forrest_m

Was recently reading this thread about Vancouver's conversion of some curb lanes to bike only and got to thinking about a traffic idea that's been heavily implemented in the city where I'm now living (Madrid, Spain).

Throughout the city, virtually every major arterial street has the curb lane separated by plastic "shark fin" dividers to form a "slow traffic lane" open to busses, taxis & motorcycles/scooters (1). I'm not sure what to think about them as a model for improving mobility in dense urban areas.





On the plus side, they do seem to be pretty effective in the broader goal of reducing congestion of all kinds. Bus transit times have fallen sharply since their implementation. As a cyclist, it is nice to have the physical separation from faster-moving traffic, as the lanes here are often quite narrow. (2). During rush hour, when the normal lanes are all stop-and-go, I can almost always travel faster in the taxi/bus lane, even if I am "stuck" behind a bus making normal stops. They seem like a reasonable solution for retrofitting existing urban streets where a total redesign (WOL, etc) isn't practical. I think there's something appealing about a solution that helps cyclists while not really being cycle-specific, but rather results from making some provision for all the various types of slow-moving traffic that a city requires (of which bikes are only a subset).

The biggest downside that I experience is that they do create an extra layer of lateral interactions, as vehicles attempt to merge in and out of the slow lane through very limited openings in the barrier (typically at intersections and at mid-block). Taxis can legally stop and wait in the lane (and delivery vehicles illegally); busses cross out to pass them or to make left turns. Cars in the faster lanes to the left generally have to cross the lane as they turn off onto side streets (with the risk of cutting off through-traffic) since they can't merge in early and treat it as a right-turn lane. I've done a bit of googling, but haven't so far been able to dig out any accident statistics on these lanes, but it's hard to believe it's not a problem.

I'm curious about what people think about this kind of solution, esp. those who are opposed to dedicated bike lanes?

1 Technically, bikes are not actually allowed in these lanes, but the city's own bicycle infrastructure plan notes that they are already used as a de-facto part of the network of cycling infrastructure and they are currently studying whether they should all be opened to bikes, with or without various modifications as conditions allow. In most other spanish cities (and many other european cities), it is already legal.

2 The problem with taking the lane in the first lane to the left of the barrier is that it often puts you between two lanes of motorized traffic, both of which are moving faster than you, which I usually find to be an uncomfortable position.

Consularrider

I hated those lanes when they put them in in Madrid and I was riding on Serrano. I never want to be in a walled off lane with a bus or a taxi!

SCROUDS

I like the idea but I would think physical seperation is unnecessary. Are cars likely to abuse the lane if there wasn't the barriers? I'm never been to Spain and am not familiar with Madrid's traffic ethos.

forrest_m

AFAIK, the barriers were installed after years of trying other alternatives, (turtles, cones, paint, enforcement). Double parking, even on busy streets, is endemic here, I think the dividers were kind of a last resort. But for the purposes of discussion, we could assume that in other, more rule-abiding cultures, physical separation isn't strictly necessary to implement some kind of universal "slower traffic" lane...

Chris516

While I have never been to Spain(I was born in Berlin, Germany and traveled through most of Western Europe), from those pictures, I definitely agree about not liking the idea of being walled off from the rest of the traffic.

SCROUDS

Looking at that pic, if they took out every other one of those barriers, bikes could slide in and out of the lane but motor vehicle traffic couldn't.

Boyd Reynolds

I've never used anything even a little bit like that, but looking at the picture above I see what I think is a right turn lane to the left of the dividers. Does that make this a through lane to the right of a right turn lane? If so, I want nothing to do with it. Am I understanding the picture correctly?

degnaw

Apparently the 'bus bike right turn' lanes on Hennepin Ave in Minneapolis aren't too popular:



https://www.flickr.com/photos/mspdude...n/photostream/

rogwilco

Among cyclists or non-cyclists?

forrest_m

I was scanning some Madrid bike blogs/forums and there isn't any real consensus. Whether people like/use them or not depends on the specifics of particular streets and traffic conditions. I didn't read anything suggesting that they be taken out (most people recognize their effectiveness as part of the overall system), just disagreement about whether they were appropriate for cycling.

Yeah, as I mentioned in the OP, right-turning traffic from the first "normal" traffic lane has to cross the bus-taxi lane at intersections. (In some locations, the lane divider becomes an intermittent painted stripe, allowing traffic to merge in and use it as a right-turn lane.) I agree, this is a real problem. My guess? The traffic engineers are thinking is that right-turning drivers already have to yield to one stream of parallel traffic (pedestrians crossing the sidewalk), so a waiting for a second lane (the bus lane) is a difference of degree, not of kind. Worth noting that pedestrian volume on the sidewalk is so heavy here that cars are more or less forced to be conscious of it - there are ALWAYS peds crossing on the walk signal, so they are part of the standard environment, not an unusual impediment... hitting a ped. with your car here is an almost automatic loss of driving license, apart from any other penalty.

Interesting, that is sort of what I was imagining a N. American interpretation might look like. But those look like they are wide enough for a bus to pass a bicycle without coming out of the bus/bike lane? Any ideas about why they aren't popular or with whom?

degnaw

Cyclists: https://www.mplsbikelove.com/forum/vi...057&start=1050

(I don't live there, I just know this as an example of a bus/bike lane). Hopefully someone from Minneapolis could provide more insight?

mikeybikes

Seems right hooks are the biggest concern.

What I'd like to see is Denver's bus lanes on Lincoln and Broadway be made 24/7 and marked explicitly for buses, bicycles and right turns. As is, when the bus lanes are bus and right turns only, abidance seems pretty complete. It helps that there are flashing yellow lights when its a bus lane.

By allowing right turns in the lane, I think it will help reduce the potential for right hooking. Also, there couldn't be any physical separation due to the number of driveways along the two streets, especially Lincoln which is a mostly residential street.

Bekologist

Bus, bike and RTO lanes are a boon to bicyclists in the Northwest in my opinion.

There's little downside - except the barrier to participation is still quite high and may not facilitate ridership among the more vulnerable population.

B. Carfree

Well, you must have better bus drivers in Seattle than we have in Eugene. I will alter my route to avoid being on a road with ours. They have no problem hitting a cyclist who is in a bike lane; I can't imagine how fun it would be to have a bus/bike lane designation to share with these guys.

SlimAgainSoon

Tallahassee, Florida, is about to give this a go on a stretch of road that runs along the edge of, and through part of, Florida State University.

Here's some info and a pix of the six-lane road up for conversion: Bikeable Tallahassee