august948 Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 New pedestrian and bicycle friendly intersection improvements at Memorial and Eldridge. https://cw39.com/news/energy-corridor-completes-its-first-protected-intersection-project/ 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texasota Posted January 8, 2021 Share Posted January 8, 2021 Man, look at the size of that intersection. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
004n063 Posted January 2, 2023 Share Posted January 2, 2023 I'm really late to this party, but uhh...slip lanes count as a "protected" intersection? . 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texasota Posted January 2, 2023 Share Posted January 2, 2023 In no meaningful way is this a protected intersection. It's above average for what it is, but it still massively prioritizes cars. I really hate that this thing got national press when Houston has a number of *actual* higher quality protected intersections now. Also - you cross the intersection on a bike or on foot, and... then what? You get dumped onto normal, mildly unpleasant sidewalks right up again high speed car lanes. 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
004n063 Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 (edited) On 1/2/2023 at 1:29 PM, Texasota said: In no meaningful way is this a protected intersection. It's above average for what it is, but it still massively prioritizes cars. I really hate that this thing got national press when Houston has a number of *actual* higher quality protected intersections now. Also - you cross the intersection on a bike or on foot, and... then what? You get dumped onto normal, mildly unpleasant sidewalks right up again high speed car lanes. Yep. Gray at Austin is a protected intersection. MKT @ Heights Blvd is a protected intersection. Cullen at 45 is semi-protected intersection (still has the damn slip lanes on the east side, but at least cars tend to slow there because visibility of traffic coming along the feeder is limited). This requires crossing three lanes of traffic in each direction, not including the slip lanes, without a refuge island. The Streetview tells you everything you need to know about this intersection: it's terrifying. Edited January 4, 2023 by 004n063 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hbg.50 Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 What is a slip lane? …never heard that term before… Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
august948 Posted January 4, 2023 Author Share Posted January 4, 2023 4 hours ago, 004n063 said: Yep. Gray at Austin is a protected intersection. MKT @ Heights Blvd is a protected intersection. Cullen at 45 is semi-protected intersection (still has the damn slip lanes on the east side, but at least cars tend to slow there because visibility of traffic coming along the feeder is limited). This requires crossing three lanes of traffic in each direction, not including the slip lanes, without a refuge island. The Streetview tells you everything you need to know about this intersection: it's terrifying. It's not terrifying. I ride through there all the time. It's much better than it used to be. You're doing a bit of apples to oranges. Gray at Austin is a one way street intersecting a one way street. Heights Blvd is one lane each direction separated by a wide median. 1 hour ago, steve1363 said: What is a slip lane? …never heard that term before… A slip lane is the curved, separated lane you see in the picture above on the right and left sides of the intersection. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
004n063 Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 5 hours ago, august948 said: You're doing a bit of apples to oranges Well, yeah. I'm comparing protected intersections to an unprotected one. A protected intersection has protected bike lanes in all four directions, dedicated bike & ped signals, short (<20ft) crossing distances (either for the whole thing or between islands), and never crosses multiple directions without an island. If you've been riding a bike regularly around west Houston, or around Houston in general for a long time, then your threshold for "terrifying" is probably a lot higher than the average person. But if we are talking about "protected" bicycle infrastructure, I like to apply the "Eight and Eighty" test: if it's not safe for an unaccompanied eight year old or an unaccompanied eighty year old, it's not protected. I'd say this fails that test. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
august948 Posted January 4, 2023 Author Share Posted January 4, 2023 10 hours ago, 004n063 said: Well, yeah. I'm comparing protected intersections to an unprotected one. A protected intersection has protected bike lanes in all four directions, dedicated bike & ped signals, short (<20ft) crossing distances (either for the whole thing or between islands), and never crosses multiple directions without an island. If you've been riding a bike regularly around west Houston, or around Houston in general for a long time, then your threshold for "terrifying" is probably a lot higher than the average person. But if we are talking about "protected" bicycle infrastructure, I like to apply the "Eight and Eighty" test: if it's not safe for an unaccompanied eight year old or an unaccompanied eighty year old, it's not protected. I'd say this fails that test. Eight and Eighty is a pretty high bar. That would just barely pass on many two lane city side streets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
004n063 Posted January 4, 2023 Share Posted January 4, 2023 58 minutes ago, august948 said: Eight and Eighty is a pretty high bar. That would just barely pass on many two lane city side streets. Yep. Not giving up until we're at outer-Amsterdam levels of bike infrastructure. Been stocking up on hopium. 2 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
august948 Posted January 5, 2023 Author Share Posted January 5, 2023 2 hours ago, 004n063 said: Yep. Not giving up until we're at outer-Amsterdam levels of bike infrastructure. Been stocking up on hopium. I guess everyone needs a dream...😀 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texasota Posted January 5, 2023 Share Posted January 5, 2023 The point is, while this might be better than the previous configuration, there's a *huge* gap between this and real high quality infrastructure. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
august948 Posted January 5, 2023 Author Share Posted January 5, 2023 1 hour ago, Texasota said: The point is, while this might be better than the previous configuration, there's a *huge* gap between this and real high quality infrastructure. What would that look like in this instance? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
004n063 Posted January 5, 2023 Share Posted January 5, 2023 54 minutes ago, august948 said: What would that look like in this instance? This 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Texasota Posted January 5, 2023 Share Posted January 5, 2023 (edited) Yeah, to some extent it's basically not possible given the number of lanes and larger context. You could convert both streets to true boulevards with high quality medians so no one ever has to cross more than 3-4 lanes at a time, but that still wouldn't be great. But, back to the actual claim made about this intersection, it just doesn't qualify as "protected". You can't call crossing a slip lane into a weird triangle "protection". Protected intersections have a real definition that this just doesnt meet: Protected Intersections | National Association of City Transportation Officials (nacto.org) Edited January 5, 2023 by Texasota 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
samagon Posted January 10, 2023 Share Posted January 10, 2023 On 1/5/2023 at 4:08 PM, Texasota said: Yeah, to some extent it's basically not possible given the number of lanes and larger context. You could convert both streets to true boulevards with high quality medians so no one ever has to cross more than 3-4 lanes at a time, but that still wouldn't be great. But, back to the actual claim made about this intersection, it just doesn't qualify as "protected". You can't call crossing a slip lane into a weird triangle "protection". Protected intersections have a real definition that this just doesnt meet: Protected Intersections | National Association of City Transportation Officials (nacto.org) exactly. this intersection intrudes into the walking areas. a protected intersection lets the walking area intrude into the intersection. for an example a lot closer to home of a protected street, Bagby in midtown is for the most part, very pedestrian friendly, and still manages to carry a lot of traffic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.