Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

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.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-15-10, 02:39 PM   #1
randya
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Bikes: who cares?
Posts: 13,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
SF Streetsblog on Door Zone Bike Lanes

This sounds about right to me:

Quote:
So what is the solution? First off, bicycle design standards need to be changed to require cross hatch markings that extend 4 feet from a parked car so that even novice cyclists realize this a “no riding” area. If there is insufficient width on the street for a buffer and a bike lane, then a parking or travel lane needs to be removed. If providing for the safety and dignity of all road users is politically infeasible, then the bike lane itself needs to be removed and replaced with sharrows indicating that cyclists should take the travel lane.

It is no longer acceptable to lure people onto bicycles with a network of bicycle lanes that look inviting, but in reality can cause injury or death when used as directed. Our bicycle infrastructure design and our bicycle safety curricula should complement, not contradict, one other.
http://sf.streetsblog.org/2010/11/08...urting-people/
randya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-10, 03:26 PM   #2
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,696
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 301 Post(s)
While I agree wholeheartedly with the comment... we need to realize that the reason such BL are designed in the first place is that the law says drivers must check to ensure a way is clear before opening a door into traffic.

Have you ever heard of someone being ticketed for opening a door into traffic?

This is yet another situation in which lax enforcement has lead to problems. So far motorists have carte blanche... speeding, running stop signs, running red lights, talking/texting on cell phones, right turn on red without stopping... the list just goes on and on... all found to be acceptable in one form or another by LEOs and judges.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-10, 03:28 PM   #3
noisebeam
Al
 
noisebeam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AZ
Bikes: Cannondale SuperSix, Lemond Poprad. Retired: Jamis Sputnik, Centurion LeMans Fixed, Diamond Back ascent ex
Posts: 14,109
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 77 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post
Have you ever heard of someone being ticketed for opening a door into traffic?
Even if this was routinely done (if that is even possible) I wouldn't ride in a door zone.
noisebeam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-10, 03:36 PM   #4
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,696
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 301 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by noisebeam View Post
Even if this was routinely done (if that is even possible) I wouldn't ride in a door zone.
Nor I, but then we aren't novice cyclists.

But the fact is that bike lanes are designed with the laws in mind... that we don't have folks (motorists and cyclists) following said laws is the problem. This also is the ironic joke behind Forester's constant rant about road rules... if in fact the rules were adhered to, vehicular cycling and bike lanes would all work quite well... but the fact is that too many folks don't know the rules, and work hard at bending rules anyway.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-10, 03:41 PM   #5
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,696
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 301 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by noisebeam View Post
Even if this was routinely done (if that is even possible) I wouldn't ride in a door zone.
Oh regarding the "possibility..." well just issue a ticket any time a cyclist hits a door.

I doubt that is even done... just as rarely are "traffic" tickets handed out when a motorist violates a cyclist in a collision... all too often "an investigation" is indicated that never results in any punishment for the offender (be they cyclist or motorist).
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-10, 04:23 PM   #6
randya
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Bikes: who cares?
Posts: 13,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It would appear to me that the design of most existing bike lanes pays more attention to getting cyclists as FRAP as possible, than to the safety risks they are exposed to when such designs are implemented.
randya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-10, 04:51 PM   #7
unterhausen
Randomhead
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Bikes:
Posts: 14,588
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post
But the fact is that bike lanes are designed with the laws in mind... that we don't have folks (motorists and cyclists) following said laws is the problem.
I can't really disagree with your thesis, but there is very little else in road design that assumes people will follow the law. For example, roadside obstacles are commonly removed even though drivers are legally required to travel on the roadway, not down the ditch. Similarly, the county here just ruined a lot of good cycling routes by putting rumble strips everywhere. The idea that people will be able to adequately check for oncoming traffic in their mirrors is a much more radical assumption than is generally used in road design. They just don't want to get rid of parking. Parking is sacrosanct in most municipalities.

Quote:
Originally Posted by randya View Post
It would appear to me that the design of most existing bike lanes pays more attention to getting cyclists as FRAP as possible, than to the safety risks they are exposed to when such designs are implemented.
I agree, although in State College there have been a number of parking spaces taken out so it's not uniformly bad. My impression is that it's not necessarily done with bad intentions.
unterhausen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-10, 04:57 PM   #8
billew
meandering nomad
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Newport,Rhode Island
Bikes: eleven bikes no car
Posts: 413
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Right on Randya! To get bicyclists out of the way or to remove my right of way in relation to motorized traffic.

I say that someone getting ticketed isn't going to save me from injury in the first place.
I will add that traffic laws were enacted in the belief that policemen actually work.
billew is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-10, 05:58 PM   #9
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,696
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 301 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by unterhausen View Post
I can't really disagree with your thesis, but there is very little else in road design that assumes people will follow the law. For example, roadside obstacles are commonly removed even though drivers are legally required to travel on the roadway, not down the ditch. Similarly, the county here just ruined a lot of good cycling routes by putting rumble strips everywhere. The idea that people will be able to adequately check for oncoming traffic in their mirrors is a much more radical assumption than is generally used in road design. They just don't want to get rid of parking. Parking is sacrosanct in most municipalities.


I agree, although in State College there have been a number of parking spaces taken out so it's not uniformly bad. My impression is that it's not necessarily done with bad intentions.
Every darn stop light and stop sign is in place on the assumption that motorists will obey them! That they fail to do so and still manage to only kill 40,000 or so annually is the real surprise.

I know this seems "illogical" at first glance, but the reality is that if motorists and cyclists actually held to the laws, everything would work just fine... Of course the ugly reality is that this isn't the case, and everyone tries to bend the rules.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-10, 07:20 PM   #10
unterhausen
Randomhead
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Bikes:
Posts: 14,588
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
I think you have made an interesting point. However, I think it's probably more logical than the actual thought process that goes on when drawing out bike lanes in door zones. If you watch motor vehicle operator behavior near parked cars, they tend to give them a significant buffer. The issue I see is that it's relatively difficult for a person exiting a parallel parked car to properly monitor traffic in the door zone with 100% certainty. I don't think we should expect to be able to use it for vehicular travel.
unterhausen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-10, 07:37 PM   #11
randya
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Bikes: who cares?
Posts: 13,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
It also seems to me that the same principles should apply to bike lane designs which place through cyclists to the right of right turning traffic
randya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-10, 07:55 PM   #12
noisebeam
Al
 
noisebeam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AZ
Bikes: Cannondale SuperSix, Lemond Poprad. Retired: Jamis Sputnik, Centurion LeMans Fixed, Diamond Back ascent ex
Posts: 14,109
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 77 Post(s)
The door zone is unwanted space for driving. No one motors in it so no motorist feels a loss if it marked for bicycles - it is preferred it that way by faster drivers as it keeps cyclists out of the way.
noisebeam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-10, 08:05 PM   #13
randya
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Bikes: who cares?
Posts: 13,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by noisebeam View Post
The door zone is unwanted space for driving. No one motors in it so no motorist feels a loss if it marked for bicycles - it is preferred it that way by faster drivers as it keeps cyclists out of the way.
so is the gutter, hence FRAP
randya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-10, 08:13 PM   #14
Pedaleur
Je pose, donc je suis.
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Back. Here.
Bikes:
Posts: 2,898
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by randya View Post
It would appear to me that the design of most existing bike lanes pays more attention to getting cyclists as FRAP as possible, than to the safety risks they are exposed to when such designs are implemented.
Around here (central VA), it appears to be more to show ('claim' is probably more accurate) that someone, somewhere, is thinking about cyclists. Hence, all the crappy 'bike lanes to nowhere'.

Anyone in C'ville who has ridden West Main can attest to that.
Pedaleur is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-10, 11:09 PM   #15
degnaw
Senior Member
 
degnaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Bellevue, WA
Bikes:
Posts: 1,605
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by randya View Post
so is the gutter, hence FRAP
Is this better? (Hennepin Ave in Minneapolis, prior to the conversion to bus/bike lanes)

I think the conclusion is that it's much more convenient and faster for cyclists, but the number of accidents skyrocketed.

degnaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-10, 11:16 PM   #16
randya
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Bikes: who cares?
Posts: 13,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by degnaw View Post
Is this better? (Hennepin Ave in Minneapolis, prior to the conversion to bus/bike lanes)

I think the conclusion is that it's much more convenient and faster for cyclists, but the number of accidents skyrocketed.

that's kind of a weird setup, what's the lane on the left of the cyclist (to the cyclist's right)?
randya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-10, 11:26 PM   #17
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I don't believe the fearmongering about the purportedly kryptonic bikelanes of death.

Quote:
Originally Posted by league of american bicyclists president letter to instructors
There is no evidence to suggest properly
designed bike lanes are more dangerous for cyclists, and there is plenty of
evidence to suggest that, in fact, bicycle lanes:
 encourage bicycle use
 improve cyclist and motorist lane discipline and predictability, and
 encourage safer riding behavior (by discouraging wrong way and sidewalk
riding).
Two primary concerns are raised in relation to bike lanes: dooring and
intersection crashes. Maintenance issues are operational issues that can be
addressed in a different forum. Neither dooring nor intersection issues are unique
to roadways with bike lanes......
Bike lanes can be striped adjacent to parking lanes and parked cars.
There are striping, signing and marking techniques that encourage and
enable cyclists to ride further away from parked cars. Bicyclists are
successfully and safely operating on urban streets even with AASHTO-
minimum recommended widths for parking, bike, and adjacent travel
lanes. This may not always be appropriate for every such street:
engineering judgment may suggest other options such as establishing
lower overall speeds and the use of shared lane arrows.

as a political high ground for a bicycle activist, pledging to demand better bikeways is a good goal, but demanding double buffered bikelanes or sharrows is going to leave some traffic coorridors with low cyclist level of service, lower and likely less safe than if AASHTO compliant bikelanes were to be placed as per the current design minimums.

Why shouldn't traffic operating significantly slower than other traffic keep FRAP? And, some posting here hold highly unrealistic expectations that faster traffic will never be passing alongside a bicyclist as the near or pass an intersection.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-10, 11:31 PM   #18
randya
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Bikes: who cares?
Posts: 13,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
^^^ so basically you are arguing for door zone and right hook bike lanes as an acceptable design standard.





IMO, that's pretty close to the end of your credibility here.

randya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-10, 11:33 PM   #19
randya
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Bikes: who cares?
Posts: 13,689
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
as a political high ground for a bicycle activist, pledging to demand better bikeways is a good goal, but demanding double buffered bikelanes or sharrows is going to leave some traffic coorridors with low cyclist level of service, lower and likely less safe than if AASHTO compliant bikelanes were to be placed as per the current design minimums.

Why shouldn't traffic operating significantly slower than other traffic keep FRAP? And, some posting here hold highly unrealistic expectations that faster traffic will never be passing alongside a bicyclist as the near or pass an intersection.
the AASHTO standard is the problem here, along with the FRAP laws and mandatory path/lane laws
randya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-15-10, 11:57 PM   #20
degnaw
Senior Member
 
degnaw's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Bellevue, WA
Bikes:
Posts: 1,605
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by randya View Post
that's kind of a weird setup, what's the lane on the left of the cyclist (to the cyclist's right)?
Contraflow bus lane, I believe:
degnaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-10, 01:17 AM   #21
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by randya View Post
^^^ so basically you are arguing for door zone and right hook bike lanes as an acceptable design standard.


IMO, that's pretty close to the end of your credibility here.
get a grip on yourself. the door zone exists on streets without bikelanes and there are ways to improve bikeways to mitigate the dreaded, kryptonic 'door zone' you're so worried about. I agree removing street parking alongside bikelanes is a way to mitigate the fearmongering hysterics over the 'door zone of death' randya is fretting over.

Fearmongers aside, I know, and so does the president of the League of American Bicyclists, that "There is no evidence to suggest properly designed bike lanes are more dangerous for cyclists, and there is plenty of evidence to suggest that, in fact, bicycle lanes: encourage bicycle use, improve cyclist and motorist lane discipline and predictability, and encourage safer riding behavior (by discouraging wrong way and sidewalk riding). "


I think road users need to respect others right of way
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-10, 07:50 AM   #22
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,696
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 301 Post(s)
Ah heck the LAB drinks it's own kool-aide.

Put down enough paint and the LAB gives you a medal... regardless of how well it's done.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-10, 08:10 AM   #23
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
genec, can you point to any study that shows 'door zone' bikelanes are worth the hysterics?

As far as I can read the conclusions of the researchers, streets with bikelanes are safer than streets without. Anecdotes about cyclists in door zones don't count.

from wikipedia ......

Quote:
Originally Posted by wiki
The authors of a 2009 meta-study on cycle infrastructure safety research at the University of British Columbia similarly conclude that "in comparison to cycling on bicycle-specific infrastructure (paths, lanes, routes), on-road cycling appears to be less safe."[8] In direct contrast to the claims of vehicular cycling proponents, Jennifer Dill and Theresa Carr's research on bicycle transportation in 35 U.S. cities also suggests that "higher levels of bicycle infrastructure are positively and significantly correlated with higher rates of bicycle commuting."[9]
Despite the hysterics and the fearmongering about the dreaded kryptonic door zone of death, bikelanes to AASHTO minimum are effective on several criteria.

The door zone lives and breeds on crowded city streets that have no bikelanes. In my experience in several cities, operating a bicycle in an AASHTO minimum bikelane in the crowded downtown core of a large american city is usually an express route in (relative) safety past the congestion and the traffic. Take a similarly congested street in the same city that has no bikelane, and the cyclist is weaving and darting in and out of stopped traffic past doorzones of parked and idling cars, squeezing thru the narrow spaces riding a street that presents a gratingly low level of service for the vast majority of american cyclists.

Specious expectations that cyclist traffic can be correctly destination positioned at every point a car may turn to the curb or turn right is wildly unrealistic when it comes to a discussion of how to plan for roadway bicycling. Speed differential is real.

Cyclists, of course, still need to keep their wits about them. bikelanes do not absolve bicyclists from paying attention while operating in traffic.

Bicyclist activism to increase the door buffer for bikelane standards established by the MUTCD is valid. Fearmongering about current facilities coupled to absolutes - give bicyclists bufferzones or make them share the lane - simply isn't realistic.

Last edited by Bekologist; 11-16-10 at 08:26 AM.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-10, 08:17 AM   #24
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,696
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 301 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
genec, can you point to any study that shows 'door zone' bikelanes are worth the hysterics?

As far as I can read the conclusions of the researchers, streets with bikelanes are safer than streets without.

from wikipedia ......



Despite the hysterics and the fearmongering about the dreaded kryptonic door zone of death, bikelanes to AASHTO minimum are effective on several criteria.

Sure, bicyclist activism to increase the door buffer for bikelane standards established by the MUTCD is valid. Fearmongering about current facilities coupled to absolutes - give bicyclists bufferzones or make them share the lane - simply isn't realistic.
Heck of a study Bek... their whole conclusion is that bike lanes "appear" to be safer.

OK, my study is that door zone bikelanes appear to be less safe. Ta da... my study!
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-16-10, 08:28 AM   #25
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
really
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:21 AM.