Poguemahone

Keith, thanks for making me laugh. I need to remember to keep my humour about me during all this.

I will suggest the fast growing shrubs, in addition to the grate.

Keith99

On the serious side if you can get any traffic engineers or city councillours to ride you make the most of it. Most important is to remember the ones most apt to be willing to do it are very likely the ones least to blame. Of course adjust to who you get but here are some things to consider.

Any politician may be totally unaware of the problems from a cyclists point of view. Even the engineers may have limited experience. Kept friendly you may get an easy convert. Assume either intended to do good for cyclists. For the engineers remember they may have been given a mandate, either put in a bike lane getting from here to there or perhaps even put a lane on this street. If someone who may have been constrained find out their constraints. Finally perhaps you might talk during the ride. Ask why would a cyclist ride? It can help put the flaws into focus. Take the offramp issue (by far the most serious as I read things, you may know better based on details). Let's say you have not got them thinking about why a rider might ride they might say well you can stop and wait, it even sounds good. But lets say you have got them thinking why a rider might ride. Take either commuting or pleasure. For commuting having to wait is not acceptable, and it might be a long wait that time of day. For pleasure that kind of wait and even potential danger takes the fun away, the ride is no longer pleasure. For a kicker you might point out that innocent parents might tell their preteen kids they can ride where there are bike lanes. I think the same split of pleasure vrs commute works well for the gutter areas also. One could think well just slow down. Well of course if slowing down doubles the commute time it kills that and having to slow down and ride the gutter makes pleasure riding far from a pleasure. Of course a non optimal section would be OK. A place where you need to slow down a bit for a while is fine if the rest of the ride is good for either pleasure or commuting.


Back to really bad. The beach bike path in L.A. has a section where it goes from path to lane. The path joins the street at a right angle and has posts designed to keep the cars out, but as a secondary effect makes sure bikes enter the street at a right angle and many if not most cyclists end up past the bike lane and in traffic before they finish the turn. Being on a bike path few stop. And yes I saw the aftermath of an accident, a cyclist leaving on a back board. Guess it could have been worse.

Poguemahone

Well, I just emailed my city councillour and Mayor Doug. I'm going to compose some letters to the local paper, maybe contact a woman I used to date in one of the TV new departments. Thanks, Keith, the suggestions are all good.

Daily Commute

Also, drunks could line it with broken glass every night, and bike-thief thugs could lie in bushes next to it. So you're right, it could be worse.

Seriously, you need to decide if your goal is a better bike lane or the elimination of this lane. I'm not going to start a debate in this thread about which way to go, but that's a fair question for city policy people to ask you.

Poguemahone

In my letters thus far, I have asked for removal. Given the rationale of the city works-- ""It's the best we could do with what we were given"-- I cannot see them improving it. That would require taking lane space away from the automobiles, esp. in front of the ABC. Can't see that happening, though I'll be sure to suggest it as an alternative.

Keith99

There is a bike path with just that problem near Santa Monica. The Balgona Creek Bike path goes behind the projects. It was rumored that they intentionally broke bottles on the path to stop, and then rob, cyclists. I can neither confirm or deny this rumor. I do know that several years ago when I was first riding and only had a mountian bike there was at least one time when there was no glass. It isn't that hard to carry a broom on a bike. (Oh and I was never even approached by anyone while sweeping, gang banger of cyclist).

yespatterns

From what my wife and I have been told by certain city traffic people, most of the bike lanes in RVA (and most definitely the one on Semmes Ave) weren't put in to benefit cyclists, so much as to act as a passive traffic control; that is, the lanes make the roads look smaller so drivers tend to slow down. Sad, huh?

Keith99

Sounds like a 'Bike Lane' near me. For those in the Los Angeles area it is Oxnard from DeSoto to Winnetka About 1 mile) . DeSoto has a bike lane, but no contuation on either end. This section is about 70% hill, much of it nasty. Almost no one ever rides this road. The reason it was put in was because residents wanted less traffic (with reasonale cause). It was 2 lanes each way. Now it is one lane each way with a left turn center divider and bike paths that rarely see bikes.

Smiziley

So regarding the original poster, I caught the 5:30 NBC 12 broadcast tonight, and just by chance they were doing a segment on this exact post. The exact same area of Hermitage road. Dealing with the Diamond travelling North past 64 (and no I don't mean Boulevard). I've tried looking for a link on their website about the story, but no dice. I'll link to their homepage but have no idea if they plan on putting this piece up on their website. NBC12
They got out some lady from public works, and a 'local expert' on bicycling. They seemed to be in agreement that it isn't a bike lane as it's "not the regulation 5 feet in width". However, they did notice that there is a diamond marked in roadworker spraypaint, and that it probably will become one. The public works engineer mentioned that the markings were meant as a buffer between pedestrians and motorists. Interestingly when she was speaking about it being this "buffer", a car split the lane to pass sitting traffic to to a right. So much for that idea I suppose. At the end of the report they were mentioning that the one on Semmes Avenue will probably become a bike lane, but for the moment isn't.

Poguemahone

I'm not sure exactly what is going on with all this. I do know that at this point the area South of the Hermitage Robin Hood Road intersection will not be marked as a bike lane. What I know is this:

1) The preliminary markings (spray paint) indicated the lanes were intended as a BL.

2) I was told they were intended as a BL by a city traffic engineer last Monday.

3) Today, I was told by a second city traffic engineer that the preliminary markings were a mistake and the first traffic enginner was mistaken.

I'm not about to untangle all that.

So the area South of Robin Hood Road will not be marked as a bike lane. In addition, the engineer I talked to today indicated that the broken lines at the stripping after each intersection, consistent with BL markings were also in error and would be painted solid.

As to the spot under the 64/95 bridge, I was told today that was supposed to be a BL, but they've gotten enough complaints that they are having second thoughts about marking it as one. The traffic engineer today insisted there was ample clearance between the lanes and car doors (there is not). Didn't contest my statements about line of vision. The lane will remain as a sort of multi-use path, for peds and cyclists. I suggested a sign at the bridge stating "cyclists may take full lane", though I would rather see the whole thing just removed.

I got an explantion similar to that in post #32 as well, that the lanes were shortend as a traffic calming measure, and that the added shoulder was installed to give cyclists some added "escape room".

sgtsmile

Hey there. I am not sure how useful this link will be for you, but it MAY give you some idea of what might be possible where you live. I live in Ontario, and this is a link to the section of our regions website (official government one) which deals specifically with the bicycle plan and what is going to happen here (and is, gladly, happening here). Perhaps it will give you some ideas for what your local advocacy group can gun for?

If you take the time to look at the maps the link provides, you will see that we have (I mean, those advocating, I am not, sadly, a part of this group due to other responsibilities and time constraints) managed to secure country onroad bike routes. These actually have bike lanes on them, some of them well over 1.5 m wide, but most about 1m max (which is not perfect, but considering the whole region has gravel shoulders big enough for mennonite buggies - a narrow road lane - this ammount is fairly generous. Ontario has, if I remember correctly, a 60m width road right of way - if I am out a bit, DONT shoot me! It has been a while since I have looked it up...)

Tis just a thought. Hope it at least inspires you. Good luck down there...

https://www.region.waterloo.on.ca/web...d!OpenDocument

Bruce Rosar

Well, that depends. The 1998 Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices had the following definition: Then there's the current MUTCD definition:(Toss a coin to choose between preferential or exclusive)

From the Nevada DOT: (Exclusive side of the coin landed up)

From the NC DOT: (Both sides landed up)

yespatterns

In today's Richmond Times Dispatch:

Shifting Gears on Commuting