Tour of the "pedestrian friendly" diverging diamond

Charles Marohn of Strong Towns narrates a "response" to an engineer's tour of the pedestrian features of a Diverging Diamond Interchange.

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• DivergingDiamondUpload

[WOkitsu]

Why are you comparing a freeway interchange in the outskirts of Springfield, Missouri to bikeways in central Amsterdam or streets in urban UK? A fairer comparison would be with an interchange under a similar setting in Europe, the US, or elsewhere.

[strongtowns]

@WOkitsu In Europe they general don't confuse urban and rural the way we do here in the US. In other words, I'm not aware of a similar setting in Europe. That having been said, I'm not sure this could really be called the "outskirts". I'm sure it has full urban utilities (sewer and water) as well as -- at least according to the original video -- some expectation of pedestrian traffic.

[Sevenfold120]

@strongtowns In Europe rural pedestrian and Bike ways are not connected to the road. So the sidewalk, which is much wider than an American Sidewalk will often go under the road or far away from the road itself. Hard to explain really. But many pathways go under roads... there are not many streetlights where I live.

[strongtowns]

@Sevenfold120 Yeah, that makes complete sense. Where cars are expected to be traveling at high speeds (roads), cycling lanes should be provided, but separated. Where cars should be traveling at neighborhood speeds (streets), then we can safely mix cyclists right into the (slow) traffic stream.

[puffpuffin1]

@strongtowns Baloney. There are rural and urban areas in Europe just like the US and they are treated differently. In fact, the first diverging diamond was built in rural France. It certainly looks like the outskirts of the city to me unless there is a new meaning for the word. BTW, red brick is a cheap way to make concrete look better. Yeah, it would be nice if everything was landscaped, but money and maintenance are issues.

[strongtowns]

@puffpuffin1 Rural and urban areas ARE treated differently in Europe. That's the point....they are not here in the U.S. In the US, street and road standards are generally ubiquitous and rural/urban differences are not discernible. I don't doubt the DDI is used in rural France, but I'm fairly certain it will not be designed for pedestrians. Additionally, where there are pedestrians, they don't build their streets with highway standards.

[strongtowns]

@Mudimush I never say is HAS to be bike and ped friendly. The original video went to great lengths to show that it WAS bike and ped friendly. That's an absurd assertion.

[strongtowns]

@Mudimush Use it. Just don't pretend it is pedestrian-friendly and cycling-friendly.

[BeeryUSA]

The problem for cyclists is that this treatment will end up killing cyclists because the 'trench' effectively screens cyclists from view until they get to the intersection. This will make intersection collisions between cars and cyclists far more likely. In cycling, visibility = safety: if you're less visible, you're less safe. This is a horribly unsafe intersection for cyclists - they would be safer cycling in the road.

[TommyMcGuinness]

calling me names won't change my opinion. I believe that we need to make transportational CHOICES available. This diamond was not built for the safety of ambidestrians, but rather as a show of "See what we are doing to appeaase the pedestrian community?" Tecnology will solve problems. Perhaps even the single occupant car. The future will tell. I try to do my part in steering that future.

[Mudimush]

@TommyMcGuinness Why don't you look at how much fuel it SAVES, compared to the diamond interchanges it replaced. It is a low cost conversion of an existing diamond interchange that makes it more efficient.

You probably believe the hogwash from the rabid liberals that automobiles will become a thing of the past. I believe that technology will solve this problem instead, and we will always have cars.

[TommyMcGuinness]

@Mudimush because one day soon, fuel will be cost prohibitive and people will want an alternative to driving. This is a rediculous waste of money. Designed by somebody who walks from his house to his car and no further...

[Mudimush]

Respond to this video... Pedestrian facilities are designed for traffic that moves no faster than 4 mph. Bicycles and Segways do not fit this category, and must be kept off the sidewalk. Traffic moving faster than 4 mph on a sidewalk is not visible long enough to be safe. Usually it is hidden behind the street trees that should not be there blocking the view. Also, a bicycle on the sidewalk is in the blind spot. Any bicycle using a crosswalk must be dismounted and walked to be safe.

[Mudimush]

It is also VERY dangerous for bicycles to be riding on the sidewalk. It is the major cause of bicycle-vehicle collisions, including most fatal ones. The problem occurs when the cyclist comes to a cross walk, and does not stop (as most state laws require a vehicle to do when entering traffic from off the road). He zooms on across traffic, oblivious to the fact that he has not been visible to turning traffic for enough time to be seen, and is coming from an unexpected direction.