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 10-26-12, 12:55 PM   #1
Seattle Forrest
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Seattle Forrest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Seattle, WA
Bikes:
Posts: 13,549
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 155 Post(s)
Cycling advocates say [bike] tracks are the future.



Quote:
Originally Posted by King 5 News
Move over bike lanes, bike tracks are gearing up in Seattle.

Seattle has spent $35 million over the past five years on bicycle lanes, but now the city is changing direction.

...

Cycling advocates say tracks are the future.

http://www.king5.com/news/local/Seat...175882571.html
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seattle Bike Blog
Rail Transit Manager for SDOT Ethan Melone said that the cycle track actually pays for itself, since there are utilities under the proposed track that would have to be moved otherwise. He called that a “win-win.” As for project details, separation methods SDOT is looking at includes curbs, planter boxes and paint (and combinations of these methods). SDOT has spent time studying bike signals and signage to the extent that they think the cycle track will be an “appealing and safe” facility.

He also pointed out that Broadway is a good place to innovate something like this because it’s not actually a bike commuter corridor. Instead, it’s a popular street that bikers may currently be avoiding due to lack of accommodation.

http://seattlebikeblog.com/2010/09/2...ay-for-itself/
I'm in favor of things that get more people on their bikes, for a lot of reasons, but among them is the fact that more cyclists make a safer riding environment for all of us.
Seattle Forrest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-12, 01:35 PM   #2
Keith99
Senior Member
 
Keith99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seattle Forrest View Post



I'm in favor of things that get more people on their bikes, for a lot of reasons, but among them is the fact that more cyclists make a safer riding environment for all of us.
If no turns are permitted on the street fine, otherwise it requires a multiphase signal (With very clear no right turn on red) or it is quite dangerous.
Keith99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-12, 02:54 PM   #3
silmarillion
Senior Member
 
silmarillion's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Atlanta, Georgia
Bikes: 2012 Cinelli Mystic Rat, Nashbar CX
Posts: 720
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
This is similar to what they have in areas of Stockholm. I didn't ride there, but I thought it looked pretty cool the way they had it laid out. Some areas even had their own little traffic lights.
silmarillion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-12, 03:06 PM   #4
telkanuru
Senior Member
 
telkanuru's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Allston, MA
Bikes: Trek 720 (touring, 1981 (?) model); Trek 7.3
Posts: 171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'm gonna go grab some popcorn for this.
telkanuru is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-12, 04:07 PM   #5
Daves_Not_Here
On your right
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Southern California
Bikes: Specialized Roubaix Elite
Posts: 694
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith99 View Post
If no turns are permitted on the street fine, otherwise it requires a multiphase signal (With very clear no right turn on red) or it is quite dangerous.
"The food was terrible, and there wasn't enough of it."

Is it just me, but does it seem like no matter how much time, thought and money is spent on cycling infrastructure, the resulting improvements are instantly judged to be extremely dangerous or deficient by the cycling community?

List of cycling facilities deemed to be extremely dangerous by cyclists
- Roads, wide, narrow, divided, with shoulder, without shoulder, 2 lane, 4 lane, containing pacelines
- Bike lanes, in door zone, separated, on right-side, 18", 24", 36", 60", with debris, on toll bridges
- Sharrows, hash marks on right, hash marks on left, hash marks in center, hash marks on some clueless place
- MUPs, with dividing lines, without dividing lines, shared with pedestrians, shared with equestrians, dogs, anyone whatsoever
- Bike paths, wide, narrow, straight, with curves, with traffic, abandoned, crossing live fire gunnery ranges
- Sidewalks, with handicap access, without handicap access, with live patrols to stop knuckleheads that walk
- High wires, tight, slack, suspended across the Grand Canyon
- Airstrips, international, dirt, with taxiways, uncontrolled, in Somalia
- Parking lots, empty, that permit automobiles, hosting autocross rallies, drivers-ed classes for blind people
- Other
Daves_Not_Here is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-12, 04:07 PM   #6
rekmeyata
Senior Member
 
rekmeyata's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Bikes:
Posts: 7,502
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 55 Post(s)
Maybe bicycles future will be like the car future where the cyclists doesn't have to steer or brake, just pedal and let the wire in the ground guide us.
rekmeyata is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-12, 04:08 PM   #7
lostarchitect 
incazzare.
 
lostarchitect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Bikes: See sig
Posts: 6,024
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith99 View Post
If no turns are permitted on the street fine, otherwise it requires a multiphase signal (With very clear no right turn on red) or it is quite dangerous.

We are getting similar things in NYC now, and they have multiphase signals which seem to work fine. I am very happy with most of the new infrastructure here.
__________________
1964 JRJ (Bob Jackson), 1973 Wes Mason, 1974 Raleigh Gran Sport, 1986 Schwinn High Sierra, 2000ish Colian (Colin Laing), 2011 Dick Chafe, 2013 Velo Orange Pass Hunter
lostarchitect is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-12, 04:09 PM   #8
lostarchitect 
incazzare.
 
lostarchitect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Bikes: See sig
Posts: 6,024
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daves_Not_Here View Post
Is it just me, but does it seem like no matter how much time, thought and money is spent on cycling infrastructure, the resulting improvements are instantly judged to be extremely dangerous or deficient by the cycling community?
People like to whine.
__________________
1964 JRJ (Bob Jackson), 1973 Wes Mason, 1974 Raleigh Gran Sport, 1986 Schwinn High Sierra, 2000ish Colian (Colin Laing), 2011 Dick Chafe, 2013 Velo Orange Pass Hunter
lostarchitect is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-12, 04:19 PM   #9
John Forester
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 4,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by telkanuru View Post
I'm gonna go grab some popcorn for this.
You may well do so. Cycle tracks have enormous appeal to people who believe that by far the greatest danger to cyclists is that from same-direction motor traffic, and who, therefore, practically ignore the hazards of crossing and turning traffic. This belief is the exact opposite of the car-bike collision statistics. This belief was created by motordom to assist in clearing the roads of cyclists, as written in the FTR, MBP, and MBL laws and taught to the public through fear. The only principled opposition to cycle tracks will come from vehicular cyclists, unless and until the traffic engineers wake up to the traffic problems associated with making cycle tracks safe.
John Forester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-12, 04:37 PM   #10
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 23,510
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daves_Not_Here View Post
Is it just me, but does it seem like no matter how much time, thought and money is spent on cycling infrastructure, the resulting improvements are instantly judged to be extremely dangerous or deficient by the cycling community?
Cycling community? What cycling community? Ya don't mean a self appointed spokesman for the one (and only) true way with a few gullible disciples do ya?
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-12, 07:17 PM   #11
Daves_Not_Here
On your right
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Southern California
Bikes: Specialized Roubaix Elite
Posts: 694
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
Cycling community? What cycling community? Ya don't mean a self appointed spokesman for the one (and only) true way with a few gullible disciples do ya?
Actually not singling anyone out in particular -- I've just noticed that when a cycling-specific investment is announced somewhere, the local cyclists seem to come out of the woodwork to complain. I'm thinking of the bikeway on the Miami Causeway and various bikelanes and sharrows.
Daves_Not_Here is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-12, 07:27 PM   #12
B. Carfree
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Bikes:
Posts: 6,196
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
Cycling community? What cycling community? Ya don't mean a self appointed spokesman for the one (and only) true way with a few gullible disciples do ya?
This "cycling community" seems to be mostly made up of people who are rather new to riding bikes. They seem a bit like the new converts to a religion. They've found god and insist you find the same one.
B. Carfree is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-12, 08:02 PM   #13
DieselDan
Senior Member
 
DieselDan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Beaufort, South Carolina, USA and surrounding islands.
Bikes: Cannondale R500, Motobecane Messenger
Posts: 8,521
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I have a word for cycling advocates that would get me banned.
DieselDan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-12, 08:18 PM   #14
skye
Senior Member
 
skye's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Bikes:
Posts: 884
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 11 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
You may well do so. Cycle tracks have enormous appeal to people who believe that by far the greatest danger to cyclists is that from same-direction motor traffic, and who, therefore, practically ignore the hazards of crossing and turning traffic. This belief is the exact opposite of the car-bike collision statistics. This belief was created by motordom to assist in clearing the roads of cyclists, as written in the FTR, MBP, and MBL laws and taught to the public through fear. The only principled opposition to cycle tracks will come from vehicular cyclists, unless and until the traffic engineers wake up to the traffic problems associated with making cycle tracks safe.
Increasing evidence from the UK and the Netherlands is steadily refuting your circa-1965 studies, John.
skye is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-12, 08:23 PM   #15
corvuscorvax
Gone.
 
Join Date: May 2011
Bikes:
Posts: 509
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
Cycling community? What cycling community? Ya don't mean a self appointed spokesman for the one (and only) true way with a few gullible disciples do ya?
He means the cognoscenti.
corvuscorvax is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-12, 09:32 PM   #16
John Forester
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 4,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Re: cycle tracks

Quote:
Originally Posted by skye View Post
Increasing evidence from the UK and the Netherlands is steadily refuting your circa-1965 studies, John.
On the contrary, that evidence from the Netherlands (I know of no evidence from the UK about cycle tracks) confirms what I wrote in the 1970s, in that cycle tracks are safe only when special measures are taken to prevent the collision-causing conflicting traffic movements produced by cycle tracks. The best that Americans have managed to do, to date, is a half-hearted imitation of Dutch practices. It is my opinion that typical American cities will not install the full Dutch system and, also, that Americans will not be making a transportationally significant switch from motor to bicycle transportation.
John Forester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-12, 07:22 AM   #17
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 23,510
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by corvuscorvax View Post
He means the cognoscenti.
(Self deluded) cognoscenti.
Datz wot I thought.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-12, 07:34 AM   #18
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 23,510
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daves_Not_Here View Post
Actually not singling anyone out in particular -- I've just noticed that when a cycling-specific investment is announced somewhere, the local cyclists seem to come out of the woodwork to complain. I'm thinking of the bikeway on the Miami Causeway and various bikelanes and sharrows.
I don't doubt that any proposed cycling project brings out "complainers." Who those complainers represent is the question. I doubt that the complainers about proposed cycling improvements represent any significant percent of the population (cycling community) that would/could use/benefit from the project. The complainers are even less likely to represent the local cycling community when the complainers are not local, or are spokesmen for an extreme fringe of "enthusiasts."
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-12, 07:42 AM   #19
hagen2456
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: Copenhagen
Bikes: A load of ancient, old and semi-vintage bikes of divers sorts
Posts: 1,827
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
You may well do so. Cycle tracks have enormous appeal to people who believe that by far the greatest danger to cyclists is that from same-direction motor traffic, and who, therefore, practically ignore the hazards of crossing and turning traffic. This belief is the exact opposite of the car-bike collision statistics. ...
...but not fatality statistics...

Quote:
...This belief was created by motordom to assist in clearing the roads of cyclists, as written in the FTR, MBP, and MBL laws and taught to the public through fear. The only principled opposition to cycle tracks will come from vehicular cyclists, unless and until the traffic engineers wake up to the traffic problems associated with making cycle tracks safe.
...and this making-safe is, among other measures, taken care of with separate lights.

But you know all this.
hagen2456 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-12, 07:53 AM   #20
rando
Senior Member
 
rando's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tempe, AZ
Bikes:
Posts: 2,967
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
No matter what the "problems" may be, people are going to figure out how to use such a facility to their best advantage. No facility is going to be perfect for everyone. I like that they are trying it out.
__________________
"Think of bicycles as rideable art that can just about save the world". ~Grant Petersen

Cyclists fare best when they recognize that there are times when acting vehicularly is not the best practice, and are flexible enough to do what is necessary as the situation warrants.--Me
rando is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-12, 08:40 AM   #21
dynodonn 
Senior Member
 
dynodonn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 7,284
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by hagen2456 View Post
...and this making-safe is, among other measures, taken care of with separate lights.

As long as it is strongly emphasized to US motorists(signage/red arrow right turn light) that they cannot make a right turn on a red light while operating near one of those cycling tracks. . I feel it's not going to be foolproof since US motorists are allowed/conditioned to make a right turn on red just about everywhere they drive.
dynodonn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-12, 11:25 AM   #22
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 23,510
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dynodonn View Post
I feel it's not going to be foolproof since ...
What road (or activity) is foolproof?
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-12, 11:46 AM   #23
dynodonn 
Senior Member
 
dynodonn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Bikes:
Posts: 7,284
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
What road (or activity) is foolproof?


Ok, foolproof may not have been the best choice of words, but if a municipality implements this design of cycle track, they should consider taking the strongest of actions to limit as many motorists as possible from making right turns on red when operating near that cycle track.
dynodonn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-12, 11:59 AM   #24
Chris516
24-Speed Machine
 
Chris516's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Wash. Grove, MD
Bikes: 2003 Specialized Allez 24-Speed Road Bike
Posts: 6,054
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seattle Forrest View Post





I'm in favor of things that get more people on their bikes, for a lot of reasons, but among them is the fact that more cyclists make a safer riding environment for all of us.
My only problem with the image you included, is that, the concrete barrier is not hi enough to be effective.

EDIT: Just as with motorized vehicular traffic, traffic engineers would have to account for the land needed to build 'cycle tracks' within the same road space, when reconstructing the total width of the 'cycle tracks n' road combined.

Every time a state DOT determined a road needed widening, I don't see 'cycle tracks' being included in a road improvement project for widening the road(s).

Last edited by Chris516; 11-03-12 at 05:44 PM.
Chris516 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-12, 02:51 PM   #25
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 23,510
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by dynodonn View Post
Ok, foolproof may not have been the best choice of words, but if a municipality implements this design of cycle track, they should consider taking the strongest of actions to limit as many motorists as possible from making right turns on red when operating near that cycle track.
A reasonable clarification. It does help to avoid vague requirements like "foolproof" that can exclude everything. Just as vague as the next poster who claims that the proposed barrier is not high enough to be "effective." Whatever "effective" is supposed to mean; maybe it means foolproof to the poster.
I-Like-To-Bike 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 02:22 PM.