2302 replies to this topic

[rmpeers]

Great, so these elephant feet have different meanings at different places. What could go wrong?

They fully support the CoV approach of making the roads as confusing as possible. Definitely get the sense these are designed by people who have never actually driven on (nor possibly even seen) a road. However, if the intent is to punish motorists, then they are indeed a leading edge work of brilliance.

[Rex Waverly]

They fully support the CoV approach of making the roads as confusing as possible. Definitely get the sense these are designed by people who have never actually driven on (nor possibly even seen) a road. However, if the intent is to punish motorists, then they are indeed a leading edge work of brilliance.

 

Well, not to nit-pick but both intersections pictured are in Saanich, not the CoV....  although i guess they do say great minds think alike 

[sebberry]

The pedestrian crosswalk also has signals sometimes but no signals other times. So that's not anything new or unusual for drivers.

 

And the ped / cycle crossing marks don't indicate have a regulatory function; they don't have anything to do with who goes first and who has the right-of-way. They're there to guide peds and cyclists as to WHERE to cross, not when / how.  They are also there to warn drivers that peds or cyclists cross there, so be on the look-out. 

 

 

It's important to note that the elephants markings shown in the Tillicum / Burnside intersection are for on-streen painted bike lanes, not protected / AAA bike facilities.  Cyclists are expected to act like vehicles, going through at the green light and stopping at the red.  Where the bike lanes are separated from traffic (i.e. Pandora / Fort or the McKenzie / Borden crossing) they are typically painted green and have extra markings, since cyclists will be operating separately from vehicles at these points. See example below (McKenzie / Borden intersection)

 

lochside.JPG

 

I wait at the McKenzie/Borden light daily and walk that intersection regularly at lunch.  Trust me when I say I rarely see the cyclists using the green/elephant bit to cross Borden to get to the Goose.  There's often lots of confusion when cyclists are mixing with pedestrians on the sidewalk, and cars turning right on the red light aren't exactly an endangered species.  

  

We need simpler marking, not more of it.  And for crying out loud, when will the bike lobby scream for reflective road markings?  It'll keep them safer. 

[Rex Waverly]

They shouldn't be using the green space to cross Borden westbound towards the Lochside Trail; the cycle crossing is only on the south side of the road and is one way (eastbound only) which is why all it's half as wide as the two-way section across McKenzie (and also why the bike stencils are in only one direction). It's to direct cyclists FROM the trail onto the eastbound on-street bike lane on McKenzie, and to let drivers know that cyclists will be entering the bike lane, which starts at Borden.    

 

I believe the intention of the design is for westbound cyclists to cross Borden on the north side first and then turn around at the two-way cycle track or on the northwest corner of the intersection (hence the large paverstone section on the corner to allow for turning around).  Alternatively, westbound cyclists would take the vehicle left turn lane and turn left to access the path.  

[rmpeers]

Well, not to nit-pick but both intersections pictured are in Saanich, not the CoV.... although i guess they do say great minds think alike

Was speaking generally, but dear god... its spreading.

[rmpeers]

As I've noted, I rarely drive, but increasingly sounding like I will need to pack a manual to decipher the roadways.

[LJ]

Any time new road markings/signage/controls are put in place it should be incumbent on the Motor Vehicle Branch to send an update to every licensed driver in BC. Are you just supposed to get this by osmosis? How about a yearly update even. 

[Mike K.]

No kidding. There’s no education, at all. Look at what the City of Victoria did with that yield lane on Humboldt. The first time I saw the signage I was totally perplexed.

[Rex Waverly]

Any time new road markings/signage/controls are put in place it should be incumbent on the Motor Vehicle Branch to send an update to every licensed driver in BC. Are you just supposed to get this by osmosis? How about a yearly update even. 

 

Well, new markings / signs / controls get added all the time; transportation management is an evolving science. But the vast majority of the changes are intended to be intuitive and self-explanatory to the driver. 

 

When it's something really different, there's often an education campaign that goes along with it.  The most recent examples i can think of are for the scramble crosswalk at Government / Wharf / Humboldt and the advisory bike lanes at Humboldt... for both of these, i believe there were press releases and news articles explaining how they worked as well as tutorials / guides on the city website. There may be better ways to educate users that could be used; however, i don't know if many people would even bother to read any updates since unfortunately most people just don't care until they encounter it in person.

[rmpeers]

Honestly, all roads should be designed intuitively. Why would anyone ever want to design a road that you have to study up on in advance? Literally makes no sense.

[Rex Waverly]

Honestly, all roads should be designed intuitively. Why would anyone ever want to design a road that you have to study up on in advance? Literally makes no sense.

 

Ideally yeah, of course the design should be intuitive whenever possible. But sometimes a new design which may be less intuitive will have benefits that outweigh this concern. And drivers are familiar with the new design, any future designs based on the new design will theoretically also be intuitive to most users.   

 

A good example of this IMO are roundabouts, which have only really been commonly used in Canada* for the last decade or two. A lot of people struggled with them when they first came in, but i think now most would say they're pretty intuitive.  And once you get used to a single lane roundabout, it's less difficult (and more intuitive) to go to a two-lane roundabout, and from there a turbo roundabout, and so on. The initial roundabout wasn't intuitive to many, but the benefits (primarily safety but also operationally and environmentally) outweighed the cost (lack of intuitiveness).

 

(*except for Edmonton which has had several dual lane roundabouts since like the 1960s. As an aside, I grew up here so to me, roundabouts have always been a standard intersection design and I always had a hard time figuring out why out-of-towners couldn't figure it out until I realized that no-one else had them.) 

[FogPub]

They shouldn't be using the green space to cross Borden westbound towards the Lochside Trail; the cycle crossing is only on the south side of the road and is one way (eastbound only) which is why all it's half as wide as the two-way section across McKenzie (and also why the bike stencils are in only one direction). It's to direct cyclists FROM the trail onto the eastbound on-street bike lane on McKenzie, and to let drivers know that cyclists will be entering the bike lane, which starts at Borden.    

 

I believe the intention of the design is for westbound cyclists to cross Borden on the north side first and then turn around at the two-way cycle track or on the northwest corner of the intersection (hence the large paverstone section on the corner to allow for turning around).  Alternatively, westbound cyclists would take the vehicle left turn lane and turn left to access the path.  

If it's as confusing to navigate as it is to try and parse the above description, no wonder it's a mess.   To get through any intersection no user should ever have to make more than one turn action and-or one stop action (counting waits for multiple light cycles as one stop action); with the exception of a pedestrian who might have to wait for one light to cross one road then another light to cross the other one.

 

That McKenzie-Borden intersection is another one that cries out for an overpass, along with a straighter-line run to where it picks up Lochside up the hill.

 

As for road markings, it doesn't matter what marks are on the road when you can't see any of 'em in the rain and dark.

Edited by FogPub, 06 January 2021 - 03:07 AM.

[Barrrister]

I have also noticed that road markings seem less visible when couvered in snow. It came as a shock.

[Mike K.]

Ideally yeah, of course the design should be intuitive whenever possible. But sometimes a new design which may be less intuitive will have benefits that outweigh this concern. And drivers are familiar with the new design, any future designs based on the new design will theoretically also be intuitive to most users.

A good example of this IMO are roundabouts, which have only really been commonly used in Canada* for the last decade or two. A lot of people struggled with them when they first came in, but i think now most would say they're pretty intuitive. And once you get used to a single lane roundabout, it's less difficult (and more intuitive) to go to a two-lane roundabout, and from there a turbo roundabout, and so on. The initial roundabout wasn't intuitive to many, but the benefits (primarily safety but also operationally and environmentally) outweighed the cost (lack of intuitiveness).

(*except for Edmonton which has had several dual lane roundabouts since like the 1960s. As an aside, I grew up here so to me, roundabouts have always been a standard intersection design and I always had a hard time figuring out why out-of-towners couldn't figure it out until I realized that no-one else had them.)

Roundabouts came with a lot of educational material when they were being implemented, but two decades on they continue to be misused. People don’t know or care to signal properly when in them, effectively turning what is supposed to be an efficient design into a point of congestion during busy periods.

In fact, there remains so little awareness of proper roundabout signalling that two decades on we can clearly see authorities utterly failed at educating motorists and enforcing the rules.

[sebberry]

I have also noticed that road markings seem less visible when couvered in snow. It came as a shock.

 

We get a heck of a lot more rain and dark than snow, and there are some incredible formulations and application techniques that would make the markings really visible at night.  But no, we would rather have people strain to see the road and in the process mow down cyclists and pedestrians because they're looking at the road 2 feet in front of them to find the lines that have inevitably been confused with the ones that were removed.  

 

But with the amount of drivers crossing solid lines these days, maybe we should just remove all lines?

[mbjj]

I mean, i get that people wouldn't know the name 'elephant's feet', but these markings are becoming more and more common and are relatively self-intuitive to understand by context IMO.  

 

For example, as far as I can tell from Google Maps there are elephant's feet markings at every intersection along the Pandora and Fort bike lanes, and i'm sure on Wharf / Humboldt and now Vancouver as well (in the sections with separated bike lanes).  So anyone who drives into / out of downtown at least should have noticed these markings.  

 

Off the top of my head, they're also in place at the Tillicum / Burnside intersection, on the Goose crossings at Burnside Rd and Wale Rd, and  at McKenzie / Borden where the Lochside crosses. I'm sure there are other examples in town, so most drivers should have been exposed to these by now.  

This is kind of funny as those are exactly the streets I no longer drive on, lol. Fort, Pandora, Wharf, Humboldt and Vancouver. Guess that's why I haven't seen these markings very often! 

[rmpeers]

Ideally yeah, of course the design should be intuitive whenever possible. But sometimes a new design which may be less intuitive will have benefits that outweigh this concern. And drivers are familiar with the new design, any future designs based on the new design will theoretically also be intuitive to most users.

A good example of this IMO are roundabouts, which have only really been commonly used in Canada* for the last decade or two. A lot of people struggled with them when they first came in, but i think now most would say they're pretty intuitive. And once you get used to a single lane roundabout, it's less difficult (and more intuitive) to go to a two-lane roundabout, and from there a turbo roundabout, and so on. The initial roundabout wasn't intuitive to many, but the benefits (primarily safety but also operationally and environmentally) outweighed the cost (lack of intuitiveness).

(*except for Edmonton which has had several dual lane roundabouts since like the 1960s. As an aside, I grew up here so to me, roundabouts have always been a standard intersection design and I always had a hard time figuring out why out-of-towners couldn't figure it out until I realized that no-one else had them.)

Even when you have the the most simplistic, intuitive design, roads are a hazardous place to start with. You've got some folks on foot, some on bikes and some driving ever-larger motor vehicles. Factor in numerous other factors, from weather to good old-fashioned human idiocy, and your starting from an already risky place. You start throwing in any elements that will confuse the humans, however theoretically great these may be, and you're potentially increasing the danger. I just don't think it's worth it. I understand what you're saying. I personally like roundabouts, for example, but I don't think we should use them because I can see that they create confusion for some.

[Ismo07]

They fully support the CoV approach of making the roads as confusing as possible. Definitely get the sense these are designed by people who have never actually driven on (nor possibly even seen) a road. However, if the intent is to punish motorists, then they are indeed a leading edge work of brilliance.

 

Again if you aren't riding a bike the 'Elephant feet' aren't for you.  They are there to indicate the continuation of the bike lane.  Having said that, now that you know is it still confusing?

[mbjj]

Perhaps not confusing, but just a lot of painted clutter to try figure out what it means in a short period of time, if one isn't familiar with that particular road. 

[TwilightZoneVictoria]

Honestly, all roads should be designed intuitively. Why would anyone ever want to design a road that you have to study up on in advance? Literally makes no sense.

 

Double that no sense for a tourist town full of visitors every year - when pandemics aren't a concern that is.