John Forester

Well, in those places where bike lanes markedly increase the risk of car-bike collision, then the obvious safety precaution is not to install bike lanes at those places.

Bekologist

the more I read this thread, the more convinced I am that John forester and his minions are interested in marginalizing cycling and inculcating an elitist, certified class of chestbeating few who will ride America's sprawl.

john forester and crewe are not interested in increasing cycling in communities, lobby to reduce cycling for the expediency of cars, and foster auto-centric road designs distinctly unfriendly for bicycling.

randya

I've read this three times and still have no idea what it means. All I can say is that adjustments to our transporation infrastructure that allow bicycling to increase to a reasonable 10% mode split may in fact inconvenience a few motorists a wee bit, but it is certainly not anti-motorist. Nor is providing bike lanes or other facilities 'capitulation to anti-bicycling motorists' or otherwise discrimination against bicyclists in any way, shape or form. It's the 21st century now, and it's time to move on.

John Forester

Somewhat inaccurate, your statement. The cyclist who intends to take the left branch should position himself in advance away from the right-turning traffic. Borrowing bikeway technique from the Dutch and other European nations is no recommendation for quality. When the European bicycle program officials appeared on this side of the Atlantic, in Montreal, they admitted that they had no information to support their designs, and, so far as I know, they haven't changed their designs since. We know more about bicycle transportation engineering than they do.

bmike

I guess I could stay off my bike too.

Are those areas more or less dangerous with the bike lanes? Would these areas be as dangerous to cyclists without the lanes?

Do the bike lanes, over time, through reinforcing familiarity with drivers and cyclists, increase safety in these areas?
If more people are out there due to the lanes, will this increase cyclings exposure in this area and eventually change drivers and cyclists attitudes about the dangers located therein?

kalliergo 

Wanting road users to be competent and behave lawfully is "completely wrong?" I don't understand how you can seriously assert such a thing.


This is just silly.

kalliergo 

It means that you are eagerly, albeit unwittingly, collaborating in your own oppression.

John Forester

Another of these emotionally nasty statements by one who thinks of herself as a bicycle advocate. Vehicular cycling is not arcane: it is no more than obeying the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles, with a little bit extra because the bicycle is narrow. There is no sense of elitism about it, because practically everybody can do it. There are two reasons that one might not desire more non-vehicular cyclists on the road. The first is that operating in the non-vehicular manner is dangerous for the cyclist (and, dare I mention it, for the motorist's paint). The second is that it would be better to have the rate of acquisition of new cyclists closer to the rate of learning through experience, so that the population of cyclists acquires better skills at a faster rate, thus making things easier for those who join later.

randya

You admit to not having seen or ridden the blue bike lanes in person, yet the joke goes on forever here: https://probicycle.com/da/bluebikers.html

The merge area is in advance of the intersection.

Only if your initial assumption is that any engineering design provided for motorists, regarless of its safety, is also safe for cyclists. Based on a 40% mode split for bicyclists in Amsterdam, I'd say we actually have something to learn from them.

John Forester

The lower speed limits for large vehicles than for passenger cars make absolutely no difference in how these vehicles are maneuvered. There is no law requiring passenger cars to always be driven faster than the truck speed limit. Passenger cars are allowed to be driven considerably below the limit, think of that, and nobody claims that the drivers of these passenger cars are not driving in the vehicular manner, in accordance with the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles.

randya

I'm serious as a heart attack. What percentage of motorists do you think rigorously follow the speed limits, come to complete stops at stop signs, yield when and as appropriate, and always use their turn signals?

randya

SSP

Except that there are minimum speed limits on some roadways, and one can be cited for "impeding traffic" even on roadways without specific mandatory minimums. And, in many districts, large trucks are prohibited from using the left lane unless passing.

Bottom line: there are already many specific rules in place that "discriminate" between vehicle types.

John Forester

Well, no, chipcom. Think of the theory of hypothesis testing, particularly in accordance with Bayes' Theorem. The bikeway advocates have had thirty years to discover and advance evidence for their major scientific claims for bike lanes, or for urban transportational bike paths. These claims are that systems of each of these bikeways reduce the car-bike collision rate and lower the level of skill that is required for safe cycling around town. They have produced no such evidence, despite strenuous and expensive investigations. Contrariwise, in those same thirty years, with much less effort and practically no money, the advocates of vehicular cycling have produced a considerable amount of evidence supporting vehicular cycling. The probability that any amount of future effort will reverse the weight of the evidence is vanishingly small, as the mathematicians say.

John Forester

"since 99% of motorists are behaving neither lawfully nor competently a vast majority of the time."

Absolute falsehood. I haven't measured the performance of motorists according to my proficiency scale, which might be managed, but the typical motorist performance in traffic is almost perfect compared to the average failing scores for the cycling populations of major American cycling cities.

Bekologist

john, have you EVER ridden in an on-road bike lane? do you still ride much?

I feel john's 20th century bias is marginalizing cycling in this country by his dogged insistence against bike facilites.

Bekologist

"typical motorist performance in traffic is almost perfect?"

john HAS taken leave of his senses.

randya

Yet motorists still manage to kill 40,000+ of themselves each year in the US. Is that due to engineering flaws in the transporation system or competency issues related to the motorists themselves? I can go for a 30 minute walk downtown at lunchtime any day and easily see more motorist violations than I can count, including (1) speeding, (2) failure to stop for a traffic control device (e.g. red light), (3) failure to yield ROW to other vehicles and/or pedestrians, (4) failure to signal turns, etc., etc., etc. The ideal world in which cyclists rely on the competence of motorists for their safety does not exist in the US, and motorist behavior is only getting worse over time.

John Forester

Absolutely false, as you ought to be able to discern had you paid attention to the material posted. I cannot help it if your emotions cause you to read into statement what is not there. I have never lobbied to reduce cycling for the convenience of motorists, and I have never fostered auto-centric road designs distinctly unfriendly for lawful, competent cyclists. Furthermore, I would be delighted to see more cycling, provided that is done in the safe and reasonable way required by the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles.

kalliergo 

Like this?

randya

No, that's a bike lane crossing a right turn slip lane from a perpendicular street; but since you posted the photo, how would you propose that bicyclists negotiate this particular intersection?

kalliergo 

Or is it like this?



I may not have found the "right" blue bike lane, yet, but I challenge the paint proponents to explain how these examples could possibly be safe for cyclists.

John Forester

Again more emotional superstition. What do you think used to be the ratio of bicycle traffic to private car traffic in Amsterdam? It used to be higher, but has dropped. It is maintained at the current level not by the bikeway system, but because motoring in Amsterdam is extremely inconvenient, making cycling much more competitive. There are those in The Netherlands who maintain that the bikeway system was started to clear the way for the motoring revolution that was predicted. Indeed, the first Dutch bike paths were in the country, intended to service farm workers for their trips to town. Of course, as one with knowledge of history would have expected, it was the rural people who first took up motoring in a big way, leaving those Dutch rural bike paths open for tourists.

randya

Nope, not that one either. But since you posted this photo, I can tell you from personal experience that it is much more pleasant and safe to ride on this particular stretch of road than it was before the bike lane was installed. I ride this daily, I'm cautious at this location, but I've never had an incident with a motorist.

How many times have you ridden this stretch of road, either before or after the bike lane was installed?

Speedo

Have you no sense of decency? If you abuse Bayes Theorem I will report you to the mods!

Appealing to Bayes in this discussion falls under the category of lies, damned lies and statistics. Bayes Hypothesis testing is chock full of places where you can insert your opinions. Priors, costs of misclassification and the like. I haven't seen anywhere in these threads where anyone can even agree on what the case conditional probabilities are.

Bayes Theorem my eye.

Speedo