Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety
Reload this Page >

Portland proposes another bike lane to the right of a RTOL

Notices
Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

Portland proposes another bike lane to the right of a RTOL

Old 04-02-11, 10:44 AM
  #1  
randya
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Posts: 13,696

Bikes: who cares?

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Portland proposes another bike lane to the right of a RTOL

at a major freeway interchange, no less. And it won't be legal to ignore it and take the lane because of the state's mandatory bike lane/sidepath law....



as the diagram shows, the eastbound bike lane is routed on to the sidewalk and into the crosswalk to the right of a right turn only lane

https://bikeportland.org/2011/04/01/r...t-in-may-50489
randya is offline  
Old 04-02-11, 12:07 PM
  #2  
mikeybikes
Senior Member
 
mikeybikes's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Edgewater, CO
Posts: 3,214

Bikes: Tons

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Of course, people trying to turn onto a major freeway will be willing to slow down and yield to bicycles crossing the on ramp. I don't see any problems with this design at all.
mikeybikes is offline  
Old 04-02-11, 01:12 PM
  #3  
randya
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Posts: 13,696

Bikes: who cares?

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
to be fair, there will be a bike only signal and no right turn on red during that signal phase, but the wait will be long for cyclists and a fair percentage of motorists will ignore the no right on red.
randya is offline  
Old 04-02-11, 02:17 PM
  #4  
Digital_Cowboy
Senior Member
 
Digital_Cowboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tampa/St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 9,352

Bikes: Specialized Hardrock Mountain (Stolen); Giant Seek 2 (Stolen); Diamondback Ascent mid 1980 - 1997

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
I could be mistaken, but I thought that Portland was one of the more bike friendly cities in the nation. Doesn't this go against their bike friendly image?
Digital_Cowboy is offline  
Old 04-02-11, 08:02 PM
  #5  
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,025

Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
how does a bike signal allowing bike traffic and no turn on red violate any general rules for traffic sorting?

It sounds, well, sound.

What is the alternative, mixing all the bike traffic with the cars, letting all the bikes and cars sort it out in the turn or thru lanes ?

THAT hardly sounds like the safer alternative.

I hope posters have experienced holding lanes of fast moving traffic approaching freeway onramps. This isn't any way to encourage cycling; rather, those types of road conditions presents a significant barrier to more populist bicycling.

Too bad they can't build a better bikeway at that intersection. a person would suspect PDOT has expectations it's going to improve roadway safety.

Last edited by Bekologist; 04-02-11 at 10:59 PM.
Bekologist is offline  
Old 04-02-11, 08:58 PM
  #6  
Digital_Cowboy
Senior Member
 
Digital_Cowboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tampa/St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 9,352

Bikes: Specialized Hardrock Mountain (Stolen); Giant Seek 2 (Stolen); Diamondback Ascent mid 1980 - 1997

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
When I lived over in Tampa, there is an interchange for I275 and Dale Maybry Highway that I used to ride through on a regular basis that I would not recommend for the novice cyclist. When starting on the north side of said interchange one is in the right hand lane, but by the time they get through it you're now in the left/center lane and have to pick and choose when to attempt to return to the right hand lane.
Digital_Cowboy is offline  
Old 04-03-11, 06:23 AM
  #7  
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,025

Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
..looking into this street impprovement, the changes are long overdue and are welcomed by the bicycling community that live in that neighborhood; Rosa Parks Way presents challenges for even experienced riders.

Originally Posted by johnathan maus, bike portland
This is welcome news for neighborhood residents (myself included) because existing conditions on Rosa Parks — especially as it crosses I-5 — are very inadequate. There is no shoulder and bike access across the overpass and into the popular New Seasons market at Interstate and Rosa Parks is challenging even for confident riders.
He even reported that PDOT is usually against striping sidewalk configured bikelanes, but the configuration at the freeway on ramps presented some unique planning difficulties that led PDOT to the configuration being installed.

Sounds like a win for safer streets in Portland.
Bekologist is offline  
Old 04-03-11, 08:49 AM
  #8  
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 26,733

Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10653 Post(s)
Liked 2,680 Times in 1,849 Posts
Originally Posted by randya View Post
at a major freeway interchange, no less. And it won't be legal to ignore it and take the lane because of the state's mandatory bike lane/sidepath law....



as the diagram shows, the eastbound bike lane is routed on to the sidewalk and into the crosswalk to the right of a right turn only lane

https://bikeportland.org/2011/04/01/r...t-in-may-50489
Given that this is the current situation:


The bike lane, bike signals and proposed pedestrian island may be an improvement.
* Stripe 6-foot bike lanes on both sides of N. Rosa Parks between N. Montana Ave to N. Vancouver Ave. (This will match the striping that already exists from N. Vancouver to MLK Jr. Blvd.)
* Two islands will be built at the intersection of N. Rosa Parks and N. Kerby St. to allow for people to cross.
* All signals at the I-5 intersection ramps will be modified and upgraded. Since we are shifting lanes to install bike lanes we need to move the signals to the new lane configuration.
* At the intersection of the I-5 on-ramp southbound and N. Rosa Parks we will be installing a new bike signal. Bikes will be able to activate the signal and get a green light while the right turn traffic (to the on ramp southbound) will be red. There will also be a “no right turn” flashing sign (similar to the intersection of N. Oregon and Interstate Ave by the Steel bridge).
* In the eastbound direction (south side of Rosa Parks) bike traffic will be routed onto an extended sidewalk between N. Montana Ave and the I-5 SB on-ramp (see image at right). The sidewalk will be 14-feet wide.
Of course, getting motorists to actually obey the laws and stop at the control signals when they are red and indicate NO TURNS, might be the biggest problem... even larger than getting motorists to accept cyclists on "their roads" and allowing cyclists to merge with motor vehicle traffic... which is exactly what cyclists have to do to move to the left side of a lane used as an on-ramp... otherwise cyclists are stuck to the right of that moving traffic anyway.
genec is offline  
Old 04-03-11, 09:22 AM
  #9  
wheel
Senior Member
 
wheel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Crystal MN
Posts: 2,147
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Digital_Cowboy View Post
When I lived over in Tampa, there is an interchange for I275 and Dale Maybry Highway that I used to ride through on a regular basis that I would not recommend for the novice cyclist. When starting on the north side of said interchange one is in the right hand lane, but by the time they get through it you're now in the left/center lane and have to pick and choose when to attempt to return to the right hand lane.
The right lane becomes a RTOL and a death trap for any cyclist who stays in the right lane.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLzWqNkSCvQ

Here the bike lane goes away to make room for RTOL, requiring a merge into 45mph traffic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vp98WbINXZ8

Many places you have to forge up a hill behind a huge line of cars.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Af52ZpZHUcY

Freeways are not meant for a cyclist and the intersections to these freeways, violate cyclist's right to the road.
wheel is offline  
Old 04-03-11, 02:31 PM
  #10  
randya
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Posts: 13,696

Bikes: who cares?

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
Originally Posted by genec View Post
That's a poorly trained cyclist shown in that picture, you wouldn't catch me riding in that lane position in that location

Last edited by randya; 04-03-11 at 02:42 PM.
randya is offline  
Old 04-03-11, 08:29 PM
  #11  
randya
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Posts: 13,696

Bikes: who cares?

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
the biggest problem here is that the highway-local street interface sucks at almost every highway interchange, and no matter what you do, it will still suck. plus ODOT probably has veto power over any proposal for change
randya is offline  
Old 04-04-11, 01:44 AM
  #12  
CB HI
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,643
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1314 Post(s)
Liked 91 Times in 58 Posts
It almost seems as if many US cities are now competing to see who can design the dumbest, least safe bike lane.

The time I am most concerned with my safety, is as a pedestrian having to deal with right turn on red motorist. This bike lane turns cyclist into pedestrians having to deal with right turn on red motorist.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  
Old 04-04-11, 02:25 AM
  #13  
sudo bike
Bicikli Huszár
 
sudo bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 2,116

Bikes: '95 Novara Randonee

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
What is the alternative, mixing all the bike traffic with the cars, letting all the bikes and cars sort it out in the turn or thru lanes ?
I think most people were just thinking of the bike lane merging left of the right turn lane, so that by the time you reach the stoplight you have (left to right): 1) Standard travel lane 2) Bike Lane 3) Right Turn Lane. It starts far right and then the right turn and bike lanes cross each other to arrive at the final position shown (1, 2, 3).

We don't have any like that here near a freeway onramp, but we do have them at a few intersections. It generally works pretty well... it puts both drivers preparing to turn and cyclists on alert as they negotiate the merge. They use this set up at busier intersections where it's considered sketchy to simply have the bike merge left into the travel lane (which is the norm... we usually have a little bike painted to show that bikes are supposed to be there and where to put your wheels in order to trip the sensor). I wish I could show an example, but Google Maps Streetview is outdated and doesn't show the newly painted intersections...

(As an aside, I'd be perfectly fine getting rid of the right on red law...)
sudo bike is offline  
Old 04-04-11, 02:42 AM
  #14  
CB HI
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,643
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1314 Post(s)
Liked 91 Times in 58 Posts
Originally Posted by wheel View Post
Freeways are not meant for a cyclist and the intersections to these freeways, violate cyclist's right to the road.
Cyclist do just fine on many freeways in the west.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  
Old 04-04-11, 02:48 AM
  #15  
Digital_Cowboy
Senior Member
 
Digital_Cowboy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Tampa/St. Pete, Florida
Posts: 9,352

Bikes: Specialized Hardrock Mountain (Stolen); Giant Seek 2 (Stolen); Diamondback Ascent mid 1980 - 1997

Mentioned: 4 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Originally Posted by sudo bike View Post
I think most people were just thinking of the bike lane merging left of the right turn lane, so that by the time you reach the stoplight you have (left to right): 1) Standard travel lane 2) Bike Lane 3) Right Turn Lane. It starts far right and then the right turn and bike lanes cross each other to arrive at the final position shown (1, 2, 3).

We don't have any like that here near a freeway onramp, but we do have them at a few intersections. It generally works pretty well... it puts both drivers preparing to turn and cyclists on alert as they negotiate the merge. They use this set up at busier intersections where it's considered sketchy to simply have the bike merge left into the travel lane (which is the norm... we usually have a little bike painted to show that bikes are supposed to be there and where to put your wheels in order to trip the sensor). I wish I could show an example, but Google Maps Streetview is outdated and doesn't show the newly painted intersections...

(As an aside, I'd be perfectly fine getting rid of the right on red law...)
I can agree with that. As from my experience it doesn't seem many motorists slow down let alone stop before making a right on red. And we'd also be able to save I don't know how much money by NOT having to erect the "reminder" signs that say "Turning Traffic Must Yield to Pedestrians."
Digital_Cowboy is offline  
Old 04-04-11, 07:43 AM
  #16  
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 26,733

Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10653 Post(s)
Liked 2,680 Times in 1,849 Posts
Originally Posted by randya View Post
That's a poorly trained cyclist shown in that picture, you wouldn't catch me riding in that lane position in that location
So are you training all the cyclists out there... and the poorly trained motorists who might also be out there?

One of the largest issues we have is that motorists are not "fully trained" when they get behind the wheel... they just "stay between the lines." When a motorist encounters a cyclist, they may not be aware of what their responsibilities are.

Cyclists too may not understand what is safest for them... and they may be riding at such a speed where trying to integrate with MV traffic is quite difficult. The design of the proposed bike lane and signal lights can help both the motorist and cyclist through a poor intersection such as the on ramps described.

Because you have the skills of Lance Armstrong, should you be the "standard" by which all cycling should be done?
genec is offline  
Old 04-04-11, 07:45 AM
  #17  
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 26,733

Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10653 Post(s)
Liked 2,680 Times in 1,849 Posts
Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
Skilled Cyclist do just fine on many freeways in the west.
Fify
genec is offline  
Old 04-04-11, 10:38 AM
  #18  
drat
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 35
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
In my area there is a really nice solution to a problem like that which is a RH jog down the freeway and a bike tunnel under the whole complex. Obviously such things are not possible everywhere, but it is a well thought out part of an overall trail system. What astonishes me is how many riders stop at the lights and try to outrun RTO drivers through the intersection. Even worse for them, they run the same gamut again on the other side as drivers exiting the freeway have a yield only RTO lane onto the cross road.
drat is offline  
Old 04-04-11, 12:31 PM
  #19  
TheHen
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 790
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by genec View Post
So are you training all the cyclists out there... and the poorly trained motorists who might also be out there?

One of the largest issues we have is that motorists are not "fully trained" when they get behind the wheel... they just "stay between the lines." When a motorist encounters a cyclist, they may not be aware of what their responsibilities are.

Cyclists too may not understand what is safest for them... and they may be riding at such a speed where trying to integrate with MV traffic is quite difficult. The design of the proposed bike lane and signal lights can help both the motorist and cyclist through a poor intersection such as the on ramps described.

Because you have the skills of Lance Armstrong, should you be the "standard" by which all cycling should be done?
Speak for your own state. In OR, the motorists have a really tough time even staying between the lines. I finally decided to count the line crossers on a recent ride. 75% of the 36 motor vehicles I saw while climbing a RESIDENTIAL street either crossed over the double yellow or into the bike lane.

As far as the skills of cyclists go, these sort of "improvements" that force cyclists to wait at every intersection work just fine for beginners who weren't really trying to get anywhere. They also discourage cyclists from moving beyond beginner level by making traveling by bike that much slower. I will eat humble pie if they put in a sensor that is far enough from the signal and gives cyclists priority such that a cyclist does not have to wait to cross the on-ramp.

This looks like another attempt to get the cyclists out of the way of the motorists. I wonder if LAB gives out brownie points for each bicycle-specific traffic light a city puts in?
TheHen is offline  
Old 04-04-11, 02:57 PM
  #20  
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 26,733

Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10653 Post(s)
Liked 2,680 Times in 1,849 Posts
Originally Posted by TheHen View Post
Speak for your own state. In OR, the motorists have a really tough time even staying between the lines. I finally decided to count the line crossers on a recent ride. 75% of the 36 motor vehicles I saw while climbing a RESIDENTIAL street either crossed over the double yellow or into the bike lane.

As far as the skills of cyclists go, these sort of "improvements" that force cyclists to wait at every intersection work just fine for beginners who weren't really trying to get anywhere. They also discourage cyclists from moving beyond beginner level by making traveling by bike that much slower. I will eat humble pie if they put in a sensor that is far enough from the signal and gives cyclists priority such that a cyclist does not have to wait to cross the on-ramp.

This looks like another attempt to get the cyclists out of the way of the motorists. I wonder if LAB gives out brownie points for each bicycle-specific traffic light a city puts in?
Does anyone have a better solution for the majority of cyclists who are not "road warriors?"

The fact is that if you look at any cross section of cyclists, you will find that those who have the talent and strength to merge with motor vehicle traffic are in the minority when compared to those that are just plodding along at 10MPH or so... so do we build roads for the road warriors, or the majority users?

Look at places like China or Amsterdam or Copenhagen, and again you'll see that in these countries where even a large share of the population ride bikes, again you will tend to see that they move at around 10-12 MPH.

The problem is not the cyclists, but it is the design of the streets; in this case the sweeping on-ramp right off of the right hand side of the road and the speed limits of the road leading up to the intersection that are really the problem. The proper fix would be to square up the corner, and prior to the on-ramp, make a lane that required motorists to pull off to make the turn, while allowing cyclists to go straight ahead in the right most lane that is not an on-ramp. Few cities would take on this economic burden. (although perhaps as an example to other cities, Portland should). In lieu of rebuilding the street, a controlled signal and a designated lane that gives cyclists priority, is workable compromise.

For those of you who feel slighted because you can't ride through as fast as you want... bear in mind that the same situation exists for all motorists who face speed limits.

Now other than "ride vehicularly," (which again, baffles the majority of cyclists and motorists) what other solutions can you or CBHI or randya suggest? I have seen nothing but criticism, but no new ideas.

As far as forcing cyclists to "wait at every intersection... " Oh you mean like the other users of the roads: pedestrians and motorists? And as far as I can tell, this solution is only being applied to this one intersection.

"drat" in post 18 offers the best solution... but that is not likely to happen.

And lest you feel I am some sort of "car lover...," bear in mind that Forester considers me "anti-motorist," and while I do ride vehicularly and regularly move at 18MPH, I also slow down when situations call for it, such as using a designated lane, or traffic crossing.
genec is offline  
Old 04-04-11, 06:06 PM
  #21  
CB HI
Cycle Year Round
 
CB HI's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Honolulu, HI
Posts: 13,643
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1314 Post(s)
Liked 91 Times in 58 Posts
Originally Posted by genec View Post
For those of you who feel slighted because you can't ride through as fast as you want... bear in mind that the same situation exists for all motorists who face speed limits.

Now other than "ride vehicularly," (which again, baffles the majority of cyclists and motorists) what other solutions can you or CBHI or randya suggest? I have seen nothing but criticism, but no new ideas.
Cyclist lose anytime they are treated as pedestrians. Since when are motorist ever treated as pedestrians.

Portland has a bad history for killing cyclist (even experienced cyclist) with right turns. You want a solution, end Oregon's mandatory use law as a first step so cyclist at least get to make the choice and then build the proper intersection as the second step. Saying it just cost too much is just wrong when the other option is serious risk to cyclist lives. Besides, a little paint and jersey barriers could cheaply turn the intersection into a proper right turn into the ramp.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
CB HI is offline  
Old 04-04-11, 06:17 PM
  #22  
randya
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Posts: 13,696

Bikes: who cares?

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time in 1 Post
the radius of that corner allows motorists to take that right turn too damned fast, they need to seriously decrease the radius of the curve in order to slow turning traffic down, but that may not be possible if it is designed for trucks
randya is offline  
Old 04-05-11, 07:15 AM
  #23  
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 26,733

Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10653 Post(s)
Liked 2,680 Times in 1,849 Posts
Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
Cyclist lose anytime they are treated as pedestrians. Since when are motorist ever treated as pedestrians.
Motorists are not treated as pedestrians, but motorists, like cyclists, often face situations in which speed is controlled in such a way that they are not allowed to "go as fast as they can." Speed bumps are a clear example of this. Try considering the aforementioned bike design as a speed bump for cyclists.

Originally Posted by CB HI View Post
Portland has a bad history for killing cyclist (even experienced cyclist) with right turns. You want a solution, end Oregon's mandatory use law as a first step so cyclist at least get to make the choice and then build the proper intersection as the second step. Saying it just cost too much is just wrong when the other option is serious risk to cyclist lives. Besides, a little paint and jersey barriers could cheaply turn the intersection into a proper right turn into the ramp.
Portland doesn't kill cyclists, motorists kill cyclists.
genec is offline  
Old 04-05-11, 07:30 AM
  #24  
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,025

Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 3 Times in 3 Posts
If anyone needs some background on why and how Portland is doing what it does,

Portland 2030 bike plan survey of best practices

Bekologist is offline  
Old 04-05-11, 09:06 AM
  #25  
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 26,733

Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2

Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 10653 Post(s)
Liked 2,680 Times in 1,849 Posts
Originally Posted by randya View Post
the radius of that corner allows motorists to take that right turn too damned fast, they need to seriously decrease the radius of the curve in order to slow turning traffic down, but that may not be possible if it is designed for trucks
Actually thinking about this just a bit more... Yeah, Portland could install speed bumps for the motorists and probably use Jersey barriers to channel the motorists to the on-ramp... of course some cyclists would still need direction so that they wouldn't also be channeled onto the freeway.

So there are alternatives to the proposal.
genec is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.