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 03-24-08, 10:08 AM
  #451  
invisiblehand
Part-time epistemologist
 
invisiblehand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 5,862

Bikes: Jamis Nova, Bike Friday NWT, STRIDA, Austro Daimler Vent Noir, Haluzak Horizon, Salsa La Raza, Hollands Tourer, Bike Friday tikit

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 120 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Script View Post
Show me some data to support your implication that a bike lane stripe has caused even one accident.
Couldn't one ascribe some blame of the Portland bike lane deaths last year to the bike lane?
__________________
A narrative on bicycle driving.
invisiblehand is offline  
Old 03-24-08, 10:26 AM
  #452  
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 26,308

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

Mentioned: 30 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6375 Post(s)
Liked 72 Times in 51 Posts
Originally Posted by invisiblehand View Post
Couldn't one ascribe some blame of the Portland bike lane deaths last year to the bike lane?
Would the cyclist's movements have been the same whether the stripe was there or not? Since there is no way to determine that... there is no way to know.

Since cyclists tend to ride in the same place on the road whether the stripe exists or not, blaming stripes on the road for something that could have easily happened anyway, is somewhat ridiculous.
genec is online now  
Old 03-24-08, 10:44 AM
  #453  
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 John Forester View Post
Your answer shows your ignorance of normal traffic operation. For example, when changing lanes one must yield to those in or approaching in the lane you desire to enter. However, that person may decide to yield to your request, whether that request is transmitted by a car's turning signal, by a outstretched arm, or by a turned head. The driver changing lanes must not move laterally simply because he has made such a signal, but only when that signal has been seen, acknowledged, and agreed to. If you are the driver who wants to change lanes, the proof that such a negotiation has succeeded is that the other driver slows down to make a place for you. It's that simple, much simpler than the explanation.
Again, your inspirational way of responding leaves me breathless...
No wonder so many people choose to disagree with you even tho' they may know you are right.

Evidently my ignorance has enabled me to survive many years of significant cycling mileage with nary an incident.

Maybe dumbing down and putting a positive spin on your words would lead to something useful. Or do you think calling people childish, superstitious, ignorant, etc. makes them want to join your cause?

Please don't reply, I'll try to survive without your inspiration.
Script is offline  
Old 03-24-08, 10:52 AM
  #454  
invisiblehand
Part-time epistemologist
 
invisiblehand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 5,862

Bikes: Jamis Nova, Bike Friday NWT, STRIDA, Austro Daimler Vent Noir, Haluzak Horizon, Salsa La Raza, Hollands Tourer, Bike Friday tikit

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 120 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by genec View Post
Would the cyclist's movements have been the same whether the stripe was there or not? Since there is no way to determine that... there is no way to know.
Well ... there is plenty of speculation to go around here in bikeforums. If we limit our discussion to what we know with certainty then the discussion will be pretty short. The premise of a bike lane is that the stripes affect behavior; more specifically, the lateral positioning of autos and cyclists. I think that it is fair to say that a bike lane increases the probability that the cyclist will remain on the right while the auto -- truck in the two cases I am thinking about -- will remain on the left. In both cases that behavior contributed to the fatalities.
__________________
A narrative on bicycle driving.
invisiblehand is offline  
Old 03-24-08, 10:59 AM
  #455  
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
you need to blame the driver for failing to follow the rules of the road and using faulty equipment on his truck, invisible hand.

so now you'll accept that bike lanes affect behavior? I want to see some statistics on that . invisiblehand. how about you accept that portlands infrastructure and bike lanes directly affect greater numbers of bicyclists and the corresponding LOWERING of the indexed accident rate for bicyclists first.
Bekologist is offline  
Old 03-24-08, 11:19 AM
  #456  
invisiblehand
Part-time epistemologist
 
invisiblehand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 5,862

Bikes: Jamis Nova, Bike Friday NWT, STRIDA, Austro Daimler Vent Noir, Haluzak Horizon, Salsa La Raza, Hollands Tourer, Bike Friday tikit

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 120 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
you need to blame the driver for failing to follow the rules of the road and using faulty equipment on his truck, invisible hand.
That is why I wrote contribute. Then again, the police seem to have concluded that the truck drivers were not at fault. Moreover, a cyclist that was riding behind Brett -- I chatted with him on the Bike Friday YAK group -- seems to have concluded that the truck driver in that case was not at fault either.

Just to be clear, I think that there is some bias in police reporting. But I don't think that it is a stretch to say that the design of the bike lanes/roads -- or perhaps the rules of Portland's roads -- at these locations were a factor in the fatalities.

Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
so now you'll accept that bike lanes affect behavior? I want to see some statistics on that . invisiblehand. how about you accept that portlands infrastructure and bike lanes directly affect greater numbers of bicyclists and the corresponding LOWERING of the indexed accident rate for bicyclists first.
Of course they affect behavior. The debate is whether that change is positive or negative or "close zero." As an example, from memory, I am thinking of the one that measured the lateral distance between the auto and cyclist on bike lane/no bike lane. What I recall is that the average distance was smaller with a bike lane but that the variance of the distance was greater without a bike lane. I don't recall whether the measured distances and their differences were meaningful.

What is the accident rate indexed for?

I have seen some of the evidence -- counts of cyclists at the bridge crossings -- that was suggestive that there was an increase in cyclists. Although if there were other changes at the time, the connection to bike lanes specifically and the number of reported cycling accidents would be noisy without more corroborating evidence. Whether the results can be generalized to other places would be another hurdle to leap.

Anyway, I really don't know much about Portland.
__________________
A narrative on bicycle driving.
invisiblehand is offline  
Old 03-24-08, 12:43 PM
  #457  
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 genec View Post
Would the cyclist's movements have been the same whether the stripe was there or not? Since there is no way to determine that... there is no way to know.

Since cyclists tend to ride in the same place on the road whether the stripe exists or not, blaming stripes on the road for something that could have easily happened anyway, is somewhat ridiculous.
Genec's comment refers to the fatal accident cases of cyclists overtaking on the right-hand side of right-turning motor vehicles.

Genec is arguing that since typical American cyclists are so deludedly ignorant that they insist on overtaking on the right-hand side of right-turning motor vehicles, the bike-lane presence cannot be condemned. I regard Genec's argument as one more of the numerous foolishly ideological defenses of a system that has no reasonable basis.

There are two aspects of this issue: the extent to which the bike-lane program increases the tendency to overtake in this dangerous manner, and the extent to which the bike-lane program reduces the tendency to overtake in the safe manner.

The public believes that bike lanes make cycling much safer and easier. The safety observation can be observed daily in Portland, where the bikeway program advocates write that their bike-lane system has reduced the car-bike collision rate. So long as a cyclist believes that superstition, that cyclist is going to stay in the lane when he should not. It is reasonable to conclude that this bike-lane superstitious propaganda adds to the pre-existing fear of same-direction motor traffic that tends to keep ill-informed cyclists close to the edge of the road when they should not so remain.

The obvious countermeasure to cyclists overtaking on the dangerous side of right-turning vehicles is instruction in vehicular cycling. As has been so frequently demonstrated, the conflicts between bike-lane advocacy and vehicular-cycling advocacy are deep and many. The popular support and official production of bike-lane programs is detrimental to improving the behavior of cyclists in the way that would produce the greatest reduction of car-bike collisions.
John Forester is offline  
Old 03-24-08, 12:56 PM
  #458  
randya
Senior Member
 
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 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
The public believes that bike lanes make cycling much safer and easier. The safety observation can be observed daily in Portland, where the bikeway program advocates write that their bike-lane system has reduced the car-bike collision rate.
show me an actual quote or source where this has been claimed. No one in Portland is making the claim that bike lanes make cyclists safer, the only claims that have made are (1) that more cyclists on the roads make cycling safer, and (2) that more facilities lead to more people cycling.
randya is offline  
Old 03-24-08, 01:01 PM
  #459  
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 Script View Post
Again, your inspirational way of responding leaves me breathless...
No wonder so many people choose to disagree with you even tho' they may know you are right.

Evidently my ignorance has enabled me to survive many years of significant cycling mileage with nary an incident.

Maybe dumbing down and putting a positive spin on your words would lead to something useful. Or do you think calling people childish, superstitious, ignorant, etc. makes them want to join your cause?

Please don't reply, I'll try to survive without your inspiration.
Your argument was the following: "And help me understand this 'negotiation' you refer to. In my experience, I've never been able to 'negotiate' without some type of direct communication such as talking or typing or writing. I'm sure eye contact or a wave is a great negotiating tool, but I prefer something more concrete than that. I'm unwilling to risk life and limb by assuming that by looking and waving a motorist will understand my 'negotiation'."

I describe your argument as being flippantly and ignorantly sarcastic, so much so that it should not be offered in a discussion group whose subject is supposed to be serious consideration of bicycle transportation issues. Instead of offering methods of communication that are obviously impossible for moving traffic interactions, which your suggested talking, typing, and writing are, you could have simply asked: "How does the cyclist recognize that his negotiation has succeeded?"

I do not know whether your ignorance was real or merely pretended in order to denigrate vehicular cycling. But dealing with people who put up such absurd arguments day after day makes one choose to describe those arguments as accurately as possible.
John Forester is offline  
Old 03-24-08, 01:15 PM
  #460  
Helmet Head
Banned.
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Script View Post
I mean miles of wide lane that alternate between numbers of vehicles abreast, not just at intersections. You picked the easy rationale...people wanting to turn right or left and 'squeezing' by another vehicle. My experience has been that in the presence of a bike stripe, people will not generally try to squeeze by but in the absense of that stripe, they will choose to 'add' a lane.
Okay, so, given a wide lane, say 16', you're saying that motorists will try to "add" a lane, meaning they will try to create a second line of traffic near the edge of the road, but, if there is a bike lane stripe present, they are much less likely to do so. You're saying this as if the problem with motorists creating two lines of traffic within one wide lane is obvious. But the problem is not obvious to me. Do you mean that precludes you from using the margin space to pass the traffic on the right when traffic is slow/stopped? In that situation I wait my turn, pass on the left, or split lanes, depending on the situation. What's the problem?

Originally Posted by Script View Post
I completely disregard anecdotal data. You are welcome to disregard my experience as well. 'Anecdotal' and 'experience' are ways to justify positions in the absence of facts. Whenever one starts referencing 'anecdotal' or 'my experience' my ***** alarm goes off.

You admit conjecture than say it is 'more sound'?

Why use facts for a position when you can use Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt?
That's sounds great, except, as IH has pointed out, if we limit ourselves to known facts based on sound studies we would not have much to talk about here. Not only that, but we'd have very little basis on which to decide how to ride in traffic. But, the dearth of such facts is the reality, and we still must ride, and do our best to be as safe and effective as we can be. So, we consider anecdotal evidence from others in addition to our own experience, and read and write books and talk about them in order to expand our knowledge and confirm what we learn and confirm as much as possible.

Anecdotal evidence is much better than nothing when it's all you've got. Human beings basically survived on nothing but anecdotal evidence for almost all of our history. Those who ignored anecdotal evidence probably were weeded out. Say a buddy eats a mushroom, became violently ill, and dies - do you ignore this as anecdotal evidence or do you avoid that variety of mushroom and tell others in your tribe about it? Again, it's far from perfect, but anecdotal evidence is much better than nothing. It's why I avoid riding in door zones, for one, and try to ride in a manner that maximizes my conspicuousness and vantage as much as is reasonably possible.
Helmet Head is offline  
Old 03-24-08, 01:23 PM
  #461  
Helmet Head
Banned.
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
Your argument was the following: "And help me understand this 'negotiation' you refer to. In my experience, I've never been able to 'negotiate' without some type of direct communication such as talking or typing or writing. I'm sure eye contact or a wave is a great negotiating tool, but I prefer something more concrete than that. I'm unwilling to risk life and limb by assuming that by looking and waving a motorist will understand my 'negotiation'."

I describe your argument as being flippantly and ignorantly sarcastic, so much so that it should not be offered in a discussion group whose subject is supposed to be serious consideration of bicycle transportation issues. Instead of offering methods of communication that are obviously impossible for moving traffic interactions, which your suggested talking, typing, and writing are, you could have simply asked: "How does the cyclist recognize that his negotiation has succeeded?"

I do not know whether your ignorance was real or merely pretended in order to denigrate vehicular cycling. But dealing with people who put up such absurd arguments day after day makes one choose to describe those arguments as accurately as possible.
That explains why you do it, and is understandable, but, Script has a point. Treating others derogatorily -- regardless of how justified it may or may not be -- is probably not a very effective manner to win them over to whatever position it is that you may be trying to persuade others to recognize and appreciate.

If one was to write a book called, say, Promoting Effective Cycling, deriding others and what they have to say would probably not be one of the methods covered, I would think.
Helmet Head is offline  
Old 03-24-08, 01:49 PM
  #462  
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
Talking

Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
Your answer shows your ignorance of normal traffic operation. For example, when changing lanes one must yield to those in or approaching in the lane you desire to enter. However, that person may decide to yield to your request, whether that request is transmitted by a car's turning signal, by a outstretched arm, or by a turned head. The driver changing lanes must not move laterally simply because he has made such a signal, but only when that signal has been seen, acknowledged, and agreed to. If you are the driver who wants to change lanes, the proof that such a negotiation has succeeded is that the other driver slows down to make a place for you. It's that simple, much simpler than the explanation.
Q: What does it mean when a driver has his turn signal on?


...




A: It's broken.



__________________
Cycling Advocate
http://BaltimoreSpokes.org
. . . o
. . /L
=()>()
The Human Car is offline  
Old 03-24-08, 01:54 PM
  #463  
invisiblehand
Part-time epistemologist
 
invisiblehand's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 5,862

Bikes: Jamis Nova, Bike Friday NWT, STRIDA, Austro Daimler Vent Noir, Haluzak Horizon, Salsa La Raza, Hollands Tourer, Bike Friday tikit

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 120 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Helmet Head View Post
That's sounds great, except, as IH has pointed out, if we limit ourselves to known facts based on sound studies we would not have much to talk about here.
I just want to write that there are sound studies. That is, the researchers do what they can with the data. The data, however, often cannot support the strong statements that we want to make without modeling assumptions.
__________________
A narrative on bicycle driving.
invisiblehand is offline  
Old 03-24-08, 03:09 PM
  #464  
Helmet Head
Banned.
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by invisiblehand View Post
I just want to write that there are sound studies. That is, the researchers do what they can with the data. The data, however, often cannot support the strong statements that we want to make without modeling assumptions.
That's true, but I think it's much more important than merely wanting to make strong statements - it's about wanting to ride bikes safely and effectively, and not wanting others to be dissuaded from doing so based on false notions about what is or is not safe and effective.
Helmet Head is offline  
Old 03-24-08, 03:50 PM
  #465  
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 John Forester View Post
Your argument was the following: "And help me understand this 'negotiation' you refer to. In my experience, I've never been able to 'negotiate' without some type of direct communication such as talking or typing or writing. I'm sure eye contact or a wave is a great negotiating tool, but I prefer something more concrete than that. I'm unwilling to risk life and limb by assuming that by looking and waving a motorist will understand my 'negotiation'."

I describe your argument as being flippantly and ignorantly sarcastic, so much so that it should not be offered in a discussion group whose subject is supposed to be serious consideration of bicycle transportation issues. Instead of offering methods of communication that are obviously impossible for moving traffic interactions, which your suggested talking, typing, and writing are, you could have simply asked: "How does the cyclist recognize that his negotiation has succeeded?"

I do not know whether your ignorance was real or merely pretended in order to denigrate vehicular cycling. But dealing with people who put up such absurd arguments day after day makes one choose to describe those arguments as accurately as possible.
Your inability to reason is only superceded by your profound righteousness.

Pick the question you want to answer and pretend the others don't exist.

My original challenge was to your statement regarding WOL's. I asked if you had ever experienced one and it is becoming evident that you have not.

If it pleases you to use derogatory descriptions for anyone that doesn't absolutely agree with your opinion that is your problem.

I started this thread with a sincere inquiry. You have taken advantage of it to promote an impossible-absolutist position.

Don't waste my time.
Script is offline  
Old 03-24-08, 04:10 PM
  #466  
Helmet Head
Banned.
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Script View Post
Your inability to reason is only superceded by your profound righteousness.

Pick the question you want to answer and pretend the others don't exist.

My original challenge was to your statement regarding WOL's. I asked if you had ever experienced one and it is becoming evident that you have not.

If it pleases you to use derogatory descriptions for anyone that doesn't absolutely agree with your opinion that is your problem.

I started this thread with a sincere inquiry. You have taken advantage of it to promote an impossible-absolutist position.

Don't waste my time.
If reason leads to the conclusion that someone with more than a modicum of traffic cycling experience has never experienced riding in a WOL, that's a certain indication that at least one of the premises upon which such an absurd conclusion is based, is false.

My questions in #460 stand.
Helmet Head is offline  
Old 03-24-08, 04:15 PM
  #467  
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 Helmet Head View Post
If reason leads to the conclusion that someone with more than a modicum of traffic cycling experience has never experienced riding in a WOL, that's a certain indication that at least one of the premises upon which such an absurd conclusion is based, is false.

My questions in #460 stand.
This is my thread... GO AWAY!
Script is offline  
Old 03-24-08, 06:50 PM
  #468  
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 John Forester View Post
There are two aspects of this issue: the extent to which the bike-lane program increases the tendency to overtake in this dangerous manner, and the extent to which the bike-lane program reduces the tendency to overtake in the safe manner.
Don't be such a big girl's blouse. It's prefectly possible to safely operate in a bike lane with traffic turning across it, if everyone follows the rules. In my estimation, any problems Portland are experiencing, and I'm only going by the information and news reports from local riders that post here, are purely due to a lack of education in their proper use.

Seems to me 'Give way to through traffic in the bike lane' should be simple enough to learn for even the most dopey driver. And cyclists learning due prudence for crossing traffic isn't that hard to teach either. Have you even tried in your little program?
Allister is offline  
Old 03-24-08, 07:08 PM
  #469  
Helmet Head
Banned.
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
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
Don't be such a big girl's blouse. It's prefectly possible to safely operate in a bike lane with traffic turning across it, if everyone follows the rules. In my estimation, any problems Portland are experiencing, and I'm only going by the information and news reports from local riders that post here, are purely due to a lack of education in their proper use.

Seems to me 'Give way to through traffic in the bike lane' should be simple enough to learn for even the most dopey driver. And cyclists learning due prudence for crossing traffic isn't that hard to teach either. Have you even tried in your little program?
Cyclists learning due prudence for crossing traffic is key to Forester's program, and is easy enough to teach once you get the cyclists in the class. Getting cyclists in the class is another issue.

As far as teaching motorists to "Give way to through traffic in the bike lane" that requires motorists to not only remember to recognize bike lanes, but to remember to look for and yield to traffic on their right before turning right, which is abnormal traffic behavior. You can make progress on this, i'm sure, but in the end it's just not normal habitual behavior in traffic, and for good reason. It's unnatural to route through traffic to the right of right turning traffic, and, so, it's unnatural to look for through traffic to the right of right turning traffic. Many drivers have a hard enough time remember to look for 1-2 mph pedestrians stepping into the intersection from the sidewalk before turning right; expecting these guys to remember to look for cyclists approaching at 20+ mph on their right is simply not reasonable.
Helmet Head is offline  
Old 03-24-08, 08:31 PM
  #470  
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 Helmet Head View Post
As far as teaching motorists to "Give way to through traffic in the bike lane" that requires motorists to not only remember to recognize bike lanes, but to remember to look for and yield to traffic on their right before turning right, which is abnormal traffic behavior.
Endlessly repeating it doesn't make it any more convincing.

Turning traffic yielding to through traffic is normal traffic operation. It works well enough here. If you think that it's too hard to learn, hand in your car keys to the first police officer you see. You shouldn't be driving.

Last edited by Allister; 03-24-08 at 11:10 PM.
Allister is offline  
Old 03-24-08, 08:51 PM
  #471  
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 Script View Post
Your inability to reason is only superceded by your profound righteousness.

Pick the question you want to answer and pretend the others don't exist.

My original challenge was to your statement regarding WOL's. I asked if you had ever experienced one and it is becoming evident that you have not.

If it pleases you to use derogatory descriptions for anyone that doesn't absolutely agree with your opinion that is your problem.

I started this thread with a sincere inquiry. You have taken advantage of it to promote an impossible-absolutist position.

Don't waste my time.
You cannot help yourself but be nasty, can you. Here are your words: "My original challenge was to your statement regarding WOL's. I asked if you had ever experienced one and it is becoming evident that you have not."

I answer you politely. About 65 years of frequent use of wide outside lanes.Wide outside lanes were very common in California, though many have now been marked as bike lanes.
John Forester is offline  
Old 03-24-08, 10:56 PM
  #472  
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 John Forester View Post
I answer you politely.


[Edit]In your style:
I describe your statement as being flippantly and ignorantly sarcastic, so much so that it should not be offered in a discussion group whose subject is supposed to be serious consideration of bicycle transportation issues.
__________________
Cycling Advocate
http://BaltimoreSpokes.org
. . . o
. . /L
=()>()

Last edited by The Human Car; 03-24-08 at 11:07 PM. Reason: Noted in text
The Human Car is offline  
Old 03-25-08, 12:03 AM
  #473  
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
Originally Posted by Allister View Post
Endlessly repeating ["remembering to look for and yield to traffic on their right before turning right, is abnormal traffic behavior"] doesn't make it any more convincing.

Turning traffic yielding to through traffic is normal traffic operation. It works well enough here. If you think that it's too hard to learn, hand in your car keys to the first police officer you see. You shouldn't be driving.
Curiously Allister, in Portland Oregon they fixed the deadly intersections by prohibiting right turns at them! Either a permanent ban with physical barriers or they installed "bike boxes" that keep motorists from turning until cyclists have cleared off in front of them.

In addition, the City of Portlandís Water Bureau has forbidden employees from turning right across a bike lane near their workplace:


"As part of a proactive effort to increase bike safety around their Interstate facility, The City of Portlandís Water Bureau will issue a mandate to employees next week that prohibits all their vehicles from using N Wheeler Avenue.

Wheeler used to provide convenient access to the Water Bureauís main Interstate facility, but this move comes in light of a growing concern for bike safety and potential collisions with bicycles at the notoriously dangerous intersection of at Wheeler, Broadway, and Flint Avenues...

Instead of turning right (north) onto Wheeler from Broadway, Guard says they will mandate that drivers go down to Larabee and enter the Interstate facility from N Tillamook Street"
The details can be found here:
http://bikeportland.org/2007/12/07/w...ler/#more-6138

So apparently it is too hard for Portland motorists to learn to yield to cyclists in a bike lane!
ChipSeal is offline  
Old 03-25-08, 12:11 AM
  #474  
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 ChipSeal View Post
Curiously Allister, in Portland Oregon they fixed the deadly intersections by prohibiting right turns at them!
I was aware of that. A bit of an over-reaction in my opinion, but whatever works in preventing boneheads behind the wheel from killing people is fine by me.

Originally Posted by ChipSeal View Post
So apparently it is too hard for Portland motorists to learn to yield to cyclists in a bike lane!
LOL. Do you seriously think that counts as trying? It's a band-aid, knee-jerk solution that'll only solve the problem at that one intersection. A real solution in teaching the rules will need to involve more than paint or prohibiting certain turns.

Last edited by Allister; 03-25-08 at 12:19 AM.
Allister is offline  
Old 03-25-08, 01:01 AM
  #475  
Helmet Head
Banned.
 
Helmet Head's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: San Diego
Posts: 13,075
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
Endlessly repeating it doesn't make it any more convincing.

Turning traffic yielding to through traffic is normal traffic operation. It works well enough here. If you think that it's too hard to learn, hand in your car keys to the first police officer you see. You shouldn't be driving.
Turning traffic yielding to through traffic is way too broad a category to even be a traffic operation, much less be a normal one.

The specific type we're talking about here is right-turning traffic yielding to same-direction through traffic passing them on the right. That would be a specific traffic operation, but it's certainly not a normal one. I can't think of a single instance where that's ever required in traffic, except when bike lanes are painted to the right of traffic lanes from which right turns are allowed. That's why I say remembering to check for and yield to such "traffic" is abnormal behavior.
Helmet Head 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.