Right, and this option, known as a "scramble" intersection, was
discussed at the meetings that Mitchell mentioned earlier in this
thread. City engineering's claim was that the diagonal distance is too
great for the timing to work properly-- the reds for the MV traffic
would be too long. I do see their point, since other examples of this
setup are either at a right angle intersection or are set up the short
way across. On the other hand, boohoo for the poor, inconvenienced
automobile driver that can't wait an additional 30 seconds at the
light ;-(
For the record, I'd be fine with a signal that changed only when
triggered by a cyclist, and don't think it has anything more to do
with drinking fountains than does the way the rest of bicycle
infrastructure is treated. In fact, I'd consider it a step up from
most of the current arrangements.
Michael
On Dec 2, 2009, Paul T. O'Leary wrote:
But as to what that intersection needs, it needs to be treated as
what it is, a six-way, three-thoroughfare intersection, with a
separate green for each thoroughfare (Regent, Monroe, Path). I've
seen the videos for those gizmos they have out in Seattle or
Portland or wherever it is, where a path diagonally crosses an
intersection, and path users ALWAYS have a red until they trip a
sensor. That's tantamount to a separate drinking fountain. An
intersection that has two roads and one path should have three
separate greens, each cycling (no pun intended) in sequence. In this
case, the green for the Path (not sure if that segment constitutes
the SW or the Missing Link) should be straight through the
intersection, just as the two car roads do, and just as the railroad
once did years ago.
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
