• 2000mph@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    Oh I get it. The top picture is a bike. 🚲 The bottom picture is the same bike after being hit by a 6ft tall SUV while trying to cross that intersection.

  • Wahots@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    Ahh, the classic “we built this six lane monstrosity of a road for cars and have scraps here, here and here for the legally mandated bike lane that people voted for, but we don’t really want to piss the NIMBYs off. Fuck it, just make it as cheap and inconvenient as possible.”

    If the roles were reversed, drivers would be kicking down the door to the mayor, lol.

  • lone_faerie@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    I really appreciate my town’s bike infrastructure. We have protected bike lanes with a berm between cyclists and traffic, as well as bike left turn “boxes” that essentially put you first in line of the cross traffic stopped at a red light.

    • Tudsamfa@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 days ago

      This bike lane is on the left side, but the bike lanes in the rest of the city are on the right. Someone then thought the best way to connect them is to have them cross 2 streets to get to the bike path leading to the right, and from there take 2 left turns if they want to go left, which also has a separate lane for right turns - just for the cars, of course, so that is another lane bicycles need to cross.

      So, depending how the traffic lights work, bicycles have to wait up to 5 times to do a simple left turn. The traffic needs to flow after all, and traffic just means car traffic to some city planners.

  • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    7 days ago

    My theory is that all traffic planning on Germany is being done by drunk chimpanzees. This confirms it yet again.

    • Sailing7@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      Jesus, i saw that picture and thought

      well murica and their anti pedestrian street designs

      Then read your comment.

      Checked the picture.

      Zoomed in. there is text.

      in disbelief

      thats actually a german crossing.

      Got angry and dumbfounded at the same time.

      What piece of shit is this crossing?!

      @WhateverCommunityPlannersOnMeth Fix that planned this shit!

      • frezik@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 days ago

        See, I watch Adam Something videos from the point of view that he’s not really talking about America. He’s talking about European politicians looking at terrible ideas from America and trying to replicate them.

        This is a pretty good example. America wouldn’t do this, exactly, but it’s a step towards our terrible bike infrastructure. The other poster had the right of it: in America, the sign wouldn’t be there at all, but the intersection would still be badly designed.

      • PwnTra1n@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 days ago

        You can easily tell it’s not American because it’s even there in the first place. You don’t get a sign explaining the bike paths and crosswalks in America. You just gotta know or get fucked. Also we wouldn’t have a complicated bike route we just wouldn’t have one, solves that issue…

      • Pechente@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        7 days ago

        Towards whatever Communityplanners on meth that did this: Fix this shit!

        The city planner: „What do you mean? This intersection is just fine. I drive my car through it every day.“

        • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          7 days ago

          And it complies with all regulations. As long as we comply with regulations, we don’t have to come up with reasonable solutions.

  • hsdkfr734r@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    https://www.adfc.de/artikel/den-regeln-der-stvo-folgen

    In principle, cyclists may choose whether to turn left directly or indirectly.

    When turning directly left, cyclists may also leave cycle paths that are subject to mandatory use in order to turn directly left, but must pay attention to straight ahead traffic, which has the right of way. If you want to turn directly left, get into the middle of the lane in good time and follow the traffic lights of the corresponding lane.

    When turning indirectly left, the cyclist first stays to the right and crosses the junction or intersection. They then turn left. The cyclist therefore crosses two lanes straight ahead.

    Of course, the question arises as to whether you want to cycle on the road or prefer to stay on the cycle path.

    • Diplomjodler@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      7 days ago

      As a cyclist you’re in constant danger around car traffic. Insisting on your Rufus will likely get you killed. We need cycling infrastructure that is separate from car infrastructure and that will create some inconvenience for car drivers.