On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 17:11:21 -0800 (PST), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Thursday, February 6, 2020 at 5:37:30 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
On Thu, 6 Feb 2020 12:57:42 -0500, Frank Krygowski wrote:

On 2/6/2020 10:27 AM, AMuzi wrote:
https://nypost.com/video/bicyclist-p...in-the-street/


Raise your middle finger in solidarity, my brothers!

He's right on almost all of that. I don't react to motorist negativity
with his loud aggression, but I get far less negativity than he does
when I ride lane center.

I'm curious about his four crashes. From what I've seen, bike crashes
have a wide variety of causes. Without knowing details of his four
causes, we can't comment on what measures might have helped to mitigate
them.

But I'm very skeptical of the closing push for "protected" bike lanes. A
few months ago, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety published a
study of so-called "protected" bike lanes and found that except for
spots like bridges (with no possibility of crossing conflicts), the
"protected" bike lanes causes something like a dozen times as many
car-bike crashes as a major street with no bike lanes. A few years ago,
Columbus Ohio put in an up-to-date "parking protected" bike lane and saw
car bike crashes jump over 600%. Columbus also tried a different
"protected" lane in the 1970s and removed it within a year or two due to
increased crash counts. Davis, CA installed one in the 1960s and pulled
it within about a year for the same reason.

But boy, are they fashionable!


I wonder...

Various studies of bicycle/auto collisions have shown that, in some
cases, as many as 60 percent of the collisions are the fault of the
bicycle. Is the increased crashes in protected bike lanes simply added
evidence that cyclists are their own worse enemy? That by segregating
them you simply eliminate the bike/auto collision factor leaving only
added evidence that so many of the collisions are the fault of the
cyclist?

I think you have to look at the causes of individual crashes. One
is the Right Hook that happens when a bicyclist rides up in a bike
lane on the right of a motorist who is turning right. Assigning fault
is tricky and maybe random. Some investigators might say it's the
motorist's fault, for not craning his neck and checking his mirrors
and peering into a place where the cyclist is invisible before making
his turn. Another might say it's foolish for the cyclist to ride into
the blind spot in the first place. I'd say it's stupid of the designer
to lure a cyclist into such a dangerous space. Would you ever put a
straight-ahead car lane to the right of a right turn lane?

Here, of course, it is the left hook, and I have experienced it. When
stopping it is often sort of easy to run up almost to the edge of the
road and rest your foot on the edge of the raised sidewalk and just
sit there on the bike waiting for the light to change. Along comes a
bus that is going to turn left (right in your case) and of course he
moves to the side of the road and when he turns there won't be room
enough for both the bicycle and the bus so, logically, the bicycle
must wait for the bus.

And, I say logically as anyone with any sense at all can undoubtedly
figure out what is going to happen in the case of a bus/bicycle
collision...

The thing that makes me wonder is, if I can figure this out, can't
others? Am I so blindly intelligent that only I can perceive the
results of a bicycle/bus collision?

I don't think so.

Another one is a bi-directional "protected" lane that sends half the
bicyclists into an intersection going the wrong way - that is, riding
on the left side of the road. That is a serious, serious violation of
normal road rules; and resulting crashes are quite common. But that
weird design is one of the things most requested by bike advocates.
But do we blame the bicyclist for doing what the designer told him to do?

There are other problems, like motorists trying to exit side streets
or driveways and not being able to see if traffic is coming, until they
pull partly out into the bike lane. Cyclists don't expect that and
may be hidden from view. Another crash.

In summary, it's fashionable to design crap that violates common sense
and then tell bicyclists they are now "protected." The results should
not surprise.

- Frank Krygowski

I find it interesting that student pilots are told repeatedly to keep
their head moving... to be looking up down and sideways to see if
anything is there. Think of it. Way up there in the air and you keep a
constant lookout for other objects while cyclists riding in traffic
apparently don't bother with all that sort of foolishness.
--
cheers,

John B.