybe we do need that in America. Also I feel like on one of the streets, the landscape should be between the cycle lane and car lane instead of between the cycle lane and sidewalk - but I see why it's the former, because of power lines. In any case those should be moved underground.
If it was "Dutch style" the motor traffic would have got a red light within a couple of seconds of the bike being detected.
Lol I'd been biking around that intersection while it was under construction for the last few months
I agree with some of the commenters that the design feels a bit overengineered. I don't really see the point of having cyclists wait at the outer stop line... in fact that actually defeats some of the benefits of a protected intersection. The whole reason behind the raised bump-outs is to give cyclists a safe space to wait that's in front of the cars so they are more visible. The outer stop line should have been a yield with sharksteeth.
My other complaint is in regard to the light timing. The current timing requires cyclists and pedestrians to wait 2 phases to turn left. This will inevitably result in cyclists illegally rolling through the red to save time. It would have been way better to make the bike/pedestrian lights turn green in all directions simultaneously. Something like:
- Phase 1: All pedestrians and bikes cross
- Phase 2: North/South bound drivers cross
- Phase 3: East/West bound drivers cross
Lastly, it would have been better if the car signals were placed on the same side as the traffic. By having the signals on the opposite side, it encourages drivers to stop in the crosswalk rather than at the stop line.
Overall, I think it's still a massive improvement, but it does demonstrate SDOT's lack of experience building designs like this.
Personally, I think that center median and the corner medians need some reflective or brightly colored delineators. I’ve noticed while driving larger vehicles it’s difficult to see curbs and I consider myself a pretty good driver. Don’t even get me started on idiot drivers
awesome
oh my god its beautiful 🤤
I am just appreciative of the aspect of trying new things! It's really cool to see different ideas and we can take what works best
Here for the Bromp
Thanks man
Would be better as a roundabout with priority for bikes and pedestrians and without the nonsense stop lights. But I guess it's a start.
I added to add more context here. Even before these changes, this intersection didn't have cars being able to cross or make left turns as this whole cross-street is being built as a walking/cycling corridor so round-about wouldn't quite fit that here.
Sure, a roundabout can be used but you really need to ask: What is possible for the least amount spent. Roundabouts are used when space isn't a limiting factor. Same holds true when a roundabout is used without a bike path, just with a patch of different coloured asphalt. Plenty of them are used, in NL.
Money is always a limiting factor in any infrastructure project. What surprises me is the width, as it gets used more, the paths will be too narrow.
We need this in Florida
As an Australian it wigs me out that you have to wait to cross a zebra crossing. Same as Europe - it just feels backwards.
Jay walking is legal in Seattle as well. The walk signal just gives a dedicated safe period to cross.
Design looks good, except for WAY too much visual clutter. I think Dutch protected intersections usually have a much cleaner design language that isnt distracting.
Super jealous in Portland
America putting pedestrians above cars is something unheard off
Just at this particular intersection
You could've improved this video a lot by taking drone footage while the cars were turning and you were crossing, Or drone footage of the bike going through. You already had the drone there from what I could tell.
Thanks for the feedback. Your comments help a lot to make my future videos even better :) hope you stay to watch more
Yea I'm confused, why is there a barrier in the middle of Thomas St, what if a car wants to continue straight or take a left turn?
To be honest, as a biker I would head straight for that center barrier and take the left turn as soon as there was a gap instead of waiting through 2 lights. I live in Philly where you have to ride more aggressively :)
@@AB-wf8ek these were the same traffic patterns that existed before
more bromptons on more dutch intersections!
Spoiler Alert there's going to be a lot more Dutch intersections on this channel soon
i don't know...this all looks so complicated to me. for these places that aren't too busy maybe they should just have traffic circles instead of four-way lights.
I was super-excited to discover a new, innovative & safer intersection design... but was unwilling to endure the assault of the soundtrack! Self-preservation wins out over curiosity in the hierarchy of needs.
Considering the low amount of cars and low speeds, the stop lights seems pointless.
I feel like this make smore sense for a much busier intersection. This intersection is in a real quiet area with low traffic. What this is really though is just another part of Seattle's plans to make driving in the city so miserable that people just won't drive at all
Looks great! But, does it protect citizens crossing legally from our wonderful Seattle police who want to speed through going 74 mph in a 25 because they feel like it? Destroying an entire family in the process as they murder their daughter for no conceivable reason and then laugh about it on the radio later saying that she had no value as a person? Because, this definitely looks like a step in the right direction, except for you know, the last person Seattle PD murdered at a crosswalk. Wouldn't have saved her. Probably won't save you. Maybe from other citizens driving cars, definitely not from Seattle PD.
It's a good vid. Could I be greedy and ask for an even wider slow, high shot of the whole thing next time so I can see all of it at once + how it works?
Commenting from a Brit viewpoint, we call these CYCLOPS Junctions (Cycle Optimised Protected Signalised). We call them "outies" or "innies" if the cycle track is on the outside or inside of the walking path.
I don't like calling something "Dutch", as car-brained traffic engineers will build something missing out a lot of safety features that would exist in NL, and still call it Dutch when it is completely different !
We also find here that the first one build in any city gets a lot of detail below-best and may need to be adjusted, because they don't want advice from other cities. The 2nd one is better of they are listening,
Here can I point to a few details? I think in the USA they like to try and treat bicycles like cars, when they are very different. I have seen all these problems in the UK from time to time.
- IMO the cycle tracks are too narrow - 2 people eg mon and kid should be able to cycle side by side comfortably on a one-way lane. We have this problem in the UK, except in a few places. Still education to be done.
- The SUV size curbs on the tracks make the useable lanes a foot narrower, since pedals can't go above them. In NL the cycle track curbs would be 50mm high and sloped to avoid pedal strike.
- The light sequencing is strange. Why does a cycle have to stop 2 or 3 times? The best I have seen is to have a third period when all the ped/cycle lights go green, so a ped can cross one or two streets, and a cycle can go all round at one time.
That is especially true with a one way circulation; you will have cycles wanting to go back the way they came crossing one road the wrong way, rather than three the right way. A problem if it is busy.
- Lastly, I don't understand why lights stop cycles from going straight around to the right, or stop cycles when they reach the pedestrian path. IMO that's treating cycles like cars again - when pedestrians and cycles mix fine where sightlines are good, as here. It's extra cost that is not needed imo.
And congratulations on having a Brompton. They are great.
awesome.
3:08 How is it great for anyone to use if the cars have to wait longer with no benefit to anyone?
people with mobility issues take longer to get across and much of the timings in the city are too short and put them in danger.
It's the "first in Seattle", but what about the country? This is the first I've heard of this. The only other time I saw something outstanding was in Cupertino, CA. They had these bike separation blocks.
Almost recognise it as a Dutchie, but still see steep curbes at the side of the bikers
Finally
Some Amsterdam style intersection.
Nice
Not safe anyways since people in Seattle do not know how to drive.
Looks like curb checks all day
It's a start! But very basic and with some flaws. Good to see this is happening in America though!!
Since this reflects better overall safety, and since we're talking about normalized cycling and Dutch style engineering, then you probably ought to be entirely normalized yourself without the bike helmet on. Personally I wear riding caps and go capless when it's dimmer and with heavy clouds.
I think it if weren't for the e-scooters, we wouldn't have seen this much moved earth for bike infrastructure.
Yeah this is dumb. This is a horrible setup and you accidentally showed it with your left turn. You blocked anyone behind you from going straight, and you’re only 1 bike. The turning left lane is just to shallow. It only works if you’re the only cyclist on the road. Another Seattle fail.
Please be more critical in your reviews, let’s not praise bad design.
Finally our government is doing something useful
This makes left turns a breeze😅
Sarcasm right?
@@drivers99 No. On my routes, the perpendicular bike lane is not marked at all and is completely blocked by cars, making it a nightmare to try to find it. This new design is so clear where to start your left turn. Look up diagrams for a "Hook Left" or "Copenhagen Left" and you'll see what I mean.
@@bradybrother100 oh ok, yeah, I get you. We have those in my city too. It's so slow though. You have to wait for the light to cycle one direction and then you have to wait for the light to change again for the other direction.
@@drivers99 Or cross two-three lanes of traffic to get into their left turn lane which is basically a death sentence at that point 💀😆
Protected intersections need to be everywhere two high traffic streets and roads meet where bike lanes are involved. There's a roundabout in downtown Chico, CA where the bike lanes are pulled up to sidewalk level, and the city is reworking a major urban road soon to feature half protection. This needs to come to my city
rare seattle W