35mph traffic, bike lane, buffer zone, parking- where does a VC ride?

[Bekologist]

Yesterday on my ride I went along Rainier Ave S in Seattle towards Renton. 2 lanes of traffic, center turn lane, bike lanes, buffer zone, parking strip. Not a lot of cars parked on the road, it was saturday.

Where do i position my bike? Do I ride like an artful dodger, riding in the center of the lane with traffic, and only ceding my position seconds before they have to pass me?

Or, does a person riding VC ride in the bike lane?

I wound up riding in the parking strip %70 of the time, with the double white lines of the bike lane and buffer to my left between me and traffic. Took the bike lane when there was parked cars ahead, and never once rode like the artful dodger except at a couple of intersections where I was pulling around turning traffic etc.

[I-Like-To-Bike]

Where do i position my bike? Do I ride like an artful dodger, riding in the center of the lane with traffic, and only ceding my position seconds before they have to pass me?

Or, does a person riding VC ride in the bike lane?
You and other Bike Lane Industrial Complex lobbyists should be prepared to be set straight, again.

Be forewarned, a new chapter of the HH manifesto on the "Danger Zone" is getting reviewed by Real Bicyclist Advocates on a different discussion group where Serge likes to preview his retorts and latest twists on dogma. Expect the latest version of Danger Zone rhetorical "stuff" to be posted upon completion of this weekend's club ride.

Even may include built-in "gotcha's" and other sophist tricks to prevent rebuttal.

[Little Darwin]

My opinion is based on information received in the forums.

If your concern is being able to declare yourself VC, then ride in the traffic lane. If your goal is to be as safe as possible, then make your decision based on what you see as the safest route. I lean toward the second option.

I am not very VC (I ride shoulders when available and safe, and choose my routes to make this most effective). Therefore my opinion should be taken with apropriate weight.

[I-Like-To-Bike]

My opinion is based on information received in the forums.

If your concern is being able to declare yourself VC, then ride in the traffic lane. If your goal is to be as safe as possible, then make your decision based on what you see as the safest route. I lean toward the second option.

I am not very VC (I ride shoulders when available and safe, and choose my routes to make this most effective). Therefore my opinion should be taken with apropriate weight.
You have succeeded in assigning the appropriate weight to the electronic dreck that passes for information on these forums and drawn an appropriate conclusion for your own cycling. Sounds to me like your weighty and sensible opinion comes from using your head, common sense and experience; not from the dreamy interpretations of reality emanating from VC Bible Thumpers.

[Brad M]

You have succeeded in assigning the appropriate weight to the electronic dreck that passes for information on these forums and drawn an appropriate conclusion for your own cycling. Sounds to me like your weighty and sensible opinion comes from using your head, common sense and experience; not from the dreamy interpretations of reality emanating from VC Bible Thumpers.
I like you.

[michaelnel]

I don't understand why it is necessary to declare oneself as VC or not. Heck, I do what I think is right for me when I ride. In the described situation I'd probably ride in the bike lane over to the left to stay out of the door zone, but I'd also feel free to leave it any time I felt it necessary to give myself more space or to avoid potholes and junk.

Just ride.

[patc]

I wound up riding in the parking strip %70 of the time, with the double white lines of the bike lane and buffer to my left between me and traffic. Took the bike lane when there was parked cars ahead, and never once rode like the artful dodger except at a couple of intersections where I was pulling around turning traffic etc.

Sounds like you found a good way to deal with the situation, once which you thought about and felt comfortable with. Why care if anyone else would call it "VC" or not?

[chipcom]

Sounds like you found a good way to deal with the situation, once which you thought about and felt comfortable with. Why care if anyone else would call it "VC" or not?

+1

[Bekologist]

I'm curious as to what a VC advocate would say is the correct road position. I already ride however the hell I want, and could give a rat's *** if people thought I was VC or not. This isn't French Indochine in the 50's.

I want to know how far removed from cycling reality VC dogma is. Would a VC artful dodger ignore this swept bike lane with buffer zone, and maybe even come up with some rationale the center of the traffic lane is a preffered, safer, riding position? Or would a real vehicular cyclist advocate to ride in the bike lane?

[richardmasoner]

Would a VC artful dodger ignore this swept bike lane with buffer zone, and maybe even come up with some rationale the center of the traffic lane is a preffered, safer, riding position?

No, of course not. Do you all really believe these strawmans?

Taking the lane is only done if the lane is too narrow to share safely. If you have the space to the right, then that's the preferred positioning.

RFM

[randya]

Answer - In a VC's wet dream there would not be a bike lane present.

[LCI_Brian]

I'm curious as to what a VC advocate would say is the correct road position. I already ride however the hell I want, and could give a rat's *** if people thought I was VC or not. This isn't French Indochine in the 50's.

I want to know how far removed from cycling reality VC dogma is. Would a VC artful dodger ignore this swept bike lane with buffer zone, and maybe even come up with some rationale the center of the traffic lane is a preffered, safer, riding position? Or would a real vehicular cyclist advocate to ride in the bike lane?
When you refer to the "buffer" zone, I you're talking about a wide enough space between the bike lane and the parked cars to avoid being doored. If so, I would consider riding in the bike lane to be the "correct" VC road position.

Even Forester himself advocates choosing a road position as if the bike lane stripe was not there. So if you were to take this same road without the bike lane stripes, a VC would first be far enough left to avoid the car doors. Since the remainder of the road would then be safely shareable with motorists, the VC wouldn't move any further left. Therefore, that puts the cyclist where the bike lane would be.

The concept of bike lanes in and of itself isn't necessary anti-vehicular. After all, for example, on freeways with a steep grade, they have slow moving vehicle lanes for trucks. Now a bike lane to the right of a right turn only lane would be anti-vehicular. But a bike lane in the situation you describe wouldn't be anti-vehicular, assuming laws in your state allow the cyclist to legally move out of the bike lane to avoid hazards, pass a slower cyclist, make a left turn, etc.

[I-Like-To-Bike]

Would a VC artful dodger ignore this swept bike lane with buffer zone, and maybe even come up with some rationale the center of the traffic lane is a preffered, safer, riding position?

No, of course not. Do you all really believe these strawmans?

Taking the lane is only done if the lane is too narrow to share safely. If you have the space to the right, then that's the preferred positioning.

Your statement about preferred positioning makes sense and is in line with what almost anyone with any cycling experience would say.

However Beckologist most certainly did not create a straw man argument about the space to the right being declared as the "Danger Zone!" for any and all cyclists. At least one member of the we-VCer, Real Bicyclist Advocate Gang has prattled on about the dangers of not using a center position in the lane as the primary/preferred cycling position. I'm sure he will soon inform you and me of our misunderstanding of the context of his belief in this VC "straw man" of his own making

[Bekologist]

I'm hoping I get a rebuttal in my 'taking the whole WOL? VC?' thread!

Yes, I believe in cyclists taking a preferred position that is to the best benefit of the cyclist, independant of any traffic striping Funny thing is, a lot of times that's the bike line/lane!

So I'm trying to figure out why I would want to ride in the middle of a road if the truly preferred position is in the middle of the bike lane (on any given particular roadway, NOT all bike lanes...).

I'm envisioning some sophistic drivel about 'lines of sight' and 'driver's reaction time to obstructions' will be the rusty bolts that picture hangs on.

[I-Like-To-Bike]

I'm envisioning some sophistic drivel about 'lines of sight' and 'driver's reaction time to obstructions' will be the rusty bolts that picture hangs on.
I have seen the future and you are having accurate visions of the Danger Zone Manifesrto soon to hit this venue.

[joejack951]

The only time I'd want to be in the middle of the road in that situation is if I wanted to make a left turn and or pass/avoid something on my right.

ILTB: can you point me to where someone with a clue about VC suggests taking the lane for the sake of taking the lane, as when an acceptable bike lane/wide road is present?

[Bekologist]

I don't know if this person actually HAS a clue, but one of them likes to post copiously about VC method in here, Joejack.

[richardmasoner]

Yes, I believe in cyclists taking a preferred position that is to the best benefit of the cyclist, independant of any traffic striping. Funny thing is, a lot of times that's the bike line/lane!

Well golly, you sound like you're riding VC to me.

RFM

[joejack951]

I don't know if this person actually HAS a clue, but one of them likes to post copiously about VC method in here, Joejack.

Yes, and I've read a lot of his posts and I've never read anything of the sort. If I missed a post, I'd certainly like to see it. I usually agree with "him" but I'd definitely disagree about that point.

[I-Like-To-Bike]

Yes, and I've read a lot of his posts and I've never read anything of the sort. If I missed a post, I'd certainly like to see it. I usually agree with "him" but I'd definitely disagree about that point.
Try message #154 or #223 in the Taking the whole WOL? VC? Thread.
http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=1817807&postcount=154
http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=1826114&postcount=223

If this doesn't answer your question nothing will. Even more of the same can be found on other lists that cater to or have been overrun by VC zealots.

[Daily Commute]

Pick your line as if the bike lane didn't exist. As Brian said, sometimes that means riding in the bike lane. That makes the road just like any other wide curb lane road, and there's a whole thread on that.

[LCI_Brian]

Pick your line as if the bike lane didn't exist. As Brian said, sometimes that means riding in the bike lane. That makes the road just like any other wide curb lane road, and there's a whole thread on that.
Wow, you said it in a lot fewer words than me! But at least I use a lot fewer words than HH! ;)

[LittleBigMan]

Speaking for myself, I would ride in the bike lane. In my case, there usually isn't a bike lane to ride in, but when there is, I ride in it, unless it's not safe to do so.

I reason that once the bike lane is painted, as long as it's a safe bike lane, I am most predictable to motorists by riding in it. They expect me to be there, so it's better for me to ride there.

If the bike lane is unsafe--filled with trash, has rough pavement, or is near hazards like parked cars--I avoid it like the plague.

I do not treat the bike lane as if I'm confined to it. I leave the bike lane whenever it seems right to do so. And as I said, bike lanes exist on only a couple of miles of the 15 mile commute I ride.

[Bekologist]

randya's response seems to mirror HH's take on bike lanes, yet the consensus among real VC in this thread endorse taking a bike lane when appropriate.

Interesting.....You know, you cannot find anything of any value whatsover at John Forrester's website. That site's just noninformation and obscurist double speak, I can see how HH and other anti facilities obstructionists get a little confused about bike riding.

[I-Like-To-Bike]

randya response seems to mirror HH's take on bike lanes, yet the consensus among real VC in this thread endorse taking a bike lane when appropriate.
"Real" VC is only as real as anyone agrees (or cares) about the definition. Which of course brings up the question, when HH and his "gang" write of "we" or "we VCer's" in their posts, who is included/excluded from their (the VC) ranks?

[Bekologist]

VC is a very personal thing!! and very time and space specific.

In 'real vehicular cyclists' I meant people that actually ride their bikes for vehicular purposes, and not a mostly car commuter that enjoys his ersatz bicycling hobby.

[noisebeam]

Bekologist - in the now closed thread you talked about the need for BL on 25mph streets. This really puzzles me. In the conditions you describe - fairly dense traffic flowing at 30mph or less I find the least need for separate lanes, in fact they can create more hazard as one gets tempted to pass cars on their right around intersection. It is these very conditions that are easy to fit in with the flow of traffic whether cycling at 10mph or 25mph. Can you explain this a bit more for me?

Al

[noisebeam]

Yesterday on my ride I went along Rainier Ave S in Seattle towards Renton. 2 lanes of traffic, center turn lane, bike lanes, buffer zone, parking strip. Not a lot of cars parked on the road, it was saturday.

Where do i position my bike? Do I ride like an artful dodger, riding in the center of the lane with traffic, and only ceding my position seconds before they have to pass me?

Or, does a person riding VC ride in the bike lane?

I wound up riding in the parking strip %70 of the time, with the double white lines of the bike lane and buffer to my left between me and traffic. Took the bike lane when there was parked cars ahead, and never once rode like the artful dodger except at a couple of intersections where I was pulling around turning traffic etc.
Why not ride in the bike lane (which is buffered from the door zone) and merge into traffic around intersections? There is no dodging needed, signal your intent to merge into the primary lanes and some drivers will let you in. Sounds like a fairly simple situation.
Al

[jscott]

what is a VC

[Bekologist]

I think you are disengeniously coloring my comments about MUPs, noisebeam. Sorry, you misunderstand. I advocate a MUP transportation cooridor(s) in every city and more real estate dedicated to cyclists by well designed bike lanes and paths. You miscatagorize me and try to minimize MY ideas by mischaracterizing me as an advocate for bike lanes on every 25mph roadway, silly!

Don't confuse me with the antithesis of your style of riding advocacy, I bet we ride very much alike.


It seems to be a vehicular cyclists' consensus that a bike lane is the preffered riding position in the situation I described in the original post.

[noisebeam]

I think you are disengeniously coloring my comments about MUPs, noisebeam. Sorry, you misunderstand. I advocate a MUP transportation cooridor(s) in every city and more real estate dedicated to cyclists by well designed bike lanes and paths. You miscatagorize me and try to minimize MY ideas by mischaracterizing me as an advocate for bike lanes on every 25mph roadway, silly!

Don't confuse me with the antithesis of your style of riding advocacy, I bet we ride very much alike.

Perhaps a misunderstanding as I re-read. You mentioned corridors and 'bike lines'. I misundrestood. But please don't accuse me of being disengenious. I am also 'blind' to ideas like this as I don't see how new corridors can fit into dense urban areas - there is no space, except taking street/sidewalk real estate which means bike lanes or paths with all the problems of how to interface them with streets. For new development maybe there are some other options.
Al

[Bekologist]

Well, they added these bike lanes to this very same Rainier Avenue in the last year, so rededication of crowded real estate in urban areas is definetly a possibility, noisebeam. Before it was a 4 lane, center turn, NOL + parking spots road. Now Rainier Ave S has effective bike lanes with the scenario I described in my original post.

No offense taken.

[noisebeam]

Bekologist-
I am also puzzled by what I perceive as you fighting a vehicular riding style. Don't look at it as rigid set of rules with only a right or a wrong way. It is a guideline to be applied differently depending on the specific circumstances. One day it may be the safest option to ride in the BL, another day in the center of the primary lane. What I feel is most important is that you know and understand the options and the pros/cons in regard to safety.
Al

[Bekologist]

I've been riding over 35 years, thanks, noisy! :) a 365 rider for the last decade.

[noisebeam]

Well, they added these bike lanes to this very same Rainier Avenue in the last year, so rededication of crowded real estate in urban areas is definetly a possibility, noisebeam. Before it was a 4 lane, center turn, NOL + parking spots road. Now Rainier Ave S has effective bike lanes with the scenario I described in my original post.

No offense taken.
What? First you say (in a different thread) that you are advocating for MUP corridors in urban areas with 25mph streets. I say above that BLs on 25mph streets are useless, then you say I misunderstood you that you were talking about MUP, I agreed it was a misunderstading, then you come back and talk about BLs. Which is it?

Al

[Bekologist]

quit yer *****in' noisy. This thread is NOT about 25mph bike lanes.


MY argument FOR bike lanes on slower speed streets is simply this- "every metropolitian area would be well served by more dedicated MUP/ and well designed bike lanes/lines across town." That includes a lot of 25mph suburban streets across crowded urban environments. Stop mischaracterizing my notions of greater bike accomodations!

[noisebeam]

quit yer *****in' noisy. This thread is NOT about 25mph bike lanes.


MY argument FOR bike lanes on slower speed streets is simply this- "every metropolitian area would be well served by more dedicated MUP/ and well designed bike lanes/lines across town." That includes a lot of 25mph suburban streets across crowded urban environments. Stop mischaracterizing my notions of greater bike accomodations!
I am not trying to mischaracterize your notions at all. Your ideas are well documented from your posts. I sometimes quote and am only trying to get an understanding of your ideas thru open and honest communication. But in response I get anger, suspicion, etc. If you lay out your ideas in a clear specific way perhaps I can better understand what you are trying to convey. I agree this thread is not about 25mph BLs, but it is about BLs on 35mph streets. I gave my opinion about where,and in a later post why, to ride above, but that didn't seem to interest you. Are you here to argue or here to share ideas and learn from each other?

Al

[Bekologist]

the only thing this thread was about was garnering real world cyclists' opinions on this well designed bike lane on Rainier Avenue.

I already got your advice, thanks, noisy :) your advice in your second post to this thread gave me useful cycling advice, your first post was disengenious sophistic logic in the context of this thread.

[Brian Ratliff]

I've got to step in here for a second. One's from Seattle, one's from Pheonix. I've been to both cities and drove around. Veeeeery different, both in terrain and traffic engineering.

We need to talk about some of the differences. Pheonix is pancake flat. Seattle is steep, rolling hills. Pheonix has a 1 miles grid of arterials. Seattle has lots of side streets and few arterials. Think of this. Going up a 100 yard hill at a 15% grade on a 25 mph street is very different from going along a 25 mph street on the flat. Bike lanes are suitable on the first, perhaps not on the second. Since bike lanes should not stop and start at random, perhaps bike lanes are more suitable for the terrain in Seattle vs. Pheonix.

Seattle also has a successful MUP which is well built. Seeing a successful path helps aleviate doubts about using such paths in different situations.

I think this is further evidence that environment colors these debates to a far greater extent than is admitted.

[Bekologist]

Cogent points, brian. However, I surmise WOL/MUPs with well placed demarcation stripes and thought out intersection routing would provide the most benefit to the greatest numbers of both riders and seniors in motorized wheelchairs and golf carts, even in Pheonix. As opposed to NOL status or unstriped WOLs.


But, I digress. I think it is already clear as to where this group of cyclists would be riding on Rainier Ave S. towards Renton. Noisebeam would be in the bike lane with me ;)

[joejack951]

Ok, so I read the HH posts and realized that in the interest of typing a concise post, I oversimplified my response. HH, as usual, goes in to great detail about what his choice would be based on. I based my short response on what I'm used to where I live, which is relatively busy arterial streets maybe 90/10 split between no shoulder or BL/shoulder or BL. A road with occasional cars and a shoulder/BL is rare if not non-existent around me so I hadn't even thought of that scenario. If passing traffic was rare, I might be inclined to ride down the middle just for the sake of having more space on my right and generally smoother pavement. If I had to move out of the road more often than say every 3 minutes, I would be inclined to just stay right.

But as Brian points out, varying terrain causes as many differences in where one might ride as road layout/traffic does. So it's a crapshoot unless we're riding the same roads.

[noisebeam]

But, I digress. I think it is already clear as to where this group of cyclists would be riding on Rainier Ave S. towards Renton. Noisebeam would be in the bike lane with me ;)
Perhaps, but it is so dependent on other factors. How dense is traffic, how often are cars pulling in out of parking spots, are there lots of pedestrians, jaywalking and/or using x-walks. Are there lots of other cyclists already using bike lane? But if traffic is somewhat to highly dense (i.e. less that 10s between cars in same lane) and cars leaving/entering parking spaces was infrequent, there were no jaywalkers coming from between parked cars, buffer zone is as wide as the widest door, intersections were rare, then I would probably ride left biased in the bike lane (and watch passing cars, move right staying in BL as they pass), as if I was riding to the right of an unmarked WOL. But as soon as other risk factors increased or if traffic was very light, I'd move into primary travel lane.

You see it is very hard to make decisions about where to ride based on someone elses description. I need to take in the situation with my senses to know what is safest.

Al

[noisebeam]

I think this is further evidence that environment colors these debates to a far greater extent than is admitted.
I've said this many times over the past year. It is so true.
Al

[Bekologist]

I really think you need to sound like an anti facilities obstructionist, Noisy, but that's just my personal opinion. I don't care how you ride your bike personally. However, You recc'd in your second post to simply "why not just ride in the bike lane?"

Given my disclaimers in the original post, and the qualifiers about traffic speeds, patterns, and the roadway, you had the simplest, best advice in you second, useful post, noisebeam. and one which meshed with the majority of posts in this thread.


'preferred position would be a bike lane bias' in the context of the biking conditions described in the original post.

you don't have to be mucking it up by espousing 'unique every time' riding, i did that in post #26.

[noisebeam]

I really think you need to sound like an anti facilities obstructionist, Noisy, but that's just my personal opinion. I don't care how you ride your bike personally. However, You recc'd in your second post to simply "why not just ride in the bike lane?"

Given my disclaimers in the original post, and the qualifiers about traffic speeds, patterns, and the roadway, you had the simplest, best advice in you second, useful post, noisebeam. and one which meshed with the majority of posts in this thread.


'preferred position would be a bike lane bias' in the context of the biking conditions described in the original post.

you don't have to be mucking it up by espousing 'unique every time' riding, i did that in post #26.
What do you mean 'I really think you need to sound like..." Why are you suggesting what I need to sound like? I am who I am. I have strong opinions about what works for facilities and what doesn't based on my personal observations and experiences. But I also can change my opinions based on discussion with others when they use fact, data, logic, etc.
My 'second post' was not totally a recommendation. It was a question to you as well "Why not ride in the BL?" as you noted you rode in the parking lane 70% of the time.
I added part with the qualifiers later after you commented that that is where I would ride as it fits right in with my post #33. The total enviroment is what one uses to decide where to ride, not if there is a BL or not or what the posted speed limit is of the street. My post was only a clarification which I would imagine anyone with experience riding would agree with. Whats the problem?

Al

[Bekologist]

quit heaping it on, noisy! this thread has degenerated into a dozen parres between us.

YOU SOUND LIKE AN ANTI FACILITIES OBSTRUCTIONIST, noisy. How much clearer do I have to be.

You sugesst to generally ride the bike lane, then spend five posts disclaiming this.

you even slip into dubious advice like riding in the traffic lane if traffic is light. On a road with a bike lane AND a buffer zone?

Whatever, buddy. I think you want to cloud debates, not clarify things.

In this thread, about Rainier Ave S, 95% of consensus (including yours!) would be to favor the bike lane positioning.

If you want to rationalize and practice your obscurist biking sophism, you've already succeeded.

[noisebeam]

quit heaping it on, noisy! this thread has degenerated into a dozen parres between us.

YOU SOUND LIKE AN ANTI FACILITIES OBSTRUCTIONIST, noisy. How much clearer do I have to be.

You sugesst to generally ride the bike lane, then spend five posts disclaiming this.

you even slip into dubious advice like riding in the traffic lane if traffic is light. On a road with a bike lane AND a buffer zone?

Whatever, buddy. I think you want to cloud debates, not clarify things.

In this thread, about Rainier Ave S, 95% of consensus (including yours!) would be to favor the bike lane positioning.

If you want to rationalize and practice your obscurist biking sophism, you've already succeeded.
I think you've mistaken me with another poster. I only write based on my honest opinions and not some ideology. Go back and read my posting history.
Al

[Bekologist]

In this thread, in post #42, I'm not mistaking you for any one except a noisy biker. With bad, anti bike lane biased advice. It isn't clear? I guess that is an example of individual gestalt.

[Ed Holland]

I think the main tenet of VC is to occupy the entire thread... duh, sorry... lane


To VC or not VC, that is the question, and I think many of us have heard enough. As for myself, I ride pragmatically, that is to say, preferring to use the road, but doing my best not to impede other road users. I prefer not to use (separate) bike lanes excepting a couple of circumstances where it is sensible to do so.

Whatever riding "strategy" is proposed by others, the individual rider must feel comfortable with their own behaviour on the journey they make, understand and be able to anticipate the situations that may arise. The individual's approach will depend enormously on environment and depth of riding experience - it's a personal thing.

Cheers,

Ed

[Helmet Head]

Yesterday on my ride I went along Rainier Ave S in Seattle towards Renton. 2 lanes of traffic, center turn lane, bike lanes, buffer zone, parking strip. Not a lot of cars parked on the road, it was saturday.

Where do i position my bike? Do I ride like an artful dodger, riding in the center of the lane with traffic, and only ceding my position seconds before they have to pass me?

Or, does a person riding VC ride in the bike lane?
Either way is VC, if that is your concern, as long as any lateral movements you make are preceded with a look back and scan shoulder check in the direction you will me moving, and as long you are not unnecessarily impeding traffic.


I wound up riding in the parking strip %70 of the time, with the double white lines of the bike lane and buffer to my left between me and traffic. Took the bike lane when there was parked cars ahead, and never once rode like the artful dodger except at a couple of intersections where I was pulling around turning traffic etc.
Going straight across an intersection from the right side of the road is not VC, but, more importantly, it can be an unsafe habit, because it puts you in a less visible lane position, and you're less predictable there (you can't tell from your lane position whether you're going straight or right - a cyclist not signalling right is hardly a reliable means to predict that he is not turning right).