Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety
Reload this Page >

Advisory bike lanes

Notices
Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

Advisory bike lanes

Old 01-19-22, 10:05 PM
  #1  
Korina
Happy banana slug
Thread Starter
 
Korina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Arcata, California, U.S., North America, Earth, Saggitarius Arm, Milky Way
Posts: 2,837

Bikes: 1984 Araya MB 261, 1992 Specialized Rockhopper Sport, 1993 Hard Rock Ultra, 1994 Trek Multitrack 750, 1995 Trek Singletrack 930

Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1100 Post(s)
Liked 867 Times in 554 Posts
Advisory bike lanes

Aka edge lane roads; interesting. I can think of a road or two around here that might benefit from it.

Korina is offline  
Old 01-20-22, 08:21 AM
  #2  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 12,441

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6488 Post(s)
Liked 6,186 Times in 3,491 Posts
Originally Posted by Korina View Post
Aka edge lane roads; interesting. I can think of a road or two around here that might benefit from it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4gzHL9KzFPQ

Interesting idea, but it's not really applicable to most of the roads where the crashes are likely to occur. I don't think this would work very well in NH, for example, because the kind of rural road this is designed for tends to be hilly and curvy, with poor sightlines ahead of the driver. If they're in the advisory bike lane entering a curve, they won't know there's a bike ahead of them in the bike lane, which I think is really the major hazard I experience on those sorts of roads regardless of where I am in in the road. By default, I tend to be extremely FRAP in those situations as it's the only part of the road I can be fairly confident a car won't speed through blindly. I don't think I'd change that strategy.


BTW, I'm not sure if you caught this, but "A 2021 study from the Mineta Transportation Institute found an aggregate CMF value of .56 using Empirical Bayes analysis for 11 U.S. installations studied over 8 years and approximately 60 million motor vehicle trips. This corresponds to a crash rate reduction of 44%. Only motor vehicle crashes were studied. There was insufficient data to evaluate vulnerable road user safety but no agency reported a bicyclist or pedestrian safety issue with their ELRs." In other words, there appears to be enough data to support that this arrangement makes DRIVERS safer, but only the lack of data to indicate that it's increasing hazards to cyclists. I'm suspicious of this because intuitively, this seems to be encouraging drivers to avoid the center of the road by driving, essentially, FRAP unless there's a cyclist ahead. The data could be documenting a situation where the drivers are being made safer by avoiding the center of the road and actually not improving the safety of pedestrians and cyclists or actually making those people more vulnerable.

I'd be a bit worried that this is really going to be seized upon to convert one-way urban roads into two way roads, which might actually encourage an increase in motor vehicle traffic.
livedarklions is offline  
Old 01-20-22, 08:27 AM
  #3  
Troul 
:D
 
Troul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: Mich
Posts: 5,249
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked 1,600 Times in 1,106 Posts
With material & layout being the same; If given the option to ride on the edge (along) side of a road with a purposed paved bicycle path or ride on a paved path with a noticeable separation as well as protection between the road & paved path, I'm going with the latter.
In some areas it might not be easily feasible to have such a built route, but imo, it's about time for those that are responsible in planning & developing such infrastructure to start applying better logic.
Example: Overpasses [overbridges or flyover] that are currently being replaced due to failing inspection that dont have a safe built in ped crossing section should incorporate an ADA pedestrian crossing if a nearby (Less than 250' walking distance) & safe accommodating structure doesn't already exist.
I get it, most contracts & budgets were approved years ago that are now breaking ground, but it's not uncommon to amend an existing contract & provide a BES to POM the new requirement. Should the existing contract need more than an amendment & lacks an additional terms section to include new clauses, T for C & draft up a new (better) contract.
__________________
-Oh Hey!
Troul is offline  
Old 01-20-22, 10:03 AM
  #4  
flangehead
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 673

Bikes: 2017 Co-op ADV 1.1; ~1991 Novara Arriba; 1990 Fuji Palisade; mid-90's Moots Tandem; 1985 Performance Superbe

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 285 Post(s)
Liked 398 Times in 238 Posts
I saw and rode on such roads in the Netherlands and in my very brief exposure it worked fine. In all cases, it was in low-traffic situations.

Originally Posted by livedarklions View Post
....I'd be a bit worried that this is really going to be seized upon to convert one-way urban roads into two way roads, which might actually encourage an increase in motor vehicle traffic.
This is important. One size does not fit all. I'd argue that traffic carnage is a lot like cancer. Each cancer has a very different treatment that, more than anything else, is the result of trial and error. My cancer was relatively rare, but I was fortunate that it had an effective treatment because the cancer community had learned from trial and error.

I don't get the sense that the US traffic engineering community has that same mindset, as it has a specs and standards tradition. Most times, the design is heavily standards-based, and I consistently get the reply that they have no choice due to liability. Using best practices for a good outcome is not the objective.

I can see this being a viable option in some situations.

Originally Posted by Troul View Post
...I get it, most contracts & budgets were approved years ago that are now breaking ground, but it's not uncommon to amend an existing contract & provide a BES to POM the new requirement. Should the existing contract need more than an amendment & lacks an additional terms section to include new clauses, T for C & draft up a new (better) contract.
Yes in theory but my experience is that it is very dependent on the bureaucracy involved. I tried to influence a project and found out that due to the funding sources, for all practical purposes the design had been frozen 10 years earlier. Even though it was clearly a bad idea, and standards had changed, implementation went ahead.

Last edited by flangehead; 01-20-22 at 10:28 AM. Reason: Oops
flangehead is offline  
Likes For flangehead:
Old 01-20-22, 11:25 AM
  #5  
Iride01
MotuekaCascadeChinook
 
Iride01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 10,413

Bikes: '20 Tarmac Disc Comp '78 Raleigh Competition GS

Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4196 Post(s)
Liked 2,724 Times in 1,898 Posts
I didn't listen to the video. I did move to a few parts to see different examples of traffic using them. If you want to indulge us with your own summarization of them then that'd be nice.

To me it looked like that that is a one lane road for two way traffic. The edge lanes are for vehicles.... motor or human powered, to use when needed to allow oncoming or overtaking traffic to pass.
Iride01 is offline  
Old 01-20-22, 01:41 PM
  #6  
Korina
Happy banana slug
Thread Starter
 
Korina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Arcata, California, U.S., North America, Earth, Saggitarius Arm, Milky Way
Posts: 2,837

Bikes: 1984 Araya MB 261, 1992 Specialized Rockhopper Sport, 1993 Hard Rock Ultra, 1994 Trek Multitrack 750, 1995 Trek Singletrack 930

Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1100 Post(s)
Liked 867 Times in 554 Posts
Originally Posted by flangehead View Post
I don't get the sense that the US traffic engineering community has that same mindset, as it has a specs and standards tradition. Most times, the design is heavily standards-based, and I consistently get the reply that they have no choice due to liability. Using best practices for a good outcome is not the objective.
I've been (very slowly) reading Chuck Mahron's Confessions of a Recovering Engineer, and he points out that in the front of the holy standards and practices textbooks, it says that these are suggestions and the engineer should use their best judgement. Funny how most of them forget that bit.
Korina is offline  
Old 01-20-22, 02:26 PM
  #7  
Korina
Happy banana slug
Thread Starter
 
Korina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Arcata, California, U.S., North America, Earth, Saggitarius Arm, Milky Way
Posts: 2,837

Bikes: 1984 Araya MB 261, 1992 Specialized Rockhopper Sport, 1993 Hard Rock Ultra, 1994 Trek Multitrack 750, 1995 Trek Singletrack 930

Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1100 Post(s)
Liked 867 Times in 554 Posts
Originally Posted by livedarklions View Post
Interesting idea, but it's not really applicable to most of the roads where the crashes are likely to occur. I don't think this would work very well in NH, for example, because the kind of rural road this is designed for tends to be hilly and curvy, with poor sightlines ahead of the driver. If they're in the advisory bike lane entering a curve, they won't know there's a bike ahead of them in the bike lane, which I think is really the major hazard I experience on those sorts of roads regardless of where I am in in the road. By default, I tend to be extremely FRAP in those situations as it's the only part of the road I can be fairly confident a car won't speed through blindly. I don't think I'd change that strategy.


BTW, I'm not sure if you caught this, but "A 2021 study from the Mineta Transportation Institute found an aggregate CMF value of .56 using Empirical Bayes analysis for 11 U.S. installations studied over 8 years and approximately 60 million motor vehicle trips. This corresponds to a crash rate reduction of 44%. Only motor vehicle crashes were studied. There was insufficient data to evaluate vulnerable road user safety but no agency reported a bicyclist or pedestrian safety issue with their ELRs." In other words, there appears to be enough data to support that this arrangement makes DRIVERS safer, but only the lack of data to indicate that it's increasing hazards to cyclists. I'm suspicious of this because intuitively, this seems to be encouraging drivers to avoid the center of the road by driving, essentially, FRAP unless there's a cyclist ahead. The data could be documenting a situation where the drivers are being made safer by avoiding the center of the road and actually not improving the safety of pedestrians and cyclists or actually making those people more vulnerable.

I'd be a bit worried that this is really going to be seized upon to convert one-way urban roads into two way roads, which might actually encourage an increase in motor vehicle traffic.
You're right; ELRs are designed for roads with good sightlines In Williams's ELR Design Guidelines, he has this to say about the subject:
WHAT SIGHT DISTANCE IS NEEDED FOR AN ELR?
Most ELRs are installed on existing streets which were converted from a two lane
configuration. A street configured with two lanes has different sight distance
requirements than an ELR. Sight distance requirements are critical on ELRs when
visual obstructions, vertical curves, or horizontal curves may prevent drivers from
seeing oncoming traffic. Current domestic guidance recommending passing sight
distance is fundamentally incorrect.
Feel free to call me at 530-859-3468 about this design problem.
I don't see how it would encourage drivers to drive FRAP aside from passing each other and cyclists. It's supposed to be used on low speed, low volume roads, and anyway I don't see drivers being comfortable driving on a dashed line; it goes against their training. It is annoying that there's no crash data for cyclists, but we know where cities' priorities lie.
Korina is offline  
Old 01-20-22, 02:48 PM
  #8  
mr_bill
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 4,449
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2058 Post(s)
Liked 604 Times in 403 Posts
I've ridden on these both in the Netherlands and, of all places, Cambridge (our fair city) MA.

First, they don't belong everywhere - and that's OK. It's absolutely not a bug that these shouldn't be on rural twisty hilly woody roads.

Second, think of it as VERY similar to how we all drive (AND RIDE) on very low traffic narrow neighborhood roads. Really, with no centerline, do we all REALLY drive on "our half" of the road 24/7/365? Are you all *REALLY* saying that you don't drive a bit far from the curb (if there is a curb). Are you all saying you REALLY don't partially cross the missing "center line" on such roads when there isn't any traffic? Are you all REALLY saying it isn't NATURAL to move right when there is oncoming traffic? Finally, how do you get home when there's a parked car in the way on a narrow road? Let alone, a parked car on BOTH sides on a narrow road?

This is how it often works, as shown the video. People drive in the middle-ish of the the road, move over to pass each other, and then move back to the middle. EVEN when folks "cheat" toward the curb (when there aren't many bicycles) the move into the "passing lane" and move back when safe just plain old works.



All this said, the people who lived on one of the streets in Cambridge where it was tried HATED IT. LOATHED IT. They rebelled, and got it reverted to be sort of conventional. Except, and this is the ironic part really, there are now big GREEN SHARROWS in the middle of each lane showing that bikes belong here too. And the people who live on the street LOVE this new layout, and now just wait behind those of us on bicycles, because, it's only a short road (goes past where e.e. cummings was born), and there's no use in rushing up to the stop signs at one end or the stop lights at the other end anyway.

Finally, for those who are freaking out that in some places in the Netherlands people WALK in the road, well, yeah, almost as many people walk on those rural roads as ride bikes or drive. (And I don't even want to think of what you'd all think about the "just paint" sidewalks in Taipei, where MORE people walk than drive or ride bikes, but honestly scooters rule those roads.)

(Oh, one last finally. Those who worry that one way roads will become two way roads. Most of Ireland. Some of the "two way" roads are so narrow you have to back up to find a place to pull over.)

-mr. bill
mr_bill is offline  
Likes For mr_bill:
Old 01-20-22, 02:50 PM
  #9  
Iride01
MotuekaCascadeChinook
 
Iride01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 10,413

Bikes: '20 Tarmac Disc Comp '78 Raleigh Competition GS

Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4196 Post(s)
Liked 2,724 Times in 1,898 Posts
and anyway I don't see drivers being comfortable driving on a dashed line;
Well that's partly the point. You aren't supposed to be comfortable. You are supposed to be alert when you are in them because you are either being passed by someone or doing the passing yourself.

Any other time you are expected to be between the lines in the center.

I guarantee when you see someone coming toward you at a high rate of speed, you won't have an issue with how comfortable you feel about having part of your car over those dotted lines hugging the edge.
Iride01 is offline  
Old 01-20-22, 02:54 PM
  #10  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 12,441

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6488 Post(s)
Liked 6,186 Times in 3,491 Posts
Originally Posted by Korina View Post
You're right; ELRs are designed for roads with good sightlines In Williams's ELR Design Guidelines, he has this to say about the subject:

I don't see how it would encourage drivers to drive FRAP aside from passing each other and cyclists. It's supposed to be used on low speed, low volume roads, and anyway I don't see drivers being comfortable driving on a dashed line; it goes against their training. It is annoying that there's no crash data for cyclists, but we know where cities' priorities lie.
I should've clarified--FRAP when there's a vehicle coming from the other direction.

The main thing I'm getting from the linked sources is that this really only makes sense on narrow, low-traffic, low-speed roads. As soon as speed and traffic increase, this increases close encounters, not decreases it.

I think this is a good idea if it's confined to the very limited set of roads it's good for, but that there's really a potential for abuse of this is seen as a way to squeeze too much two-way traffic onto a narrow road. I can see how this is going to work in low-density flat-land.

My guess as to why there really isn't good data regarding safety of pedestrians and cyclists is that these are roads where they're relatively safe already, so there aren't enough crashes to calculate risk.
livedarklions is offline  
Old 01-20-22, 02:59 PM
  #11  
flangehead
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 673

Bikes: 2017 Co-op ADV 1.1; ~1991 Novara Arriba; 1990 Fuji Palisade; mid-90's Moots Tandem; 1985 Performance Superbe

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 285 Post(s)
Liked 398 Times in 238 Posts
Originally Posted by Korina View Post
I've been (very slowly) reading Chuck Mahron's Confessions of a Recovering Engineer, and he points out that in the front of the holy standards and practices textbooks, it says that these are suggestions and the engineer should use their best judgement. Funny how most of them forget that bit.
It isnít about the engineers themselves, but the environment they function in. In most big (deep pocket) organizations there is a very understandable aversion to liability. The easy button for the organization is to not vary from recognized standards. That approach then hardens into a specs and standards culture as compared to a best practices and outcomes culture.

And it is not the case that all standards have a general duty clause in the preface. In my experience, the more specific the scope, the less likely that explicit wiggle room is granted.

Wide scope standards do usually have something akin to a general duty clause in the introduction. In practice that gets treated like the basic speed law in traffic regulations. It is much easier for the lawyers to hang you on a specific detail than a complex situation.
flangehead is offline  
Old 01-20-22, 10:31 PM
  #12  
UniChris
Senior Member
 
UniChris's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Northampton, MA
Posts: 1,768

Bikes: 36" Unicycle, winter knock-around hybrid bike

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 861 Post(s)
Liked 354 Times in 257 Posts
Originally Posted by Troul View Post
If given the option to ride on the edge (along) side of a road with a purposed paved bicycle path or ride on a paved path with a noticeable separation as well as protection between the road & paved path, I'm going with the latter.
The fully separate bike route is great for little kids in summer, but to be the ultimate answer two conditions are necessary:
  1. It needs to be plowed within a few hours of the road after each winter storm
  2. Because it's invariably far more dangerous at intersections (where most of the crashes occur) it needs to go a long way - ideally at least a mile - between them
Any time one has to interact with traffic anyway, you're really better off on a safe portion of the road.

And if there isn't a high confidence that the separated bike path is going to be managed as a true year round transit (vs simply "recreational") resource, then it's much better having that width as part of the fungible roadway space, than having it walled off for bikes 8 months of the year and unavailable even to bikes much of the other 4.
UniChris is offline  
Old 01-21-22, 08:32 AM
  #13  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 12,441

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6488 Post(s)
Liked 6,186 Times in 3,491 Posts
Originally Posted by UniChris View Post
The fully separate bike route is great for little kids in summer, but to be the ultimate answer two conditions are necessary:
  1. It needs to be plowed within a few hours of the road after each winter storm
  2. Because it's invariably far more dangerous at intersections (where most of the crashes occur) it needs to go a long way - ideally at least a mile - between them
Any time one has to interact with traffic anyway, you're really better off on a safe portion of the road.

And if there isn't a high confidence that the separated bike path is going to be managed as a true year round transit (vs simply "recreational") resource, then it's much better having that width as part of the fungible roadway space, than having it walled off for bikes 8 months of the year and unavailable even to bikes much of the other 4.

I also think that the roads they're suggesting this for are so low-volume that there's probably little or no call for a separated bike route in the immediate area.
livedarklions is offline  
Old 01-21-22, 08:46 AM
  #14  
UniChris
Senior Member
 
UniChris's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Northampton, MA
Posts: 1,768

Bikes: 36" Unicycle, winter knock-around hybrid bike

Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 861 Post(s)
Liked 354 Times in 257 Posts
Originally Posted by livedarklions View Post
I also think that the roads they're suggesting this for are so low-volume that there's probably little or no call for a separated bike route in the immediate area.
Indeed. There's probably also no need for paint.

The ones that come immediately to mind for me are also neighbourhood streets, say north of Inman Square, and of course the issue there isn't the width but the parking - which ironically likely contributes to the cooperativeness of it.

Rural versions in the US are typically wide enough, unless they're dirt or were last paved a generation ago, but those properties tend to mean they don't have a consistently defined edge anyway, and often that they're shared between occasional farm use and people driving trips that are recreational and not just "late for work"

It's much more about attitude than infrastructure, and Europe seems to have much more expectation that color between the lines will actually result in it. In the US it's recognized there's a need to look at all the cues prompting behavior.
UniChris is offline  
Old 01-21-22, 10:57 AM
  #15  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 12,441

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6488 Post(s)
Liked 6,186 Times in 3,491 Posts
Originally Posted by UniChris View Post
Indeed. There's probably also no need for paint.

The ones that come immediately to mind for me are also neighbourhood streets, say north of Inman Square, and of course the issue there isn't the width but the parking - which ironically likely contributes to the cooperativeness of it.

Rural versions in the US are typically wide enough, unless they're dirt or were last paved a generation ago, but those properties tend to mean they don't have a consistently defined edge anyway, and often that they're shared between occasional farm use and people driving trips that are recreational and not just "late for work"

It's much more about attitude than infrastructure, and Europe seems to have much more expectation that color between the lines will actually result in it. In the US it's recognized there's a need to look at all the cues prompting behavior.

My first thought about this arrangement is that basically it really isn't a change from the cyclist's perspective. All that's really been done is they've painted in the FRAP zone. From the various studies that you can follow to through the links in the OP, there's little or no evidence this has any effect either way on bicyclist safety..
livedarklions is offline  
Old 01-21-22, 03:25 PM
  #16  
noisebeam
Arizona Dessert
 
noisebeam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 15,030

Bikes: Cannondale SuperSix, Lemond Poprad. Retired: Jamis Sputnik, Centurion LeMans Fixed, Diamond Back ascent ex

Mentioned: 76 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5343 Post(s)
Liked 2,164 Times in 1,286 Posts
Like some freeways in Argentina (as seen from top window of bus)

noisebeam is offline  
Old 01-22-22, 03:02 PM
  #17  
mr_bill
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 4,449
Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2058 Post(s)
Liked 604 Times in 403 Posts
Originally Posted by UniChris View Post
Indeed. There's probably also no need for paint.

The ones that come immediately to mind for me are also neighbourhood streets, say north of Inman Square, and of course the issue there isn't the width but the parking - which ironically likely contributes to the cooperativeness of it.

Rural versions in the US are typically wide enough, unless they're dirt or were last paved a generation ago, but those properties tend to mean they don't have a consistently defined edge anyway, and often that they're shared between occasional farm use and people driving trips that are recreational and not just "late for work"

It's much more about attitude than infrastructure, and Europe seems to have much more expectation that color between the lines will actually result in it. In the US it's recognized there's a need to look at all the cues prompting behavior.
Originally Posted by livedarklions View Post
My first thought about this arrangement is that basically it really isn't a change from the cyclist's perspective. All that's really been done is they've painted in the FRAP zone. From the various studies that you can follow to through the links in the OP, there's little or no evidence this has any effect either way on bicyclist safety..
It isn't for everywhere. But it belongs not at the local neighborhood roads and not on arterials. In between, the too many cut through roads, moderate traffic, particularly with young children in the neighborhood. (Which is part of the reason it failed next to e.e. cummings.) No matter if urban or "rural." If you wouldn't drive down the road except WAZE told you to, bingo.

Finally, it's nice to know if we AREN'T getting hit on such infrastructure, then there isn't any evidence it's good for us.

-mr. bill
mr_bill is offline  
Old 01-23-22, 07:35 AM
  #18  
dedhed
SE Wis
 
dedhed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Milwaukee, WI
Posts: 8,839

Bikes: '68 Raleigh Sprite, '02 Raleigh C500, '84 Raleigh Gran Prix, '91 Trek 400, 2013 Novara Randonee, 1990 Trek 970

Mentioned: 32 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2056 Post(s)
Liked 2,000 Times in 1,244 Posts
Originally Posted by flangehead View Post
It isnít about the engineers themselves, but the environment they function in. In most big (deep pocket) organizations there is a very understandable aversion to liability. The easy button for the organization is to not vary from recognized standards. That approach then hardens into a specs and standards culture as compared to a best practices and outcomes culture.

And it is not the case that all standards have a general duty clause in the preface. In my experience, the more specific the scope, the less likely that explicit wiggle room is granted.

Wide scope standards do usually have something akin to a general duty clause in the introduction. In practice that gets treated like the basic speed law in traffic regulations. It is much easier for the lawyers to hang you on a specific detail than a complex situation.
The FDM here is 27 chapters

https://wisconsindot.gov/rdwy/fdm/FDM-TOC.pdf
dedhed is offline  
Old 01-23-22, 08:00 AM
  #19  
jon c. 
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Tallahassee, FL
Posts: 4,211
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1216 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 429 Times in 236 Posts
Originally Posted by mr_bill View Post

Second, think of it as VERY similar to how we all drive (AND RIDE) on very low traffic narrow neighborhood roads. Really, with no centerline, do we all REALLY drive on "our half" of the road 24/7/365? Are you all *REALLY* saying that you don't drive a bit far from the curb (if there is a curb). Are you all saying you REALLY don't partially cross the missing "center line" on such roads when there isn't any traffic? Are you all REALLY saying it isn't NATURAL to move right when there is oncoming traffic?
-mr. bill
That's true with a lot of roads I ride on. Barely wide enough for two cars, the roads have no lane markings at all. Whether in a car or on a bike the norm is drive near the center and move toward the side when vehicles approach. Works well for everyone and I don't think the cost of putting lines on the roads would be warranted. It would serve little purpose.
jon c. is offline  
Old 01-23-22, 09:49 AM
  #20  
CliffordK
Senior Member
 
CliffordK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Eugene, Oregon, USA
Posts: 26,876
Mentioned: 213 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 15678 Post(s)
Liked 3,125 Times in 2,328 Posts
I've seen this topic before. It wouldn't be my choice.

In some cases I've encountered urban neighborhood roads without road markings, and they're generally fine.

For the rural roads, we have DITCHES, and in some cases vertical dropoffs (something not shown in most of the photos above).

Mom's road might be a good candidate. Low traffic, the occasional cyclist or pedestrian. And VERY NARROW. Personally, I like to drive on it with the left tire just to the left of the center line.

However, it has several issues that make it an emphatic NO!
  • Get your lane positioning off and you're in the ditch, or taking out mail boxes. Thus, when traffic comes, I like the center lines to aid with lane positioning.
  • Corners are very crisp right angle corners which are mostly blind. I've driven on one lane roads from time to time, and the rule is always be to the right when going around a corner or blind area. This "Advisory" marking would tend to encourage drivers to take corners, hills, or other dangerous areas dead center which is very dangerous for them.
  • There just isn't enough pedestrians or traffic to really make it an issue.

The other issue that I've brought up from time to time with discussions is a human performance issue. If one makes an error in judgement, it is much easier to move right or left one foot or so, than pulling over a full car width. And, you have to trust the response of the oncoming traffic too.

I can't imagine trying to convince people that 20 MPH is the appropriate speed limit for roads that formerly had 55 MPH limits.

Edit: Oops, Cat posted the response.

Last edited by CliffordK; 01-23-22 at 10:02 AM.
CliffordK is online now  
Old 01-23-22, 10:15 AM
  #21  
Iride01
MotuekaCascadeChinook
 
Iride01's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 10,413

Bikes: '20 Tarmac Disc Comp '78 Raleigh Competition GS

Mentioned: 40 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4196 Post(s)
Liked 2,724 Times in 1,898 Posts
Everyone realizes the edge lane road markings in the OP are not bike lanes don't they?
Iride01 is offline  
Old 01-23-22, 01:21 PM
  #22  
burnthesheep
Newbie racer
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 3,210

Bikes: Propel, red is faster

Mentioned: 33 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1465 Post(s)
Liked 1,424 Times in 886 Posts
Well, in our area the traditional parking/bike lane thing always winds up with poor parking, trash cans, piles of leaves, and gross abuse of the bike lane. So if you don't buffer the bike lane for doors, or outright ban anything sitting in the bike lane ever.........it gets abused.

For the US two thoughts: Thought one thought for lower volume areas with currently bike lanes hurt by street parkers or abuse..... why not protect the bike lane by pushing one of the parking zones out towards the middle and make it a single bike lane that's bi-directional on the same side of the road and not double width, but maybe 150% width but you get the double width anywhere cars aren't parked as you get that 50% as door opening buffer but a wider lane? You guarantee the full double width predictably at some XX distance of parking allowed, then no parking allowed. So a bike rider can plan for oncoming.

Thought two, lots of urban/suburban places in the US funnel bike riders into unsafe situations simply because some of the neighborhood roads that are nicer to ride deadend and don't connect parts of town. Often, if looking at a google map, all you need is a single 100 yard long cut through from one major area to another. Sometimes on Strava heatmaps you even see already people risking trespass to cut thru walking their bike like that! I can think of many parts of my town like this. It would improve ride quality SOOO much so.

Thought 1 may be silly, just a personal thought. I will say, a very few roads here where the downhill gets chevrons and uphill a dedicated lane........the dedicated lane has a door/parking buffer. Which I really appreciate.
burnthesheep is offline  
Old 01-23-22, 05:24 PM
  #23  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 12,441

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6488 Post(s)
Liked 6,186 Times in 3,491 Posts
Originally Posted by mr_bill View Post

Finally, it's nice to know if we AREN'T getting hit on such infrastructure, then there isn't any evidence it's good for us.

-mr. bill
You multiquoted, so I'm not sure if that snarky comment was aimed at me, but if you follow the links in the OP sources, you will see that there's evidence for a 45% reduction in the chances of collisions between motor vehicles when this arrangement is put in, but that there was insufficient data to make any calculations for motor vehicle vs. pedestrian or cyclist crashes, but that countries that have it don't report a problem with this. That lack of data is completely consistent with both no benefit or a benefit to cyclists depending on if these were extremely low risk roads for cyclists prior to conversion. Given that they're recommending these for roads that are very low-traffic, low speed limit, level and straight, it's completely plausible that we would be extremely unlikely to get hit on such a road either way, so putting in these dotted lines really doesn't affect us either way. I also think if they do start installing this on inappropriate roads (too winding, for example), it could be possible that it makes drivers safer at the expense of safety to cyclists. Nobody appears to be recommending this, but I don't know if someone facing political pressure to make a one-way street two-way would glom onto this inappropriately. That might be farfetched, but since there's almost none of these in the U.S., I'm not sure how this might play out if the concept becomes popular.
livedarklions is offline  
Old 01-23-22, 05:36 PM
  #24  
livedarklions
High Performance Noodler
 
livedarklions's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: New England
Posts: 12,441

Bikes: Serotta Atlanta; 1994 Specialized Allez Pro; Giant OCR A1; SOMA Double Cross Disc; 2022 Allez Elite mit der SRAM

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6488 Post(s)
Liked 6,186 Times in 3,491 Posts
Originally Posted by mr_bill View Post
I've ridden on these both in the Netherlands and, of all places, Cambridge (our fair city) MA.

First, they don't belong everywhere - and that's OK. It's absolutely not a bug that these shouldn't be on rural twisty hilly woody roads.

Second, think of it as VERY similar to how we all drive (AND RIDE) on very low traffic narrow neighborhood roads. Really, with no centerline, do we all REALLY drive on "our half" of the road 24/7/365? Are you all *REALLY* saying that you don't drive a bit far from the curb (if there is a curb). Are you all saying you REALLY don't partially cross the missing "center line" on such roads when there isn't any traffic? Are you all REALLY saying it isn't NATURAL to move right when there is oncoming traffic? Finally, how do you get home when there's a parked car in the way on a narrow road? Let alone, a parked car on BOTH sides on a narrow road?

This is how it often works, as shown the video. People drive in the middle-ish of the the road, move over to pass each other, and then move back to the middle. EVEN when folks "cheat" toward the curb (when there aren't many bicycles) the move into the "passing lane" and move back when safe just plain old works.



All this said, the people who lived on one of the streets in Cambridge where it was tried HATED IT. LOATHED IT. They rebelled, and got it reverted to be sort of conventional. Except, and this is the ironic part really, there are now big GREEN SHARROWS in the middle of each lane showing that bikes belong here too. And the people who live on the street LOVE this new layout, and now just wait behind those of us on bicycles, because, it's only a short road (goes past where e.e. cummings was born), and there's no use in rushing up to the stop signs at one end or the stop lights at the other end anyway.

Finally, for those who are freaking out that in some places in the Netherlands people WALK in the road, well, yeah, almost as many people walk on those rural roads as ride bikes or drive. (And I don't even want to think of what you'd all think about the "just paint" sidewalks in Taipei, where MORE people walk than drive or ride bikes, but honestly scooters rule those roads.)

(Oh, one last finally. Those who worry that one way roads will become two way roads. Most of Ireland. Some of the "two way" roads are so narrow you have to back up to find a place to pull over.)

-mr. bill
I live on a street in Nashua that's too narrow for two cars to get past each other when there's cars parked in the road, yet somehow we all manage to get through every day without any fancy marking. Interesting that people hated it more than sharrows, it might actually be a matter of tmi being confusing. Generally, confusion is not a good thing in a road arrangement.
livedarklions is offline  
Old 01-23-22, 08:54 PM
  #25  
Korina
Happy banana slug
Thread Starter
 
Korina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Arcata, California, U.S., North America, Earth, Saggitarius Arm, Milky Way
Posts: 2,837

Bikes: 1984 Araya MB 261, 1992 Specialized Rockhopper Sport, 1993 Hard Rock Ultra, 1994 Trek Multitrack 750, 1995 Trek Singletrack 930

Mentioned: 24 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1100 Post(s)
Liked 867 Times in 554 Posts
Originally Posted by livedarklions View Post
I also think if they do start installing this on inappropriate roads (too winding, for example), it could be possible that it makes drivers safer at the expense of safety to cyclists.
Would it? You don't think taking away the center striping would encourage drivers to go slower and more cautiously? Full disclosure: I came thisclose to getting my license a quarter century ago, so my car perspective is as a passenger.

Tl;dr, I'm just whining.
It's a frustrating fact that despite living in a rural area surrounded by forest, there are very few places to ride ( not counting mtb trails) that aren't cluttered by cars, usually going well over the speed limit. All of our side streets go straight up for 1/10 mile and end in someone's driveway. There's one particular road, West End Rd., that's popular with cyclists for its beauty. It's rural residential, so plenty of traffic; despite being barely two lanes wide, with 3" to 6" shoulders and sections that are winding and rolling, drivers feel comfortable going alarmingly fast. It's those parts that make it unsuitable for edge lane treatment, no matter how I try to twist it in my brain.
Korina is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.