tandempower

This story creates the implication that bike lanes slow motor-traffic and are, therefore, a problem. Ultimately, motor-traffic reductions can only occur if traffic shifts to bikes and buses but this report says nothing about how much motor-traffic in motor-vehicle lanes slows down traffic. The deeper implication seems to be that bike lanes and bus lanes have the burden of reducing travel time for drivers and if they don't, even if it's the drivers' fault and not the cyclists or bus riders, then it will be the bike and bus lanes under attack instead of those who fail to use them.

https://news.yahoo.com/video/dot-chie...042013954.html

Walter S

It's about time *something* slows motorized traffic.

El Cid

It makes sense -- trucks that used to park halfway up on the sidewalk are now stopping in the middle of a traffic lane, making a bottleneck for cars. There's really no easy answer to this problem. Bike lanes (done properly) are a good thing, but delivery trucks still need to be able to work in compact, downtown cores that were never designed for the type of traffic they see today.

Roody

It's just a big freakin' lie that a bike lane decrease automobile capacity. As one traffic engineer told me years ago, "There will never be a bike lane built in America that slows down car traffic."

Never is a strong word, but it takes a full environmental impact study if a bike lane will slow car traffic in the slightest. That costs hundreds of thousands of dollars and takes many years to complete. See the thread on Level of Service requirements for more info on this subject.

El Cid

I'm always a little leary of how valueable these official studies are. Just 'cause the government put lots of time and money into something, doesn't mean its worthwhile.

Let the study get peer-reviewed and have the results debated by various competing interests. Then it'll mean something.

cooker

I don't care if I slow down motor traffic.

gerv 

Slower moving car traffic would be a great benefit for streets around here that have bike lanes. Generally, it helps make business and residences more "human". More people start walking or riding. Businesses see more business.

However, I'd agree that they don't slow down traffic at all.

Onyxaxe

Kentucky is completely unaffected. They mow down anyone and anything here. Bike lines and crosswalks are just pretty lines.

Walter S

Seems to me like when the bike lane sees significant use it will speed up auto traffic because there's fewer drivers.

Ekdog

Sounds like you need some barriers protecting those bike lanes.

koolerb

Haters are going to hate, that's all there is too it. As soon as anyone anti bike get a shred of anything that indicates bicycle traffic on roads is a negative in any way, shape, or form they're going to latch on and run with it.

bragi

You seem to have hit the nail on the head. Car traffic hasn't been very smooth for decades. Now, it's insanely bad. Cities in the US are increasingly crowded, partly by design; the idea was to get us out of our cars. In practice, cities are now denser and more walkable again, but Americans, being who they are, have not, in fact, gotten out of their damn cars at all. Instead, we have very dense urban cores where people insist on driving everywhere anyway, because that's what they're used to, despite the fact that it's not at all practical in this new environment. When drivers are faced with backups that can be several blocks long on roads that were never designed for half as many cars, instead of questioning their own behavior, they get aggressive and nasty. In the last couple of weeks, I've been verbally threatened by drivers simply because I've ridden past them on bike lane at busy intersections. When I engaged them, which I am inclined to do, it became apparent that the bike lanes themselves enraged them, as though giving up three feet of space was the cause of their traffic jam, and not the presence of hundreds of other cars along streets lined with gigantic new apartment complexes on every block.

Our inner cities have been revitalized, which is a very good thing. But many new urban residents still transport themselves as if they're in 1980's suburbia, and get totally bent out of shape when they encounter the reality that cars are rarely the best choice in dense urban areas.

Onyxaxe

That would be sweet. Especially around campus.

Rowan

Actually, in the traffic engineering circles with which I have been associated, bike lanes are recognised as one method of moderating traffic speeds by narrowing the vehicle traffic lanes.

Roody

I'm sure that many traffic engineers would like to slow down cars and divert more people to other transportation modes. But because of the standards and codes that are in effect, their hands are tied. It is, to oversimplify a bit, illegal to slow down car traffic. I'm glad that the situation is better outside the USA.

Maxillius

Actually, it isn't illegal. Speed limits get lowered all the time. The problem is that people will drive as fast as they feel like regardless of the law. If they feel like a speed limit is unjust, it'll be ignored and no amount of enforcement will work. It just pisses people off. When someone figures out how to slow people down without causing borderline civil unrest, that person will either become extremely rich or have a 100% secure government job until the end of time. But I'll tell you what seems to work: zero curb. There are a few roads around here that are paved right up to the grass and mailboxes are placed about 4 inches from the road surface. It effectively creates the perception of driving down a hallway and it slows people down by about 10-15 mph. The road is just as wide as those with a full shoulder, but close-clearance mailboxes create the illusion of a narrower road, thus increasing awareness by making people think the road is narrower. I don't know how that would work in the city and it certainly isn't bike-friendly. Another way to slow car traffic down is to unpave it. Washboard bumps and huge potholes work great to slow people down AND bikes can avoid the holes better than cars can. Washboards are a problem though, and when a dirt road is freshly graded it's nearly impossible for a road tire to manage. And it's more than slightly unworkable in cities.

I think separate bike routes may be the answer. Close some roads to cars entirely, elevate bike roads over interstates and major roads. It would be less obtrusive to put a 20-foot bike thoroughfare in the sky than it would be to stick a 4-lane freeway up there. And cheaper. I had an idea a few years ago to ring a city with parking structures and parking lots and just use the inner city streets for buses and bikes. I figured on using MSU's campus as an example because it's fairly difficult to drive through there between classes so it would make things safer for everyone.

tandempower

Closing certain roads to all but certain types of traffic would make certain roads more bike- and pedestrian friendly but elevated roads would be a problem because entrance- and exit- ramps would have to be spaced too far apart to be useful; plus cyclists would still have to get to their destination after leaving the bike-highway.

Ultimately, I think American developers were onto something with malls, corporate campuses, and big one-stop-shops. Each of these segments off an area where cars are prohibited from driving. And strangely no one ever complained about not being allowed to drive through the mall!

The question is what it would take to expand the concept of car-free malls to encompass a wider area that included biking and transit as modes of (outdoor) transportation in addition to walking. Maybe people just got too spoiled by malls to ever acclimatize to walking and biking outdoors again. They do it for amusement parks but those contain huge amounts of sensorial distractions and fixes to keep them from boiling over into comfort-withdrawal symptoms.

Maxillius

Oh, on/off ramps for that would be so shallowly graded they'd be huge. I'd have big cargo elevators serving that purpose. I don't know if it would be more convenient to have the lift on a timer like a traffic light or on-demand like a normal elevator. Using a timer would prevent homeless from taking it over and would be more hygienic because you wouldn't have to touch anything to use it. Could do both, timer during peak times and on-demand in between peaks. Anyway, not having ramps would also remove the possibility of cars trying to use it. Drunks will try anything, and old people may confuse it for an actual road. The lift car I think would have to be big enough to fit 12 extracycles (as if there'd ever be 12 of those in one place!) but the doors should be too narrow for a car, even a Smart, to get in.

As for people's "comfort withdrawal": f--k em. Seriously, people are too soft. Provide mart-carts or a moving sidewalk for people who truly need mobility assistance but everyone else can walk their lazy butts to the shops And biking indoors? That would be WEIRD!!

Roody

As long as w're doing all that, we might as well make the ramps slope downhill at a very gentle grade to make cycling a little faster and easier.

Jaywalk3r

Why not just open up interstate shoulders to bikes and address problem areas individually? I accidentally found myself on an interstate in South Carolina this summer while bike touring when the US Route I was on merged with the interstate for a few miles. The law notwithstanding, it was, far and away, the most bicycle friendly infrastructure I encountered in that state (and most others). The riding was very stress-free, at least until I was pulled over. Most other controlled access highways I rode on during my tour, in states where it was legal, were similarly well suited for cycling.

Sure, a segregated bicycle interstate system would be nice, but it would take decades to implement. Interstate shoulders are a viable alternative that could be implemented very quickly. Florida has already done something similar, effectively made the shoulders of many (non-interstate) highways into bike lanes, making for very pleasant riding.

Roody

Riding on the freeway shoulder is already legal in California and a couple other states.

Jaywalk3r

It's also legal in Missouri and Arizona. I'm not sure what other states allow it.

Rowan

I agree that riding the freeway shoulders can be an efficient way to get about. There are some issues. The first is the debris that builds up, and especially the stuff that causes punctures. The second is that, at least here, the shoulder can disappear when the highway crosses bridges, which presents some significant problems in high-speed traffic.

The reason why some jurisdictions do not permit cycling along freeway shoulders is the high speeds allows in exiting or entering from off/on ramps.

As a by-the-by, I had an interesting experiences in France in 2003. I had become "trapped" in a university precinct, and for the life of me, I couldn't find a way out, except along a freeway, which naturally had a ban on cycling. I eventually decided to take the risk, and got all the way along to where the ban ended... except the driver's didn't realise this, and I had various honks and gesticulations to get off. It was a darned good ride, too... lots of speed for me, and the shoulders weren't badly littered.

As to some interstate highways in the US, the road authorities there have a habit of putting down a concrete surface, then grooving it. This results in a constant, high-pitched squeal from the 18-wheelers... I don't think I could tolerate riding a bicycle on the shoulders with that noise for very long; it's tough enough in a motor vehicle!

Rowan

There are some in Texas and New Mexico, I think, that allow it when there is no alternative route. Often, there are parallel service roads, as well.

The best shoulders I have used in North America are in Canada. Alberta, an oil state, specifically has some great shoulders for riding, and the traffic generally is considerate there, too.

Walter S

The last place I want to ride is on a busy interstate shoulder. Cars and big trucks wizzing by very fast. Much more open to the sun and wind than almost anywhere. Just not my cup of tea. I would usually favor sharing other roads with the cars. I could imagine exceptions but they would be rare.