When separated facilities can save a life.
11-16-07, 11:25 PM
#26
Rider in the Storm
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Portland, Oregon
Posts: 736
Bikes: LeMond Zurich, KHS Fiero (Fixed), Centurion Ironman Expert
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Well, I guess the next logical question in your sequence could be, "How many cyclists were not killed at intersection by turning traffic because they rode in a segregated, protected facility? 100, 200, 400...5,000?"
There is no comparison. Ha!
There is no comparison. Ha!
11-17-07, 02:45 AM
#27
----
Thread Starter
There are about 800 cyclists killed per year in the U.S.
About how many of these are killed by out-of-control cars? 1? 2?
How many cyclists per year are not killed by out-of-control cars thanks to a guardrail or similar facility that separates a cycling facility from the roadway? 1? 2?
How many cyclists are killed at intersections by turning traffic because they were riding outside what Franklin calls the zone of maximum surveillance [1] and were overlooked? 100? 200? 400?
There is no comparison.
About how many of these are killed by out-of-control cars? 1? 2?
How many cyclists per year are not killed by out-of-control cars thanks to a guardrail or similar facility that separates a cycling facility from the roadway? 1? 2?
How many cyclists are killed at intersections by turning traffic because they were riding outside what Franklin calls the zone of maximum surveillance [1] and were overlooked? 100? 200? 400?
There is no comparison.
Whether the car is in the control of the driver or "out of control" it is still 3000 lbs of steel, glass and rubber hurtling down a road at relatively high speeds. The point of a separated facility is to put as much distance as possible between a car and a fully exposed vulnerable human being on a 25 lb bicycle in a collision (unlike the auto driver who is encased in the steel frame and airbagged and seat belted). The forces necessary to smash the guard rail in the picture are enormous. Even hitting another cyclist at full speed on the bike path barely compares to that force.
I assume from your moniker that you wear a helmet to protect your head. Think of a separated bicycle facility as a helmet for your entire body. And how many times have you hit your helmet? Once? Twice? Never? But I'll bet you wear that helmet every day. And so what if you need it only once? It's only one life- what's that compared to 100, 200, 400? I guess it's everything when it's your own life, isn't it? Or someone who matters to you.
11-17-07, 05:15 PM
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Fallbrook, CA.
Posts: 1,109
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
There are about 800 cyclists killed per year in the U.S.
About how many of these are killed by out-of-control cars? 1? 2?
How many cyclists per year are not killed by out-of-control cars thanks to a guardrail or similar facility that separates a cycling facility from the roadway? 1? 2?
How many cyclists are killed at intersections by turning traffic because they were riding outside what Franklin calls the zone of maximum surveillance [1] and were overlooked? 100? 200? 400?
There is no comparison.
About how many of these are killed by out-of-control cars? 1? 2?
How many cyclists per year are not killed by out-of-control cars thanks to a guardrail or similar facility that separates a cycling facility from the roadway? 1? 2?
How many cyclists are killed at intersections by turning traffic because they were riding outside what Franklin calls the zone of maximum surveillance [1] and were overlooked? 100? 200? 400?
There is no comparison.
You have the same rights on the road as a car, along with the same responsibilities of watching all around you, not just where is most convenient.]
Not to mention, the argument can be just as easily made that on a road with a mirror design (but bike path still on the north end, and the road entrance on the south) the rider in the road now needs to pay attention to way more than the guy on the bike path... amazing, but not really.
Last edited by StrangeWill; 11-17-07 at 05:24 PM.
11-17-07, 06:23 PM
#29
CRIKEY!!!!!!!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: all the way down under
Posts: 4,276
Bikes: several
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1589 Post(s)
Liked 687 Times
in
365 Posts
Of the 800 cyclists per year killed in the U.S. how many were using physically segregated facilities at the time? 1? 2?... so maybe 798 or 799 were sharing the road when they were killed. Let me put it this way - if you have a choice to fly in two identical aircraft to reach the same destination, the only difference it that one will take a flight path that was 800 times more likely to end in a fatal crash, which would you choose to fly in? and I think I'm being gracious because I think that more people use segregated facilities than the number that practice VC-style sharing of the road, so the odds are probably worse than 800:1
How many cyclists are killed at intersections by turning traffic because they were riding outside what Franklin calls the zone of maximum surveillance [1] and were overlooked? 100? 200? 400?
798-799 cyclist deaths sharing the road Vs 1 or 2 deaths on segregated facilities caused by drivers accessing the facility illegaly. You're absolutely right, there is no comparison.
Last edited by Cyclaholic; 11-17-07 at 06:48 PM.
11-18-07, 01:25 AM
#30
CRIKEY!!!!!!!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: all the way down under
Posts: 4,276
Bikes: several
Mentioned: 37 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1589 Post(s)
Liked 687 Times
in
365 Posts
I just don't want the bike lane debate to spill over into segregated facilities, they're two very different debates.
11-18-07, 06:04 AM
#31
Violin guitar mandolin
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Friendsville, TN, USA
Posts: 1,171
Bikes: Wilier Thor, Fuji Professional, LeMond Wayzata
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
In riding a few miles, looking at riders and motorists, I tend to think the best use of money would be in making drivers and riders safer through training, responsibility, etc. I don't know that would be effective in this frontier USA country. Next best would be making roads appropriate for mixed use. Segregated facilities would fall somewhere below that. They're great, but they're essentially a second system of transportation. Likely too big a job and one that designers will screw up.
I'd like to see major radials from major suburbs backed up by cycle throughways with proper grading etc. No reason an Interstate or equivalent can't have a segregated facility along the right of way.
But segregated everywhere would be prohibitively expensive. Not only in terms of the construction, but in terms of design and in land / litigation to expand rights of way.
I'd like to see major radials from major suburbs backed up by cycle throughways with proper grading etc. No reason an Interstate or equivalent can't have a segregated facility along the right of way.
But segregated everywhere would be prohibitively expensive. Not only in terms of the construction, but in terms of design and in land / litigation to expand rights of way.
11-18-07, 12:23 PM
#32
----
Thread Starter
If we are talking only about the US- it's a big and diverse country in terms of topography and how it's cities, towns, suburbs and rural areas are designed and accomodated for transportation- what may work well in one locale might not serve another area at all and could be counter productive.
11-18-07, 07:28 PM
#33
Violin guitar mandolin
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Friendsville, TN, USA
Posts: 1,171
Bikes: Wilier Thor, Fuji Professional, LeMond Wayzata
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
"They don't accumulate anything when they're physically segregated, not just a white line.
It's a shame you 'can't see the country funding a separate bike lane along every road we're entitled to use'... I can."
Cyclaholic was advocating a separate system perhaps. At least that's what I took it to be. Matters little - we're not going to squeeze bike lanes into the endless strips of substandard road that traverse this country. Let alone something separate. Roads I ride on won't fit a dualie and a UPS truck side by side - someone has to drop tires over the edge. Bike lanes would take making each road an oversize lane, which would take complete regrading and widening. I doubt my little county could fund that!
It's a shame you 'can't see the country funding a separate bike lane along every road we're entitled to use'... I can."
Cyclaholic was advocating a separate system perhaps. At least that's what I took it to be. Matters little - we're not going to squeeze bike lanes into the endless strips of substandard road that traverse this country. Let alone something separate. Roads I ride on won't fit a dualie and a UPS truck side by side - someone has to drop tires over the edge. Bike lanes would take making each road an oversize lane, which would take complete regrading and widening. I doubt my little county could fund that!
11-19-07, 09:28 AM
#34
genec
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times
in
3,158 Posts
In riding a few miles, looking at riders and motorists, I tend to think the best use of money would be in making drivers and riders safer through training, responsibility, etc. I don't know that would be effective in this frontier USA country. Next best would be making roads appropriate for mixed use. Segregated facilities would fall somewhere below that. They're great, but they're essentially a second system of transportation. Likely too big a job and one that designers will screw up.
I'd like to see major radials from major suburbs backed up by cycle throughways with proper grading etc. No reason an Interstate or equivalent can't have a segregated facility along the right of way.
But segregated everywhere would be prohibitively expensive. Not only in terms of the construction, but in terms of design and in land / litigation to expand rights of way.
I'd like to see major radials from major suburbs backed up by cycle throughways with proper grading etc. No reason an Interstate or equivalent can't have a segregated facility along the right of way.
But segregated everywhere would be prohibitively expensive. Not only in terms of the construction, but in terms of design and in land / litigation to expand rights of way.
Finally a series of segregated bike hiways/arterials to enhance cycling longer distances by reducing the need for cyclists to have to stop at every intersection. These will have to be below or above grade bike paths similar to that in Oulu Finland. These paths should preclude the need for cyclists to share high speed arterials.
Lower speed downtown roads and residential streets can be used in the vehicular manner.
11-19-07, 09:40 AM
#35
Senior Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 155
Bikes: Stevens Strada 600
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Bike paths for me! Ottawa has an extensive and growing system of bike paths that mostly runs parallel to roads and sometimes takes better routes than roads. My daily commute is 95% bike path and I'm not sure I would do it if I had to be on the road for the whole trip.
The argument for and against segregated lanes will always be a dialog of the deaf. I think people should do what they prefer and keep their preaching to the choir.
The argument for and against segregated lanes will always be a dialog of the deaf. I think people should do what they prefer and keep their preaching to the choir.
11-19-07, 12:41 PM
#36
Dominatrikes
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Still in Santa Barbara
Posts: 4,920
Bikes: Catrike Pocket, Lightning Thunderbold recumbent, Trek 3000 MTB.
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
They are moving my office next week. So now I have a choice to make: Ride on the bike path and stay on it all the way through the university (which will be mighty scary due to bike traffic in the morning, but no car traffic at all) or to take "blood alley", the main drag through Old Towne Goleta where pedestrians and cyclists are killed on a somewhat regular basis. It's a tough call because the bike path does take me out of my way. But let's see, risk death or risk inconvenient bicycle traffic jams?
11-19-07, 01:27 PM
#37
Arizona Dessert
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: 5345 Post(s)
Liked 2,169 Times
in
1,288 Posts
11-19-07, 02:46 PM
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
I don't think anyone is advocating for a fully segregated system nationally, regionally or even locally but that separated bike ways have a place in the transportation infrastructure and are something worthy of consideration if there is land space (often using abandoned public space) and the roadways that would otherwise be the route are poorly designed and could not be improved in such a way to make them safe to share with bicycle traffic.
If we are talking only about the US- it's a big and diverse country in terms of topography and how it's cities, towns, suburbs and rural areas are designed and accomodated for transportation- what may work well in one locale might not serve another area at all and could be counter productive.
If we are talking only about the US- it's a big and diverse country in terms of topography and how it's cities, towns, suburbs and rural areas are designed and accomodated for transportation- what may work well in one locale might not serve another area at all and could be counter productive.
A case in point is the bike path here in L.A. next to the Orange line. Abiout 20 miles long. There are are a couple of very nice 2-3 mile sections, but there are also a lot of sections where it stays hidden from drivers until the crossing (often even worse that a normal intersection about 20-30 feet from an intersection somewhere you would never expect a crossing). The segregrated facilities will be a contributing factor in accidents, but they will not get recorded as such, the bike path officially ends at each and every intersection.
11-19-07, 02:54 PM
#39
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 5,866
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times
in
2 Posts
BTW there have been fatalities on the bike path going through UCSB. Near the football stadium if I recall correctly. Might be worth finding out when classes start and avoind the last few minutes when late to class students are even more less than careful than usual.
11-19-07, 04:41 PM
#40
Arizona Dessert
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: 5345 Post(s)
Liked 2,169 Times
in
1,288 Posts
Al
11-19-07, 05:10 PM
#41
RacingBear
Well some of the people that ride on the street do it because it's well more convenient. They like to go fast, which on a bike path is dangerous (clueless walkers, etc), they don't want to constantly worry about what a guy/gal in front will do, slow down, yell, ring the bell. To them it's easier to deal with cars then to share a bike path. Bike paths are great if you want to just pedal along at 10mph. If you want to go 20mph, do intervals, and training rides in general, not so much.
My wife, one of those cyclists who actually prefers bike lanes, bike paths and MUP's, rides daily to work on the Charles River bike path, which runs alongside Soldier's Field Road. I've told her about the anti-bike facilities arguments that rage here in BF and she just doesn't get it- if she had to ride to work on the road as opposed to the bike path she simply wouldn't ride. I've told her that when she occasionally sees cyclists ride that section of Soldier's Field Road and forgo the bike path they are more than likely hardcore opponents of bike paths and prefer to ride on the road. She says she wouldn't feel safe doing that.
Today she called me to let me know that as she rode the bike path (it was pretty rainy in Boston today) she heard a loud bang and as she looked over she saw a car spinning out of control on Soldier's Field Road and sliding right at her. In no time it hit the guardrail smashing the guardrail and the support timbers behind it and shot back out into the roadway. She was physically unharmed but completely freaked out. I'm ever thankful that she was okay.
She is more convinced than ever of the value of a separated facility and so am I.
There's a certain logic in the fact that:
A helmet would not have saved her.
Cyclist education would not have saved her.
Dynamic lane positioning would not have saved her,
Wearing bright visible clothing would not have saved her.
But a separated bike facility did.
Here is a google map link to the location of the accident. If you zoom in all the way you'll see the guardrail bent from a similar crash that must have happened around the time of the photo. These kinds of spin outs are a regular occurrence on that stretch of road.
I'll try to grab a shot of it tomorrow in the daylight. I rode by the scene of the crash tonight in the dark and it was pretty scary to see the extent of damage to guardrail and the pieces of bumper.
https://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=e...wloc=addr&om=1
For what's it worth I was running late to work today and rode in on the road (Comm Ave) and there were some serious near misses between cars around me on the ride. It was a little freaky out there today.
Today she called me to let me know that as she rode the bike path (it was pretty rainy in Boston today) she heard a loud bang and as she looked over she saw a car spinning out of control on Soldier's Field Road and sliding right at her. In no time it hit the guardrail smashing the guardrail and the support timbers behind it and shot back out into the roadway. She was physically unharmed but completely freaked out. I'm ever thankful that she was okay.
She is more convinced than ever of the value of a separated facility and so am I.
There's a certain logic in the fact that:
A helmet would not have saved her.
Cyclist education would not have saved her.
Dynamic lane positioning would not have saved her,
Wearing bright visible clothing would not have saved her.
But a separated bike facility did.
Here is a google map link to the location of the accident. If you zoom in all the way you'll see the guardrail bent from a similar crash that must have happened around the time of the photo. These kinds of spin outs are a regular occurrence on that stretch of road.
I'll try to grab a shot of it tomorrow in the daylight. I rode by the scene of the crash tonight in the dark and it was pretty scary to see the extent of damage to guardrail and the pieces of bumper.
https://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=e...wloc=addr&om=1
For what's it worth I was running late to work today and rode in on the road (Comm Ave) and there were some serious near misses between cars around me on the ride. It was a little freaky out there today.
11-19-07, 11:30 PM
#42
----
Thread Starter
I think the two of us agree. But what some people are trying very hard to brush under the carpet is that not all segregrated facilities ate really segregated. Something that keeps bikes and cars physically seperated until the next intersection are disasters waiting to happen. Intersections are the worst spot anyway and this makes the most dangerous spot worse. (Though I can think of some streets where it might still be worth it).
A case in point is the bike path here in L.A. next to the Orange line. Abiout 20 miles long. There are are a couple of very nice 2-3 mile sections, but there are also a lot of sections where it stays hidden from drivers until the crossing (often even worse that a normal intersection about 20-30 feet from an intersection somewhere you would never expect a crossing). The segregrated facilities will be a contributing factor in accidents, but they will not get recorded as such, the bike path officially ends at each and every intersection.
A case in point is the bike path here in L.A. next to the Orange line. Abiout 20 miles long. There are are a couple of very nice 2-3 mile sections, but there are also a lot of sections where it stays hidden from drivers until the crossing (often even worse that a normal intersection about 20-30 feet from an intersection somewhere you would never expect a crossing). The segregrated facilities will be a contributing factor in accidents, but they will not get recorded as such, the bike path officially ends at each and every intersection.
true, true... agreed. However, a while back I compared in one of these forums my commute when I take the road in to work (much of it on Commonwealth Avenue for those of you who know Boston) versus the bike path for the number of intersections. The bike path crosses 6 road ways- and they are admittedly poor designs for a total of 11 intersections with the bits of road I use on that commute. The road route, which is 3 mile shorter was upwards of 60 actual intersections not counting side streets, parking lots etc which would have been too numerous to mention.
The bike path intersections must be very carefully negotiated and require their own skill set but the lower number, in my opinion, would seem to reduce the potential for a collision with an auto over the road route.
11-20-07, 08:19 AM
#43
genec
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times
in
3,158 Posts
Well some of the people that ride on the street do it because it's well more convenient. They like to go fast, which on a bike path is dangerous (clueless walkers, etc), they don't want to constantly worry about what a guy/gal in front will do, slow down, yell, ring the bell. To them it's easier to deal with cars then to share a bike path. Bike paths are great if you want to just pedal along at 10mph. If you want to go 20mph, do intervals, and training rides in general, not so much.
Oh sure on the unbroken stretches I can "train," but what is the difference between an unbroken stretch of street and a long unbroken stretch of good bike path? Of course it has to be good bike path, not the narrow sidewalk width stuff.
11-20-07, 11:25 AM
#44
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: New York, NY
Posts: 531
Bikes: Still researching
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
A good example would be the Central Park loop road in Manhattan. Is is a three lane one way road closed to cars on the weekend. The south end is very congested most of the time but the further north you go, the better it gets. You can ride much more quickly than you can on nearby streets.
11-22-07, 12:10 PM
#45
24-Speed Machine
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Wash. Grove, MD
Posts: 6,058
Bikes: 2003 Specialized Allez 24-Speed Road Bike
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
My wife, one of those cyclists who actually prefers bike lanes, bike paths and MUP's, rides daily to work on the Charles River bike path, which runs alongside Soldier's Field Road. I've told her about the anti-bike facilities arguments that rage here in BF and she just doesn't get it- if she had to ride to work on the road as opposed to the bike path she simply wouldn't ride. I've told her that when she occasionally sees cyclists ride that section of Soldier's Field Road and forgo the bike path they are more than likely hardcore opponents of bike paths and prefer to ride on the road. She says she wouldn't feel safe doing that.
Today she called me to let me know that as she rode the bike path (it was pretty rainy in Boston today) she heard a loud bang and as she looked over she saw a car spinning out of control on Soldier's Field Road and sliding right at her. In no time it hit the guardrail smashing the guardrail and the support timbers behind it and shot back out into the roadway. She was physically unharmed but completely freaked out. I'm ever thankful that she was okay.
She is more convinced than ever of the value of a separated facility and so am I.
There's a certain logic in the fact that:
A helmet would not have saved her.
Cyclist education would not have saved her.
Dynamic lane positioning would not have saved her,
Wearing bright visible clothing would not have saved her.
But a separated bike facility did.
Here is a google map link to the location of the accident. If you zoom in all the way you'll see the guardrail bent from a similar crash that must have happened around the time of the photo. These kinds of spin outs are a regular occurrence on that stretch of road.
I'll try to grab a shot of it tomorrow in the daylight. I rode by the scene of the crash tonight in the dark and it was pretty scary to see the extent of damage to guardrail and the pieces of bumper.
https://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=e...wloc=addr&om=1
For what's it worth I was running late to work today and rode in on the road (Comm Ave) and there were some serious near misses between cars around me on the ride. It was a little freaky out there today.
Today she called me to let me know that as she rode the bike path (it was pretty rainy in Boston today) she heard a loud bang and as she looked over she saw a car spinning out of control on Soldier's Field Road and sliding right at her. In no time it hit the guardrail smashing the guardrail and the support timbers behind it and shot back out into the roadway. She was physically unharmed but completely freaked out. I'm ever thankful that she was okay.
She is more convinced than ever of the value of a separated facility and so am I.
There's a certain logic in the fact that:
A helmet would not have saved her.
Cyclist education would not have saved her.
Dynamic lane positioning would not have saved her,
Wearing bright visible clothing would not have saved her.
But a separated bike facility did.
Here is a google map link to the location of the accident. If you zoom in all the way you'll see the guardrail bent from a similar crash that must have happened around the time of the photo. These kinds of spin outs are a regular occurrence on that stretch of road.
I'll try to grab a shot of it tomorrow in the daylight. I rode by the scene of the crash tonight in the dark and it was pretty scary to see the extent of damage to guardrail and the pieces of bumper.
https://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=e...wloc=addr&om=1
For what's it worth I was running late to work today and rode in on the road (Comm Ave) and there were some serious near misses between cars around me on the ride. It was a little freaky out there today.
Christopher
P.S. Another thing I just thought of, when I was living in Duluth(Minnesota), the state had apparently started to put bumps on the shoulder for, when drivers would fall asleep at wheel. This was after, the state had created the bike paths. That is another reason why a decided I should always 'take the lane'.
11-25-07, 02:45 AM
#46
----
Thread Starter
While I agree there is some truth to this statement- and certainly cyclists would be best served when using bike lanes to be as vigilant and aware of the traffic around them as if the lane markings were not there- I think there can be as much of a sense of "false security" with "taking the lane". Just as a bike lane is not a cure all nor a "cloak of invincibility" neither is "taking the lane".
When I "take the lane" I do it with the same level of caution and confidence I would use for most bike lanes.
This same argument is often used in the pro-/anti- helmet debates with some arguing that wearing a helmet gives a false sense of security to it's wearer. A tough assumption to prove since it's more than likely that the cyclist who chooses to wear a bike helmet may tend to be less of a risk taker in general than the cyclist who chooses not to wear one.
"Taking the lane" requires a certain level of confidence, skill and experience that not all cyclists have or ever will achieve. They may resist "taking the lane" because they are overly cautious and prefer the feeling of safety the bike lane gives them. Whether that feeling is an illusion I'll leave open to debate since it is dependent on such a variety of factors that most genralizations about them are rendered moot. However, sidewalk riding does have some inherent and provable risks that make it statistically a dangerous place to ride. If any place to ride lends the rider a false sense of security it is a sidewalk- it requires extraordinary vigilance to ride safely on the sidewalk.
11-25-07, 05:21 PM
#47
genec
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times
in
3,158 Posts
11-25-07, 07:54 PM
#48
feros ferio
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: www.ci.encinitas.ca.us
Posts: 21,793
Bikes: 1959 Capo Modell Campagnolo; 1960 Capo Sieger (2); 1962 Carlton Franco Suisse; 1970 Peugeot UO-8; 1982 Bianchi Campione d'Italia; 1988 Schwinn Project KOM-10;
Mentioned: 44 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1391 Post(s)
Liked 1,322 Times
in
835 Posts
On a 25-30 mph / 40-50 kph street, I generally favor full integration of bicycles and motor vehicles, but on a 50 mph / 80 kph prime arterial, I want at least a Class II bike lane, and I shall go out of my way to avoid many of the local freeway-style interchanges with high-speed free merges and diverges, where I would fully welcome, and use, a "separate-but-equal" segregated facility.
__________________
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
"Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing." --Theodore Roosevelt
Capo: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger (2), S/N 42624, 42597
Carlton: 1962 Franco Suisse, S/N K7911
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1982 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
11-26-07, 07:53 AM
#49
genec
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 13658 Post(s)
Liked 4,532 Times
in
3,158 Posts
Safe and efficient intersection configuration is the biggest challenge in designing a decent segregated facility, and most I have seen fail miserably in this regard. Oceanside's is pretty decent, only because they were able to take advantage of a partial grade separation between the river bank and the bridges above, but the grade separation does create some tricky and potentially dangerous curves and dips.
On a 25-30 mph / 40-50 kph street, I generally favor full integration of bicycles and motor vehicles, but on a 50 mph / 80 kph prime arterial, I want at least a Class II bike lane, and I shall go out of my way to avoid many of the local freeway-style interchanges with high-speed free merges and diverges, where I would fully welcome, and use, a "separate-but-equal" segregated facility.
On a 25-30 mph / 40-50 kph street, I generally favor full integration of bicycles and motor vehicles, but on a 50 mph / 80 kph prime arterial, I want at least a Class II bike lane, and I shall go out of my way to avoid many of the local freeway-style interchanges with high-speed free merges and diverges, where I would fully welcome, and use, a "separate-but-equal" segregated facility.
And those faster arterials... nothing but freeways disguised as surface streets... ugggg!
11-27-07, 08:08 PM
#50
Sumanitu taka owaci
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 8,945
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
She should ride wherever she is safe. Nobody can make that choice for her.
I'm glad she's safe, and not hurt in any way.
__________________
No worries
No worries