Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety
Reload this Page >

How bout some REAL bike lanes?

Notices
Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

How bout some REAL bike lanes?

Old 05-27-08, 10:56 PM
  #26  
52-week commuter
 
DCCommuter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,929

Bikes: Redline Conquest, Cannonday, Specialized, RANS

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
The Moritz study is here if anyone is interested: https://www.bicyclinglife.com/Library/Moritz2.htm

The Moritz study tracks two types of accidents -- "minor" and "serious." Serious is defined as causing more than $50 in damage to a person or equipment. (That doesn't sound necessarily serious to me, but we go to war with the facts we have). Note that the vast majority of these accidents are simple falls -- collisions with motor vehicles only account for 11% of all reported accidents and 24% of serious accidents.

The numbers that Moritz reports -- and Bek echoes -- are for all accidents, minor and serious. Moritz doesn't report rates for serious accidents, and he doesn't make it easy to deduce them from the data he presents, as most of what he gives is percentages, not numbers. However, from the data he presents I was able to deduce that there were 176 serious accidents and 567 total accidents reported. From his percentages I was able to then calculate the number of each type, and from his crash rates I was able to calculate the kilometers traveled for each facility type.

That allowed me to calculate serious accident rate for each facility type. What I got was a very different picture:

Major w/o bike facilities 17.6
Minor w/o bike facilities 17.9
Signed bike route only (BR) 19.9
On-street bike lanes (BL) 16.0
Multiuse trail 24.3
Off road/unpaved 38.9
Other (most often 'sidewalk') 318.4

Now, do these numbers show anything meaningful about relative safety? No.

There were only 7 reported serious accidents in bike lanes. If there had been 8, the accident rate for bike lanes would have been higher than for streets with no facilities. Is 8 significantly different from 7 in a population of this size? With a population of 1956 and 8 observations the standard deviation is 2.8, so we're not even talking half a standard deviation. Not even close to significant.

Now, what is interesting is that bike lanes do have a statistically significant advantage when it comes to non-serious accidents -- those causing less than $50 in damage. What this mostly reflects, however, is that bike lane accidents are far more likely to be serious. In bike lanes, 64% of the accidents are reported as serious, as opposed to 30% for minor roads and 14% off road. Of course this could all be coincidence since there were only 11 total bike lane accidents reported in the study.

Try again?
__________________
The United States of America is the only democratic nation in the world to deny citizens living in the nation's capital representation in the national legislature. District residents have no vote in either the U.S. Senate or U.S. House of Representatives. www.dcvote.org
DCCommuter is offline  
Old 05-27-08, 11:31 PM
  #27  
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023

Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times in 8 Posts
despite your attempts to discredit a nationally vetted and referenced study that shows bike laned streets are safer than roads with no bike facilites, both your data mining and Moritz' show bike laned streets are safer per mile travelled.

you'll be familiar with this catchphrase, DCcommuter - you seem to have a working knowledge of obfuscatory statistics........

"figures don't lie, but liars can figure!"

Originally Posted by DCcommuter
bike lanes do have a statistically significant advantage when it comes to non-serious accidents...
Did you really say "going to war with the facts we have?"

Last edited by Bekologist; 05-28-08 at 06:06 AM.
Bekologist is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 04:59 AM
  #28  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Stoughton, WI
Posts: 249

Bikes: Specialized Rock Hopper, Felt F-70, lemond Buenos Aires, Trek T900 Tandem, Bianchi Volpe

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bekologist
1996 Moritz Study showing bike laned roads less hazardous per miles travelled...
Thank you.

Steve
stevetone is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 05:56 AM
  #29  
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023

Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times in 8 Posts
additionally, there are nationally vetted studies that show bike lanes both reduce wrong way cycing AND decrease sidewalk riding at intersections (Hunter), and strong correlations between bike infrastructure and indexed reduction in accident rates, all the while increasing cycling participation in communities. (everywhere)

moving on, perhpas we can get back to the OP:

bike lane widths built to code are recommended minimiums, the AASHTO Green Book encourages more width if there is significant bike traffic. with strong bike advocacy in your community you could work to better accomodate cyclists on these arterials with additional width in the bike lane.

Last edited by Bekologist; 05-28-08 at 07:19 AM.
Bekologist is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 06:24 AM
  #30  
Senior Member
 
maddyfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ky. and FL.
Posts: 3,944

Bikes: KHS steel SS

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Maybe if you are safer restricted to your bike lane, you'd more safe restricted to your garage?
If it were all about perceived safety, then we'd all stay in our beds all day long and play on the internet.
maddyfish is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 06:29 AM
  #31  
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023

Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times in 8 Posts
no bicyclist in america is 'restricted to bikelanes' in any state in the nation if safety considerations, road condition, traffic or turning motions preclude their use.

the bonifide results of bikelanes in communities, maddyfish, is they reduce wrong way cycling AND reduce sidewalk use at intersections, encourage cycling as transportation AND remain safer than unaccomodated roads.

this holds true for any cyclist, maddyfish. the Moritz study was of thousands of LAB cyclists, people that generally are 'experienced cyclists' with thousands of km of road riding a year.
Bekologist is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 07:00 AM
  #32  
52-week commuter
 
DCCommuter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,929

Bikes: Redline Conquest, Cannonday, Specialized, RANS

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Bekologist
you'll be familiar with this catchphrase, DCcommuter - you seem to have a working knowledge of obfuscatory statistics........

"figures don't lie, but liars can figure!"

Did you really say "going to war with the facts we have?"
As expected, when I attacked Bek's facts, he attacked my person.
__________________
The United States of America is the only democratic nation in the world to deny citizens living in the nation's capital representation in the national legislature. District residents have no vote in either the U.S. Senate or U.S. House of Representatives. www.dcvote.org
DCCommuter is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 07:01 AM
  #33  
52-week commuter
 
DCCommuter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,929

Bikes: Redline Conquest, Cannonday, Specialized, RANS

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Bekologist
despite your attempts to discredit a nationally vetted and referenced study that shows bike laned streets are safer than roads with no bike facilites, both your data mining and Moritz' show bike laned streets are safer per mile travelled.
What part of "not statistically significant" don't you understand?
__________________
The United States of America is the only democratic nation in the world to deny citizens living in the nation's capital representation in the national legislature. District residents have no vote in either the U.S. Senate or U.S. House of Representatives. www.dcvote.org
DCCommuter is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 07:18 AM
  #34  
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023

Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times in 8 Posts
woah, woah, DC commuter. the phrase "figures don't lie, but liars can figure" is statistics 101, dude. I'm sure you are familiar with the obfuscatory effects of statistics analysis to prove different POVs?

'attacking the person?'

Originally Posted by DCcommuter
bike lanes do have a statistically significant advantage when it comes to non-serious accidents...
I don't know, you tell me. Why should I consider your number crunching (to discredit vetted research) more significant than than the author of the study?

Originally Posted by Moritz, 1996 study
A RELATIVE DANGER INDEX is calculated which shows that streets with bike lanes have a significantly lower crash rate then either major or minor streets without any bicycle facilities (38 and 56% respectively). [/b]
both DCcommuter and the author considers bikelanes statistically 'significant' in reducing crash rates...

Additionally, bike lanes have other bonifide and verifiable positive effects on cycling in communities.

Last edited by Bekologist; 05-28-08 at 07:25 AM.
Bekologist is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 07:24 AM
  #35  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Stoughton, WI
Posts: 249

Bikes: Specialized Rock Hopper, Felt F-70, lemond Buenos Aires, Trek T900 Tandem, Bianchi Volpe

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bekologist
...Additionally, bike lanes have other bonifide and verifiable positive effects on cycling in communities.
I would have to agree with that. The mere presence of bike lanes tends to draw casual riders out to use their bikes to actually GO places, rather than doing laps around the MUP.

And, it tends to be a demonstration of the city's commitment to cycling in general.

Having said that, proper cycling behavior is a prerequisite to safe biking, regardless if there are bike lanes or not (I know, stating the obvious...).

Steve
stevetone is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 07:55 AM
  #36  
52-week commuter
 
DCCommuter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,929

Bikes: Redline Conquest, Cannonday, Specialized, RANS

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
For over 30 years, researchers have been trying to show that bike lanes have safety value. It has never been done. Why?

Researchers usually cite the lack of available data, but that's only half of the picture. Let's look at how an experiment would be designed if we had perfect data available about exposure and location of accidents. According to the National Personal Transportation Survey, Americans travel about 4 billion miles by bicycle a year. Moritz in 1996 found that 5% of bicycle travel is in bike lanes. I don't think much of his survey, but I'll buy that number. About 700 cyclists a year are killed in the US.

Given those numbers, our null hypothesis would be that bike lanes are no safer than other parts of the roadway, so we would expect bike lanes to account for fatalities proportionate to miles traveled, 5%, or 35 fatalities a year. Here's the key question in experiment design: How many accidents a year would there have to be in order for us to conclude that bike lanes are statistically significantly safer? Would 34 be enough? 33? 32?

In academic research a confidence interval of 95% is required in order for a result to be considered statistically significant. This is associated with a result that is three standard deviations from the null hypothesis. In our case, the standard deviation would be expected to be 5.9 accidents/year. In order to conclude that bike lanes are safer, we would have to see 17 or fewer fatalities per year -- less than half the expected rate. In order to conclude that bike lanes are less safe, we would have to see 52 or more fatalities a year.

Bike lanes may be safer and they may be less safe, but the effect if any is small. Certainly, if bike lanes were twice as safe -- or 50% more dangerous -- we wouldn't be having this discussion. Since the effect is small, and the rate of accidents is so low, the effect on safety is not measurable.

Anyone who makes any safety claims about bike lanes is playing loose with the facts.
__________________
The United States of America is the only democratic nation in the world to deny citizens living in the nation's capital representation in the national legislature. District residents have no vote in either the U.S. Senate or U.S. House of Representatives. www.dcvote.org
DCCommuter is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 08:08 AM
  #37  
52-week commuter
 
DCCommuter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,929

Bikes: Redline Conquest, Cannonday, Specialized, RANS

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Bekologist
both DCcommuter and the author considers bikelanes statistically 'significant' in reducing crash rates...
Moritz makes no claims of statistical significance. He doesn't even discuss it.

The only way that Moritz's data even suggests that bike lanes have a safety effect is when the data on non-serious accidents are included. By his definition, these are accidents where less than $50 in property damage or personal injury occurs. Think about what a ridiculously low standard that is -- we're talking people falling off their bikes and not hurting themselves. By his standard, when I bang my shin on the trailer hitch of my car that should be counted as a "non-serious" automobile accident. If bike lanes can keep me from banging my shin on the trailer hitch, I'm all in favor of them, but in the meantime I'm just going to put a tennis ball over the damn thing.

Even his definition of "serious" is ridiculous. By his definition, when I knocked over my bike in my driveway and broke the light, that was a serious accident. When I forgot that I had my Ipod in my pocket and the headphones go tangled in the front wheel, that was a serious accident. Sadly, bike lanes don't seem to prevent those sorts of accidents.
__________________
The United States of America is the only democratic nation in the world to deny citizens living in the nation's capital representation in the national legislature. District residents have no vote in either the U.S. Senate or U.S. House of Representatives. www.dcvote.org
DCCommuter is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 08:13 AM
  #38  
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023

Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times in 8 Posts
anyone who needs to strongly attempt to discredit a growing body of research and vetted conclusions surrounding the positive effects of bicycling infrastructure is blowing smoke.

accident mitigation is not the sole purpose of bikelanes; there are myriad other positive effects that support bike lanes - Increasing bike modal share, increasing comfortability of roads for both motorists and bicyclists, increasing coginznace of bikes using roads, reduction of sidewalk riding at intersections and reducing wrong way riding.

Here are some excerpts from a 2007 NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM report "GUIDE TO REDUCING ACCIDENTS INVOLVING BICYCLISTS...


"...Bicycle lanes are often appropiate when most bicyclists on the route are less experienced"

"Most studies present evidence that bicycle lanes may provide protection against bicycle/motor vehicle collissions. Evidence also shows that riding with traffic reduces bicyclists' chances of collission with a motor vehicle. Locations with bike lanes have lower rates of wrong-way bicycling"

"Bike lanes have been found to provide more consistent seperation between bicyclists and motorists than shared travel lanes. The presence of the bike lane stripe has also been shown from research to result in fewer erratic motor vehicle driver movements, more predictable bicyclist riding behavior, and enhanced comfort levels for both motorists and bicyclists."


Originally Posted by DCcommuter
Anyone who makes any safety claims about bike lanes is playing loose with the facts.

Last edited by Bekologist; 05-28-08 at 08:20 AM.
Bekologist is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 08:16 AM
  #39  
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023

Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times in 8 Posts
Originally Posted by DCCommuter
Moritz makes no claims of statistical significance. He doesn't even discuss it.
really???
what does the word significant refer to when distilling statistics then???

Originally Posted by moritz
streets with bike lanes have a significantly lower crash rate

seems moritz DID find it significant, statistically!

LAME-O.
Bekologist is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 08:18 AM
  #40  
feros ferio
 
John E's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: www.ci.encinitas.ca.us
Posts: 21,765

Bikes: 1959 Capo Modell Campagnolo; 1960 Capo Sieger (2); 1962 Carlton Franco Suisse; 1970 Peugeot UO-8; 1982 Bianchi Campione d'Italia; 1988 Schwinn Project KOM-10;

Mentioned: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1384 Post(s)
Liked 1,294 Times in 819 Posts
I still claim the elephant in the room is speed differential. In low-speed traffic, which I define as roads with posted speed limits of no more than 25mph / 40kph, I favor full integration of bicyclists into the main traffic flow -- call me VC in this context. On high-speed roads, which I define as those with posted speed limits of at least 40mph / 65kph, I strongly favor lateral separation, which can be a marked bike lane, a well-maintained shoulder, or simply a wide curb lane. There is a 30-35mph / 50-60kph hazy transition zone in between, in which well-designed bicycle facilities can help calm traffic, and which have to be approached on a case-by-case basis.

There are other specific contexts in which I favor bike lanes, such as those between through-only and right-only lanes, because they tell motorsts where to expect bicyclsits to be, and they remind timid or clueless bicyclists not to set themselves up for a right hook.
__________________
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
John E is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 08:26 AM
  #41  
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023

Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times in 8 Posts
i'm with you on speed differentials affecting infrastructure design. the OP is referencing a 40MPH road i believe.
Bekologist is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 08:45 AM
  #42  
Banned
 
dynodonn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: U.S. of A.
Posts: 7,466
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1268 Post(s)
Liked 78 Times in 67 Posts
Bike lanes here locally in my area are a mixed bag of results, some would have me riding in a mud strewn gutter, and others place me riding far more "vehicular" than if there was no bike lane in place.
Most bike lanes here put me in the "door zone" making it a challenge to work the rear approaching traffic and still watch for the door flinging motorist parked on the side of the street(just had one yesterday, getting out of his vehicle with his six pack of beer). I could ignore the "door zone" bike lanes all together and ride outside them, but that action seems to enrage the "territorial" motorists even more, so just staying just inside the bike lane seems to be the best compromise.
To add insult to injury, even with the better implemented bike lanes in place on some of our streets, the majority of cyclists I see are still riding on the sidewalk, so much for the "build it and they will come" theory.
__________________
Prisoner No. 979




dynodonn is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 08:58 AM
  #43  
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023

Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times in 8 Posts
despite your observations, bike lanes increase bike modal share and reduce sidewalk riding.

Last edited by Bekologist; 05-28-08 at 10:00 AM.
Bekologist is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 11:56 AM
  #44  
52-week commuter
 
DCCommuter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,929

Bikes: Redline Conquest, Cannonday, Specialized, RANS

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Bekologist
despite your observations, bike lanes increase bike modal share and reduce sidewalk riding.
You got any proof for that very broad generalization?

What is true is that bike facilities tend to be built in places where bike usage is popular and growing. But correlation is not causation.

Any proof for causation?
__________________
The United States of America is the only democratic nation in the world to deny citizens living in the nation's capital representation in the national legislature. District residents have no vote in either the U.S. Senate or U.S. House of Representatives. www.dcvote.org
DCCommuter is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 12:06 PM
  #45  
52-week commuter
 
DCCommuter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,929

Bikes: Redline Conquest, Cannonday, Specialized, RANS

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Bekologist

accident mitigation is not the sole purpose of bikelanes; there are myriad other positive effects that support bike lanes
You're backing away from your earlier statement that bike lanes have been "proven" to enhance safety.

Originally Posted by Bekologist

Here are some excerpts from a 2007 NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM report "GUIDE TO REDUCING ACCIDENTS INVOLVING BICYCLISTS...


"...Bicycle lanes are often appropiate when most bicyclists on the route are less experienced"

"Most studies present evidence that bicycle lanes may provide protection against bicycle/motor vehicle collissions. Evidence also shows that riding with traffic reduces bicyclists' chances of collission with a motor vehicle. Locations with bike lanes have lower rates of wrong-way bicycling"

"Bike lanes have been found to provide more consistent seperation between bicyclists and motorists than shared travel lanes. The presence of the bike lane stripe has also been shown from research to result in fewer erratic motor vehicle driver movements, more predictable bicyclist riding behavior, and enhanced comfort levels for both motorists and bicyclists."

Your quotes just prove my point that 30+ years of attempting to prove that bike lanes improve safety have failed. Let's take them one at a time:

"Most studies present evidence that bicycle lanes may provide protection against bicycle/motor vehicle collissions. " Well, that's the very definition of a qualified statement. "Bicycle lanes may provide protection?" Even I can't deny that, because I can't prove they don't. But that certainly is a long stretch from proving that they do.

"Evidence also shows that riding with traffic reduces bicyclists' chances of collission with a motor vehicle. Locations with bike lanes have lower rates of wrong-way bicycling." Still no proof that bike lanes improve safety, perhaps an inference that they increase behavior associated with safety.

""Bike lanes have been found to provide more consistent seperation between bicyclists and motorists than shared travel lanes. The presence of the bike lane stripe has also been shown from research to result in fewer erratic motor vehicle driver movements, more predictable bicyclist riding behavior ..." Again, no proof of anything having to do with safety.

"...enhanced comfort levels for both motorists and bicyclists." Bingo! That's what bike lanes are all about. Enhanced comfort levels -- particularly for motorists. Many motorists just don't like sharing the road with cyclists.
__________________
The United States of America is the only democratic nation in the world to deny citizens living in the nation's capital representation in the national legislature. District residents have no vote in either the U.S. Senate or U.S. House of Representatives. www.dcvote.org
DCCommuter is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 12:45 PM
  #46  
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079

Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2

Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times in 3,158 Posts
Originally Posted by John E
I still claim the elephant in the room is speed differential. In low-speed traffic, which I define as roads with posted speed limits of no more than 25mph / 40kph, I favor full integration of bicyclists into the main traffic flow -- call me VC in this context. On high-speed roads, which I define as those with posted speed limits of at least 40mph / 65kph, I strongly favor lateral separation, which can be a marked bike lane, a well-maintained shoulder, or simply a wide curb lane. There is a 30-35mph / 50-60kph hazy transition zone in between, in which well-designed bicycle facilities can help calm traffic, and which have to be approached on a case-by-case basis.

There are other specific contexts in which I favor bike lanes, such as those between through-only and right-only lanes, because they tell motorists where to expect bicyclists to be, and they remind timid or clueless bicyclists not to set themselves up for a right hook.
While I really tend to agree with your thoughts and statements here... there is an even higher speed issue at hand. The 55 and 65MPH arterial. A 6 or 8 inch line does not provide enough separation between very high speed motor traffic traveling on said arterials... even the wind from a passing motorist (especially large SUVs) on such roads can wobble a cyclist.

The irony is that the same speeds on these arterials, is present on limited access roads known as interstate freeways... which have wide 10 foot shoulders that are a far cry better then that of the typical 5 foot bike lane on such an arterial. I have ridden on interstate freeway shoulders and personally testify that the comfort level is far better on the interstate than riding in a 5 foot bike lane on a 55-65MPH arterial.

I realize that few states have such high speed arterials, but these are indeed becoming a standard here in California... and are used to link housing tracts with commercial areas... where cyclists may typically want to go, once leaving their suburbs.
genec is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 01:09 PM
  #47  
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023

Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times in 8 Posts
Originally Posted by DCCommuter
You got any proof for that very broad generalization?

What is true is that bike facilities tend to be built in places where bike usage is popular and growing. But correlation is not causation.

Any proof for causation?

Yes, the Hunter study showed roads without bike lanes had over five times as many sidewalk cyclists than bike laned roads at the numerous intersections he studied.

and please. Evidence is overwhelming that building bike infrastructure increases modal share of bikes. seen in repeated locales acround the world. the paltry argument 'causation doesn't imply correlation' is yet another tired talking point, often used in forensics and debate, but turns a blind eye to the positive effects infrastructure has on bike riding.

Bike riding share was declining in Denmark after WWII, the addition of bike infrastructure has nearly tripled modal share in Copenhagen in the lasty thirty years. what reversed the decline? bike infrastructure. Repeated turns in declining bike share seen in Germany, also, many american cities.

Simply taking a look at american accomodated cities versus poorly unaccomodated ones, the cities with vigorous bike infrastucture programs CONSISTENTLY show higher modal share- to claim bike riders 'just increased', magically somehow, to 12 times the nation average in some cities is an ignorant and arrogant denial of reality. I'd link to a recent Oregon study showing the positive effects bike infrastrucure has there, but suspect it wouldn't sink in past the vigorous anti-infrastructuralist stance of some of the posters.

Despite worthless attempts to deny portlands bike infrastructure has anything to do with the numbers, portlands bike infrastructre has increased numbers of bicyclists there. It's on the ground reality, seen in dozens, hundreds of cities around the world: bike infrastructure increases bike modal share.

ALL off topic, however. why did i have to dredge up statistics and quotes from federal and cross agency reports to rebutt internet talking heads with an axe to grind against the accomodationalist model?


what is this thread about? OP complaining about bike lanes just 5 feet wide on higher speed arterial roads? Bike lanes aren't limited to five feet, AASHTO repeatedly instructs traffic engineers to consider wider lanes for bikes if bike use and/or road speeds are high. LOBBY the community to improve road conditions for bicyclists- and that doesn't mean 'rip out the bike lane'

Last edited by Bekologist; 05-28-08 at 01:21 PM.
Bekologist is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 01:35 PM
  #48  
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079

Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2

Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times in 3,158 Posts
Originally Posted by Bekologist
Yes, the Hunter study showed roads without bike lanes had over five times as many sidewalk cyclists than bike laned roads at the numerous intersections he studied.

and please. Evidence is overwhelming that building bike infrastructure increases modal share of bikes. seen in repeated locales acround the world. the paltry argument 'causation doesn't imply correlation' is yet another tired talking point, often used in forensics and debate, but turns a blind eye to the positive effects infrastructure has on bike riding.

Bike riding share was declining in Denmark after WWII, the addition of bike infrastructure has nearly tripled modal share in Copenhagen in the lasty thirty years. what reversed the decline? bike infrastructure. Repeated turns in declining bike share seen in Germany, also, many american cities.


Simply taking a look at american accomodated cities versus poorly unaccomodated ones, the cities with vigorous bike infrastucture programs CONSISTENTLY show higher modal share- to claim bike riders 'just increased', magically somehow, to 12 times the nation average in some cities is an ignorant and arrogant denial of reality. I'd link to a recent Oregon study showing the positive effects bike infrastrucure has there, but suspect it wouldn't sink in past the vigorous anti-infrastructuralist stance of some of the posters.

Despite worthless attempts to deny portlands bike infrastructure has anything to do with the numbers, portlands bike infrastructre has increased numbers of bicyclists there. It's on the ground reality, seen in dozens, hundreds of cities around the world: bike infrastructure increases bike modal share.

ALL off topic, however. why did i have to dredge up statistics and quotes from federal and cross agency reports to rebutt internet talking heads with an axe to grind against the accomodationalist model?


what is this thread about? OP complaining about bike lanes just 5 feet wide on higher speed arterial roads? Bike lanes aren't limited to five feet, AASHTO repeatedly instructs traffic engineers to consider wider lanes for bikes if bike use and/or road speeds are high. LOBBY the community to improve road conditions for bicyclists- and that doesn't mean 'rip out the bike lane'
I think that the census information shared in this thread: https://www.bikeforums.net/advocacy-safety/421027-bf-challenge-what-s-your-city-s-bike-mode-share.html pretty much also shows that cities with bike infrastructure tend to have more riders... as for the actual "causation" it could be debatable, but "something" certainly encourages cycling in those cities.
genec is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 01:50 PM
  #49  
52-week commuter
 
DCCommuter's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,929

Bikes: Redline Conquest, Cannonday, Specialized, RANS

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by Bekologist
Evidence is overwhelming that building bike infrastructure increases modal share of bikes.

Then it should be easy for you to provide some of that evidence instead of just waving your arms and repeating it is so.
__________________
The United States of America is the only democratic nation in the world to deny citizens living in the nation's capital representation in the national legislature. District residents have no vote in either the U.S. Senate or U.S. House of Representatives. www.dcvote.org
DCCommuter is offline  
Old 05-28-08, 01:56 PM
  #50  
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023

Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times in 8 Posts
kinda off topic there DCcommuter, dontchyathink? When does reality set in anyway?

the stats are readily available. you can look them up yourself. I think its off topic and disruptive to the forum (!!!) to continue to discuss bike lane effects on rider share in a thread about improvements to bikelanes the OP considers subpar.

I also find 'debating' the roundness of the earth with a member of the flat earth society is pointless as well.


There are ways he can work within his community to improve roadway accomodations and that doesn't mean 'rip out the five foot bike lane on the arterial route' the OP is describing.

AASHTO repeatedly instructs traffic engineers to place wider bike lanes if either bike use and/or motorist speeds are high.

got any good advice for the OP, DCcommuter???

Last edited by Bekologist; 05-28-08 at 02:06 PM.
Bekologist is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.