Vehicular Cycling (VC) - Bike Facilities Supported by Forester and other Vehicular Cyclists

Here's a Cary greenway/road junction that I'm trying to get the city to improve for bicycle access:
http://sggoodri.home.mindspring.com/sidewalks/greenwayaccess/swiftcreek1.jpg

Here's another:
http://sggoodri.home.mindspring.com/sidewalks/greenwayaccess/hinshaw2.jpg

It's one thing to hop these on my mountain bike; it's another to get over them with my road bike pulling my son in his Burley trailer. The root of these design problems was the mindset that greenways are pedestrian facilities (pre-ADA curb ramps) rather than non-motorized vehicle facilities. By designing greenways more like miniature roads, they perform better for bicycle transportation.

-Steve Goodridge

Still a little difficult for me to picture. Is it an area next to the crosswalk?
bikexprt.com on Bike Box (http://www.bikexprt.com/bikepol/facil/stopline.htm)

overall, i see a lot of positive input on this thread. good deal, good brainstorming.

but i have to remind the OP to watch his sources; JF, as you presented his writing here, directly refutes another publication that he himself directed me to in support of his points in another thread. oddly, the publication supports what we are saying here! is that rich, or what?

I support:



Roundabouts instead of traffic signals or stop signs (no one benefits more from not having to stop than a cyclist!)



I fully agree that cyclists desire to retain momentum, but if drivers are not conditioned to see cyclists at standard intersections, why would they see cyclists at roundabouts? Safety at roundabouts depends on seeing the other vehicle and adjusting one's own speed to always merge at a gap.

If cyclists are not generally visible enough, why would they be more visible at roundabouts?

at roundabouts, drivers are not required to stop. If they aren't going to look or to see me, I'd rather they stop first. It gives me more time to prepare for them.

but i have to remind the OP to watch his sources; JF, as you presented his writing here, directly refutes another publication that he himself directed me to in support of his points in another thread. oddly, the publication supports what we are saying here! is that rich, or what?

I'm curious where you found apparent contradiction. I have not seen John Forester contradict himself; I have, however, seen him vary in his specificity, making generalizations about bikeway programs in one instance, and making distinctions between harmless and problematic bikeways in another.

I fully agree that cyclists desire to retain momentum, but if drivers are not conditioned to see cyclists at standard intersections, why would they see cyclists at roundabouts? Safety at roundabouts depends on seeing the other vehicle and adjusting one's own speed to always merge at a gap.

If cyclists are not generally visible enough, why would they be more visible at roundabouts?

at roundabouts, drivers are not required to stop. If they aren't going to look or to see me, I'd rather they stop first. It gives me more time to prepare for them.
The problem at standard intersections is not that motorists are not conditioned to see cyclists. The problem is that cyclists are not conditioned to ride at standard intersections where motorists are conditioned to pay most of their attention.

Same with roundabouts. We have a bunch of fairly new ones near my house. I see cyclists struggle with them all the time. But if you merge left and take the lane prior to the roundabout, and control the lane all the way through, which I always do, there is no problem.

I thought this issues was settled by this thread weeks ago, now we're having a poll (http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=291629) about it?

I fully agree that cyclists desire to retain momentum, but if drivers are not conditioned to see cyclists at standard intersections, why would they see cyclists at roundabouts? Safety at roundabouts depends on seeing the other vehicle and adjusting one's own speed to always merge at a gap.

If cyclists are not generally visible enough, why would they be more visible at roundabouts?

at roundabouts, drivers are not required to stop. If they aren't going to look or to see me, I'd rather they stop first. It gives me more time to prepare for them.

Roundabouts work well only when the right-of-way is assigned to the traffic that is already in the circle. They clog up if the right-of-way is assigned to the traffic entering the circle.

I don't know whether you recognize this.

http://www.azdot.gov/Roundabouts_Common/images/ctoon_cowboy.gif

Just about everything you want to know about modern roundabouts here:
http://www.azdot.gov/CCPartnerships/Roundabouts/faq.asp

Most relevant:
"Will the Roundabout be unsafe for pedestrians and bicycles?
Auto-pedestrian crash rates are usually lower at Modern Roundabouts than traffic signals. Those pedestrian injuries that do occur tend to be less serious due to the relatively low speeds encountered at Modern Roundabouts. Legitimate concerns have been raised regarding the ability of blind pedestrians to negotiate Roundabouts, and this topic is under consideration within the U.S. transportation community. At intersections, which are used by blind pedestrians, other countries such as the United Kingdom have implemented design measures including signalized crosswalks with good success. Where appropriate, these measures will promote safe conditions for blind pedestrians.

Properly designed Roundabouts also safely accommodate bicycles. Because vehicles are traveling at low speeds, which are comparable to bicycle speeds, bicycles can negotiate a Roundabout like motorized vehicles. Bicycles have two choices to negotiate a Roundabout. The more avid and skilled bicyclists can merge into a traffic lane before the bike lane ends; ride close to the middle of the lane to prevent vehicles from passing and cutting the bicyclist off; enter the Roundabout after yielding to vehicles within the Roundabout; circulate the Roundabout being careful to watch for vehicles waiting to enter the Roundabout; and exit the Roundabout as a normal vehicle would do. Bicyclists not wanting to enter the Roundabout can enter the sidewalk using the ramps where the bike lane ends, and proceed around the Roundabout as a pedestrian. "

Look at that a government website promoting both VC and AC!

Al

http://www.azdot.gov/Roundabouts_Common/images/ctoon_cowboy.gif

Just about everything you want to know about modern roundabouts here:
http://www.azdot.gov/CCPartnerships/Roundabouts/faq.asp

Most relevant:
"Will the Roundabout be unsafe for pedestrians and bicycles?
Auto-pedestrian crash rates are usually lower at Modern Roundabouts than traffic signals. Those pedestrian injuries that do occur tend to be less serious due to the relatively low speeds encountered at Modern Roundabouts. Legitimate concerns have been raised regarding the ability of blind pedestrians to negotiate Roundabouts, and this topic is under consideration within the U.S. transportation community. At intersections, which are used by blind pedestrians, other countries such as the United Kingdom have implemented design measures including signalized crosswalks with good success. Where appropriate, these measures will promote safe conditions for blind pedestrians.

Properly designed Roundabouts also safely accommodate bicycles. Because vehicles are traveling at low speeds, which are comparable to bicycle speeds, bicycles can negotiate a Roundabout like motorized vehicles. Bicycles have two choices to negotiate a Roundabout. The more avid and skilled bicyclists can merge into a traffic lane before the bike lane ends; ride close to the middle of the lane to prevent vehicles from passing and cutting the bicyclist off; enter the Roundabout after yielding to vehicles within the Roundabout; circulate the Roundabout being careful to watch for vehicles waiting to enter the Roundabout; and exit the Roundabout as a normal vehicle would do. Bicyclists not wanting to enter the Roundabout can enter the sidewalk using the ramps where the bike lane ends, and proceed around the Roundabout as a pedestrian. "

Look at that a government website promoting both VC and AC!

Al

Sounds like sound advice to me. Personally, I think I'd like having roundabouts as opposed to traffic signals.

Sounds like sound advice to me. Personally, I think I'd like having roundabouts as opposed to traffic signals.

I agree for single-lane roundabouts.

Raleigh recently approved installation of a multi-lane roundabout near NC State University, to replace an intersection on a 4-lane road. Drivers entering the roundabout will have to change lanes from the outer to the inner lane to proceed past the first "exit" out of the roundabout and will have to merge back from the inside to the outside to take a later "exit". That is, lane changes are required for through travel; cyclists will have to operate vehicularly, or use the sidewalks slowly, otherwise they will likely get T-boned. I wonder how it will go.

I suspect that a driver might have more difficulty changing lanes on a roundabout than on an ordinary road, because the distance in which one must change lanes is very short - one cannot change lanes well in advance when the opportunity arises early as one can with most left turns. It may be that the slow traffic on fairly small roundabouts makes this easy. But my experiences in a taxi on fast, multi-lane British roundabouts left me somewhat overwhelmed, possibly because the left-side driving threw my instincts out of whack.

^^^
My experience with roundabouts is limited. I'd suspect a Brit would laugh at the roundabouts here. Yes, they are all single lanes too.

I suspect that motorists will adapt. At least speeds are low, so while there may be an inconvenience factor, I don't think safety is an issue. Moreover, because speeds are low and I am much smaller and more maneuverable on my bicycle, I think cyclists would eat up multi-lane roundabouts, or at least the vehicular cyclists amongst us. Cyclists not so bold will probably find a place to the inside of the outside lane to hang out, or use the pedestrian facilities.