joejack951

Thanks for the response. I probably should have clarified that the road I have in mind is two lanes each direction if that makes a difference to you.

Any input Bek? My current practice is similar to HH's which can be, at times, unpopular. How do you deal with the situation of fast straight traffic which you've been riding to the right of but then encounter a turn lane? Screaming for a road diet is not an option

sbhikes

The great armchair tractorist is more like it.

Personally I have no problem with traffic calming. It bothers me not at all. Most people drive way too fast. I don't. So it doesn't bother me.

What I do object to is when people who are against traffic calming try to appeal to people's fears about riding their bikes. They like to claim that the traffic calming devices force vulnerable cyclists into the paths of drivers and force drivers to have to swerve to avoid killing them.

This, of course, is folly. If people would just slow down, there would be no swerving needed.

I'm sure that HH opposes traffic calming because he's linked to the American Dream Coalition and those people are paid to come and speak against anything that stands in the way of total automobile domination of the roads.

donnamb 

I can see the potential for that happening, Chip. I'm grateful ours are well-planned. When I was still driving a car, they sure had their intended effect on me - I slowed the heck down! As a cyclist, I don't see visibility decreased in any way, but obviously your experience shows that isn't always the way. Hey - any chance you could get a pic of yours?

richardmasoner

I took this photo of a traffic circle in Boulder, Colorado. I think you'll like it.

Bekologist

now, there's some traffic calming that works for bikes. nice one, richard.

i believe traffic calming can be bicyclist friendly. And restriping roads with road diets can have the effect of calming streets, while improving traffic ADT, increase pedestrian safety ,increase visibility of cyclists AND provide traffic calming.

it all depends on how the lines are drawn, where the changes are made.

(joejack, i know what i do. This thread has nothing to do with dat chestbeat. who cares about your unwavering adoration for HH's lane position?)

richardmasoner

I agree. But many real cycling advocacy groups are against many street calming projects. These are not motorists groups in disguise -- these are genuine advocacy groups, many with a strong anti-car bias. The people in these groups may agree in principle with the purpose of road diets, but when the rubber meets the road they often don't like the results.

Conversely, I've also seen groups that start out against traffic calming measure who change their minds after discussion on the issue. As several people in this discussion have noted, a major problem is traffic calming engineering 'done wrong,' so to speak.

RFM

joejack951

Do you ever answer a question directly? The reason I asked both you and HH is that I was a little surprised to hear that HH would use a turn lane to go straight (hence why I asked for clarification). I'm shocked that you haven't used this oppurtunity to blast him for not following the rule book. I'd also honestly like your opinion on the subject but I realize it's a stretch since you never answer any direct questions. If you don't feel like responding, just say so.

mparker326

They recently put traffic circles on my neighborhood streets. They placed them at intersections. The City addressed the visability issue by only allowing certain types of plants to be planted which do not restrict visability. They seem to have stopped the drive 60 mph through the neighborhood people. The people who drive fast between circles probably were the ones that drove 60 before so at least it slowed them down some. My only beef with them is that at least half the drivers that take lefts don't go around them.

We also have on street parking. In the three years I've lived here, I've seen several parked cars sideswiped/hit by inattentive drivers.

noisebeam

Traffic calming is also you and me driving at no more than the speed limit on these streets.

Part of my ride home calms a few blocks of residential streets.

My drive home yesterday from the bike shop, took the back way during 5:30 rush hour - all 25mph streets, I kept it at 25mph, quickly cars built up behind me, a long string.

The issue here is arterials are full, motorists choose the backways and push their speed 35-40mph. Its a different mentality - the need to get fast and the need to be minimally delayed so as to do better than if they had choosen the main route.

Having other slow moving vehicles using these routes will make them much less desireable for the 'cutters'

Al

Bekologist

and what if you're on your bike doing the same, al? do you block the traffic and get honked at, or let the drivers go 35 or 40 on those side streets.

I rather like the picture of Boulder's traffic calming. very nice.

rando

D'oh! that was you? man, that was annoying. we all hated you.

noisebeam

I do the exact same car and bike on these 25mph streets - hence both the bicycle and car examples.

I was aggressively passed twice and honked at once during my drive home on a 4mi stretch of 25mph street from the LBS yesterday.

There is no need on a bike to block traffic on these streets - except approaching intersections, or passing the occasional parked cars. I manage the aggresive drivers fine, not by any unusual aggressiveness on my part, but my just riding along in a lane position needed for my desitination, and give the occasional car that approaches from rear the slow down signal.

Al

noisebeam

I was going south on College (25mph posted) and then east on Alemeda (also 25mph posted)
Driving my car at 25mph I ended up with a line of vehicles 9 long behind me at the McClintock crossing.
As I said above it resulted din one truck passing the line of me and two other cars behind us, honking as they passed me. Another pass later on - which resulted in me catching up to them at every speed hump, I kept a constant 25mph, they went 35mph between humps and slowed to 15 over them.

Al

richardmasoner

In other words, a one man Critical Mass.

Increasing cycling and pedestrian presence on a street also has a traffic calming effect. Make the street seem safer for cyclists and pedestrians, you'll increase the number of these other users, resulting in more traffic calming for that street.

Guerrilla Street Calming

In my previous neighborhood in Colorado, the street was your typical 40 foot right of way in a new subdivision. Nominally 25 mph speed limit, but the wide street is engineered for 40 mph. The road provided access to the middle school at the end of our street, so we had lots of traffic in the mornings and afternoon.

We put a temporary barrier in the middle of the block -- not a complete barricade but something in the middle that drivers had to manuever around, and we also moved this barrier around. We also purposely left toys in the the middle of the street. Stuff like that works really really well. People learn about permanent structures and adjust their driving so that they don't get slowed as much, but random stuff like balls, scooters, bikes and portable hockey goals are things the drivers have to watch for in that neighborhood.

RFM

noisebeam

On streets designed for high throughput longer distance travel (i.e. arterials) I cooperate greatly with other drivers as nearly all of them are permitted and able to go much faster than me. This means moving over when safe to allow faster traffic to pass.

My more 'political' riding comes on 25mph streets - especially those in my neighborhood. Of course I'll cooperate with considerate drivers, even those wanting to go over limit, or get ahead of me with care even if intersection is not so far off. But those who abuse these residential streets and treat them as shortcuts, made only shorter by racing thru - I get a bit agressive with them - giving slow signal to driver with engine roaring up behind me obviously gong 10-15mph over limit, etc. I do the same in my SUV. If more folks, including residents, of these hoods that want traffic calming drove more calmly, then fewer cutters would find benefit in using residential streets.

Al

Bekologist

richard, that guerrila street calming sounds similar to how the dutch institutionalized woonerfs and the extreme traffic calming these provide.
the Dutch in a city NOT amerdam literally and physically reclaimed the streets over 40 years ago with a guerrila tactics. long since institionalized in the national legislature, what's it called?


toys in the street, good one. isn't that the way most drivers see bicyclists?

noisebeam

I don't - with the bike lane in a door zone too.
The cyclist should already be in primarly lane to go thru constriction long before the bike lane stripe ends. Seems the stripe ended and the sign are much too late.

Al

Bekologist

Al, i'm real happy for your criticisms, but i bet that works remarkably well. richard?


Al, just get off your high horse and realize if you rode there, you'd take advantage of any facility you found appropriate, and leave one you didn't. NOT ALL REDESIGNS of public roads are %100 perfect, nor do all attempts at traffic calming advantage all users.

If that intersection becomes a problen, redesign will be implemented. if it works for the populace, it will not.

that street likely works better than your poorly designed road redesigns in AZ, as there is free traffic mixing according to the cyclists' verve. or swerve, depending on how you look at it.

are you just an anti facilities chestbeater, Al? on the auto-centric bandwagon that serves to limit greater cycling in your community? why predicate your demands on what likely encourages even greater bicycle use in Boulder?

noisebeam

I'm none of that Bek and on no high horse either.

I'm not against the design from Boulder, sure it slows traffic and sure it integrates cyclist, but the implementation could be better. Like that big sign further back from the merge. Sure it works well as is, but I'd bet most if not all cyclist leave that BL before it ends.

I like to explore and learn about the best cyclist facilities to meet a range of cyclist needs and for the type of road layout where I live (high speed arterials on 1mi grid w/frequent intersections bounding a maze of residential streets) that WOLs are the best facility. I'm also fine with the aesthetic improvements being made to canal routes here, of little use for me, but make for good interconnect for recreational and unique cases of transportational cycling.

If intersections (of all kinds) were far less frequent (i.e. every 1mi or so) I'd be fine with BL striping on faster and well maintained roads as long as the stripe ended 200' before any intersection where there is not a RTOL.

Al

invisiblehand

Sorry for my ignorance, but what is the difference between a traffic circle and a roundabout?

noisebeam

https://www.azdot.gov/CCPartnerships/Roundabouts/faq.asp

"What is the difference between a Traffic Circle and a Modern Roundabout?
Modern Roundabouts are different than traffic circles in the following ways
Traffic circles can involve stop signs or stop signals
Traffic circles can be very large or very small
Traffic circles can operate at higher speeds and often require motorists to move from one lane to another
Some traffic circles still exist in the USA, however safety and operational problems caused many of them to fall out of favor in the 1950s and 60s.

Modern Roundabouts are not Traffic Circles
Modern Roundabouts follow a yield at entry rule, which requires approaching vehicles to wait for a gap in the circulating traffic before entering the Roundabout
Modern Roundabouts involve low speeds for traffic entering and driving through the Roundabout
Modern Roundabouts use deflection to slow entering traffic and enhance safety
Vehicles in the Modern Roundabout have the right of way "

invisiblehand

Hey, thanks noisebeam.

Some of you guys know each other too well ...

Another thing that is unclear, is the cycling advocacy groups' disinclination for traffic calming. As a city resident, it is easy to convince me that people drive too fast. My wife was run over by a van at the intersection by our apartment and we drive less than the average family. But it seems like something advantageous for cycling in particularly dense areas.

Is it the case that despite the name "traffic calming" such measures make drivers more aggressive like the situation described the previous post that described traffic on streets with numerous speed bumps?

There is a residential area in a DC suburb with small roundabouts. For those familiar with the area, it is in Arlington between Wilson Blvd and Route 50. Anyway, my understanding is that people used to cut through the neighborhoods often. At some point, several connecting roads were blocked and speed bumps and small roundabouts were installed. It appears to me, the occasional visitor, to work well despite the population boom in the last ten years. Would this be an example of traffic calming?

richardmasoner

I wasn't aware of this nomenclature of "Modern Roundabouts." I learned something new. I was using 'roundabout' for the big, high speed traffic circles, and 'traffic circle' for the small "modern roundabout" designed to deflect and slow traffic.

Regarding invisiblehand's comment: Speed bumps are considered almost obsolete. Nobody likes them: they damage cars and they create a lot of noise. Speed bumps result in increased speeds between the bumps. Same with stop signs that are placed for 'traffic calming' purposes instead of to determine right-of-way.

RFM

donnamb 

That's the kind of traffic calming I'm familiar with.

Bekologist

they've used and are increasing use of 'planter circles' in the middle of intersections to add traffic calming in residential areas in seattle with effectiveness. and they work!

Anyone else in here familiar with the citizen guerilla work in Holland in the town of Delft and the subsequent nationwide implementation of traffic calming in that country known as 'woonerfs' very interesting story.

In the mid 70's, after the third child had been run over in a residential neighborhood in Delft and the authorities refused to take action, citizens armed with picks and shovels literally tore up a road overnight and put in their version of traffic calming.

when the bulldozers arrived with police in tow, the citizens held their ground. this led to 'woonerfs'- living yards- being given legal basis for implementation in the Netherlands in 1976 and changes in traffic rules in 1978.

a far cry from autocentric views held in the US and propogated by a true anti-cyclist, john forester, The underlying and basic principle of a woonerf is that a street is a valuable public space and should be shared by all users.

credit due "the End of the Road; Wolfgang Zuckerman, lutterworth press, 1991