Agreed, disobedience can however prompt legislative change, provided it is practiced safely and rationally; this is partly why civil disobedience has been effective in the past. Although advocacy is probably a better approach

I see, sorry for having misunderstood your intent


I would argue that if they are working of the same information, and are equally motivated toward the personal safety and the safety of the group, they would reach the same conclusion. Motivation and information are the key variables here, they can almost never be normalized across individuals, which is why laws are essential (hopefully some day this will change, not in our lifetimes though).

I'm in the DC area, and fortunately the number of bikers here increases yearly as congestion and gas prices get worse and health and environmental consciousness increase...they are very slow to create provisions though. Most of the downtown area has no bikelanes, and not a single major highway has a path that crosses the river. As an example, if I was able to ride my bike along the highway, my commute would be 8 miles...instead, I have to go south and then north to cross the Potomac, making my commute closer to 19 miles

I can see that...you make good points.

The bike police here in Columbus regularly ride on the sidewalk (illegal for adults here), wrong way down one way streets, etc. Its no wonder so many regular people ride the same way when they see the police doing it. People run red lights/stop signs in front of them without worry. The only time I've heard of anyone being cited for anything is if they were involved in a crash.

Cough up the cash, recent story from my parts:
"A signalized intersection would cost about $2.7 million, city officials say. A roundabout likely would cost about $2 million more."
Article here

Idaho red-signal rule would be fine by me.

Wilson Bridge (aka I-95) has a nice bike lane.

From N to S:
Legion Bridge - no bike lane
Chain Bridge - bike lane
Key Bridge - bike lane
Roosevelt Bridge - bike lane
Memorial Bridge - bike lane
395 bridge - bike lane
Wilson Bridge - bike lane

Yeah, the issue is most of these bridges are in a pretty close vicinity, not much help for someone going from Virginia to Maryland. I guess what I meant was there aren't any bike lanes that cross the river outside DC, you usually have to go pretty close to DC to eventually cross

Personally, I go from Tysons Corner to Rockville, so instead of being able to take a trail along the 495 bridge (there is none), I have to go south, cross over at the chain bridge, then go back north

Edit: and then bike about 7 miles on Rockville pike

Raise you:
http://www.azdot.gov/CCpartnerships/roundabouts/faq.asp

Also you're leaving out future maintenance costs, benefits to fuel savings and noise reduction, and no electrical cost.

So safer and cheaper over the long run.

I hear you regarding the lack of river crossings north of town, but that includes both cars and bikes. Other than the Legion Bridge, which is car only, every bridge in the immediate DC area accomodates bikes. The next crossing to the north is Route 15 (not counting White's Ferry) and to the south is Route 301, both pretty far away. In my lifetime, I'd like to see a northern river crossing that will accomodate bikes, but I'll probably be long retired by then (I'm thinking like 50 years out, based on how long it took to approve the ICC).

Have you tried MacArthur to Seven Locks to Falls/Wooton Parkway to get to Rockville? Probably not as busy as Rockville Pike.

I actually agree that roundabouts are the best solution, in theory. For your reasons above and from the link you sent with these points:
[TABLE="width: 99%"]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] [/TD]
[TD="width: 95%"] 10 percent reduction in bicycle crashes
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="align: right"] [/TD]
[TD="width: 95%"] 30-50 percent increase in traffic capacity thereby enhancing traffic flow
[/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

However, in practical terms, I've noticed a couple things at the few roundabouts that I traverse:
1. Doesn't "feel" safer on a bike - cars tend to not yield to cyclists in lane and can get awfully close when merging.
2. Cars speed through the roundabout, causing merging drivers to stop, erasing the traffic flow advantage

Now, that said, more roundabouts would "teach" more people how to use them better, increasing the advantages. But, there lies the problem, at $2M "additional" a pop, we're talking some serious coin. Yes, I know, that 2M was from one sample retrofit, but obviously retrofitting many intersections can get expensive. One answer: how about purchasing a bunch of stop signs instead?

I have a question about roundabouts.

I have a couple that I ride through on a regular basis. At the most, most of them have small plants or nothing in the center. One has a LARGE cement planter in the center and another has a gazebo like structure in the center of it.

Doesn't putting something that is large and obscures the sight lines defeat the purpose of installing a roundabout? I mean if they're about improving safety than why put large statues in the center, or gazebo like structures or other things in the center that obscures the sight lines?

I've noticed the same .. it's difficult for cyclists and cars alike to see. Not very bright.
I think my city (and likely others) have rule where a portion of public projects must have a percentage of the funds spent on artwork.
So, a bridge might have artwork design on the separator wall, for instance.
I'm wondering if this is the bureaucratic solution to the requirement - the artist didn't consult with the traffic engineer on the design, perhaps.

Agreed, and I can agree with allocating a certain percentage of the budget to "beautification" projects, but a little common sense goes a LONG way.

Maybe there needs to be language requiring both the artist and the traffic engineer to work together. And there should be a limit as to how tall something in the center of a roundabout can be.

Properly designed roundabouts have 2 lanes in and out for each road so the right lane turns into the right lane of the road to the right without much need to slow or stop. The left (inner lane) acts as a yield and moves to the center of the roundabout when traffic is clear and turns out of the roundabout into a left lane further around the circle. Assuming the inner green area is of a large enough radius, why do you need to see across? If you're in the right lane, it shouldn't matter (though training drivers in the inner lane of the roundabout that they can only turn out into left lanes and not right lanes can be a challenge), and if you're in the left lane as long as the sight lines aren't obstructed enough that you can see say 90degrees around the circle you should have enough room to know when traffic is clear to pull into the inner lane. What's going on on the opposite side of the roundabout shouldn't affect you in the slightest.

Exactly. There is no need to see once you are in the roundabout as traffic yields to you. and I doubt you can take a roundabout with much speed unless you have a very expensive car or the center section is too small and is not requiring enough if a direction change so the cars treat it as a straight road.

The reason for the plants blocking view of merging traffic is that if you make things FEEL more difficult to cross people tend to slow down.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-tj-sD7Zpc

Back when I lived in eastern Kansas, KDOT installed a roundabout on K33 at the Paola junction without signing the change. Because of a combination of incomplete signage, sight lines and being young and dumb, I ended up taking the roundabout about 65. I essentially spun out around the roundabout and ended up about at my turn off, but backwards. I would have ended up in a ditch if it hadn't been built large to accommodate semi's.

On my way to work one morning, I came upon a traffic light intersection with the red light on (southbound, McCarthy Blvd & Ranch Drive, Milpitas, CA). I made a right turn, then a U-turn, and finally, a right turn, just to avoid stopping. I did not see the motorcycle cop and he witnessed the whole thing. I got stopped, let me know what my violation was, then, send me on my way with just a warning. Man, I thought I was going to get cited.

Has anyone heard of an Idaho stop? you can slow down at a red and proceed if its clear

http://bikeportland.org/2009/01/14/i...-law-faq-13387

Here in Idaho the laws give bicyclists a lot of freedom. If traveling on the road we are required to follow the same rules as motor vehicles exept, we are required to signal unless the cyclist feels unsafe taking their hands off the handlebars and we are only required to slow down at lights and stop signs to make sure the way is clear. Also, it is legal to ride on the sidewalks and while doing so, cyclists are entitled to the same rights of way as pedestrians.

Well then I guess that the roundabouts that I have to go through are not "properly" designed as they're all only one lane.

How about cops ticketing idiots in the bikelane?

Was out heading for some shopping today, and had some moron (probably mentally defective) stand in the middle of the bike lane and scream out "I dare you to hit me, get off the damn road you don't belong on the road" and as I took the car lane to pass him, he decided to run in front of me anyways, ended up just passing him by going into the lane for traffic going the other way. As he seemed in the mood for a confrontation so I'd have rather not stopped. :S

Jim

The last time I was pulled over on my bike was in the 7th grade (1995) and it was for not wearing a helmet. I didn't have one because I had locked it up to my bike in the school bike cage and when I came back to it after school let out, it was shattered into a dozen pieces. I walked the cop back to the bike cage to show it to him and he was preparing to write me a citation when my PE teacher came up and chewed him out.

That was the last time I road my bike to school that year. We weren't a family that could afford what was then considered a luxury-- it was originally given to me by a neighbor for whom it didn't fit.

To get back to where the OP had started,

1. In my case, I always stop at red traffic lights and stop signs.

2. I've never been stopped and/or ticketed by the police.

Check your law a little closer. In Idaho a cyclist may treat a "stop sign" the same as a yield sign, but cyclist must STOP at a red light and only then if it is clear may the cyclist ride through the red light (treat it like a stop sign).

In Holland the button to activate signal is placed so a Bicyclist can reach it from the curb. There are separate roundabouts for bikes in many intersections. Holland has a long tradition of bike paths, one going between Amsterdam and Paris was built by Napoleon. Might be some good ideas to emulate.

Sadly, it takes all kinds. It'd also be nice if they'd ticket those who not only drive in the bike lanes but who also park in the bike lanes as well as "park" their garbage cans, or what have you in the bike lanes.

Yes! I agree, roundabouts are awesome.

I hope his parents burn in hell. Fixt!

Very cool.

Haha! This is also awesome.