jimbo.

The local gov here is doing a real bad job on the tram that is supposed to open soon. Poor planning from the beginning. They are still stuck on what to do about bicycle and the trolly track groove. There have been several accidents so far, and the trolly is not even in service yet. I have found a company named Getzner that makes a rail groove filler. Do you know of any other companies that make a rail groove filler? There is a suggestion to do signage and various painted on the street signage but that has yet to be approved. Do you have any suggestions on what I might approach the city council with. One major problem here is that there is no parallel street next to the street with the trolly. So a detour to the next street over is not available. The street is also too narrow for a separate bike lane. The tram platforms are a nightmare. Proposals from a city with a tram system would be most appreciated. Contact info for the Tram system engineer would be appreciated that I can pass on to the engineer here.

FBinNY 

How about some details so anyone with ideas or concerns or who simply may care on general principles knows what the issues are.

If you can't furnish a link, or more info, how about at least mentioning the street and city?

BTW - if you fill out your profile including the city where you live, that alone would help/

jimbo.

I should have been more specific. The Trolly Co. here is looking for a flexible rail groove filler, that will support a bicycle but will compress under the wt of the trolly. Signage has been discussed, but they also want the filler. If you live somewhere where such filler has been used, successfully or not. Please let me know. I would like to pass on contact info for that trolly co. engineer to my trolly co engineer.
I'm particularly interested to hear from what's been tried in Europe.

FBinNY 

I searched "trolley flangeway filler" and found numerous links to various products and discussions about them. I suggest you start there, to find options and sources, along with places where they're in use, and bike forum duscussions in those ciies, ie. Portland and Seattle.

A guick look at the sketches tells me that they'll probably help, but I suspect the gap is still deep enough to trap a bicycle wheel. I grew up in NYC where they still had light rail trolley tracks which were sort of an "S" shape, like a Spanish roof tile. These were cemented in place, and the flange groove depth was about only1.5" deep, yet that was enough to trap a bike if hit a a shallow enough angle. OTOH, they were much more forgiving than a standard track arrangement.

Ideally, you would want a flexible or sprung filler, that the flange pushes down as it passes, then springs back to flush with the pavement. I saw some sketches of ideas, but don't know if they exist, and if they do, what issues of cost and maintenance they entail.

Good luck, you have some research ahead of you, but hopefully I pointed you in the right direction.

CliffordK

Yes, I was thinking of some kind of spring loaded gate, but then there is risk of filling under it. Probably one would need to find some kind of flexible foam as a base, and hard rubber on top, so that it would depress and spring back, but not leave room for gravel to impede the movement. Having a sheer line, however could lead to rapid wear.

I'm seeing a number of notes about Portland that has been investing heavily recently in both surface tram infrastructure and bicycle infrastructure, although I don't remember encountering any special bike safety structures when I was there. There are some places where the tram tracks are absolutely treacherous, and definitely some poor designs. Anyway, I would hope to see some changes in the next decade with bikes and trams.

One option that has been used successfully in normal angled RR track crossings is to provide an area for bicycles to turn to take a straighter course across the tracks, and then return to their bike lane, all without entering the vehicle lanes. In some cases, these landing areas are designed to be more or less mandatory for bikes.

Of course, that doesn't help those areas where a tram track is running parallel to the street. In those cases, there may be design choices to put a bike lane in a place where they are away from both tracks and doors (which make for a bad combination).

FBinNY 

Pedantic quibble alert.

A normal angle, means meeting at a perpendicular or close, aka a right angle. So, no need to redirect bikes crossing at a normal angle. I know you mean a shallow angle, or a near parallel crossing, but figure you might care to choose your words more carefully.

In any case, I provided the OP with a search term which will lead to various links, and leave it to him to see what's already been done.

For my part, having grown up among trolley tracks, bridge expansion joints, and gaps in concrete slab roads, I'm used to being alert to these hazards. When building the commuter I used for many years, I opted for 1.9" tires purely to gain more forgiveness, especially when riding at night. The route I used would have presented risks on my road bike, even if potholes weren't also an issue.

CliffordK

Ordinary?

Oh, the wonders of the English language and trying to figure out the dependency order of adverbs and adjectives.

The point is that for periodic railroad crossings, there are often design choices that allow bicycles to safely traverse the tracks, but there are a number of considerations including space for building the landing zones, and interactions between bikes, cars, pedestrians, and commercial property.

Traveling parallel to the tracks creates unique problems, but can be alleviated somewhat with careful design of where to put the tracks on the road, and where to encourage cyclists to ride.

I encountered this silly design up in Portland a month ago.



I suppose I would have been fine on just the road bike, but I was pulling a trailer forcing me about a foot and a half to the left. It isn't a filler issue, but rather a bikepath design issue.

FBinNY 

As I said, I KNEW exactly what you meant, but only suggested the need for clarity because other readers might not. The linked photo is also helpful.

For my part, I choose these words very carefully such that non-technical readers get the gist. So, no normal angles, just right angles, or words like square on for the desired angle, and shallow angle or near parallel for the wrong way to cross. Fortunately, a right angle happens to be the right way to cross the tracks, eliminating an opportunity for confusion.

Eons ago, when I used to lead trips, part of my briefing was a reminder about shallow angle crossings, which are very common in parts of the northeast. I reminded the group that anytime they saw tracks running parallel the the road, there was a good chance of a shallow crossing, and I had a rule that the first person to come to one, had to stop there and point it out to those following. Of course it didn't always work out, but I figured it greatly reduced the odds of someone missing it.

CliffordK

Yes, those revered crossings...

Especially when Halloween is coming up

jimbo.

Thanks for another phrase about rail filler to search. I've been through several variations. But including the one you suggested none of them included a real company that makes a real filler. A couple of good studies about how a trolly system should be designed to include cyclists and pedestrians. In the studies and discussions a lot about a filler SHOULD be available. But no real filler available. I did mention the one company I found. I've passed that on. A lot of what you do see is about street crossings. I have talked to the tram directors of a few cities also, but not outside the USA. So I'ld still like to hear from somebody that lives in a city with a tram that has used a filler.

FBinNY 

Among the photos brought up in the search I suggested, was one that seemed to be what you were looking for. It seems to be something they were testing in Zurich. Here's a link to that article, which you might follow up to see whet came of the test.

Meanwhile, I'm not convinced that trolley tracks are the hazard we make of them in the USA. As I said, I grew up around them and it was a very short learning process. If you read the linked article, and have been to The Netherlands, Germany or Switzerland, where they love their light rail, you see plenty of cyclists among the ubiquitous trolley tracks all over the place. So, I suspect it's only a matter of a short learning curve.

mr_bill

I've ridden in Netherlands and Germany among the ubiquitous trolley tracks all over the place.

The specification, installation, and maintenance of the tracks combine to make a HUGE difference in how much of a hazard they present to people on bikes.

THIS is unthinkable there.

-mr. bill

indyfabz

Where is "here"?

jimbo.

Thanks for sticking with me FB. That is a nice video. I'm familiar with it. It shows what you said about short learning curve. I'll ask if and how I can show it at the city council meeting. I firmly believe that education is the real answer. But we are talking about USA here, where fewer people cycle, it's just not part of our culture. Most people here really don't know how to ride a bicycle properly, so there is more education to do. Europeans have been exposed to urban cycling their whole life. The trolly company is willing to use their yard for a workshop monthly. Signage on posts and pavement has been suggested, and rejected by the council. They want something that will physically fix the problem. They want something idiot proof. After all you can't expect the average American to be able to think. The trolly company and the city engineer are on the side of education. Portland and Cincinnati have some good signage. Here is St. Louis.
Speaking of Zurich. I believe they did a test project with track filler. They have not responded to my email yet. The filler company Getzner said they would provide references from cities that have used their filler. I'm hoping that will provide real info. As I said Velostrail is mainly for street crossings. The other product I found was for industrial areas with tracks mixing with forklifts and people on foot, specifically slow speed. Getzner is rated for 40 km/hr.

jimbo.

Here is St. Louis. If you want to see the trolly on Google Earth the stupid section starts at Delmar and Kingsland, continues on Delmar to De Peres. There the street gets wider, still Delmar. There's enough room to put in a sensible systems, room for everybody. Continue east to DeBalivier, turn right, south, it continues to Lindell. Where the Missouri History is.

mr_bill

So this?

-mr. bill

jefnvk

Lot of complaints when these went up in Detroit, but they aren't really that hard to cycle around. As @FBinNY said, they are all over Europe, and cyclists manage just fine. Just requires paying attention to the road you are riding on, something you should be doing anyhow.

mr_bill

Again, in Germany, Netherlands or any other RATIONAL place you would be hard pressed to find a trolley system where the trains operate down the middle of the road but then move to the curb to discharge passengers.

At least the locals have a sense of humor.

-mr. bill

jimbo.

It's much more stupid than that. Instead of the trolly moving to the curb, they actually moved the curb a big distance out into the street. Where it takes up a lane of traffic that could have served better purposes. The trolly platform pushes the bicycles, cars and trolly into the same narrowed lane. The distance from trolly to platform is less than 1 ft.. for discharge/entry purposes. So that forces the cyclist to cross the parallel track right in front of cars and trolly. Then the cyclist needs to again cross the track after the platform. You can only imagine what's it like to try to talk to these people.
Really take a look on Google Earth!

jefnvk

Maybe not the exact same, but an analogous example from one of the tram lines I used to take to school in Prague: https://www.google.com/maps/@50.0867...7i13312!8i6656

Plenty of crap like that all over those town. It is not a uniquely American issue.

mr_bill

You do realize there is a dramatic difference between straight tracks and zig-zagging tracks?

-mr. bill

jefnvk

From a practical standpoint, there really isn't a difference to the cyclist if the bike lane or the road or the tram lane zig-zags.

I'm not getting where you are showing any examples of "zig-zag" tracks, though. If you found some anecdotal evidence, I'm sure if I looked hard enough I could find examples of something equally egregious Europe. The overall point being, they deal with a helluva more tram tracks than us, and get by just fine, on cobble roads to boot. They really aren't that hard to deal with, and quite honestly given the choice of rail free streets or expanded public transit, I'd rather have the rails in the road.

mr_bill

Uh, from a safety standpoint there is a HUGE difference. Tracks that are perpendicular to the direction of travel are nearly trivial to deal with. Tracks that are horizontal to the direction of travel are less easy to deal with, but it's relatively easy to learn. Even with the lane drop you say is the "same" as a zig-zagging track.

But tracks that are at a shallow angle to the direction of travel are a PITA to deal with.

One of the trolley stations under construction on Delmar. Since I believe in Occam's Razor this is one of the examples of extreme stupidity we are talking about. One could be forgiven for thinking someone went out of their way to hurt people though:


Knock yourself out finding the equivalent somewhere in Europe, a land where the tracks repeatedly meander from center of the right of way to the curb and back again, and people on bikes LOVE it.

FWIW, I walk, ride bikes, *AND* take buses, trolleys, subways, trains, planes and automobiles. Even boats too.

It's not either/or. You can have trolleys *AND* have streets that are safe for people who walk and ride bikes.

We've got to STOP accepting CRAP and STOP blaming the people on bicycles for the problems CAUSED BY BAD DESIGN.

-mr. bill

jimbo.

Yes a lot like the picture Jeff posted. But add the zig-zig track and change the distance from track to curb under 1 ft. So the cyclist must cross the parallel track. Does make it worse here. As I said the city council wants idiot proof. So expecting the cyclist to learn how to cross tracks is not a consideration. Full responsibility on the trolly co. Think possibility of lawsuit.
I've heard there are crashes in Europe as well. And people there are also asking for track filler.

Thanks for the photo Mr.Bill. Yes that's the finished product here. You can't see the platform on the bottom of the street quite as well. There are like 10 of these platforms along about 1 km of street. Another important point, there are no side streets on either side of the trolleyed street to use as a Delmar Bicycle Detour. They also had to do something about the brakes on the very old rebuilt trollys as it took 700 ft. to stop the trolly at 25 MPH. The cost of the project doubled to $50 million.
Gotta go my brain is melting!!

bubish

As I was reading this thread, I kept thinking "It's St. Louis, isn't it."

As someone who lives there, I'm both happy and really sad that I'm correct.