| ▲ | itronitron 6 days ago | |||||||||||||
Can someone explain this, the italicized part below, in more detail? >> When you approach from the side street, as a driver, the order of dealing with other traffic is different, but the priority is similar. First you will notice a speed bump. The complete intersection is on a raised table. Pedestrians would not have priority if the street was level, but now that it isn’t the “exit construction” rule could apply and in that case a crossing pedestrian would have priority. But for that rule to apply the footway should be continuous, and that is not the case here. | ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | miggol 6 days ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||||||||
This is a part of the national design language of the roads in The Netherlands. Almost universally the following two rules hold: pedestrians walk on a raised pavement next to the road, and through roads have priority. To compliment those existing rules, exits from side streets where pedestrians on the through road have priority include a raised hump that brings motorists up to pavement level. That emphasizes that it is the motorist who is crossing into a pedestrian area, where pedestrians have priority. The pedestrian footpath is continuous, while the car road is interrupted. Here's a typical example of the "exit construction" with continuous footway: https://rijbewijshulp.nl/wp-content/uploads/2022/11/Uitrit-7... And an obvious added benefit is that motorists will slow down for the speed bump. The author phrases this a bit awkwardly without really making a point. But what I think they are saying is that because the footpath isn't continuous despite the raised bump this is not a typical exit construction, and pedestrians on the through road don't have priority. Even though most motorists would yield to them anyway because of the shark's teeth on the cycle path. I think it's debatable if the pavement is continuous or not, I would say "kinda". But either way the intersection in the article is not a "typical" example of the exit construction. | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | palotasb 6 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||||||||
https://www.theorieexamen.nl/theory-exam/what-is-a-entrance-... An entrance or exit construction is a place on a road where you aren't just turning onto the road but exiting the road entirely. The most common example from any country would be a private driveway. Pedestrians, cyclists and cars going along the sidewalk, bike path or road have priority against anyone turning into the driveway or turning onto the road from the driveway. The Netherlands generalizes this concept to some low-priority side streets. If there is a continuous sidewalk (i.e., the cars go up a bump to the level of the sidewalk as opposed to the pedestrians stepping down from the sidewalk to the level of the street). This is not the case in this specific intersection. | ||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Out_of_Characte 6 days ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||||||||
That's some word salad but let me make things clear, All intersections have signs indicating priority. All intersections have road markings indicating right of way. All intersections have a level change indicating priority. Either you bump up to pedestrians, which also reduces your speed. Or pedestrians step down to asphalt. All intersections have/dont have color change to indicate right of way. All intersections have/dont have pavement type indicating right of way (usually bricks for street or pedestrians, black asphalt for roads, red asphalt for cyclists.) Although you could probaly find some rulebreakers in there, its universally accepted as such. | ||||||||||||||
