Bike Forums

Bike Forums (http://www.bikeforums.net/forum.php)
-   Vehicular Cycling (VC) (http://www.bikeforums.net/vehicular-cycling-vc/)
-   -   Which are more vehicular shoulders or bike lanes? (http://www.bikeforums.net/vehicular-cycling-vc/316877-more-vehicular-shoulders-bike-lanes.html)

Bekologist 07-03-07 10:45 PM

Which are more vehicular shoulders or bike lanes?
 
some comments in another thread has left me seriously doubting the vc idealogues abilities and logic.

some of the idealogues have mentioned how wide shoulders on high speed arterials are ample for their road riding. Interesting to me that a vehicular cyclist would prefer a wide shoulder to a wide bike lane.

I think riding on shoulders, while safe if shoulders are wide and relatively clean, is NOT very 'vehicular' and does NOT suggest to other road users that bicyclists are supossed to be riding on the roads.

wide, clean bike lanes, integrated with the rest of the road striping, are much more 'vehicular' in concept, and suggests more strongly to other road users that bikes are supossed to be riding on the road.

Shoulders or bike lanes - which suggest more vehicular operation of bicycles to other road users?

John Forester 07-04-07 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bekologist
some comments in another thread has left me seriously doubting the vc idealogues abilities and logic.

some of the idealogues have mentioned how wide shoulders on high speed arterials are ample for their road riding. Interesting to me that a vehicular cyclist would prefer a wide shoulder to a wide bike lane.

I think riding on shoulders, while safe if shoulders are wide and relatively clean, is NOT very 'vehicular' and does NOT suggest to other road users that bicyclists are supossed to be riding on the roads.

wide, clean bike lanes, integrated with the rest of the road striping, are much more 'vehicular' in concept, and suggests more strongly to other road users that bikes are supossed to be riding on the road.

Shoulders or bike lanes - which suggest more vehicular operation of bicycles to other road users?

More illogical thoughts that make sense only in the context of the cyclist-inferiority superstition. Cyclists have the right to ride on the roadway, and on a shoulder if they prefer to do so, and exercising neither option indicates anything that is contrary to the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles. Where a good shoulder exists and the speed and movement of the cyclist so indicate, there is no problem about riding on the shoulder. The existence of the shoulder, save in the legal fiction of the transportation funding act, says nothing at all about whether or not a cyclist should use it. On the contrary, the existence of a bike-lane stripe indicates that cyclists should be using only that portion of the roadway, which provides both the appearance of a diminution of rights and contradicts the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles. Both of these effects are contrary to the interests of lawful, competent cyclists, otherwise known as vehicular cyclists.

genec 07-04-07 12:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Forester
On the contrary, the existence of a bike-lane stripe indicates that cyclists should be using only that portion of the roadway, which provides both the appearance of a diminution of rights and contradicts the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles. Both of these effects are contrary to the interests of lawful, competent cyclists, otherwise known as vehicular cyclists.

What a minute... a bike lane stripe does not mean "only" any more than a bus lane does not mean that a bus may only use that space or a taxi lane may only be in that space.

You are adding something to bike lanes that is NOT part and parcel to bike lanes. Nothing says a bike must remain in the BL.

The "only" associated with all those spaces I mentioned, is that autos are supposed to stay out, just like a solitary motorist is not supposed to use a car pool lane.

CB HI 07-04-07 01:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bekologist
some comments in another thread has left me seriously doubting the "Bek" idealogues abilities and logic.

Look in the mirror Bek, outstanding description of yourself!:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:

CB HI 07-04-07 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by genec
What a minute... a bike lane stripe does not mean "only" any more than a bus lane does not mean that a bus may only use that space or a taxi lane may only be in that space.

You are adding something to bike lanes that is NOT part and parcel to bike lanes. Nothing says a bike must remain in the BL.

The "only" associated with all those spaces I mentioned, is that autos are supposed to stay out, just like a solitary motorist is not supposed to use a car pool lane.

Not true in Hawaii and a few other states that have mandatory use of bike lane laws. Even mopeds are required to stay in the bike lane in Hawaii.

Stop the discrimination, remove the bike lane paint!

You bike lane folks say you oppose mandatory use laws, but none are stepping up to the plate at the legislature to help end this discrimination! Anyone see any activity from LAB trying to do away with these bike lane laws - they also ignore the problem. (Maybe they will for sidepath laws but not for bike lane BS)

How about those cops in Portland that ticket cyclist for leaving the bike lane, even when the cyclist want to make a left turn?

genec 07-04-07 02:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CB HI
Not true in Hawaii and a few other states that have mandatory use of bike lane laws. Even mopeds are required to stay in the bike lane in Hawaii.

Stop the discrimination, remove the bike lane paint!

You bike lane folks say you oppose mandatory use laws, but none are stepping up to the plate at the legislature to help end this discrimination! Anyone see any activity from LAB trying to do away with these bike lane laws - they also ignore the problem. (Maybe they will for sidepath laws but not for bike lane BS)

How about those cops in Portland that ticket cyclist for leaving the bike lane, even when the cyclist want to make a left turn?

Are the laws in Hawaii such that the exceptions allow you to leave the BL at almost any whim? That is hardly mandatory in my book.

ghettocruiser 07-04-07 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by genec
What a minute... a bike lane stripe does not mean "only" any more than a bus lane does not mean that a bus may only use that space or a taxi lane may only be in that space.

Indeed. Maybe we should investigate to confirm or refute that "bus driver inferiority complex" comes from them having the option of using bus-only lanes.

sbhikes 07-04-07 04:11 PM

Bek, you just don't get it. The serious cyclists in the Forester camp all ride bicycles than can scarcely handle the conditions of the average road. Pine needles send them into spasms of fear. A single leaf drives them to cries of "debris! debris!" Nevermind potholes or other conditions likely to break their fragile bicycles. Being so fragile, they just find it much easier to ride in the breakdown lane, ever ready for the inevitable breakdown. They know darn well if they break down in a bike lane they'll be mowed down by all the incompetent cyclists who can't be bothered to stop and fret with them about the sorry state of bike lanes because they're all on their way to work or some kind of important business.

dynodonn 07-04-07 06:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sbhikes
Bek, you just don't get it. The serious cyclists in the Forester camp all ride bicycles than can scarcely handle the conditions of the average road. Pine needles send them into spasms of fear. A single leaf drives them to cries of "debris! debris!" Nevermind potholes or other conditions likely to break their fragile bicycles. Being so fragile, they just find it much easier to ride in the breakdown lane, ever ready for the inevitable breakdown. They know darn well if they break down in a bike lane they'll be mowed down by all the incompetent cyclists who can't be bothered to stop and fret with them about the sorry state of bike lanes because they're all on their way to work or some kind of important business.


That's quite to the contrary, I'm the one who's usually stopping to offer my help to a stranded cyclist, you included Diane if you were in need of help and requested it. When the weather get's nasty and there is road debis galore, it get's rather lonely out on the roads in my area, so I have no need to worry about being over run by hoards of fretless cyclists on my trusty and sturdy ride.

CB HI 07-04-07 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by genec
Are the laws in Hawaii such that the exceptions allow you to leave the BL at almost any whim? That is hardly mandatory in my book.

When the burden of proof is switched to the cyclist to show cause for leaving the bike lane, then that is MANDATORY.

The Portland cyclist have just reason to leave the bike lane to make a left turn; they still got ticketed.

CB HI 07-04-07 06:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sbhikes
Bek, you just don't get it. The serious cyclists in the Forester camp all ride bicycles than can scarcely handle the conditions of the average road. Pine needles send them into spasms of fear. A single leaf drives them to cries of "debris! debris!" Nevermind potholes or other conditions likely to break their fragile bicycles. Being so fragile, they just find it much easier to ride in the breakdown lane, ever ready for the inevitable breakdown. They know darn well if they break down in a bike lane they'll be mowed down by all the incompetent cyclists who can't be bothered to stop and fret with them about the sorry state of bike lanes because they're all on their way to work or some kind of important business.

A long time ago, your post were reasonable and made sense; more often, they just look like Bek's post.

John Forester 07-04-07 08:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by genec
What a minute... a bike lane stripe does not mean "only" any more than a bus lane does not mean that a bus may only use that space or a taxi lane may only be in that space.

You are adding something to bike lanes that is NOT part and parcel to bike lanes. Nothing says a bike must remain in the BL.

The "only" associated with all those spaces I mentioned, is that autos are supposed to stay out, just like a solitary motorist is not supposed to use a car pool lane.

No? That is the view that motorists take about bike-lane stripes. And in some areas, that is the law as well. And, for that matter, that is the view that many cyclists take about bike-lane stripes, because they believe that the stripe protects them from danger and, also, legitimizes cycling. You can't have it both ways, that bike-lane stripes persuade people of benefits without also accepting the consequences of that false belief.

LittleBigMan 07-04-07 09:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CB HI
Not true in Hawaii and a few other states that have mandatory use of bike lane laws. Even mopeds are required to stay in the bike lane in Hawaii.

Looks like the issue is still very hot in some places.

Around here, cops don't even blink, no matter where I ride.

My best to you in Hawaii. Sounds like unfavorable discrimination to me! (Especially after that so-called "bike lane" you were expected to use, which looked about 1 1/2 feet wide--I dare them to expect a pedestrian to use a sidewalk that skinny!)

Nycycle 07-04-07 09:20 PM

I don't care to ride the shoulder, crap its rough, loose rocks, junk car doors flying open.
I have to drive a truck on the job, I don't even like to let a wheel get off in that shoulder, it will vibrate everything out of the dashboard.

I want bike lanes dammit.

sbhikes 07-05-07 08:48 AM

Junk car doors flying open? I'm totally laughing my ass off here envisioning those junked cars on the shoulder, the multitudes of them, rusted and burned out, with their doors just flying open all by themselves willy-nilly! It's dangerous! A death-zone I tell ya! Hilarious!

Laika 07-05-07 08:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sbhikes
Bek, you just don't get it. The serious cyclists in the Forester camp all ride bicycles than can scarcely handle the conditions of the average road. Pine needles send them into spasms of fear. A single leaf drives them to cries of "debris! debris!" Nevermind potholes or other conditions likely to break their fragile bicycles. Being so fragile, they just find it much easier to ride in the breakdown lane, ever ready for the inevitable breakdown. They know darn well if they break down in a bike lane they'll be mowed down by all the incompetent cyclists who can't be bothered to stop and fret with them about the sorry state of bike lanes because they're all on their way to work or some kind of important business.

:lol: well done :lol:

invisiblehand 07-05-07 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CB HI
How about those cops in Portland that ticket cyclist for leaving the bike lane, even when the cyclist want to make a left turn?

I missed that CB. What was the outcome?

Maryland, I believe, also has a mandatory bike lane law. Although I have never seen nor heard it being enforced; nor does it require the use of side paths.

http://www.waba.org/areabiking/bikelaws.php

.....

Regarding the question, neither seems particularly "vehicular" since both seem to serve the same function in this case; i.e., shift the cyclist over out of the way of motorized traffic.

.....

Personally, I don't think that the issue of debris is trivial. More often than not, there are clear differences in the amount of debris when comparing the shoulder or bike lane to the adjacent road.

invisiblehand 07-05-07 10:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Forester
No? That is the view that motorists take about bike-lane stripes. And in some areas, that is the law as well. And, for that matter, that is the view that many cyclists take about bike-lane stripes, because they believe that the stripe protects them from danger and, also, legitimizes cycling. You can't have it both ways, that bike-lane stripes persuade people of benefits without also accepting the consequences of that false belief.

I agree that there are motorists that take the presence of a bike lane as a signal of where cyclists are supposed to ride. Moreover, I guess that this effect is stronger than on an identical road with SHARROWs or a WOL with "Bike Route" signs.

But I believe that most motorists understand and would agree that there are conditions for which a cyclist should ride outside the bike lane. Although I doubt that motorists are able to recognize some cycling-hazards as quickly as a person on a bicycle.

EDIT: Just to complete a thought ... my guess is that the relative change in motorists' perceptions of cyclists' rights--in a practical sense--is that bike lanes improve conditions for cyclists relative to nothing at all.

Bekologist 07-05-07 10:26 AM

invisible hand, which scenario is MORE vehicular?

Bikes riding on the shoulder, or bikes in a velotransit lane, integrated with the rest of the road striping? bike lanes away from the shoulder, off from the sides of the road, integrated with the turn patterns at major intersections?

which scenario is more vehicular, shoulder riding or riding in a travel lane (striped for bikes)?

seems disarmingly skewed if foresterism declares shoulders more vehicular than striped travel lanes....

invisiblehand 07-05-07 10:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bekologist
invisible hand, which scenario is MORE vehicular?

Bikes riding on the shoulder, or bikes in a velotransit lane, integrated with the rest of the road striping? bike lanes away from the shoulder, off from the sides of the road, integrated with the turn patterns at major intersections?

which scenario is more vehicular, shoulder riding or riding in a travel lane (striped for bikes)?

seems disarmingly skewed if foresterism declares shoulders more vehicular than striped travel lanes....

Hmmmm, sorry Bek ... I am not trying to avoid fully answering the question. I just thought that I would have a few more minutes to think about it before anyone else responded.

Using the vernacular of "vehicular" with my understanding that ordinary vehicles do not travel on the shoulder of major roads, I would say that your bike lanes are more vehicular.

-G

joejack951 07-05-07 10:54 AM

In my state, shoulders are to be used by drivers to let faster moving traffic pass when there is not an available passing lane. I use them as such and use bike lanes the same way. I consider shoulders more vehicular as shoulders are not intended to be a travel lane and thus do not direct cyclists to travel straight from a lane to the right of another lane where right turns are allowed. Shoulders can also be used by any vehicle that is going slower than the speed of traffic to allow traffic to pass. Additionally, shoulders can be used when a vehicle has mechanical trouble, for parking, by pedestrians, rollerbladers, and skateboarders, or for a bus stop (to name a few of the uses I often see).

Bekologist 07-05-07 11:18 AM

the skew that shoulders are more vehicular seems vacous, rote repetition in the anti-accomdationalists...

why are shoulders more vehicular, joe? there is sometimes a bike lane, to the left of shoulders, with striping that moves bikes towards the center of the road, away from the curb, and are accomodated at major intersections by striping the bike lanes to the left of right hand turn lanes.

shoulders are not as 'vehicular' as a bike lane, sorry. shoulders do nothing to emphasise bikes are legitimate road users. bike riders on the shoulders indicate more strongly that bikes are not bonafide road users, versus bike infrastructure that integrates bikes on the road to the left of the fog line.

steve goodridge's comments in another thread about how he's perfectly content using shoulders of high speed roads, versus bike infrastructure, shows how far off base the anti-accomodationalist camp is in their 'message' that leaves bikes riding the shoulders of high speed roads, versus accomodations that provide on road lanes for bikes.

but hey, give me a wide shoulder and i'm riding in it. but recognize they are not as vehicular as a lane for bicycles.

genec 07-05-07 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joejack951
I consider shoulders more vehicular as shoulders are not intended to be a travel lane and thus do not direct cyclists to travel straight from a lane to the right of another lane where right turns are allowed.

Interesting observation... I wonder if bike lanes should end with some sort of "bulb" forcing cyclists to move out at the intersections.

We don't have much in the way of good shoulders here in CA... one can really see this difference when traveling down 101 in Oregon, where the wide shoulder is designated as very wide bike lane with very regular signs... then one enters California, where the shoulder disappears completely... along with the regular bike lane signs.

A couple miles south past the CA/OR border, there is a hogepoge of different very small bike lane signs scattered at irregular intervals... then after Fort Dick, 101 becomes "the Redwood Hiway" and is closed to cyclists. Oddly enough, as a hiway, it gets shoulders again. Go figure.

The alternative road to the "Redwood Hiway" is hiway 1... which is not closed to cyclists, but is a narrow (read "no shoulders") winding road (albeit quite beautiful, being right along the coast) that is marked at 50MPH. Based on the driving patterns of motorists observed in the area, they like to push that 50MPH and probably have given little thought to the possibility of a cyclist moving slowly on the road ahead... :eek:

sbhikes 07-05-07 12:16 PM

Most people think of bike lanes and shoulders quite interchangeably. And this is to be expected. Most people wouldn't dream of riding their bikes right smack in the middle of a lane if there is any kind of space off to the side, and most roads delineate that space with some kind of line.

This does not mean that bike lanes are not better-designed than shoulders, because they very well are in many places. This also does not mean that cyclists are "prisoners" behind the line. I think most intelligent people understand they can cross the line when necessary.

genec 07-05-07 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sbhikes
I think most intelligent people understand they can cross the line when necessary.

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Forester
On the contrary, the existence of a bike-lane stripe indicates that cyclists should be using only that portion of the roadway...

The rest is back about message 2 if you care to read the whole thing...


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:55 PM.