Cyclists are putting red cups in the road to show how drivers ofteninvade bike lanes

On Friday, April 26, 2019 at 7:30:39 PM UTC-7, Joy Beeson wrote:
On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 21:12:11 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

This "Desecration!" stuff is nonsense.

"Deadly" is more accurate than "nonsense". When motorists refuse to
touch tire to the "bike lane", it means that instead of merging into
the rightmost lane ahead of or behind a bike rider, right-turning
motorists swerve across the lane through the bike rider.

--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net
http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/

There are several places on my rides where the lanes are improperly designed so that drivers will try to beat a cyclist rather than merge in behind him. They save NO time at all and endanger the cyclist for no reason whatsoever.

On Sunday, April 28, 2019 at 5:06:14 PM UTC-7, sms wrote:
On 4/28/2019 2:21 AM, db wrote:
On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 15:58:42 -0700, sms wrote:

https://www2.bostonglobe.com/metro/2...e-putting-red-
cups-road-show-how-drivers-often-invade-bike-lanes/fskNwwciZ5I793zvL7hUWN/
story.html

“We ... need connected protected bike lanes to accommodate everyone from
age 8 to 80 to ride stress free to school, work, and to the store,� he
said. “We also need to educate drivers that cyclists are legally
entitled to ride on the road and for drivers to share the space and be
courteous.�

Come to Denmark; we have that here. Having cycled many
years in Australia, I am still amazed when a car lets
me go through an intersection while they wait to do a
turn, wow.

It's a different mindset in the U.S. than from Denmark, unfortunately.
But it varies by community, and there can be big differences between
cities very close to each other, based on the demographics, and even
within large cities. Palo Alto and Berkeley are more like Denmark. Parts
of San Jose are like Australia, parts of San Jose are okay. Towns with
big universities like Palo Alto, Berkeley, Davis, etc. have high rates
of cycling
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._cities_with_most_bicycle_commuters.

Of non-college towns, Portland and San Francisco are the standouts of
larger cities in terms of cycling levels. San Francisco has invested a
lot in bicycle infrastructure. Even a lawsuit by a resident against
bicycle lanes temporarily allowed the city to divert money into bicycle
infrastructure not affected by the lawsuit, and in retrospect was a good
thing because it forced the city to do an environmental study that
looked at bicycle lanes as a complete package rather than to create them
piecemeal. A disconnected network of bicycle infrastructure is a big
frustration to cyclists.

It's also a bit ironic that gridlocked car traffic does have benefits
for cyclists in terms of safety. When I was working in San Francisco,
from the train station I rode along the Embarcadero separated multi-use
path, but there was also a bicycle lane on the road. I was always going
much faster than the motor vehicle traffic.

One thing the people who keep repeating "danger danger" don't understand
is that in economically vibrant areas like Portland, Seattle, San
Francisco, and Silicon Valley, there is a need to try to mitigate
congestion by multiple means. Oregon has a 0.1% employee transit tax and
Portland has an employer tax of 0.7637% om wages. Oregon is big on
progressive taxes, while California has powerful big business groups
that advocate for regressive taxes, generally sales taxes and increased
tolls.

Of the ten largest cities in the U.S. only three are in the top ten for
transit use, New York, Chicago, and Philadelphia (all cities with good,
though aging, separated grade rail).

In economically vibrant areas, because of increased density without a
commensurate increase in mass transit, traffic congestion has increased
to levels where drivers get impatient and do stupid things. There's the
beautiful bike lane with just a few pesky cyclists using it so why not
turn it into an unofficial traffic lane and squeeze by all those cars.
Vehicles abusing the painted bicycle lanes make potential cyclists
reconsider bicycling, and it's the willing, but somewhat reluctant,
cyclists that we need to convince that they won't be run over by an
errant vehicle.

A good article about this is at
https://www.betterbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Making-Cycling-Irresistible-Lessons-from-Europe-Pucher-2008.pdf
which examines how the Netherlands, Denmark, and Germany have succeeded
in increasing cycling. Pay attention to table 1 on page 512.

There are more and more activists who do not drive and hence have a great interest in safety issues. I am actually quite surprised at just how large the movement is and the impact they are making.

But this isn't the cause of traffic deaths. That is due to drivers who do not care what is in the way. Watch some jerk that turns from the leg of a T intersection onto a double lane thoroughfare - they will take both lanes and the bike lane to make that turn. Cops will watch that and do absolutely nothing. Until the prevailing traffic laws are actually enforced you cannot expect that there will be any additional improvements in traffic related bicycle deaths.

On Monday, April 29, 2019 at 9:22:49 AM UTC-7, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Sunday, April 28, 2019 at 8:06:14 PM UTC-4, sms wrote:
On 4/28/2019 2:21 AM, db wrote:
On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 15:58:42 -0700, sms wrote:

https://www2.bostonglobe.com/metro/2...e-putting-red-
cups-road-show-how-drivers-often-invade-bike-lanes/fskNwwciZ5I793zvL7hUWN/
story.html

“We ... need connected protected bike lanes to accommodate everyone from
age 8 to 80 to ride stress free to school, work, and to the store,� he
said. “We also need to educate drivers that cyclists are legally
entitled to ride on the road and for drivers to share the space and be
courteous.�

Come to Denmark; we have that here. Having cycled many
years in Australia, I am still amazed when a car lets
me go through an intersection while they wait to do a
turn, wow.

It's a different mindset in the U.S. than from Denmark, unfortunately.
But it varies by community, and there can be big differences between
cities very close to each other, based on the demographics, and even
within large cities. Palo Alto and Berkeley are more like Denmark. Parts
of San Jose are like Australia, parts of San Jose are okay. Towns with
big universities like Palo Alto, Berkeley, Davis, etc. have high rates
of cycling
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._cities_with_most_bicycle_commuters.

Of non-college towns, Portland and San Francisco are the standouts of
larger cities in terms of cycling levels. San Francisco has invested a
lot in bicycle infrastructure. Even a lawsuit by a resident against
bicycle lanes temporarily allowed the city to divert money into bicycle
infrastructure not affected by the lawsuit, and in retrospect was a good
thing because it forced the city to do an environmental study that
looked at bicycle lanes as a complete package rather than to create them
piecemeal. A disconnected network of bicycle infrastructure is a big
frustration to cyclists.

It's also a bit ironic that gridlocked car traffic does have benefits
for cyclists in terms of safety. When I was working in San Francisco,
from the train station I rode along the Embarcadero separated multi-use
path, but there was also a bicycle lane on the road. I was always going
much faster than the motor vehicle traffic.

One thing the people who keep repeating "danger danger" don't understand
is that in economically vibrant areas like Portland, Seattle, San
Francisco, and Silicon Valley, there is a need to try to mitigate
congestion by multiple means. Oregon has a 0.1% employee transit tax and
Portland has an employer tax of 0.7637% om wages. Oregon is big on
progressive taxes, while California has powerful big business groups
that advocate for regressive taxes, generally sales taxes and increased
tolls.

Of the ten largest cities in the U.S. only three are in the top ten for
transit use, New York, Chicago, and Philadelphia (all cities with good,
though aging, separated grade rail).

In economically vibrant areas, because of increased density without a
commensurate increase in mass transit, traffic congestion has increased
to levels where drivers get impatient and do stupid things. There's the
beautiful bike lane with just a few pesky cyclists using it so why not
turn it into an unofficial traffic lane and squeeze by all those cars.
Vehicles abusing the painted bicycle lanes make potential cyclists
reconsider bicycling, and it's the willing, but somewhat reluctant,
cyclists that we need to convince that they won't be run over by an
errant vehicle.

A good article about this is at
https://www.betterbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Making-Cycling-Irresistible-Lessons-from-Europe-Pucher-2008.pdf
which examines how the Netherlands, Denmark, and Germany have succeeded
in increasing cycling. Pay attention to table 1 on page 512.

And then there are those who insist that riding a bicycle is so ultimately dangerous that they MUST have extremely bright DRL, and many other safety devices plus completely segregated bicycling infrastructure. Never mind that most bicycling segregated routes don't go to where a bicyclist wants to go. Okay, you get some segregated bicycle routes built and you get some bicyclists using them. How now do you get those bicyclists to cycle anywhere those segregated routes don't go? After all those bicyclists are now convinced (or most of them are) that riding outside of that segregated area is far too dangerous to even contemplate let alone do.

Constantly harping that bicycling outside of segregated bicycle lanes, and harping that riding a bicycle in bright daylight without a bright DRL is suicidal, is EXTREMELY DETRIMENTAL to getting more people onto bicycles. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot!

Btw, I just got back from Niagara-on-the-lake and I did it without any segregated bicycle lanes or even painted bicycle lanes. IF I felt that I must have either in order to feel that I was safe riding my bicycle there and back I would never have gone or returned.

Cheers

In San Francisco it isn't at all unusual to watch cars drive right down streets that are bicycle and Muni Transit Buses only and so marked. My residence is on a No Trucks Allowed street and I watch trucks driving by regularly.. And I have watched doubles back and hitch to make the turn to get ONTO this residential street.

On Monday, April 29, 2019 at 12:33:28 PM UTC-4, wrote:

In San Francisco it isn't at all unusual to watch cars drive right down streets that are bicycle and Muni Transit Buses only and so marked. My residence is on a No Trucks Allowed street and I watch trucks driving by regularly. And I have watched doubles back and hitch to make the turn to get ONTO this residential street.

FWIW, that happened to me in Paris a few years ago. There was a segregated bike-
bus lane along a busy street. I was riding it in the rain. A dude in a black
fancy German car (Audi or Mercedes, I forget which) turned illegally into the
lane behind me and began honking for me to get out of the way. I just shook my
head and rode on. He stayed behind me until the next intersection then turned
off. He had no realistic alternative. I certainly wasn't about to pull over
to let him pass!

- Frank Krygowski

On Monday, April 29, 2019 at 11:00:12 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Monday, April 29, 2019 at 12:33:28 PM UTC-4, wrote:

In San Francisco it isn't at all unusual to watch cars drive right down streets that are bicycle and Muni Transit Buses only and so marked. My residence is on a No Trucks Allowed street and I watch trucks driving by regularly. And I have watched doubles back and hitch to make the turn to get ONTO this residential street.

FWIW, that happened to me in Paris a few years ago. There was a segregated bike-
bus lane along a busy street. I was riding it in the rain. A dude in a black
fancy German car (Audi or Mercedes, I forget which) turned illegally into the
lane behind me and began honking for me to get out of the way. I just shook my
head and rode on. He stayed behind me until the next intersection then turned
off. He had no realistic alternative. I certainly wasn't about to pull over
to let him pass!

- Frank Krygowski

The drivers in San Francisco are very odd ducks. On the streets where cars are severely limited they want to run over you. But out on streets where there are lanes divided down the middle with street cars and overhead electric wires and the lanes are somewhat limited they are polite as hell.

Around areas of San Francisco there are areas that look like wide sidewalks that they call something else (forget the name) but you can ride a bike on them. But you aren't allowed to ride on sidewalks. The cops don't even like you turning up onto a sidewalk to dismount and stop at a café or something.

And if these sorts of crazy things aren't enough you should try reading the gun laws. Let us say that you have a Concealed Carry Permit and carry a gun with you. You see someone robbing a bank and he is opening fire on people - if you shoot and kill that guy you can be prosecuted for murder. You are only allowed to discharge a weapon to protect your own personal safety. You actually would be in less danger of prosecution by carrying an illegal concealed weapon. Democrat State at work for the people.

On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 11:00:10 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Monday, April 29, 2019 at 12:33:28 PM UTC-4, wrote:

In San Francisco it isn't at all unusual to watch cars drive right down streets that are bicycle and Muni Transit Buses only and so marked. My residence is on a No Trucks Allowed street and I watch trucks driving by regularly. And I have watched doubles back and hitch to make the turn to get ONTO this residential street.

FWIW, that happened to me in Paris a few years ago. There was a segregated bike-
bus lane along a busy street. I was riding it in the rain. A dude in a black
fancy German car (Audi or Mercedes, I forget which) turned illegally into the
lane behind me and began honking for me to get out of the way. I just shook my
head and rode on. He stayed behind me until the next intersection then turned
off. He had no realistic alternative. I certainly wasn't about to pull over
to let him pass!

- Frank Krygowski

I can't comment on Paris but here, and I suspect in other countries as
well, the law says that "thou shall not impede other traffic".
--
cheers,

John B.

On 4/29/2019 7:19 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 11:00:10 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Monday, April 29, 2019 at 12:33:28 PM UTC-4, wrote:

In San Francisco it isn't at all unusual to watch cars drive right down streets that are bicycle and Muni Transit Buses only and so marked. My residence is on a No Trucks Allowed street and I watch trucks driving by regularly. And I have watched doubles back and hitch to make the turn to get ONTO this residential street.

FWIW, that happened to me in Paris a few years ago. There was a segregated bike-
bus lane along a busy street. I was riding it in the rain. A dude in a black
fancy German car (Audi or Mercedes, I forget which) turned illegally into the
lane behind me and began honking for me to get out of the way. I just shook my
head and rode on. He stayed behind me until the next intersection then turned
off. He had no realistic alternative. I certainly wasn't about to pull over
to let him pass!

- Frank Krygowski

I can't comment on Paris but here, and I suspect in other countries as
well, the law says that "thou shall not impede other traffic".

That's not the law here. Every slow moving truck impedes traffic. Every
school bus does the same, as well as every rural delivery post office
truck, every farmer's tractor moving between fields, every Amish buggy,
and quite a few motorists who spend their red light gazing at their cell
phones, then failing to notice the green light until others start
honking at them.

But in the Paris incident, there was no way I would get out of the way
of a rude and impatient law breaker.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On 4/29/2019 12:24 PM, wrote:
On Friday, April 26, 2019 at 7:30:39 PM UTC-7, Joy Beeson wrote:
On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 21:12:11 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

This "Desecration!" stuff is nonsense.

"Deadly" is more accurate than "nonsense". When motorists refuse to
touch tire to the "bike lane", it means that instead of merging into
the rightmost lane ahead of or behind a bike rider, right-turning
motorists swerve across the lane through the bike rider.

--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net
http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/

There are several places on my rides where the lanes are improperly designed so that drivers will try to beat a cyclist rather than merge in behind him. They save NO time at all and endanger the cyclist for no reason whatsoever.

Actually, it's not just bicyclists who get that treatment. I was driving
on a minor country four-lane today, approaching a red light. A Nissan
sedan was the only car at the light, stopped in the left lane. I noticed
the cross traffic yellow, meaning the light was about to go green; so I
timed my deceleration to go through on the fresh green. Then I signaled
and moved to the left lane, since about half a mile on, the right lane
ended at the next light.

The driver was apparently offended. He accelerated as fast as he could,
roaring past me on my right and cutting directly in front of me. We both
got stopped at that next light, and he and I both proceeded, driving the
speed limit.

I guess in his mind, I wasn't allowed to take advantage of an empty
lane. :-/

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Monday, April 29, 2019 at 11:19:32 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/29/2019 7:19 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 11:00:10 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Monday, April 29, 2019 at 12:33:28 PM UTC-4, wrote:

In San Francisco it isn't at all unusual to watch cars drive right down streets that are bicycle and Muni Transit Buses only and so marked. My residence is on a No Trucks Allowed street and I watch trucks driving by regularly. And I have watched doubles back and hitch to make the turn to get ONTO this residential street.

FWIW, that happened to me in Paris a few years ago. There was a segregated bike-
bus lane along a busy street. I was riding it in the rain. A dude in a black
fancy German car (Audi or Mercedes, I forget which) turned illegally into the
lane behind me and began honking for me to get out of the way. I just shook my
head and rode on. He stayed behind me until the next intersection then turned
off. He had no realistic alternative. I certainly wasn't about to pull over
to let him pass!

- Frank Krygowski

I can't comment on Paris but here, and I suspect in other countries as
well, the law says that "thou shall not impede other traffic".

That's not the law here. Every slow moving truck impedes traffic. Every
school bus does the same, as well as every rural delivery post office
truck, every farmer's tractor moving between fields, every Amish buggy,
and quite a few motorists who spend their red light gazing at their cell
phones, then failing to notice the green light until others start
honking at them.

But in the Paris incident, there was no way I would get out of the way
of a rude and impatient law breaker.


--
- Frank Krygowski

IIRC, in Ontario Canada if your vehicle is holding up 4 or more other vehicles then the law says when safe to do so you're to pull over and allow t hat traffic to pass. Failure to do so can result in citations and fines for impeding traffic.

Cheers

On 4/30/2019 1:39 AM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Monday, April 29, 2019 at 11:19:32 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/29/2019 7:19 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 29 Apr 2019 11:00:10 -0700 (PDT), Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On Monday, April 29, 2019 at 12:33:28 PM UTC-4, wrote:

In San Francisco it isn't at all unusual to watch cars drive right down streets that are bicycle and Muni Transit Buses only and so marked. My residence is on a No Trucks Allowed street and I watch trucks driving by regularly. And I have watched doubles back and hitch to make the turn to get ONTO this residential street.

FWIW, that happened to me in Paris a few years ago. There was a segregated bike-
bus lane along a busy street. I was riding it in the rain. A dude in a black
fancy German car (Audi or Mercedes, I forget which) turned illegally into the
lane behind me and began honking for me to get out of the way. I just shook my
head and rode on. He stayed behind me until the next intersection then turned
off. He had no realistic alternative. I certainly wasn't about to pull over
to let him pass!

- Frank Krygowski

I can't comment on Paris but here, and I suspect in other countries as
well, the law says that "thou shall not impede other traffic".

That's not the law here. Every slow moving truck impedes traffic. Every
school bus does the same, as well as every rural delivery post office
truck, every farmer's tractor moving between fields, every Amish buggy,
and quite a few motorists who spend their red light gazing at their cell
phones, then failing to notice the green light until others start
honking at them.

But in the Paris incident, there was no way I would get out of the way
of a rude and impatient law breaker.


--
- Frank Krygowski

IIRC, in Ontario Canada if your vehicle is holding up 4 or more other vehicles then the law says when safe to do so you're to pull over and allow t hat traffic to pass. Failure to do so can result in citations and fines for impeding traffic.

Some U.S. states have similar laws (typically, 5 vehicles) but mine does
not. And here in Ohio there was a court decision stating that a
bicyclist isn't bound by obstruction provisions if he's moving at a
reasonable speed for a bicyclist. The same applies to slow moving
trucks, etc. Only limited access freeways have minimum speed requirements.

Having said that, there have been a few times I've pulled over to let
multiple cars pass me on a narrow and busy two-lane road. But only a few
times. The issue comes up only very rarely, because it's actually
uncommon for a motorist to have to wait behind me for even 30 seconds.


--
- Frank Krygowski