Advocacy & Safety - Bicycle Infrastructure Can Reduce Risk of Cycling Injuries. Duh...

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/10/121018162207.htm

In B4 Forester/CBHI tells us why this is all wrong. :roflmao2:

It appears that a major take-home message here is that prioritizing the storage of cars higher than the safety of cyclists leads to increased injury to cyclists. I guess that's another "Duh..." to go with the OP's title.

One of the things I find frustrating locally is that we have many streets with door-zone bike lanes that also have six to ten foot median buffer stripes. That means that the traffic engineers are acknowledging that motorists cannot stay in their lane, but somehow think these same ill-trained motorists will look before opening their doors into cyclists who are foolish enough to ride in a door-zone bike lane.

Even with bike lanes in the "door zone", I think they make drivers more aware of the presence of cyclists.

Even with bike lanes in the "door zone", I think they make drivers more aware of the presence of cyclists.

There appear to be two kinds of cyclists in America: Those who don't ride in door zones and those who will be doored. Just because the door zone has been painted with a bike lane is no reason to ride there.

I believe this study has been previously rejected by the anti-facilites crowd based on their perception of lack of thorough studies, lack of data, and that Doctors have no idea of how to ride bikes or do traffic engineering.

Of course what do all these folks know about facilities, eh?

Kay Teschke, Melody Monro, and Hui Shen are with the School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. M. Anne Harris is with the Occupational Cancer Research Centre, Toronto, Canada. Conor C. O. Reynolds is with the Liu Institute, University of British Columbia. Meghan Winters is with the Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada. Shelina Babul is with the BC Injury Research and Prevention Unit, Vancouver, Canada. Mary Chipman, Michael D. Cusimano, and Lee Vernich are with the School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. Jeff R. Brubacher and Garth Hunte are with the Department of Emergency Medicine, University of British Columbia. Steven M. Friedman is with the Emergency Department, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada. Peter A. Cripton is with the Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of British Columbia.


Read More: http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300762

There appear to be two kinds of cyclists in America: Those who don't ride in door zones and those who will be doored. Just because the door zone has been painted with a bike lane is no reason to ride there.

Only idiots would stay in the bike lane if there was a possibility of being doored. All I'm saying is that the presence of those white lines and bicycle symbol painted on the road cause drivers to expect cyclists.

And since there's very little street parking in my area (suburbs) a bike lane on the edge of the road would be fantastic.

Locally we have streets with bike lanes or sharrows. I don't like the streets with sharrows. Riding outside the door zones puts you in the middle of the lane with cars doing 35 backing up behind you.

I believe this study has been previously rejected by the anti-facilites crowd based on their perception of lack of thorough studies, lack of data, and that Doctors have no idea of how to ride bikes or do traffic engineering.

Of course what do all these folks know about facilities, eh?

Kay Teschke, Melody Monro, and Hui Shen are with the School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. M. Anne Harris is with the Occupational Cancer Research Centre, Toronto, Canada. Conor C. O. Reynolds is with the Liu Institute, University of British Columbia. Meghan Winters is with the Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada. Shelina Babul is with the BC Injury Research and Prevention Unit, Vancouver, Canada. Mary Chipman, Michael D. Cusimano, and Lee Vernich are with the School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. Jeff R. Brubacher and Garth Hunte are with the Department of Emergency Medicine, University of British Columbia. Steven M. Friedman is with the Emergency Department, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada. Peter A. Cripton is with the Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of British Columbia.


Read More: http://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/AJPH.2012.300762

While Genec is attempting irony when rhetorically asking "what do all these folks know about facilities, eh?", the question is eminently worth considering. I have read only the free abstract; haven't paid for the full paper. But the abstract states that each crash was linked to the full trip that the cyclist was making. For each crash, another location along that trip was randomly selected for comparison. I think that that makes no sense. I think that the study must have aggregated all trips and locations to get many crash sites and many non-crash sites, and worked the probabilities from there.

I suggest several grounds for skepticism. Are the sites properly categorized? Maybe so, maybe not, but these investigators certainly are not qualified by their professions to do so. Are the crash sites properly categorized, not by the location of the crash but by the course that the cyclist was following? For example, were crashes where paths (of any kind) intersected roads categorized by whether the cyclist had been using the path, or were they classed as roadway crashes because they occurred on the roadway? The abstract suggests that the facility type was the cause of whatever crash probability the data disclosed, in that the investigators suggested that similar facility designs from elsewhere be made more frequent here. That's not necessarily correct, because in the USA and Canada there is considerable before-the-fact decision making in determining whatever facility type be installed; facilities often get installed in the safer locations because doing so is easier there than elsewhere. None of these considerations are considered in the field of public health and medicine; they are not only traffic engineering considerations, but constitute a distinct specialty in the bicycle traffic engineering aspect of general traffic engineering.

So, you see, while Genec thought that he was asking a nonsense question, just for effect, his question raises very real concerns about the accuracy of the paper.

While Genec is attempting irony when rhetorically asking "what do all these folks know about facilities, eh?",

So, you see, while Genec thought that he was asking a nonsense question, just for effect, his question raises very real concerns about the accuracy of the paper.

Actually I was attempting Satire... but what the heck, Irony works too. The thing I most wonder about John is that you are a self described expert, whereas this was a committee of folks that together make up quite a think tank.

Now like you, I only read the abstract, so in reality, they may have some very flawed data... but the fact is, that neither one of us can truly judge the data, the analysis method, or the conclusion without looking at the full paper.

Any so called study that indicates more cyclist injuries occur mid block due to parked cars rather than at intersections is extremely suspect.

Kay Teschke, Melody Monro, and Hui Shen are with the School of Population and Public Health, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Canada. M. Anne Harris is with the Occupational Cancer Research Centre, Toronto, Canada. Conor C. O. Reynolds is with the Liu Institute, University of British Columbia. Meghan Winters is with the Faculty of Health Sciences, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, Canada. Shelina Babul is with the BC Injury Research and Prevention Unit, Vancouver, Canada. Mary Chipman, Michael D. Cusimano, and Lee Vernich are with the School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. Jeff R. Brubacher and Garth Hunte are with the Department of Emergency Medicine, University of British Columbia. Steven M. Friedman is with the Emergency Department, University Health Network, Toronto, Canada. Peter A. Cripton is with the Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of British Columbia.


Gene, you really need more research than that buddy. You forgot the lords a leaping, and the partridge in a pear tree. How can you expect us to buy all this hooey based on comments from shady people like these? :D

Locally we have streets with bike lanes or sharrows. I don't like the streets with sharrows. Riding outside the door zones puts you in the middle of the lane with cars doing 35 backing up behind you.

Whatthehellisasharrow?

Whatthehellisasharrow?

it's a marking that indicates the lane is too narrow to share so that motorists who wish to pass must go into the next lane. The pavement marking is sometimes called Sgt Cyclist because it is a bike emblem with chevrons. It is a strange name, but when the pavement marking is properly placed it can be effective in getting folks to stop gutter-hugging and ride take the lane in those situations where it is called for.

it's a marking that indicates the lane is too narrow to share so that motorists who wish to pass must go into the next lane. The pavement marking is sometimes called Sgt Cyclist because it is a bike emblem with chevrons. It is a strange name, but when the pavement marking is properly placed it can be effective in getting folks to stop gutter-hugging and ride take the lane in those situations where it is called for.

The sharrows we have here are painted right in the door zone of the cars that are parallel parked along the curbs. There is no option of gutter hugging. I really don't like that route but it is the best choice for riding N/S. The other choice is much busier and has the parallel parking as well. I am new at "controlling the lane" and I am much more comfortable in a designated bike lane.

Locally we have streets with bike lanes or sharrows. I don't like the streets with sharrows. Riding outside the door zones puts you in the middle of the lane with cars doing 35 backing up behind you.



I happen to like sharrows, motorists are more cautious around me since there's no dividing white line for them to just blast by me without much worry. Plus, sharrows are swept clean by regular traffic, whereas bike lanes are nothing but debris collectors.

I happen to like sharrows, motorists are more cautious around me since there's no dividing white line for them to just blast by me without much worry. Plus, sharrows are swept clean by regular traffic, whereas bike lanes are nothing but debris collectors.

Our streets including the gutters are cleaned twice a month so the bike lanes are really clean.

I don't feel that the sharrows do anything for me since I am forced to ride in the left half of the only lane. Cars are forced to wait behind me until the opposite lane clears enabling them to pass. It makes me very uncomfortable and reduces my riding.

I am trying to get used to it and trying to learn but so far I really don't enjoy it.

Our streets including the gutters are cleaned twice a month so the bike lanes are really clean.



The beauty of our sharrows, depending on the traffic flow, is that they are swept almost every minute/second, with everything ending up in the gutter, waiting for the monthly street sweeper.

The sharrows we have here are painted right in the door zone of the cars that are parallel parked along the curbs. There is no option of gutter hugging. I really don't like that route but it is the best choice for riding N/S. The other choice is much busier and has the parallel parking as well. I am new at "controlling the lane" and I am much more comfortable in a designated bike lane.
As I understand it, this is the first time AASHTO has included the sharrow markings in their manual. Of course they set a minimum distance from the curb that allows, but does not require, traffic planners to put the darned markings in the door zones. This has the unfortunate effect of encouraging inexperienced cyclists to ride in a dangerous lane position as well as causing ignorant motorists to think that is where the cyclists are supposed to be. This is like the stupid "Share the Road" signs that are also put up to indicate that the LANE is not wide enough to share. It ends up causing more problems than it prevents. Try talking to your city traffic planners and see if they will consider putting the markings in a more appropriate place, like where the cyclists should be riding.

I was actually impressed when the University of Oregon put sharrow markings on University Ave through the campus. The road has perpendicular parking on both sides and a nasty two inch seam in the center of the remaining lane. They put the sharrow stencils to the left of the seam. Unfortunately, very few of the handful of local cyclists actually choose to ride there. For some reason, they seem to prefer to have the folks who are leaving their parking spaces back into them and/or be driven into the rear quarter of a parked king-cab pick-up by a motorist who decides to share the lane.