Content deleted Content added
→CYCLOPS Junction: Not a proper noun |
→Protected roundabouts: That's a blog! It's not even permitted in external links, let alone as a reference Tag: references removed |
||
Line 71:
For the safety of cyclists, motor traffic speeds should be reduced. Single-lane roundabouts are generally used in the Netherlands. Otherwise, a turbo roundabout can be used, which has multiple lanes and separates motor traffic going in different directions. The best form of protection is grade separation, however as an alternative a segregated cycle track should be placed around the roundabout. This should not normally be used if there is more than one lane on exit. The track normally circulates one-way in the same direction as motor traffic to reduce confusion for motorists.<ref name=":0"/>{{Rp|page=|pages=147–148}}
As cyclists will conflict with motorists at the exit arms of the motorised roundabout, priority must be established. In the Netherlands, cyclists will normally be given priority to promote cycling over driving.<ref name=":0"/>{{Rp|page=148}} This is the design that has often been transposed internationally, labelled the 'Dutch roundabout', e.g. in [[Cambridge]], UK.<ref>{{Cite news|date=2020-09-26|title=Cambridge's Dutch-style roundabout: Why all the fuss?|language=en-GB|work=BBC News|url=https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-cambridgeshire-53947440|access-date=2022-01-17}}</ref
File:Protected roundabout 3D.png|alt=Diagram of a single-lane roundabout with a circulatory segregated cycle roundabout. Cyclists and pedestrians have priority over vehicles joining and leaving the roundabout.|3D view of a protected roundabout, as commonly used in the Netherlands
File:Alternative dutch roundabout.png|alt=A single lane roundabout with a bidirectional circulatory cycle track and set back cycle crossings. Cyclists must give way to vehicles leaving and joining the roundabout. |Alternative Dutch roundabout design, with bidirectional tracks and motorist priority
| |||