bikelane flamebait and going right

In article ,
Frank Krygowski writes:
On Oct 28, 12:59*am, (Tom Keats) wrote:
In article ,
* * * * Frank Krygowski writes:



On Oct 27, 12:42*am, (Tom Keats) wrote:

In fact, effectively getting around Vancouver on a bicycle
involves knowing where are the bike routes, bike lanes, best
stretches of arterial streets, back access lanes/alleys
and parking lots to cut through. *But it's not a black art.
One just rides around, explores, becomes acquainted, and learns.
It's rather fun to do so, because our local riding environment
is always changing, as new facilities come to the fore.
Our metro area has no official bike routes, but those of us that use
our bikes for practical uses have found many more-pleasant streets
parallel to arterials. *And I've found some interesting cut-throughs.
Most of them, I use only rarely, but sometimes it's fun to explore
them - like the dirt path the kids made, out the end of the dead-end
street that jogs right past the water tower and pops out onto the
other street, saving a block or two of riding.
I think that if we could interview all the kids in town, we'd soon
have a list of hundreds of those things. *Kids are like ants*; they
get _everywhere_ eventually. *Their knowledge would be handy for the
contribution to a bike map.
*(Not as much as they used to be, I fear, but they still know lots of
things we adults are too "conventional" to ever figure out.)

Bike lanes are ubiquitiously an urban thing, enmeshed in the
tangle of routes of all sorts, and often just as valid and
useful as a back alley, torn-down gas station or vacant
parking lot as a means of getting across town.

I suspect many of the folks here expressing their misgivings
about bike lanes are thinking in terms of the open road.

Of course bike lanes don't belong on the open road.

The thick of urban traffic is a different matter. *This is
where you can't get much speed up because you'll be stopped
by traffic lights every block or two. *Sometimes a rider
will opt for an arterial street portion of their route because
the grades are easier and the line to the destination is more
direct; other times he or she will opt for the parallel streets
because they're less inflicted with traffic lights, or because
they're quieter.

In practice, urban bike lanes are not railway tracks from
which riders may not deviate. *Au contraire, they add to,
and expand a rider's repertoire of choices of route segments..

In a traditional rectangular street-grid city with fairly
dense population and traffic, bike lanes are not limiting.
I don't see that bike lanes add to a choice of route segments. If a
given street has enough pavement width to be striped with a bike lane
stripe, it must have had enough width to safely share with motor
vehicles before that stripe was painted. IOW, I can always make the
choice to ride there.

We have some terrain here in Vanncouver espieally around a
certain geolical feature we call Little Mountain (a smallish
extinct volcano which we've festooned with much horticulture,
canopy weddings, and Tai Chi classes.) There are certain
streets which reach across like shoelaces the instep of this
abyssmuth mound. Sightlines are horrid, and bike lanes
provide a refuge.

The advamtage of bike lane stripes is not that they give
bicycle riers a place to go, but a place for car drivers
to be in (and not be in.)

And as I've described upthread, it will have had less glass, gravel
and trash along its right side before the stripe was painted. That's

one of the reasons I've ridden streets without bike lanes when given
the choice.

Even on Vancouver's bike-laned streets you'd still legally
have your choice.

Granted, there are people who actually think "I can't ride a bike on
that street because it doesn't have a bike lane."

There are all kinds of people who say they'd ride,
if only if ... insert excuses here

People who will ride, will.

People who won't, won't.

Can't force 'em,
and it wouldn't be right to try to.

cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

On Oct 29, 3:11*am, (Tom Keats) wrote:
In article ,
* * * * Frank Krygowski writes:

I don't see that bike lanes add to a choice of route segments. *If a
given street has enough pavement width to be striped with a bike lane
stripe, it must have had enough width to safely share with motor
vehicles before that stripe was painted. *IOW, I can always make the
choice to ride there.

We have some terrain here in Vanncouver espieally around a
certain geolical feature we call Little Mountain (a smallish
extinct volcano which we've festooned with much horticulture,
canopy weddings, and Tai Chi classes.) *There are certain
streets which reach across like shoelaces the instep of this
abyssmuth mound. *Sightlines are horrid, and bike lanes
provide a refuge.

I don't understand.

The way I usually deal with bad sightlines is to move to the middle of
the lane. The only way a bike lane would help that move would be if
it were at lane center. ISTR seeing one photo of a lane-center bike
lane, but I've never seen one in real life, and I doubt that's what
you're talking about.

And if I wanted refuge at the right edge of the road, couldn't I get
that without a paint stripe? If the road's wide enough for a striped
bike lane, isn't it wide enough without the stripe?

- Frank Krygowski

Frank Krygowski writes:

On Oct 29, 3:11Â*am, (Tom Keats) wrote:
In article ,
Â* Â* Â* Â* Frank Krygowski writes:

I don't see that bike lanes add to a choice of route segments. Â*If a
given street has enough pavement width to be striped with a bike lane
stripe, it must have had enough width to safely share with motor
vehicles before that stripe was painted. Â*IOW, I can always make the
choice to ride there.

We have some terrain here in Vanncouver espieally around a
certain geolical feature we call Little Mountain (a smallish
extinct volcano which we've festooned with much horticulture,
canopy weddings, and Tai Chi classes.) Â*There are certain
streets which reach across like shoelaces the instep of this
abyssmuth mound. Â*Sightlines are horrid, and bike lanes
provide a refuge.

I don't understand.

The way I usually deal with bad sightlines is to move to the middle of
the lane. The only way a bike lane would help that move would be if
it were at lane center. ISTR seeing one photo of a lane-center bike
lane, but I've never seen one in real life, and I doubt that's what
you're talking about.

And if I wanted refuge at the right edge of the road, couldn't I get
that without a paint stripe? If the road's wide enough for a striped
bike lane, isn't it wide enough without the stripe?

- Frank Krygowski

I realise this is totally outside of your ability to understand, but the
stripe is there to warn cars not to cross it. Hard I know. But do try.

On Oct 29, 11:44*am, Simon Lewis wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:
On Oct 29, 3:11*am, (Tom Keats) wrote:
In article ,
* * * * Frank Krygowski writes:

I don't see that bike lanes add to a choice of route segments. *If a
given street has enough pavement width to be striped with a bike lane
stripe, it must have had enough width to safely share with motor
vehicles before that stripe was painted. *IOW, I can always make the
choice to ride there.

We have some terrain here in Vanncouver espieally around a
certain geolical feature we call Little Mountain (a smallish
extinct volcano which we've festooned with much horticulture,
canopy weddings, and Tai Chi classes.) *There are certain
streets which reach across like shoelaces the instep of this
abyssmuth mound. *Sightlines are horrid, and bike lanes
provide a refuge.

I don't understand.

The way I usually deal with bad sightlines is to move to the middle of
the lane. *The only way a bike lane would help that move would be if
it were at lane center. *ISTR seeing one photo of a lane-center bike
lane, but I've never seen one in real life, and I doubt that's what
you're talking about.

And if I wanted refuge at the right edge of the road, couldn't I get
that without a paint stripe? *If the road's wide enough for a striped
bike lane, isn't it wide enough without the stripe?

I realise this is totally outside of your ability to understand, but the
stripe is there to warn cars not to cross it. Hard I know. But do try.

Get serious. (I'd say get civil, but that's wasted on you.)

Of course that's the reason for the bike lane stripe - to keep
motorists from ever driving on the pavement to its right. But it's
worse than useless when a cyclist is not present, because cars on
pavement beneficially sweep pavement clean. And when a cyclist is
present, cars avoid cyclists, just like they avoid other vehicles and
objects. The fear that they won't avoid you is delusional.

We don't need paint stripes around every vehicle on the road. In
fact, Monderman showed pretty conclusively that we don't need many of
the "normal" paint stripes, let alone extra ones.

- Frank Krygowski

In article ,
Frank Krygowski writes:
On Oct 29, 3:11*am, (Tom Keats) wrote:
In article ,
* * * * Frank Krygowski writes:

I don't see that bike lanes add to a choice of route segments. *If a
given street has enough pavement width to be striped with a bike lane
stripe, it must have had enough width to safely share with motor
vehicles before that stripe was painted. *IOW, I can always make the
choice to ride there.

We have some terrain here in Vanncouver espieally around a
certain geolical feature we call Little Mountain (a smallish
extinct volcano which we've festooned with much horticulture,
canopy weddings, and Tai Chi classes.) *There are certain
streets which reach across like shoelaces the instep of this
abyssmuth mound. *Sightlines are horrid, and bike lanes
provide a refuge.
I don't understand.

Car drivers here hate to cross painted lines.


The way I usually deal with bad sightlines is to move to the middle of
the lane.

I see you've read a page of Robert Hurst's book(s).

The only way a bike lane would help that move would be if
it were at lane center.

Respectfuly ... says who?

ISTR seeing one photo of a lane-center bike
lane, but I've never seen one in real life, and I doubt that's what
you're talking about.

Actually, we have those in Vancouver. Vanness St @ Boundary Road
springs immediately to mind. We also have "bike boxes" delineated
with coloured pavement, and with advanced stop lines allowing bikes
to get ahead of the cars.

And if I wanted refuge at the right edge of the road, couldn't I get
that without a paint stripe?

The stripe is reflective paint, easily discerned during a
dark and stormy night. Car drivers are loathe to drive
across lines on the street.

If the road's wide enough for a striped
bike lane, isn't it wide enough without the stripe?

No.

Drivers feel comfortable to steer between painted lines and
stay within their own delineated space, and we can use that
pyschological effect to our advantage.

We can also abuse it to our disadvantage.

I think the best approach is to inculcate a culture of
sociable consideration of others. That includes urban
riders being sociably considerate to urban car drivers.

In the past I've seen the opposite too many times.
Riders feel the impulse to go, go, go, and will not
pull over a little to let a soccer mom minvan go by
on a narrow street. Y'know what? On narrower
residential streets I've had many oncoming drivers
pull over 'cuz they think I'd otherwise dangerously
thread the needle between them and the on-street
parked cars. And while they're pulling over for me,
I'm pulling over for them, and we end up wasting each
other's time, because they're expecting me to behave
like a stereotypical, selfish, self-centred,
inconsiderate, greedy pig, "the street is mine"
urban bike rider.

If traffic was more sociable & social, there'd be
fewer problems. And possibly more solutions.


cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

In article ,
Claus Assmann writes:
Tom Keats wrote:

In a traditional rectangular street-grid city with fairly
dense population and traffic, bike lanes are not limiting.

Visit Germany and you will learn that this statement is incorrect
("All generalizations are wrong" :-)

Many "Radwege" (separated bike lanes) will force you to make a
sharp, short right/left ("S") turn at each crossing, so the corner
can be "rounded" for the cars to make their turns. That prevents
you from going reasonably fast: you have to check for cars significantly
before the crossing because your attention will be needed to follow
the lane (where often one or two sign posts or a fence right next
to the lane make riding even more "interesting" and force you
to slow down even more than usual).

Vancouver bike lanes don't force riders to
do anything. They are there as options,
not as mandates.

Urban traffic is not dead-head easy, nor should it be.

cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

On Oct 30, 2:35*am, (Tom Keats) wrote:
In article ,
* * * * Frank Krygowski writes:
[Tom Keats wrote:]
*Sightlines are horrid, and bike lanes
provide a refuge.
I don't understand.

Car drivers here hate to cross painted lines.

But again, cyclists are visible, unless they're foolishly in ninja
mode. If I'm far enough right on a wide-enough road, I'm in as much
of a refuge as a bike lane would be.

The way I usually deal with bad sightlines is to move to the middle of
the lane.

I see you've read a page of Robert Hurst's book(s).

And others. And I've learned a lot by experience, and by taking a
cycling class.

*The only way a bike lane would help that move would be if
it were at lane center.

Respectfuly ... says who?

Well, me, for one. Can you explain how a bike lane at the right makes
it easier for a cyclist to move left? I don't see that possibility.

And if I wanted refuge at the right edge of the road, couldn't I get
that without a paint stripe?

The stripe is reflective paint, easily discerned during a
dark and stormy night. *Car drivers are loathe to drive
across lines on the street.

My taillight and reflectors are easily discerned during a dark and
stormy night, too. Drivers are loathe to run down cyclists from
behind. We know that because of the rarity of that occurrence.

If the road's wide enough for a striped
bike lane, isn't it wide enough without the stripe?

No.

Please explain.

Five foot bike lane plus ten foot (minimum) traffic lane is fifteen
feet of pavement. Take out the stripe and you've got minimum fifteen
feet of lane width. I _easily_ share fifteen foot lanes.

- Frank Krygowski

Frank Krygowski writes:

On Oct 30, 2:35Â*am, (Tom Keats) wrote:
In article ,
Â* Â* Â* Â* Frank Krygowski writes:
[Tom Keats wrote:]
Â*Sightlines are horrid, and bike lanes
provide a refuge.
I don't understand.

Car drivers here hate to cross painted lines.

But again, cyclists are visible, unless they're foolishly in ninja
mode. If I'm far enough right on a wide-enough road, I'm in as much
of a refuge as a bike lane would be.


No you're not.

How bloody ridiculous.

The white line ensures the car is NOT in your area long before he spots
you.

Stop talking garbage and think about what you're saying for once.

On Oct 30, 3:30*pm, Simon Lewis wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:


But again, cyclists are visible, unless they're foolishly in ninja
mode. *If I'm far enough right on a wide-enough road, I'm in as much
of a refuge as a bike lane would be.

No you're not.

[snotty remarks trimmed]

The white line ensures the car is NOT in your area long before he spots
you.

I don't care where the car is long before he gets to me. I care where
he is when he passes me.

- Frank Krygowski

Frank Krygowski writes:

On Oct 30, 3:30Â*pm, Simon Lewis wrote:
Frank Krygowski writes:


But again, cyclists are visible, unless they're foolishly in ninja
mode. Â*If I'm far enough right on a wide-enough road, I'm in as much
of a refuge as a bike lane would be.

No you're not.

[snotty remarks trimmed]

The white line ensures the car is NOT in your area long before he spots
you.

I don't care where the car is long before he gets to me. I care where
he is when he passes me.

- Frank Krygowski

OK .... so lets see if you can see why him being further out a long time
before he sees or doesnt see you is safer and puts him a safer place.

Please, please tell me you are joking or trolling here.