Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Advocacy & Safety > Vehicular Cycling (VC)
Reload this Page >

Are you happier without bike facilities?

Vehicular Cycling (VC) No other subject has polarized the A&S members like VC has. Here's a place to share, debate, and educate.

Are you happier without bike facilities?

Old 03-18-08, 09:46 AM
  #401  
WaltPoutine
GNU Cyclist
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 185
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by buzzman View Post
Did you look at my use of a bike lane in the video? I move in and out of the lane
I just took a look at it now. I don't understand what you think it demonstrates. To me it shows that the bike lane does not even do what you say it should: provide a place where cyclists can procede in a straight line and motor vehicles will be absent. In at least one place it looks like a classic doorzone bikelane of insufficient width to prevent a dooring, even if you ride on the far left.

It's also very difficult to get a sense of exactly how you are positioned and what the relative distances are. That's why Dan Gutierrez's and Brian de Sousa's videos which add a view shot from behind are so good.

Originally Posted by buzzman View Post
So the striping means leave that space for bikes. Don't drive your car there.
And quite demonstrably by your own video that doesn't work.

Originally Posted by buzzman View Post
In NYC it means when there's gridlock cyclists should have an advantage.
Meaning that you'll definitely be overtaking in the doorzone because unless you have 8-inch wide chopped messenger-style bars you'd be clipping mirrors and the sides of cars if you rode "nearly on the stripe".

Originally Posted by buzzman View Post
You see the problem is without the striping every possible inch of road space is filled with cars creeping their way along. It has more to do with keeping autos out of the bike lane than forcing bikes into it.
Your video shows no gridlock, relatively clearflowing conditions and thus no need for a bikelane. You may be able to make the appropriate judgment calls about how soon to pull out of the lane to get around trucks or how far out to stay from doors etc (given how much experience you have) but for the people that these lanes are explicitly designed to encourage onto the road those behaviors are probably a mystery. So again, it might be possible to make your bikelanes work IFF both motorists and cyclists are educated about how to use them. And if it is possible to do that then there's no need to have the bikelane.

Originally Posted by buzzman View Post
Given that 93% of NYC cyclists report preferring streets with bike lanes
What sort of cyclists are they? Are they people that cycle several times a day nearly every day? Or are they aspirational cyclists who in practice hardly ever venture out? There is a similar study from some transportation unit in British Columbia which also sounds impressive until you examine the breakdown: most of the people surveyed (and it was a reasonably large number) don't actually cycle more than once a month. I don't consider their opinions on cycling very meaningful. Yours on the the other hand disturbs me as you have obviously a good deal of experience.

Originally Posted by buzzman View Post
Perhaps in your area or other areas it's different. NYC is still adapting to bike lanes I'm just telling you what I've experienced, which is far removed from the "propaganda/fear mongering" that you describe.
That's fine. I accept that you've experienced that. I, and those near and dear to me, on the other hand have experienced mandatory bike lanes, and explicit reference by motorists (including cops) to their presence as a reason why we should be in a position which is dangerous and/or inconvenient to us.



Originally Posted by buzzman View Post
BTW, I was riding 30 years ago (pre-bike lanes) and encountered drivers just as you described that honked at me stopped in the lane positioned where I should be
Yeah, and now you've just reinforced their belief. Thanks.

Originally Posted by buzzman View Post
I suppose when your anti-bike lane argument is so weak you feel the need to bolster it with petty inaccuracies.
I think the pettiest thing so far in this discussion is that comment.
WaltPoutine is offline  
Old 03-18-08, 09:54 AM
  #402  
WaltPoutine
GNU Cyclist
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 185
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
Now if the same space previously given to parked cars was fully devoted to cycling, one would have 8 foot bike lanes. But we "never" see that now do we?
Interesting point and it reminds me of another objection to bikelanes and a possible disincentive to cycling. Frequently as I cycle along with my wife and a few friends they've observed that if we were in a car we'd be able to chat more easily instead of being strung out in a long line bawling things back and forth to each other.

Depending upon the locale it's is of course possible to ride two up legally. Most bikelanes on the other hand explicitly are designed for a single file (if that) of cyclists. In other words they enforce an anti-social and atomized travel experience.

Similar problems can be seen in the design of many sidewalks.

Originally Posted by genec View Post
Frankly I'd rather see a narrow "shared lane" with sharrows indicating a slow lane,
.

This is something I wouldn't necessarily object strongly too, except that I'd want sharrows on just about every street surface.
WaltPoutine is offline  
Old 03-18-08, 09:55 AM
  #403  
ChipSeal
www.chipsea.blogspot.com
 
ChipSeal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: South of Dallas, Texas
Posts: 1,026

Bikes: Giant OCR C0 road

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
buzzman, there is a lot of overlap and areas of agreement between the bike lane advocates and the bike lane skeptics. (BLA and BLS- to coin a new A&S acronym! ) Naturally these areas are obscured in all the dust and thunder as we wrestle over the margins.

We both agree that bike lanes can be useful. BLS folks reckon those spots to be so rare that BLA folks easily think we are never their allies.

We both agree bike lanes can be bad. BLA folks may even agree that majority of bike lanes are poorly executed. It is easy for my side to think BLA prefers bad bike lanes to no lanes at all.

We both have fears, and we both think the fears of the other camp are overblown. BLS think the other side is overly concerned with overtaking traffic. BLA think we exaggerate the danger bike lanes pose to our liberty.

We both think our opponents are naive. the BLA camp think we have "roadie" elitist attitudes, and that we want all cyclists to conform to what our image of cycling is. The BLS think that cycling advocacy has been hijacked by non-cycling forces to the detriment of all cyclists, and that you are either unaware of those forces or are willing to make implicit "deals with the devil", so to speak.

The BLA crowd knows in their heart that they are fighting the good fight, and their own motives are pure. Therefore, anyone in the BLS crowd is not pure, does not have good motives. Because it is unnecessary to reason with evil people, BLA can simply dismiss BLS arguments out of hand, rather than deal with the substance of their point. It would advance the conversation if BLA would start from a place that acknowledges BLS goals are the same as theirs: To advance cycling in a positive and constructive way.

BLS grants that courtesy to to BLA folks without question. BLS just think the methods BLA choose to advance the cause is misplaced.

I think both sides have a lot of common ground, and we ought to try to increase the acreage when we can!
ChipSeal is offline  
Old 03-18-08, 10:15 AM
  #404  
dynodonn 
Senior Discount Member
 
dynodonn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: U.S. of A.
Posts: 7,465
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1251 Post(s)
Liked 22 Times in 20 Posts
Originally Posted by WaltPoutine View Post
Interesting point and it reminds me of another objection to bikelanes and a possible disincentive to cycling. Frequently as I cycle along with my wife and a few friends they've observed that if we were in a car we'd be able to chat more easily instead of being strung out in a long line bawling things back and forth to each other.

Depending upon the locale it's is of course possible to ride two up legally. Most bikelanes on the other hand explicitly are designed for a single file (if that) of cyclists. In other words they enforce an anti-social and atomized travel experience.

Similar problems can be seen in the design of many sidewalks.

.

This is something I wouldn't necessarily object strongly too, except that I'd want sharrows on just about every street surface.

The family and I gravitate towards the quieter backstreets on our rides, even though they are chock full of stopsigns and far slower, and so we can avoid the conditions you described, ride side by side. I won't even try to hold a conversation with any of them unless it's for directions or a warning while single file.

Last edited by dynodonn; 03-18-08 at 10:40 AM.
dynodonn is offline  
Old 03-18-08, 10:18 AM
  #405  
noisebeam
Al
 
noisebeam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 14,612

Bikes: Cannondale SuperSix, Lemond Poprad. Retired: Jamis Sputnik, Centurion LeMans Fixed, Diamond Back ascent ex

Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3328 Post(s)
Liked 31 Times in 22 Posts
THC,
The paragraph you quoted comes from the section "Bike Lanes and Turning Lanes" - that is where RTOL and LTOL are present. In these cases AASTHO shows merging to occur just as the turn lanes begin and mostly entail the motorist merging across the lane and the cyclist maintaining a static hopeful position. Such merging needs to occur before the RTOL begins. No diagram (including the photo in fig.) in AASTHO shows (ending) BL striping for this. The cyclist using the BL must rely fully on the motorist to not turn across their path, no different than a right hook condition.

I also am concerned with the idea that a good engineer knows these are minimums. How are they to know how to make ideal? Is a 12' bike lane better than a 4' one? Is it 'ideal' to end the bike lane stripe 20' or 200' before intersections? I find it curious that so many BL just meet the AASTHO minimum guidelines.

Al
noisebeam is offline  
Old 03-18-08, 10:35 AM
  #406  
e0richt
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Hammonton, NJ
Posts: 998

Bikes: Dawes Lightning sport, Trek 1220, Trek 7100

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Script View Post
I've noticed a couple posts that have pretty passionate responses to the notion of biker inferiority, childish cycling behavior, anti-bikelane-ism and the like.

Didn't want to create another poll but am interested in what is the majority opinion.

I think that bike lanes, signs, signals, etc. are very important and can only help improve the safety and convenience of riding.

I believe I am part of the majority. I plan my rides around safe routes that include well marked bike lanes. Since I've retired I concede that my strategy may not be helpful for commuters but I'd guess that most commuters would prefer not to have to fight traffic for room on the road.

It isn't enough to add a stripe to the road. A bike lane requires a planned increase in width that is best achieved upon complete repaving or new routes.

This does require advocacy and a unified front. That's probably the biggest challenge....

On the other hand, do most think the more agressive 'it's my road too' will achieve more?
I prefer my facilities to be shoulders basically about bike lane width but not nessarily marked as a "bike lane" because I want to be out in the road sometimes to avoid right hooks from motorists...
I DO like "share the road" type of signs and enforcement of the traffic laws... I think that vehicular cycling is the "ideal" unfortunately, I don't think we have reached that with the way motorists act and the lack of involvement (or actual lack of knowledge of laws and bicycling...) by police...
e0richt is offline  
Old 03-18-08, 01:05 PM
  #407  
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 26,297

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

Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6338 Post(s)
Liked 60 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by WaltPoutine View Post
Interesting point and it reminds me of another objection to bikelanes and a possible disincentive to cycling. Frequently as I cycle along with my wife and a few friends they've observed that if we were in a car we'd be able to chat more easily instead of being strung out in a long line bawling things back and forth to each other.

Depending upon the locale it's is of course possible to ride two up legally. Most bikelanes on the other hand explicitly are designed for a single file (if that) of cyclists. In other words they enforce an anti-social and atomized travel experience.

Similar problems can be seen in the design of many sidewalks.

.

This is something I wouldn't necessarily object strongly too, except that I'd want sharrows on just about every street surface.
Right, so it comes down to poor bike lane design as being the biggest issue, rather then the bike lanes themselves.

As far as wanting them on every street... we have to admit that certain streets are plenty good enough for cycling... such as your typical 25MPH residential street... But that other streets may not be very bike friendly, such as high speed arterials with free merge turns... And thus, we need only target those "less then suitable streets" to have a complete network suitable for cyclists.
genec is offline  
Old 03-18-08, 01:18 PM
  #408  
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 26,297

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

Mentioned: 27 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6338 Post(s)
Liked 60 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by noisebeam View Post
THC,
The paragraph you quoted comes from the section "Bike Lanes and Turning Lanes" - that is where RTOL and LTOL are present. In these cases AASTHO shows merging to occur just as the turn lanes begin and mostly entail the motorist merging across the lane and the cyclist maintaining a static hopeful position. Such merging needs to occur before the RTOL begins. No diagram (including the photo in fig.) in AASTHO shows (ending) BL striping for this. The cyclist using the BL must rely fully on the motorist to not turn across their path, no different than a right hook condition.

I also am concerned with the idea that a good engineer knows these are minimums. How are they to know how to make ideal? Is a 12' bike lane better than a 4' one? Is it 'ideal' to end the bike lane stripe 20' or 200' before intersections? I find it curious that so many BL just meet the AASTHO minimum guidelines.

Al
I tend to agree... that the AASTHO standards are minimum, and indeed are often implemented poorly... For instance I had to laugh this morning as I passed a dashed BL that went past a certain one way hiway offramp... there is no right turning onto this offramp, (into oncoming traffic??) and it is light controlled... so there is no reason for the dashed lines... but there they were, as usual, as no one had really thought about what they are for or why they really belong.... as is the usual case for just slapping down the paint lines... IE no "engineering" had been applied.

I saw another lack of real engineering a few years ago when a BL was laid down to the right of an onramp... the BL lead right onto the freeway... but hey, it "followed" the AASTHO standard for painting of a BL. In the latter case, I talked to the engineer and was quite dismayed at his wave of the hand and proclamation that it was "to a standard." A few phone calls to the local advocacy group managed to get his mind changed... and the BL was re-routed to the left of the RTO on ramp.

Seems to me that a few days riding a bike in such design disasters might "educate" a few engineers.
genec is offline  
Old 03-18-08, 05:24 PM
  #409  
buzzman
----
 
buzzman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Newton, MA
Posts: 4,574
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by ChipSeal View Post
buzzman, there is a lot of overlap and areas of agreement between the bike lane advocates and the bike lane skeptics. (BLA and BLS- to coin a new A&S acronym! ) Naturally these areas are obscured in all the dust and thunder as we wrestle over the margins.

We both agree that bike lanes can be useful. BLS folks reckon those spots to be so rare that BLA folks easily think we are never their allies.

We both agree bike lanes can be bad. BLA folks may even agree that majority of bike lanes are poorly executed. It is easy for my side to think BLA prefers bad bike lanes to no lanes at all.

We both have fears, and we both think the fears of the other camp are overblown. BLS think the other side is overly concerned with overtaking traffic. BLA think we exaggerate the danger bike lanes pose to our liberty.

We both think our opponents are naive. the BLA camp think we have "roadie" elitist attitudes, and that we want all cyclists to conform to what our image of cycling is. The BLS think that cycling advocacy has been hijacked by non-cycling forces to the detriment of all cyclists, and that you are either unaware of those forces or are willing to make implicit "deals with the devil", so to speak.

The BLA crowd knows in their heart that they are fighting the good fight, and their own motives are pure. Therefore, anyone in the BLS crowd is not pure, does not have good motives. Because it is unnecessary to reason with evil people, BLA can simply dismiss BLS arguments out of hand, rather than deal with the substance of their point. It would advance the conversation if BLA would start from a place that acknowledges BLS goals are the same as theirs: To advance cycling in a positive and constructive way.

BLS grants that courtesy to to BLA folks without question. BLS just think the methods BLA choose to advance the cause is misplaced.

I think both sides have a lot of common ground, and we ought to try to increase the acreage when we can!
well said.
buzzman is offline  
Old 03-18-08, 05:57 PM
  #410  
buzzman
----
 
buzzman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Newton, MA
Posts: 4,574
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by WaltPoutine View Post
I just took a look at it now. I don't understand what you think it demonstrates. To me it shows that the bike lane does not even do what you say it should: provide a place where cyclists can procede in a straight line and motor vehicles will be absent. In at least one place it looks like a classic doorzone bikelane of insufficient width to prevent a dooring, even if you ride on the far left...
bike lanes in NYC are definitely a "work in progress". When I shot that video it was just an opportunity to try out a new camera and a rig I'd fashioned on my handlebars- not to demonstrate the effectiveness (or not) of bike lanes.

It does, however, give a real life example of one particular bike lane in NYC (on 8th Avenue). Since my intention when shooting is neither to prove or disprove the efficacy of bike lanes but just to ride it's maybe a more "honest" video than a "staged" one made by an advocate or opponent of bike lanes and I hope you will take it as such.

It does clearly demonstrate that NYC drivers blatantly ignore the bike lane markings and make use of them whenever they choose- especially for parking- this is something addressed in the NYC Bicycle Plan and is part of the survey, which is a link in my original post by the way and is quite specific as to the types of cyclists that participated in the survey. To attribute this as a problem with bike lanes to me seems a falsehood it is a problem of drivers knowing and obeying the law and the city enforcing those laws.

Regarding the door zone- it's hard to tell in the video but I'm pretty far removed from the door zone while I'm in the bike lane. I ride the far left edge (or right in the video) of the bike lane a good 5'-6' from parked cars. If there were no bike lane I might position myself roughly the same- basically it is a default position on a road like 8th Avenue.

One of the reasons that I posted the video was because there was some commentary that drivers expect bicyclists to ride in the lane only and will respond negatively if the cyclists leaves the lane for any reason. Obviously this was not a problem for me when I moved in and out of the lane. They could have cared less- I'm just a part of the traffic flow. *Keep in mind I posted my video in reference to this comment you made:

Originally Posted by WaltPoutine*
If you paint a bike lane stripe on the road then motorists are going to think that it means that we should not be leaving the lane.


As I read your comments I'm guessing, and please correct me if I am wrong, but I get the feeling you have not ridden in Manhattan. It's in many ways a unique experience- Chipseal and Forester make a good point when they say NYC is an anomaly (my feeling is each city is unique but I'll save that for another time). I've ridden in NYC with no bike infrastructure and I've ridden in NYC with bike infrastructure and I'm really liking riding in NYC now that it's adding more infrastructure. It's way better- what can I say- I'm not trying to convince anybody but I've ridden a lot of places and I've ridden a lot in NYC and the bike lanes are making it better. And I'll say it again and again and again, "are they perfect?-NO!" but is it better with them than without, "most certainly!" And 93% of the cyclists in NYC no matter how "experienced" agree and I think that carries some weight.

When I first started going down to NYC for work 20 years ago I would be the only one riding my bike to and from my places of employ or to visit friends. Friends looked at me like I was crazy. This summer I was leaving my job one night and watched as 7 of us out of the 21 working together rolled away on everything from folders to fixed gears. Why? and I'm not exaggerating- bike lanes. I asked them all- why do you ride now? "Oh, the cities putting in all these bike lanes." and the West Side bike path.

So we can beat the bike lanes no bike lanes thing into the ground but when I say they "work" I mean they "work" they get people riding and they give them a place to ride.

*added later for clarification

Last edited by buzzman; 03-18-08 at 11:10 PM. Reason: clarification
buzzman is offline  
Old 03-18-08, 05:59 PM
  #411  
The Human Car
-=Barry=-
 
The Human Car's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Baltimore, MD +/- ~100 miles
Posts: 4,077
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by noisebeam View Post
THC,
The paragraph you quoted comes from the section "Bike Lanes and Turning Lanes" - that is where RTOL and LTOL are present. In these cases AASTHO shows merging to occur just as the turn lanes begin and mostly entail the motorist merging across the lane and the cyclist maintaining a static hopeful position. Such merging needs to occur before the RTOL begins. No diagram (including the photo in fig.) in AASTHO shows (ending) BL striping for this. The cyclist using the BL must rely fully on the motorist to not turn across their path, no different than a right hook condition.

I also am concerned with the idea that a good engineer knows these are minimums. How are they to know how to make ideal? Is a 12' bike lane better than a 4' one? Is it 'ideal' to end the bike lane stripe 20' or 200' before intersections? I find it curious that so many BL just meet the AASTHO minimum guidelines.

Al
I'm not really sure what we are discussing (long weekend for me,) but IMHO AASHTO at it's worst is near equivalent to nothing at all. Without bike lanes mosts cyclists/motorists would be merging at the beginning of the turn lane anyway.

Also a lot of AASHTO examples rely on the existence of a pocket lane. Since this subtopic is about cyclists being to the right of a right hand turn lane (in violation of the rules of the road (because of a bike lane)) I am assuming no pocket lanes because they do not reinforce that. And without a pocket lane there is nothing to connect doted lines to so we should be left with bike lanes that end before the turn lanes as being the AASHTO "problem" bike lanes.

For me the rule of the road is if your lane is coming to an end you can merge into another lane before the end of the lane. Is that rule clear to cyclists in AASHTO? No. Is it clear to cyclists without bike lanes? No again.

Your comment about the "cyclist maintaining a static hopeful position" is valid but at the same time the dashed lines encourages motorists to yield so we have a minus and a plus score on this treatment so IMHO the net gain/loss is close to zero.

AASHTO has a major role in negligence law suites, if a bike facility is not up to AASHTO then a government agency can be sued if damages results (except in California.) So in a lot of ways the minimum AASHTO is set to perform no better then roads without bike lanes (because if Government actions made it worse that would be negligence.) So AASHTO has this dual personality to improve our safety yet at the same time protect Government which can be simplified as not making things any worse. So the end result is making sure the minimum is well defined and leaving the ideal up in the air so we get bike lanes that really don't do much.

I agree with you over the concern over what is ideal, this is why we really need a better national standard on these things. In Maryland we have been stressing getting someone who bikes into positions that influence road designs. It seems the better the cyclist we get the better the considerations. But we do have some exceptions where the people in charge seem to be responsive to cyclists issues and seem to get it without being (much) of a cyclist themselves.
__________________
Cycling Advocate
http://BaltimoreSpokes.org
. . . o
. . /L
=()>()
The Human Car is offline  
Old 03-18-08, 07:39 PM
  #412  
Allister
Devilmaycare Cycling Fool
 
Allister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Wynnum, Australia
Posts: 3,819

Bikes: 1998 Cannondale F700

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
Allister- in certain situtions bike lanes let a bicyclist pass stopped traffic with fair amounts of ease; done it many of times. Not just applicable in New York City.
Well, yes. I've posted a video of passing stopped traffic in a bikelane, myself. It's fine if there's room for it. Generally, at least around the Brisbane CBD, there isn't without removing a standard lane, which I wouldn't object to, by the way. In those cases, if I'm going to pass stopped traffic, I prefer not to do it between parked cars and the passenger side of kebside traffic.

Last edited by Allister; 03-18-08 at 08:02 PM.
Allister is offline  
Old 03-18-08, 09:40 PM
  #413  
dynodonn 
Senior Discount Member
 
dynodonn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: U.S. of A.
Posts: 7,465
Mentioned: 41 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1251 Post(s)
Liked 22 Times in 20 Posts
Originally Posted by The Human Car View Post
I'm not really sure what we are discussing (long weekend for me,) but IMHO AASHTO at it's worst is near equivalent to nothing at all. Without bike lanes mosts cyclists/motorists would be merging at the beginning of the turn lane anyway.

Also a lot of AASHTO examples rely on the existence of a pocket lane. Since this subtopic is about cyclists being to the right of a right hand turn lane (in violation of the rules of the road (because of a bike lane)) I am assuming no pocket lanes because they do not reinforce that. And without a pocket lane there is nothing to connect doted lines to so we should be left with bike lanes that end before the turn lanes as being the AASHTO "problem" bike lanes.

For me the rule of the road is if your lane is coming to an end you can merge into another lane before the end of the lane. Is that rule clear to cyclists in AASHTO? No. Is it clear to cyclists without bike lanes? No again.

Your comment about the "cyclist maintaining a static hopeful position" is valid but at the same time the dashed lines encourages motorists to yield so we have a minus and a plus score on this treatment so IMHO the net gain/loss is close to zero.

AASHTO has a major role in negligence law suites, if a bike facility is not up to AASHTO then a government agency can be sued if damages results (except in California.) So in a lot of ways the minimum AASHTO is set to perform no better then roads without bike lanes (because if Government actions made it worse that would be negligence.) So AASHTO has this dual personality to improve our safety yet at the same time protect Government which can be simplified as not making things any worse. So the end result is making sure the minimum is well defined and leaving the ideal up in the air so we get bike lanes that really don't do much.

I agree with you over the concern over what is ideal, this is why we really need a better national standard on these things. In Maryland we have been stressing getting someone who bikes into positions that influence road designs. It seems the better the cyclist we get the better the considerations. But we do have some exceptions where the people in charge seem to be responsive to cyclists issues and seem to get it without being (much) of a cyclist themselves.

That says a lot about the large discrepencies between bike lanes in my area, and tells me that poorly designed bike lanes already implemented locally are not going to be changed anytime soon. No penalty, no need to change one's ways.


One of my longings has always been that every engineer must work on or use anything that they design.

Last edited by dynodonn; 03-18-08 at 09:48 PM.
dynodonn is offline  
Old 03-18-08, 10:05 PM
  #414  
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 0 Times in 0 Posts
and roads get redesigned and restriped in progressive cities around the world and the USA, particularily in the last 18 months seems like- there's been a synergystic proliferation of bicycling master plans in major metropolis in the last short few years, and implementated more and more everyday in more and more USA cities.

heck, just this week on the way to work I rode a street that went from in my opinion a weak bike lane design, got restriped and placed it to the left of right turning traffic at a signalized intersection. It's a complex intersection, a doglegged 5 way.

Monday AM I rode into this at speed coming off one of the four laned legs, in the inside lane no less. transistioning into the newly restriped bike lane -to the left of all right turning traffic, approaching the intersection, well, it rode, naturally, vehicularily, and smoooth like a roller coaster.

to stonewall in claims 'nothings' going to get done' is denial of what can happen in US cities. Why hasn't greater accomodation for bicyclists been done in YOUR major US city?

Anecdotally, well designed and implemented bike infrastructure systems of unaccomodated roads, wide lanes, sharrows, bike lanes, paths, MUPS and end of trip facilities, unique to each municipality, appear to be working in the USA.

Last edited by Bekologist; 03-18-08 at 10:13 PM.
Bekologist is offline  
Old 03-18-08, 10:58 PM
  #415  
buzzman
----
 
buzzman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Newton, MA
Posts: 4,574
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
... Anecdotally, well designed and implemented bike infrastructure systems of unaccomodated roads, wide lanes, sharrows, bike lanes, paths, MUPS and end of trip facilities, unique to each municipality, appear to be working in the USA.
without a doubt that has also been my experience.
buzzman is offline  
Old 03-19-08, 10:16 AM
  #416  
noisebeam
Al
 
noisebeam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 14,612

Bikes: Cannondale SuperSix, Lemond Poprad. Retired: Jamis Sputnik, Centurion LeMans Fixed, Diamond Back ascent ex

Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3328 Post(s)
Liked 31 Times in 22 Posts
Originally Posted by The Human Car View Post
I'm not really sure what we are discussing (long weekend for me,) but IMHO AASHTO at it's worst is near equivalent to nothing at all. Without bike lanes mosts cyclists/motorists would be merging at the beginning of the turn lane anyway.

Also a lot of AASHTO examples rely on the existence of a pocket lane. Since this subtopic is about cyclists being to the right of a right hand turn lane (in violation of the rules of the road (because of a bike lane)) I am assuming no pocket lanes because they do not reinforce that. And without a pocket lane there is nothing to connect doted lines to so we should be left with bike lanes that end before the turn lanes as being the AASHTO "problem" bike lanes.
I too was a little confused as I thought we were originally talking about BL to the right of a lane from which other vehicles may turn right - and I quoted AASTHO in how to treat bike lane stripe at these type of intersection approaches (basically make it dashed some feet before major intersections and solid at all for minor.) Then you replied, quoting the AASTHO section (referencing fig.9/10) about how to implement BLs when there are R/LTRO lanes. So that confused me too as to what type of intersection we were talking about.

I am less concerned about what other cyclist do in the absence of bike lane stripes (keep the pavement space!) and more about the expectations of motorists on cyclist behavior when stripes are present at intersection approaches. I personally find negotiation to get out of badly (even if meeting AASTHO guidelines) implemented bike lanes to be harder than when there is no stripe at all for matched conditions.

Al
noisebeam is offline  
Old 03-19-08, 02:30 PM
  #417  
The Human Car
-=Barry=-
 
The Human Car's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Baltimore, MD +/- ~100 miles
Posts: 4,077
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by noisebeam View Post
I am less concerned about what other cyclist do in the absence of bike lane stripes (keep the pavement space!) and more about the expectations of motorists on cyclist behavior when stripes are present at intersection approaches. I personally find negotiation to get out of badly (even if meeting AASTHO guidelines) implemented bike lanes to be harder than when there is no stripe at all for matched conditions.
I think discussing difficult negotiations out of bad AASHTO bike lanes may be of some use. I will comment that Baltimore seems to be using a combination of bike lanes then sharrows to continue the route/assert aprox cyclists position with no bike lanes (at times in intersections); so far I like the combo. Still too early to tell what the eventual opinion will be of motorists and cyclists.
__________________
Cycling Advocate
http://BaltimoreSpokes.org
. . . o
. . /L
=()>()
The Human Car is offline  
Old 03-19-08, 03:18 PM
  #418  
John Forester
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by The Human Car View Post

sniupped

AASHTO has a major role in negligence law suites, if a bike facility is not up to AASHTO then a government agency can be sued if damages results (except in California.) .
Slight correction here. The California court opinion, made in Carroll, Prokop etc., applies only to bike paths, which the court considered to have no more legal standing than do dirt paths across unimproved property. Those opinions do not apply to bike lanes.
John Forester is offline  
Old 03-19-08, 03:18 PM
  #419  
Script
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Script's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Florida,Indiana,Pennsylvania
Posts: 179

Bikes: Seven (brand, not number....

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
and roads get redesigned and restriped in progressive cities around the world and the USA, particularily in the last 18 months seems like- there's been a synergystic proliferation of bicycling master plans in major metropolis in the last short few years, and implementated more and more everyday in more and more USA cities.

heck, just this week on the way to work I rode a street that went from in my opinion a weak bike lane design, got restriped and placed it to the left of right turning traffic at a signalized intersection. It's a complex intersection, a doglegged 5 way.

Monday AM I rode into this at speed coming off one of the four laned legs, in the inside lane no less. transistioning into the newly restriped bike lane -to the left of all right turning traffic, approaching the intersection, well, it rode, naturally, vehicularily, and smoooth like a roller coaster.

to stonewall in claims 'nothings' going to get done' is denial of what can happen in US cities. Why hasn't greater accomodation for bicyclists been done in YOUR major US city?

Anecdotally, well designed and implemented bike infrastructure systems of unaccomodated roads, wide lanes, sharrows, bike lanes, paths, MUPS and end of trip facilities, unique to each municipality, appear to be working in the USA.
Script is offline  
Old 03-20-08, 11:45 AM
  #420  
The Human Car
-=Barry=-
 
The Human Car's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Baltimore, MD +/- ~100 miles
Posts: 4,077
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by buzzman View Post
As I read your comments I'm guessing, and please correct me if I am wrong, but I get the feeling you have not ridden in Manhattan. It's in many ways a unique experience- Chipseal and Forester make a good point when they say NYC is an anomaly (my feeling is each city is unique but I'll save that for another time). I've ridden in NYC with no bike infrastructure and I've ridden in NYC with bike infrastructure and I'm really liking riding in NYC now that it's adding more infrastructure. It's way better- what can I say- I'm not trying to convince anybody but I've ridden a lot of places and I've ridden a lot in NYC and the bike lanes are making it better. And I'll say it again and again and again, "are they perfect?-NO!" but is it better with them than without, "most certainly!" And 93% of the cyclists in NYC no matter how "experienced" agree and I think that carries some weight.
Having ridden in NYC in the 80's I personally find little difference between NYC and the Central Business District in Baltimore. Ok fine, I am only talking about ~2 square miles here but still there are similarities with NYC.
__________________
Cycling Advocate
http://BaltimoreSpokes.org
. . . o
. . /L
=()>()
The Human Car is offline  
Old 03-20-08, 04:25 PM
  #421  
The Human Car
-=Barry=-
 
The Human Car's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Baltimore, MD +/- ~100 miles
Posts: 4,077
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by WaltPoutine View Post
I'll forgo commenting on the others as this is the one where I think you repeatedly don't appreciate the point. It doesn't matter what AASHTO standards or the actual rules of the road say in terms of motorist perception of what bike lanes mean. If you paint a bike lane stripe on the road then motorists are going to think that it means that we should not be leaving the lane. You can have all the bureaucratically mandated standards you like but if you create a confusing situation by adding complexity to the roadway markings then motorists will interpret the confusion to suit their own ends. (This is natural and not a behavior unique to motorists.)
Walt, It's not a matter of not appreciating your point, as I can totally relate to your comments about attitudes of drivers. Just one problem with me relating to those comments, I don't have any bike lanes where I (mostly) ride. You see I live in VC paradise with hardly a nare of bike lanes to speak of (that is till last Dec) and driver harassment abounds. If not installing bike lanes was a fix then Baltimore would be fixed.

I am of the opinion that stay right laws and allowance of motorists to unsafely pass us in the same lane is at the nature of driver harassment and confusing situations. If you have it all worked out how to uncomplicate the requirement to ride to the right then it's not much of a stretch how to uncomplicate the use of bike lanes.
__________________
Cycling Advocate
http://BaltimoreSpokes.org
. . . o
. . /L
=()>()
The Human Car is offline  
Old 03-20-08, 04:27 PM
  #422  
noisebeam
Al
 
noisebeam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 14,612

Bikes: Cannondale SuperSix, Lemond Poprad. Retired: Jamis Sputnik, Centurion LeMans Fixed, Diamond Back ascent ex

Mentioned: 49 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3328 Post(s)
Liked 31 Times in 22 Posts
THC - are these roads where you get harassment mostly with wide sharable lanes or narrow ones?
Al
noisebeam is offline  
Old 03-20-08, 05:27 PM
  #423  
Allister
Devilmaycare Cycling Fool
 
Allister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Wynnum, Australia
Posts: 3,819

Bikes: 1998 Cannondale F700

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Digging around the intertubes last night, I came upon this page. Bikelane designs are primarily under the 'Traffic' link, bikepaths under 'Roads', ironically enough.

Of particular note is this design, which I see all over the place on busier intersections, and in my experience works very well in preventing left crosses from the traffic light. On the approach, motorists are crossing the lane when they're already slowing for the turn, minimising speed differentials, and at a red light, they can turn behind you. You can see one in use from about 6:50 in this video. With or without the sliplane, bikelanes always have the stopline slightly forward of the 'carlane'.

Last edited by Allister; 03-20-08 at 05:33 PM.
Allister is offline  
Old 03-20-08, 06:13 PM
  #424  
John Forester
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 4,071
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Allister View Post
Digging around the intertubes last night, I came upon this page. Bikelane designs are primarily under the 'Traffic' link, bikepaths under 'Roads', ironically enough.

Of particular note is this design, which I see all over the place on busier intersections, and in my experience works very well in preventing left crosses from the traffic light. On the approach, motorists are crossing the lane when they're already slowing for the turn, minimising speed differentials, and at a red light, they can turn behind you. You can see one in use from about 6:50 in this video. With or without the sliplane, bikelanes always have the stopline slightly forward of the 'carlane'.
I examined the material presented, including the bicycling commute. In American terms the cyclist passed several right-turn-only lanes and one free-running right with a pork-chop island. Nothing unusual there. I started arguing for more right-turn-only lanes as a cyclist safety measure in 1973 or so, and that proposal was refused by the bike-lane designers as not being what they wanted. "The cyclist would have cars on both sides of him, something nobody wants" said the chief designer.
John Forester is offline  
Old 03-21-08, 08:22 AM
  #425  
buzzman
----
 
buzzman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Newton, MA
Posts: 4,574
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by The Human Car View Post
Having ridden in NYC in the 80's I personally find little difference between NYC and the Central Business District in Baltimore. Ok fine, I am only talking about ~2 square miles here but still there are similarities with NYC..

I lived over on N. Calvert for a little while and rode around that section of Baltimore- down to the Harbor and E. Pratt. While it shared some similarities with NYC I would say it was more like the borough of Brooklyn than Manhattan. Grid like streets but a closer mix of residential commercial and traffic volume and pedestrian population like one would find in Brooklyn or the Bronx. Manhattan with it's exceptionally densely packed commercial areas mixed in with full time residents, daytime employees, deliveries and tourists all in a limited geographic space (an island)is like those areas on steroids.

Brooklyn now has it's share of bike lanes and they are filled with transportational bicyclists daily. A substantial number of NYC bike commuters begin and end their day in Brooklyn- and they, once again, prefer having the bike laned streets and it has definitely increased rider share.

Originally Posted by TheHumanCar
If not installing bike lanes was a fix then Baltimore would be fixed.
Absolutely, and compare rider share in any part of Baltimore with NYC today and you will see that NYC is far outpacing other east coast cities- and the reason is infrastructure. All of that with no increase in accident or fatality rate given the large and dramatic increase in ridership.

Last edited by buzzman; 03-21-08 at 08:27 AM. Reason: correction
buzzman is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.