LittleBigMan

One thing that's good to avoid in conversation is saying "you always" or "you never." It's not realistic.

Helmet Head

Yes, they cease to be BIKE lanes, by definition. That's the point. But the question is how would these "slow/entering/exiting traffic zones" (for yet another name) function in practice, particularly for cyclists, and whether the differences with "bike" lanes would be significant, and, if so, whether those significant differences would be positive or negative.

In other words, is this a better way to "provide space for cycling" on the roadway than are bike lanes?

nick burns

Yeah, a couple years ago I would have agreed that's excellent advice. Then I discovered the A&S forum.

LittleBigMan

Bike lanes serve an important function. They accomodate cyclists who want them. For my purposes, bike lanes actually tend to narrow the existing usable roadway by increasing the width of the debris patch along the road edge. When that happens, I avoid the debris and ride as far out as I consider practical.

In any case, any inconvenience a bike lane poses me is not significant enough to warrant it's removal, especially since there are other cyclists who want the bike lane.

In other words, bike lane or not, there is always space for me to ride, even if it's a little narrower.

Tom Stormcrowe

Ironically enough, I think HH has a point as well! This is what I was saying earlier...Apocalypse soon! I have no idea what to call the lane, but I do like the concept.............maybe safety lane?

LittleBigMan

C'mon, y'all. Let's get off the drawing board, here.

Since when did a speed limit sign ever actually have any meaning?

Bekologist

i've rarely seen speed limits assigned by lane, but plenty of speed limits placed by class of vehicle. and also lane restrictions by class that actually lend itself to the idea FOR class specific velotransit lanes over general lane speed limits.

looking to get lane speed limits is a holy stretch. But the intent of a bike lane is to provide preferential facilties FOR bicyclists, not slow speed travel for all vehicle types.

Rename bike lane a velotransit lane. Rename roadway space for ALL nonmotorized travel the veloped zone. Let the baby joggers and the roller bladers IN, but keep the cars out of it.

Accomodate for bikes, rollerbladers and joggers on our public rights of way, NOT slow moving semi trucks and motorcycles in the bike accomodations.

LittleBigMan

Actually, a bike lane is for bicycles, that's why it's called a bike lane. If there was a need for an "edge lane," "slow edge lane," "narrow slow edge lane," or "nasle lane," it would already be there, along with a big nose painted on it.

Ok, I'm bored. I wanna go home.

I-Like-To-Bike

You must be, to revive this chestnut.

sbhikes

I just returned from visiting India and over there they have no bike lanes and even under these conditions bicycles travel mostly on the edges of the roadways because they are slower. Even when some hapless soul rode his bike in the inner lane (the fast lane) he rode so close to the center divider he risked hitting it with his pedal.

Bike lanes would make no difference in India because all lanes are ignored. Sidewalks are even ignored as they provide extra lanes during rush hour if you can maneuver your car between the trees.

Bike lanes make sense here because people use lanes. They expect them. Most of my problems in traffic arise in situations where the use of lanes is not understood, such as when there is no bike lane and I am in the main lane or when there is a bike lane and some dolt in a car doesn't understand how to use it properly. This is not the fault of bike lanes or the lack of them it is the fault of drivers who don't understand how to drive.

So a name change would do nothing. What is needed is driver education. Either that or to abolish all driver education and do it jungle style.

chipcom 

Welcome home Diane...I do love it when you talk dirty like that.

LittleBigMan

Really, BF is sort of a place to forget about riding my bike for a while.

I-Like-To-Bike

On A & S, the topic seldom is about bicyling, but rather, all about someone's "good idea." This thread is a good example.

kf5nd

Call bike lanes something like "Express Paths", "Express Lanes", "Priority Lanes" because they are faster than a line of grid-locked SUVs

If we name them something desireable, then maybe others will want to ditch their cages and join us

LittleBigMan

You know, that's one point about bike lanes that is very on-target. You may leave a bike lane for any number of specific safety reasons, but where are you allowed to leave a bike lane simply because your speed demands moving away from the road edge?

I think a motorist behind me might not understand that as a cyclist travelling 30+ mph. downhill in a bike lane, it would be prudent for me to move further away from the road edge than the bike lane stripe indicates. Truth is, there are so few bike lanes around here that I only recently thought about my habit of moving toward the center of the lane on downhills.


I do enjoy this aspect of bike lanes.

billh

I was riding with an elite masters roller blader national champ a couple years back who could easily keep a 20+mph pace on his roller blades. But most people would probley not want him roller blading in traffic. With new transpo technology (eg. segway), there will have to be legal, design changes to the transpo system in general. Maybe some combo of type and speed?

billh

I always try to to follow that advice . . . most of the time.

Helmet Head

On n/b I-5 in Socal dropping into Grapevine traffic is generally moving at 75 mph (speed limit is 65) except for the slow truck lane which has a 35 mph max speed limit, and trucks in it traveling that slow. That's a 40+ mph differential between adjacent lanes. What's wrong with applying this principle on regular streets?

sbhikes

How come you all can manage driving with your wheels less than 3 feet from the curb but you can't manage riding your bike this close?

I think bike lanes should be called bicycle passing lanes. You can pass me when I'm in it. I can pass you when I'm in it, but when I'm not in it, you can't pass me.

Helmet Head

Do not confuse contending that it is unsafe to travel downhill at 30+ mph 3' from the curb with an inability to do so.

Just because you can get away with practicing something safely most of the time does not mean it is generally safe to do it.

The fact is, that the faster you're going, the less time you have to notice a potential hazard, and the more space you will need to avoid it. Since at any given time it is possible to be about-to-be-passed on the left by a faster motor vehicle, relying on being able to suddenly swerve left is not a reasonable plan when riding in a bike lane. You need to have space to swerve right, just in case. 3' might not be enough, especially if the obstacle you need to avoid goes all the way to the curb.

Actually, even between intersections, I think bike lanes are reasonably safe to ride in only up to about 15 mph. At speeds above 15 mph, I merge out of the bike lane into the main traffic lane. The only exception to this I can think of is on freeway-like arterials with wide paved shoulders beyond the edge of the 5' wide bike lane.

joejack951

In addition to HH's points about why driving 3 or less feet from the road edge is different than cycling at the same distance, cars don't have a tendency to flip over from hitting potholes/large road debris. If the tires of your car go off the road edge, reentering the road doesn't have the possiblity of the car falling into faster moving traffic (if you are leaning left but your tires don't ride up the pavement and instead get stuck). Sand and wet leaves don't have nearly the impact on a car when just under one or two wheels that they do to a cyclist when under one or two wheels.

Riding in a centerish position allows the cyclist to focus on traffic instead of focusing on the consistentency of the road edge.

Helmet Head

Good point, Joe Jack. Note that motorcyclists also don't ride 3' from the curb at 15-30+ mph... Bicyclists shouldn't either, for the exact same reasons.

sbhikes

I often have to ride my trike inches from the edge of the road due to its width and lack of space and have no trouble doing this.

But didn't you guys like my bicycle passing lanes?

Bekologist

Do you ride on Interstate 5 much, head?

Why do you want trucks driving in the bike lanes again, head? It sure sound like you don't ride bikes much. You certainly fail to understand the needs of cyclists not as steely eyed and omnipotent as you.

Bike lanes are for bicycles. Bike lanes reclaim roadway space for multimodal use, and integrate human scaled transportation into a community road grid.

Call them HUMAN POWERED TRANSIT lanes, increase their integrated space on the roads, and open them up to rollerbladers, families with strollers, kick scooters and bicyclists.

Not enough room to ride a bike 3' from the curb alongside higher speed traffic? Make the bike lanes bigger and better buffered.

I think VELOTRANSIT, HUMAN POWERED TRANSIT, or VELOPED lanes are what should be considered, NOT 'slow moving vehicle' lanes, where, on level ground, the majority of bicyclists will be moving 15MPH or less.

You sound more and more like an auto lobbyist tool every post, Mr. Head.

Reclaim roadway space for human powered use with integrated VELOPED TRANSIT lanes.

LCI_Brian

Check out page 16 of this document from Caltrans: