Is public opinion on the new Manchester cycling roundabout still slightly on the negative side? Short story: yep, pretty much.
HLaB says: “With that cycleabout or whatever they want to call it, do they honestly think abled bodied Folks won’t follow their desire lines and cross to the middle or go round it clockwise? All the design does successfully is to inconvenience the less abled bodied.”
hawkinspeter added: “That roundabout does look unnecessary. The large space in the middle seems unnecessary unless they want to turn it into a mini park with a bench or something. The route round is quite narrow in places – I wonder if that’ll cause issues with trikes?”
Car Delenda Est says: “I’m thinking it’s there to allow push and wheelchairs a direct route across rather than making them go around. That said I feel that it would probably be an improvement for everyone if the island had a dropped curb the whole way round.”
Any cycle roundabout fans care to add some balance? Do keep your comments coming in as always…
33 thoughts on “Magic roundabout or tragic roundabout? New “novelty” cycling roundabout hasn’t gone down well; Cyclist maps 109-mile Father Christmas Strava art across Paris; New bike day; Ride with Remco (virtually) + more on the live blog”
That roundabout does look
That roundabout does look unnecessary. The large space in the middle seems unnecessary unless they want to turn it into a mini park with a bench or something. The route round is quite narrow in places – I wonder if that’ll cause issues with trikes?
Looks pretty terrifying if
Looks pretty terrifying if there is the slightest build up of leaf matter or touch of frost!
I’m thinking it’s there to
I’m thinking it’s there to allow push and wheelchairs a direct route across rather than making them go around.
That said I feel that it would probably be an improvement for everyone if the island had a dropped curb the whole way round.
I’d probably do the
I’d probably do the equivalent of this if someone asked me to knit a sweater. But I’m not being paid sums of public money to do so. Nor will anyone need to wear my defective creation.
BicycleDutch has some thoughts on this – yes, a few people tried it over there. No, it isn’t a good idea and does lead to confusion at least.
https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2015/03/10/a-bicycle-roundabout-that-shouldnt-have-been-built/
https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2018/07/24/a-bicycle-roundabout-in-boxtel/
The Dutch example at least
The Dutch example at least looks like a proper roundabout in scale, whereas the Salford one is more of a mini-roundabout. Or mini-mini-roundabout. Micro-roundabout? A good site for a bench and a picnic table perhaps.
Microundabout
Microundabout
Those aren’t applicable
Those aren’t applicable examples as the island isn’t pedestrianised, which is what necessitates the roundabout in this case.
It’s not what I’d come up with from a clean sheet, but tbh they just need to drop the kerbs and make the island shared and it’ll essentially be freestyle when there aren’t pedestrians using it. Which is what it defacto is right now anyway.
Why does the island need to
Why does the island need to be pedestrianised?
To me this looks like someone having the thoughts “bikes are like tiny cars” and “because bikes are like tiny cars we need to
get the pedestrians out of the wayprotect the pedestrians from them… we need a pedestrian reservation!”I’m wondering why (apart from the examples of “how not to do it”) AFAIK nothing similar is seen in a country with many more cyclists, just across the sea? Could there be something special about the area which explains this unique creation (genuine question)?
EDIT – just had a thought – this is Manchester where they “reinvented” the Dutch roundabout so that pedestrians were on the inside. I wonder if this is either to facilitate something like that or because of that kind of thinking e.g. “we need to swap the pedestrians to the outside and the cyclists to the inside…”?
I think if I wanted to turn
I think if I wanted to turn right coming from the right, I’d be going around it the wrong way. Looks a far safer line to take (provided no one is coming the other way !)
It’s aspirational. It’s
It’s aspirational. It’s designers will seem prescient once this junction is seeing 5000 cyclists per hour.
No, it’ll be even more of a
No, it’ll be even more of a PITA at that point… no such foolery used by the real experienced professionals. 32000 per day here on a bike and that was over 5 years back:
https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2017/06/06/the-busiest-cycleway-in-the-netherlands/
Surprised you didn’t have bob
Surprised you didn’t have bob from accounts pic
“The empty, abandoned cycle lanes of London. Tragic”
“How long did you have to wait to get that shot”
“quite some time ; )”
And yet the counter states 2
And yet the counter states 2,678,999 cyclists past that point this year. Way to fail in making a point.
They were being sarcastic as
They were being sarcastic – see the final 2 sentences.
Samtheeagle wrote:
sarcasm is obviously wasted on you
hirsute wrote:
I can never click or select those links on Desktop so here’s a link to the tweet for grown-up computers:
https://twitter.com/BobFromAccounts/status/1599366130061017088
With that cycleabout or
With that cycleabout or whatever they want to call it, do they honestly think abled bodied Folks won’t follow their desire lines and cross to the middle or go round it clockwise :-/ All the design does successfully ? is to inconvenience the less abled bodied ??
Don’t forget, it wastes money
Don’t forget, it wastes money and allows people to point at it as an example of why money should not be spent on cycle infrastructure and how cyclists don’t obey the rules when people inevitably don’t use it as intended.
How does it inconvenience the
How does it inconvenience the less able bodied?
I assumed the design was that way to give the less able bodied a direct way to cross.
Less abled bodied can also be
Less abled bodied can also be cyclists.
Sorry I still don’t
Sorry I still don’t understand how this would unfairly inconvenience a less able bodied cyclist.
Tbh unless someone can actually give specifics I’m inclined to think this is just another case of using the disabled as a cudgel against cycle infra.
I’d say this one has 3 issues
I’d say this one has 3 issues. None terrible but compounding all 3 makes it a bit rubbish. TBH if you fixed the first one this would all be fine, 1 and 2 it’d be top class UK infra! Bicycle Dutch explains the issues in video form.
1) (For everyone) – the roundabout is not needed AND it’s in your way! Unless strictly necessary just don’t put stuff in the bike paths. Plus it will confuse everybody which is not what you want in infra.
2) (Also for everyone) – catching a wheel or pedal on a kerb is not good. Where kerbs are higher (here) or vertical (here again) this is more likely to happen and cause a problem.
3) Depending on the radius of the turn this might be an issue for people with e.g. trikes or other adapted cycles which don’t have a great turning circle. Even if you can making a sharp turn on a trike is can be more difficult for some you need to shift about to balance. Several entrances to this look rather narrow (given the space available).
They appear to have put in reasonably dropped kerbs with tactiles and most of these seem to have flat fronts, so it’s probably OK in a wheelchair (see here on that subject).
2) and 3) can come together e.g. you need to take a wider line which puts you closer to the high / unforgiving kerb. Also things other than standard cycles may be more likely to have smaller wheels and can have more issues if they do hit a bump. Or lower bottom brackets so lower pedals.
In general Ranty Highwayman’s your man for some accessibility kerbnerdery. He’s explained issues with e.g. navigating some dropped kerbs with a 3-wheeler (can’t find links ATM). I don’t think that’s the issue here as it doesn’t look like you’d need to use the dropped kerbs but again these may be tricky if you did.
Ah thank you I didn’t know
Ah thank you I didn’t know about the turning radius issue.
No problem. In many cases
No problem. In many cases “more accessible” is actually “better for *everyone* ” – albeit at a cost in extra space usage / slightly slower or less direct for the fit.
Someone looking for a career
Someone looking for a career change to the Grade Separated Junction department.
If it’s in Salford, shouldn’t Chris Boardman or one of his sidekicks have had a say?
Whoever designed that
Whoever designed that roundabout probably didn’t study civil infrastructure engineering beyond pre-school.
I suppose the roundabout
I suppose the roundabout clearly communicates to pedestrians that they will be crossing a cycle lane, so hopefully fewer will just step out oblivious. That said, the design seems to go out of its way to force pedestrians to cross the cycle lane, since the pavement pinches out around the periphery.
And the nearest resident’s hedge is occupying half the width of the pavement proper.
Sriracha wrote:
It clearly communicates to pedestrians that cycling is something odd and will inconvenience them as much as cars and their infra. Only worse because we’ve all got so used to cars and roads we don’t “see” them and the space they take up.
It clearly communicates that no-one is working to national cycling design standards, just like they would if e.g. this was a road, or a railway.
It clearly communicates that we’re prepared to give people who don’t understand cycling chunks of precious active travel money to waste.
It clearly communicates that designers don’t understand the parameters and requirements for transport cycling – indeed they seem hazy about the concept of a bicycle. (The whole thing – but look at the kerb height!)
I want this for the UK… for
I want this for the UK… for starters. Can anyone planning world domination any time soon make it happen. Ta.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/dec/05/speeding-motorists-austria-cars-seized-auctioned
More shite infrastructure!
More shite infrastructure!
The “cycleabout” is the bastard lovechild of a car based civil engineer doing what they have always done, allegedly speeding up traffic flow from a motoring perspective.
With such great examples of how to do it just the other side of the English Channel in the Netherlands, Germany, even France, its amazing that we still get it so, so wrong here in good old Blighty.
Everyone whinging, but
Everyone whinging, but presumably they were trying to give bikes and pedestrians clear delineation, especially bikes coming from Broadway crossing.
Might not be perfect, but better than it was.
Some good points have been
Some good points have been raised about adaptive and cargo bikes maybe not being able to make the tight turns for the exits.
But overall I’m happy to see infrastructure that is too safe and overbuilt rather than the complete opposite that we’re used to.
And they don’t get everything
And they don’t get everything perfect in NL. The multi story bike park in Utrecht needed redone (inc. narrow entrance and crappy radius on bends.)