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 06-24-14, 01:09 PM   #101
kickstart 
Senior Member
 
kickstart's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8
Posts: 4,722
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
Nearly all motor vehicles can exceed most road speed limits. That's irrelevant to this discussion. The relevant point is that the facilities for America's bicycle transportation system are officially intended to safely accommodate bicycle riders of all ages and all levels of traffic skill. That means that the designs must favor the low-skills end of the population (because the requirements prohibit designs that requires significant traffic skills), and the combination of cost and politics will sharply cut off money spent on making the designs safe for faster than average cycling. Therefore, these facilities built for America's bicycle transportation system, being bikeways but not roadways, will be found unsatisfactory for those cyclists who understand the benefits of operating according to the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles and who cycle faster than average. Therefore, the bikeway system ought to be what its advocates claim for it, an option for those who prefer it, and not a ghetto established by motordom within which to confine cyclists. That's the issue in contention.
YES....An option for those who prefer it, the rest is just nonsense.
kickstart is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 01:10 PM   #102
Sir Bikesalot
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: CA, USA
Bikes: Surly CrossCheck, Xootr Swift
Posts: 334
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by work4bike View Post

BTW, this seems to be something, for now, only in Portland, Or.

A New Bike Lane That Could Save Lives and Make Cycling More Popular | Autopia | WIRED
That's not exactly the way it's done by the Dutch (or at least in Belgium). A right turn lane for cars is typically placed behind the intersection (so that they don't have to wait for the light at the intersection) which still makes cars cross through bike lanes. While Dutch-style intersections do help, it's the number of cyclists and the attitude towards cyclists that really make the difference in these countries.
Sir Bikesalot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 01:35 PM   #103
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: 23,853
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kickstart View Post
I'm on the road 10 hours a day in the Seattle metropolitan area, yet I almost never see cyclists going that fast except going down some hills as I do on my morning commute. Sustained high speed riding seems to be mostly limited to weekend warriors riding destination roads outside of urban areas.
Your Seattle observations would likely be validated almost anywhere.

I would not expect a single "high speed" 30mph cyclist to last too long in city traffic or anywhere else with numerous intersections or driveways. Such a rider (especially one in a head down areo position maintaining high speed posture) is a ripe candidate for a collision with a motorist making a left turn or entering/crossing the street at an intersection or driveway. The excuse from the motorist would likely be "never saw the cyclist" or more correctly "never expected the cyclist to be going that fast and the turn seemed safe." The cyclist (or survivors) may take comfort in having had the right of way.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 02:08 PM   #104
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,781
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 464 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by spare_wheel View Post
part of my bike commute for almost a decade: http://goo.gl/maps/ykRsy.
i typically hit and maintained 30+ for ~1.5 km on my way to UW.
Oooo 1.5km... not even one mile. Gosh.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 02:45 PM   #105
jyl
Senior Member
 
jyl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland OR
Bikes: 61 Bianchi Specialissima 71 Peugeot G50 7? P'geot PX10 74 Raleigh GranSport 75 P'geot UO8 78? Raleigh Team Pro 82 P'geot PSV 86 P'geot PX 91 Bridgestone MB0 92 B'stone XO1 97 Rans VRex 92 Cannondale R1000 94 B'stone MB5 97 Vitus 997
Posts: 6,954
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Interesting topic - speed differential between cyclists in urban riding.

From what I observe on my daily commute, the range of cyclist speed is something like this:
- Average cyclist pedals 12-15 mph on the flat, slows to around 8 mph on slight uphills (+2% to +3% grades), coasts around 20 mph on slight downhills (-2% to -3%).
- Fast cyclist - I am still talking commuters here, I am not including race teams in pacelines or anything like that - pedals 18-22 mph on the flat, 10-12 mph on the slight uphill, and pedals around 25-30 mph on slight downhills.
- Slow cyclist - can be weak and beginning riders, riders of loaded cargo bikes, pulling kids in trailers, the delivery trikes that we are starting to see more of in Portland, and simply people who are moseying along - who pedals 10-12 mph on the flat, 5 mph on slight uphills, and 15-20 mph on slight downhills.

Remember, only a very small percent of people bicycle today. Suppose more of the "interested/concerned" and "8to80" folks are coaxed to try cycling. Perhaps the "average" cyclists in that case will be slower than today's "average" cyclist.

How do slow, fast and average cyclists co-exist in bike lanes today? On flats, there is a range from 10 to 22 mph. On slight uphills, 5 to 12 mph. On slight downhills, 20 to 30 mph. Those are pretty wide speed variations, in pretty narrow bike lanes (often only 3 feet wide).

In my observation, the reason it works is because cyclists can move freely in and out of the bike lane. When a fast cyclist comes up on a pack of average cyclists, or a slow cyclist pulling a trailer, he can simply check over his shoulder, move left into the traffic lane, pass, and get back in the bike lane. If he is fast enough, he may not ride in the bike lane at all.

Suppose cyclists are trapped in the bike lane, by curbs or parked car buffers on both sides. Then the fast, slow and average cyclists will have a harder time co-existing. The fast cyclist will be passing the slow cyclist at a speed delta that can be 10-15 mph. The lane can't be 3 feet wide any more. Maybe it can be 6 feet wide, if the slower cyclists are disciplined about staying to the right, but many cyclists are not disciplined at all. The more cyclists use the bike lane, the worse this gets. On the N Williams bike lane in Portland, there are sometimes traffic jams of cyclists bottled up, and that is even with the option of using the traffic lane to pass. If the N Williams bike lane were curbed on each side, I think there'd be rider rage incidents.
jyl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 03:05 PM   #106
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 jyl View Post
Interesting topic - speed differential between cyclists in urban riding.

From what I observe on my daily commute, the range of cyclist speed is something like this:
- Average cyclist pedals 12-15 mph on the flat, slows to around 8 mph on slight uphills (+2% to +3% grades), coasts around 20 mph on slight downhills (-2% to -3%).
- Fast cyclist - I am still talking commuters here, I am not including race teams in pacelines or anything like that - pedals 18-22 mph on the flat, 10-12 mph on the slight uphill, and pedals around 25-30 mph on slight downhills.
- Slow cyclist - can be weak and beginning riders, riders of loaded cargo bikes, pulling kids in trailers, the delivery trikes that we are starting to see more of in Portland, and simply people who are moseying along - who pedals 10-12 mph on the flat, 5 mph on slight uphills, and 15-20 mph on slight downhills.

Remember, only a very small percent of people bicycle today. Suppose more of the "interested/concerned" and "8to80" folks are coaxed to try cycling. Perhaps the "average" cyclists in that case will be slower than today's "average" cyclist.

How do slow, fast and average cyclists co-exist in bike lanes today? On flats, there is a range from 10 to 22 mph. On slight uphills, 5 to 12 mph. On slight downhills, 20 to 30 mph. Those are pretty wide speed variations, in pretty narrow bike lanes (often only 3 feet wide).

In my observation, the reason it works is because cyclists can move freely in and out of the bike lane. When a fast cyclist comes up on a pack of average cyclists, or a slow cyclist pulling a trailer, he can simply check over his shoulder, move left into the traffic lane, pass, and get back in the bike lane. If he is fast enough, he may not ride in the bike lane at all.

Suppose cyclists are trapped in the bike lane, by curbs or parked car buffers on both sides. Then the fast, slow and average cyclists will have a harder time co-existing. The fast cyclist will be passing the slow cyclist at a speed delta that can be 10-15 mph. The lane can't be 3 feet wide any more. Maybe it can be 6 feet wide, if the slower cyclists are disciplined about staying to the right, but many cyclists are not disciplined at all. The more cyclists use the bike lane, the worse this gets. On the N Williams bike lane in Portland, there are sometimes traffic jams of cyclists bottled up, and that is even with the option of using the traffic lane to pass. If the N Williams bike lane were curbed on each side, I think there'd be rider rage incidents.
When I last had a regular commuting ride, the distance was 11.5 miles which I typically did in 44 minutes, which is 15.7 mph. The terrain was flat, Sunnyvale to Menlo Park, California.
John Forester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 03:09 PM   #107
CrankyOne
Senior Member
 
CrankyOne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 1,898
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jyl View Post
Suppose cyclists are trapped in the bike lane, by curbs or parked car buffers on both sides. Then the fast, slow and average cyclists will have a harder time co-existing.
Mostly a non-issue if designed properly. Cycletracks and paths in The Netherlands are generally 3-4m wide (10-13 feet) which easily accommodates 3 to 4 'lanes' of bicycle traffic. They also generally have proper curve radiuses and no impediments or furniture. Perhaps most important, people there, just like drivers in most of the world outside of the U.S., stay right except to pass or if riding side-by-side are fairly quick to move right. I've had a number of instances where I've been in a hurry to get somewhere and even during rush times it wasn't a problem.
CrankyOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 03:29 PM   #108
CrankyOne
Senior Member
 
CrankyOne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 1,898
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
The relevant point is that the facilities for America's bicycle transportation system are officially intended to safely accommodate bicycle riders of all ages and all levels of traffic skill. That means that the designs must favor the low-skills end of the population (because the requirements prohibit designs that requires significant traffic skills), and the combination of cost and politics will sharply cut off money spent on making the designs safe for faster than average cycling. Therefore, these facilities built for America's bicycle transportation system, being bikeways but not roadways, will be found unsatisfactory for those cyclists who understand the benefits of operating according to the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles and who cycle faster than average. Therefore, the bikeway system ought to be what its advocates claim for it, an option for those who prefer it, and not a ghetto established by motordom within which to confine cyclists. That's the issue in contention.
John clearly has not spent any time riding the infrastructure in The Netherlands nor even studying anything about it. His views of bicycle infrastructure and how to design bicycle infrastructure indicate that he has significant tunnel vision and believes that bicycle infrastructure must be designed the same as roads for motor vehicles (and worse, motor vehicles in the U.S.) and that bicycles must be limited to the same limits as motor vehicles. And this is not the case.

Bicycles for transportation are far more efficient than cars. Bicycles don't need as much space in general. Bicycles do not need stop signs or lights nor do they need the queuing space and turn lanes necessary for cars to improve the efficiency of stopped traffic at junctions. These are only needed when bicycles intersect with cars. Riders of all ages and abilities, including disabled, co-exist quite well throughout the Netherlands. John has this view that massive skills are necessary for riding a bicycle, which is the case for riding with traffic in the U.S., but is not the case for riding on well designed infrastructure. This is why you see gobs of 8-year-olds riding on their own to school and elsewhere right alongside business people in a hurry to get somewhere beside an 80-year-old on a mobility scooter who are all passed by 4 guys from the BMC racing team.

John needs to spend some time in The Netherlands so that he can broaden his perspective a bit. There's a study tour led by David Hembrow this Sep that I'd highly recommend. I'll even go along (at my own expense) if you want some help and we can even do a tandem together (and I think we'd do better than Boris and Paxo)
CrankyOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 03:44 PM   #109
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,781
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 464 Post(s)
OMG, could we take up a collection to actually send John? Does he even still ride a bike? Will he be able to join the oldsters in the Netherlands and ride with them, and the 8 year old youth? Or will his quest for maximum speed at all times render him unable to withstand the supposed "slow pace" of cycle tracks?

genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 03:49 PM   #110
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,781
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 464 Post(s)
Oh and BTW whether such bike lanes or "infrastructure" actually works in the Netherlands is somewhat irrelevant to John et. al., as they merely contend that such infra would never be installed in the US and/or that US drivers would never understand it.

Remember we still have to tell US drivers to stop ahead and that they must give way to pedestrians while turning. Apparently those things they should have learned before getting a license, seem to slip their minds.
genec is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 04:31 PM   #111
spare_wheel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: NA
Bikes: NA
Posts: 4,281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
Your Seattle observations would likely be validated almost anywhere.
I would not expect a single "high speed" 30mph cyclist to last too long in city traffic or anywhere else with numerous intersections or driveways. Such a rider (especially one in a head down areo position maintaining high speed posture) is a ripe candidate for a collision with a motorist making a left turn or entering/crossing the street at an intersection or driveway. The excuse from the motorist would likely be "never saw the cyclist" or more correctly "never expected the cyclist to be going that fast and the turn seemed safe." The cyclist (or survivors) may take comfort in having had the right of way.
Wishing me ill, ILTB? That's not very nice.
spare_wheel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 04:36 PM   #112
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 CrankyOne View Post
Bicycles do not need stop signs or lights nor do they need the queuing space and turn lanes necessary for cars to improve the efficiency of stopped traffic at junctions. These are only needed when bicycles intersect with cars.

Much snipped
This has been a major point in bicycle traffic engineering from the very beginning. Consider the points of a diamond labelled, for ease in visualization, N, E, S, W as in the points of a compass. A cyclist who wishes to travel from N to S has to cross all traffic between E and W. As long as travel is limited to one plane, call it the ground plane, that has to be so, regardless of what route the cyclist takes. No matter what bikeways get built, the traffic between E and W still exists. And crossing and turning movements cause about 95% of car-bike collisions. The trouble spots are where motor and bicycle traffic intersect, just as CrankyOne stated. So what gets done about these?
John Forester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 04:36 PM   #113
spare_wheel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: NA
Bikes: NA
Posts: 4,281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrankyOne View Post
Mostly a non-issue if designed properly. Cycletracks and paths in The Netherlands are generally 3-4m wide (10-13 feet) which easily accommodates 3 to 4 'lanes' of bicycle traffic. They also generally have proper curve radiuses and no impediments or furniture. Perhaps most important, people there, just like drivers in most of the world outside of the U.S., stay right except to pass or if riding side-by-side are fairly quick to move right. I've had a number of instances where I've been in a hurry to get somewhere and even during rush times it wasn't a problem.
Cycle paths in the netherlands are designed to accommodate much faster scooter and e-bike traffic. On the other hand, cycle tracks in the usa are almost always painfully narrow and clogged with debris and/or pedestrians. In fact, this is *exactly* why I favor buffered bike lanes. We in USAnia and canuckistan can actually afford to build 10 foot wide buffered bike lanes. 10 foot wide separated cycle paths...not so much.
spare_wheel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 05:19 PM   #114
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 CrankyOne View Post
John clearly has not spent any time riding the infrastructure in The Netherlands nor even studying anything about it. His views of bicycle infrastructure and how to design bicycle infrastructure indicate that he has significant tunnel vision and believes that bicycle infrastructure must be designed the same as roads for motor vehicles (and worse, motor vehicles in the U.S.) and that bicycles must be limited to the same limits as motor vehicles. And this is not the case.
John has this view that massive skills are necessary for riding a bicycle, which is the case for riding with traffic in the U.S., but is not the case for riding on well designed infrastructure. This is why you see gobs of 8-year-olds riding on their own to school and elsewhere right alongside business people in a hurry to get somewhere beside an 80-year-old on a mobility scooter who are all passed by 4 guys from the BMC racing team.

John needs to spend some time in The Netherlands so that he can broaden his perspective a bit. There's a study tour led by David Hembrow this Sep that I'd highly recommend. I'll even go along (at my own expense) if you want some help and we can even do a tandem together (and I think we'd do better than Boris and Paxo)
Much snipped, keeping only the material covering CrankyOne's views of John Forester
Way back when the AASHTO bikeway standards were being created, we hoped that bike paths would be like miniature highways in both design and operation. After all, the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles provide for reasonably safe and reasonably efficient operation. However, American society didn't want that; it wanted MUPs, and that's what it got.

CrankyOne believes that I hold that "bicycles must be limited to the same limits as motor vehicles". That's a very vague assertion; it could mean almost anything. I can neither agree with nor deny any statement so outside understanding.

CrankyOne states: "John has this view that massive skills are necessary for riding a bicycle, which is the case for riding with traffic in the U.S., but is not the case for riding on well-designed infrastructure." This is plain false, certainly at the U.S. end, probably at the Dutch end. Operating according to the rules of the road for drivers of vehicle does not require "massive skills". This can be taught to grade-school children in about 1.5 instructor hours; I have done so, and I have supervised other teachers doing so, and the results were demonstrated by actual riding on actual roads in actual traffic. As I understand it, according to those who praise the Dutch system, the Dutch system includes at least as much instruction as I provided in the U.S.

CrankyOne states: "This is why you see gobs of 8-year-olds riding on their own to school and elsewhere right alongside business people in a hurry to get somewhere beside an 80-year-old on a mobility scooter who are all passed by 4 guys from the BMC racing team." I have paid attention to the photographs and videos shown in this nation by those who praise the Dutch and Danish systems, and I have seen nothing such as is described. Young children, and also mothers, yes. The only business people I could identify were obviously not in a hurry; indeed I have seen neither photos nor videos showing Dutch or Danish cyclists hurrying through traffic conditions. Note that when a Dutch cycling advocate visiting the US took videos of plain ordinary commuting cyclists (as identified by cheap bicycles, flat pedals, casual clothes) riding in the normal American way in traffic, the Dutch cyclist described them as racing. Ideas of speed clearly differ between nations. As I posted earlier today, my last regular commuting run was 11.5 miles, over flat terrain between Sunnyvale and Menlo Park, California, which I typically did in 44 minutes. That's 15.7 mph.

For the last five years I have not done significant cycling. I have one bad knee and two bad shoulders and the pain of cycling is just too great. For my last rides I had to give up using a jersey; couldn't get it on over my head.
John Forester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 05:35 PM   #115
CrankyOne
Senior Member
 
CrankyOne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 1,898
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
... The trouble spots are where motor and bicycle traffic intersect, just as CrankyOne stated. So what gets done about these?
Firstly, a primary trouble spot is between junctions with bicycle riders being hit from behind as the recent LAB report indicated, thus the need for cycletracks (or protected bike lanes).

Junctions in The Netherlands, both intersections and roundabouts, handle this conflict by separating bicycles from motor traffic in time and space. Space separation is certainly best with perhaps the bicycle route going underneath motor vehicles. This is not only safer, but also much faster since bicycle riders never need to stop.

When this is not possible then next best is bicycle riders are separated from motor vehicles in time—by signals. Generally, anytime a bicycle rider has a green light, no cars will also have a green light that allows them to cross the cycle crossing. Also keep in mind that right-on-red is an American deal and I don't believe is practiced anywhere in Europe. BTW, I think the longest I have ever had to wait for a green light on my bicycle is 30 seconds (vs routinely waiting 2 or 3 minutes in the U.S.). On many routes bicycles are included in the standard light cycles, many of the others have sensors (usually motion), and a few do have buttons.

The pinnacle of this is the simultaneous green where bicycle riders from all directions (John's N, S, E, W, as well as diagonals) are given a green at once and all motor traffic is given red. This is extremely efficient as a huge number of bicycle riders can make it safely through in a short amount of time and there is no two-stage turn required since diagonals can be used.

For more: A view from the cycle path: Delays at traffic light controlled crossings

At roundabouts and non-signaled intersections right-of-way is indicated by shark's teeth. Often bicycle riders have ROW so motor traffic is given the teen though sometimes motor traffic has ROW and bicycle riders are given the teeth. There is a good photo to illustrate this in the middle of this page. The sharks teeth make it very evident who has ROW.
CrankyOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 05:50 PM   #116
CrankyOne
Senior Member
 
CrankyOne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Bikes:
Posts: 1,898
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 50 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
For the last five years I have not done significant cycling. I have one bad knee and two bad shoulders and the pain of cycling is just too great. For my last rides I had to give up using a jersey; couldn't get it on over my head.
Before continuing with other stuff I want to offer my heartfelt condolences. I'm a couple of decades behind you but feel your pain. I hope that you'll be able to get back on a bike someday and that I'll be able to continue for a couple of more decades. At least. :-)
CrankyOne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 06:36 PM   #117
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 CrankyOne View Post
Firstly, a primary trouble spot is between junctions with bicycle riders being hit from behind as the recent LAB report indicated, thus the need for cycletracks (or protected bike lanes).

Junctions in The Netherlands, both intersections and roundabouts, handle this conflict by separating bicycles from motor traffic in time and space. Space separation is certainly best with perhaps the bicycle route going underneath motor vehicles. This is not only safer, but also much faster since bicycle riders never need to stop.

When this is not possible then next best is bicycle riders are separated from motor vehicles in time—by signals. Generally, anytime a bicycle rider has a green light, no cars will also have a green light that allows them to cross the cycle crossing. Also keep in mind that right-on-red is an American deal and I don't believe is practiced anywhere in Europe. BTW, I think the longest I have ever had to wait for a green light on my bicycle is 30 seconds (vs routinely waiting 2 or 3 minutes in the U.S.). On many routes bicycles are included in the standard light cycles, many of the others have sensors (usually motion), and a few do have buttons.

The pinnacle of this is the simultaneous green where bicycle riders from all directions (John's N, S, E, W, as well as diagonals) are given a green at once and all motor traffic is given red. This is extremely efficient as a huge number of bicycle riders can make it safely through in a short amount of time and there is no two-stage turn required since diagonals can be used.

For more: A view from the cycle path: Delays at traffic light controlled crossings

At roundabouts and non-signaled intersections right-of-way is indicated by shark's teeth. Often bicycle riders have ROW so motor traffic is given the teen though sometimes motor traffic has ROW and bicycle riders are given the teeth. There is a good photo to illustrate this in the middle of this page. The sharks teeth make it very evident who has ROW.
CrankyOne is incorrect in claiming: "Firstly, a primary trouble spot is between junctions with bicycle riders being hit from behind as the recent LAB report indicated, thus the need for cycletracks (or protected bike lanes)." LAB fooled you, didn't it? That's deliberate on their part because LAB is a bikeway advocacy organization. LAB is expressing concern about only about 1% of car-bike collisions, which is the fraction that fatal hit-from-directly-behind are of all car-bike collisions. A better understanding is that somewhat less than 5% of car-bike collisions are caused by that means while 95% of car-bike collisions are caused by turning or crossing movements by either or both parties.

Certainly grade separated intersections between motor and bicycle traffic are possible. One of the earliest system installations was in a newly-developed north London suburb near my cousin's house (forget its name now; I knew its designer) where all the arterial junctions were treated this way. But there's little point in relying on such when it is impractical to rebuild to install them.

Time separation by different traffic-signal phases has been known for decades. It ought to be obvious that the more separate phases are in the cycle, the less green time that anybody gets. So, when installed for typical American traffic conditions cyclists are going to get significantly more and longer delays than when relying on the present signalling system.

The cyclist scatter intersection (I had a better name for it, once. There was one on the south side of the UC Berkeley campus.) is efficient only if cyclists also go through on the motor-vehicle greens, and I'm not even sure about that.

As for using shark's teeth to assign right of way when conditions do not otherwise indicate it, that has been started in the US. If it gets frequently used in the US, who is going to typically get the right of way, American motorist or American cyclist? Based on past practice in similar situations, it will be the American motorist.
John Forester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 06:46 PM   #118
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: 23,853
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by spare_wheel View Post
Wishing me ill, ILTB? That's not very nice.
Do you really believe that my comments are about you? Ha, ha, you must be funnin' me.

Believe it or not I never wish anything about you, or even think about you, ever.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 08:41 PM   #119
ro-monster
Senior Member
 
ro-monster's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Bay Area, California
Bikes: Pacific Reach, Specialized Myka Expert
Posts: 791
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrankyOne View Post
Firstly, a primary trouble spot is between junctions with bicycle riders being hit from behind as the recent LAB report indicated, thus the need for cycletracks (or protected bike lanes).
Perhaps you should read the report again, a little more critcally. Look at the actual data, and not at the summary, which is unfortunately marred by marketing spin. Yes, they did try to frame it so it sounded like hit-from-behind collisions were common, but that isn't what their data actually indicated. The data indicated that hit-from-behind collisions comprise 40% of all fatal collisions. But what's not mentioned is that fatal collisions are a tiny fraction of all bike crashes. You are far more likely to be hit by a vehicle in an intersection than between intersections, but these crashes tend to cause injuries rather than fatalities, so they were not considered in the study.
ro-monster is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 10:01 PM   #120
jputnam
Senior Member
 
jputnam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Pacific, WA
Bikes: Custom 531ST touring, Bilenky Viewpoint, Bianchi Milano, vintage Condor racer
Posts: 1,261
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
Where are those streets, especially in cities, where "fast cyclists" regularly ride at 30 mph for any length of time or distance? Maybe on downhill slopes but not likely anywhere else. What percentage of current riders on city streets (i.e. not on club or training rides) fit into your so-called "fast cyclists" designation?
Very few riders are truly fast, that's why they're not considered in design of bicycle facilities, either in the U.S. or in Europe.

AASHTO says facilities for ordinary, non-enthusiast cyclists should be designed to an 18 mph design speed on level ground, which accommodates 85% of expected users.

CROW calls for a slightly higher 18.5 mph design speed... does that make the Netherlands the capital of the vehicular cycling movement? Or does it mean they have a goal of promoting bicycle mode share, which demands safety and convenience?
jputnam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 10:12 PM   #121
jputnam
Senior Member
 
jputnam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Pacific, WA
Bikes: Custom 531ST touring, Bilenky Viewpoint, Bianchi Milano, vintage Condor racer
Posts: 1,261
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
FYI, Denmark also sees speed as vital for successful cycling. From the city's bicycle plan and polling:

[h=2]Why do Copenhageners cycle?[/h]
  • Itís faster Ė 56 %
  • Itís more convenient Ė 37 %
  • It's healthy - 26 %
  • Itís cheap Ė29 %
  • Itís a good way to start the day/well-being - 12 %
  • Itís because of new job/relocation - 9 %
  • Itís because of the environment - 5 %


No surprise, then, that Copenhagen is going to great lengths to increase the speed of its bicycle facilities, such as removing traffic signals, and upgrading remaining traffic signals to prioritize cyclists. "Green wave" timing all by itself can add 2 mph to the average cyclist's speed made good (net travel speed including intersection delays), and in Copenhagen, they say that's worth the cost.
jputnam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 10:39 PM   #122
jyl
Senior Member
 
jyl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland OR
Bikes: 61 Bianchi Specialissima 71 Peugeot G50 7? P'geot PX10 74 Raleigh GranSport 75 P'geot UO8 78? Raleigh Team Pro 82 P'geot PSV 86 P'geot PX 91 Bridgestone MB0 92 B'stone XO1 97 Rans VRex 92 Cannondale R1000 94 B'stone MB5 97 Vitus 997
Posts: 6,954
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrankyOne View Post
Mostly a non-issue if designed properly. Cycletracks and paths in The Netherlands are generally 3-4m wide (10-13 feet) which easily accommodates 3 to 4 'lanes' of bicycle traffic. They also generally have proper curve radiuses and no impediments or furniture. Perhaps most important, people there, just like drivers in most of the world outside of the U.S., stay right except to pass or if riding side-by-side are fairly quick to move right. I've had a number of instances where I've been in a hurry to get somewhere and even during rush times it wasn't a problem.
10-13 foot wide cycle ways will not be built on many streets in my city. There are a handful of places this could happen, mostly on short stretches of one way streets where 3 traffic lanes could be changed to 2 traffic + 1 bike, most of those are in the city center. On the vast majority of city streets, there is no room. Unless you want to make a four lane arterial into a two lane bottleneck, or remove miles of street parking through commercial and residential districts; neither would have even close to enough public support.
jyl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-14, 11:18 PM   #123
spare_wheel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: NA
Bikes: NA
Posts: 4,281
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jyl View Post
Unless you want to make a four lane arterial into a two lane bottleneck
On arterials with moderate traffic, road diets do not typically cause bottlenecks because they stimulate use of other modes or routes.
spare_wheel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-14, 12:24 AM   #124
Rollfast
What happened?
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Around here somewhere
Bikes:
Posts: 3,715
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 116 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrankyOne View Post
Mostly a non-issue if designed properly. Cycletracks and paths in The Netherlands are generally 3-4m wide (10-13 feet) which easily accommodates 3 to 4 'lanes' of bicycle traffic. They also generally have proper curve radiuses and no impediments or furniture. Perhaps most important, people there, just like drivers in most of the world outside of the U.S., stay right except to pass or if riding side-by-side are fairly quick to move right. I've had a number of instances where I've been in a hurry to get somewhere and even during rush times it wasn't a problem.
It was a major pain when they widened SW 4th Avenue in Ontario, OR from 3 to five lanes in the 80s as it was. That may be why that entire street has no bike lanes for nearly 30 blocks and then after that only at the Yturri Beltway and N. Oregon St and then E. Idaho Ave at the I-84 interchange, which ends at the Idaho border near Walmart and is never seen again past the Snake River Bridge and Mallard's Grocery.

ODOT couldn't be trusted to actually inform anybody outside of Payette what those flashing lights in the middle of the road are (not very well-thought out demand pedestrian crossings at the park and ahead of Mallard's and at the Medical Center, right there for the clueless to blow right through.

And NOW you know why the sidewalks are safer in most parts of town. After thirty years you just notice these things and work with it.

PS It's not so easy to resolve problems with a town layout dating back to at least 1930 and the 1890s near the center of town (where the short line and now Union Pacific has right of way, one underpass dated just before WWII to serve what became Heinz Frozen Foods/Ore-Ida and US Highway 30 then Interstate 84 and in the early nineties Walmart and the fast food/sprawl hades went in, and that overpass at SW 18th that finally got built less that ten years ago, leaving only FOUR West to East connections across the railroad.

Every effort to improve traffic flow lately has involve getting truck and other highway arterials aimed around the edge of town at Highways 201 and 20-26.

Lately even that sprawled east side has been rather dead.

What is the most ironic is that ODOT built into that mess and DMV moved over behind our now-dead mall next to the cemetery.

I tend to think you have it better in Portland.
__________________
Don't let some well-meaning person write an uplifting story in your obituary. YOU ARE DEAD.

Last edited by Rollfast; 06-25-14 at 12:41 AM.
Rollfast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-25-14, 05:46 AM   #125
jyl
Senior Member
 
jyl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland OR
Bikes: 61 Bianchi Specialissima 71 Peugeot G50 7? P'geot PX10 74 Raleigh GranSport 75 P'geot UO8 78? Raleigh Team Pro 82 P'geot PSV 86 P'geot PX 91 Bridgestone MB0 92 B'stone XO1 97 Rans VRex 92 Cannondale R1000 94 B'stone MB5 97 Vitus 997
Posts: 6,954
Mentioned: 11 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by spare_wheel View Post
On arterials with moderate traffic, road diets do not typically cause bottlenecks because they stimulate use of other modes or routes.
A single TriMet bus will bottle up a two lane road.
jyl 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 03:21 PM.