|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Making "protected" bike lanes safe
For six or seven years, the loudest and best financed bike lobbying organizations
have been saying we need "protected" bike lanes everywhere. They say it's obviously inadequate to have just a paint stripe separating bikes from cars; we need at _least_ posts, and preferably a line of parked cars. You know, so the bicyclists are totally hidden from motorists until the motorist crosses the bike lane to access a street or driveway. Segregation skeptics have been saying for just as long that the "protection" vanishes precisely where the conflicts are worse. And the design adds new surprises to traffic interactions. Surprises in traffic are NOT good. And there have been crashes, just as predicted. A mile of "protected" bike lane put in Columbus, Ohio a few years ago went from 1.5 car-bike crashes per year to 13 crashes (IIRC) in the year it was installed. And here's the latest one: https://sf.streetsblog.org/2019/04/0...e-mixing-zone/ The solution? "Protected" intersections everywhere! https://vimeo.com/86721046 I haven't seen any cost estimates for this new cycling nirvana. That would be interesting. - Frank Krygowski |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Making "protected" bike lanes safe
It's all folly until we ban cars from areas where there are cyclists and peds present.
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Making "protected" bike lanes safe
On Tuesday, April 9, 2019 at 11:39:10 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
For six or seven years, the loudest and best financed bike lobbying organizations have been saying we need "protected" bike lanes everywhere. They say it's obviously inadequate to have just a paint stripe separating bikes from cars; we need at _least_ posts, and preferably a line of parked cars. You know, so the bicyclists are totally hidden from motorists until the motorist crosses the bike lane to access a street or driveway. Segregation skeptics have been saying for just as long that the "protection" vanishes precisely where the conflicts are worse. And the design adds new surprises to traffic interactions. Surprises in traffic are NOT good. And there have been crashes, just as predicted. A mile of "protected" bike lane put in Columbus, Ohio a few years ago went from 1.5 car-bike crashes per year to 13 crashes (IIRC) in the year it was installed. And here's the latest one: https://sf.streetsblog.org/2019/04/0...e-mixing-zone/ The solution? "Protected" intersections everywhere! https://vimeo.com/86721046 I haven't seen any cost estimates for this new cycling nirvana. That would be interesting. - Frank Krygowski Bike lanes have sufficient "protection" by lines on the street. In many places you have broken glass in the lane and you have to pull out into the full lane. Yesterday there were heavy gusting winds and on the downhills I had to use the entire lane to be able to retain full control. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Making "protected" bike lanes safe
On Wednesday, April 10, 2019 at 1:01:00 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tuesday, April 9, 2019 at 11:39:10 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: For six or seven years, the loudest and best financed bike lobbying organizations have been saying we need "protected" bike lanes everywhere. They say it's obviously inadequate to have just a paint stripe separating bikes from cars; we need at _least_ posts, and preferably a line of parked cars. You know, so the bicyclists are totally hidden from motorists until the motorist crosses the bike lane to access a street or driveway. Segregation skeptics have been saying for just as long that the "protection" vanishes precisely where the conflicts are worse. And the design adds new surprises to traffic interactions. Surprises in traffic are NOT good. And there have been crashes, just as predicted. A mile of "protected" bike lane put in Columbus, Ohio a few years ago went from 1.5 car-bike crashes per year to 13 crashes (IIRC) in the year it was installed. And here's the latest one: https://sf.streetsblog.org/2019/04/0...e-mixing-zone/ The solution? "Protected" intersections everywhere! https://vimeo.com/86721046 I haven't seen any cost estimates for this new cycling nirvana. That would be interesting. - Frank Krygowski Bike lanes have sufficient "protection" by lines on the street. In many places you have broken glass in the lane and you have to pull out into the full lane. Yesterday there were heavy gusting winds and on the downhills I had to use the entire lane to be able to retain full control. The problem with far too many painted strip bike lanes is that they put the bicyclist smack dab in the door zone of parked cars. I've seen bike lanes that go partway onto the on ramp of a 100 kph 60 mph highway where bicycles are NOT permitted. The problem is that any motorist using such an on ramp does NOT expect to see a bicyclist there. I use the through traffic lane in those areas and ignore the painted bicycle lane entirely. That's also not to mention painted bicycle lanes that end suddenly especially those that do it on a downhill. Cheers |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Making "protected" bike lanes safe
On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 10:40:28 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote: On Wednesday, April 10, 2019 at 1:01:00 PM UTC-4, wrote: On Tuesday, April 9, 2019 at 11:39:10 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: For six or seven years, the loudest and best financed bike lobbying organizations have been saying we need "protected" bike lanes everywhere. They say it's obviously inadequate to have just a paint stripe separating bikes from cars; we need at _least_ posts, and preferably a line of parked cars. You know, so the bicyclists are totally hidden from motorists until the motorist crosses the bike lane to access a street or driveway. Segregation skeptics have been saying for just as long that the "protection" vanishes precisely where the conflicts are worse. And the design adds new surprises to traffic interactions. Surprises in traffic are NOT good. And there have been crashes, just as predicted. A mile of "protected" bike lane put in Columbus, Ohio a few years ago went from 1.5 car-bike crashes per year to 13 crashes (IIRC) in the year it was installed. And here's the latest one: https://sf.streetsblog.org/2019/04/0...e-mixing-zone/ The solution? "Protected" intersections everywhere! https://vimeo.com/86721046 I haven't seen any cost estimates for this new cycling nirvana. That would be interesting. - Frank Krygowski Bike lanes have sufficient "protection" by lines on the street. In many places you have broken glass in the lane and you have to pull out into the full lane. Yesterday there were heavy gusting winds and on the downhills I had to use the entire lane to be able to retain full control. The problem with far too many painted strip bike lanes is that they put the bicyclist smack dab in the door zone of parked cars. I've seen bike lanes that go partway onto the on ramp of a 100 kph 60 mph highway where bicycles are NOT permitted. The problem is that any motorist using such an on ramp does NOT expect to see a bicyclist there. I use the through traffic lane in those areas and ignore the painted bicycle lane entirely. That's also not to mention painted bicycle lanes that end suddenly especially those that do it on a downhill. Cheers Perhaps the solution is to go the other way and build motor vehicle only lanes. This would do essentially the same thing as the bicycle only lanes of separating the big fierce motor vehicles from the small meek bicycles. -- cheers, John B. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Making "protected" bike lanes safe
On Wednesday, April 10, 2019 at 7:48:01 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 10:40:28 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, April 10, 2019 at 1:01:00 PM UTC-4, wrote: On Tuesday, April 9, 2019 at 11:39:10 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: For six or seven years, the loudest and best financed bike lobbying organizations have been saying we need "protected" bike lanes everywhere. They say it's obviously inadequate to have just a paint stripe separating bikes from cars; we need at _least_ posts, and preferably a line of parked cars. You know, so the bicyclists are totally hidden from motorists until the motorist crosses the bike lane to access a street or driveway. Segregation skeptics have been saying for just as long that the "protection" vanishes precisely where the conflicts are worse. And the design adds new surprises to traffic interactions. Surprises in traffic are NOT good.. And there have been crashes, just as predicted. A mile of "protected" bike lane put in Columbus, Ohio a few years ago went from 1.5 car-bike crashes per year to 13 crashes (IIRC) in the year it was installed. And here's the latest one: https://sf.streetsblog.org/2019/04/0...e-mixing-zone/ The solution? "Protected" intersections everywhere! https://vimeo.com/86721046 I haven't seen any cost estimates for this new cycling nirvana. That would be interesting. - Frank Krygowski Bike lanes have sufficient "protection" by lines on the street. In many places you have broken glass in the lane and you have to pull out into the full lane. Yesterday there were heavy gusting winds and on the downhills I had to use the entire lane to be able to retain full control. The problem with far too many painted strip bike lanes is that they put the bicyclist smack dab in the door zone of parked cars. I've seen bike lanes that go partway onto the on ramp of a 100 kph 60 mph highway where bicycles are NOT permitted. The problem is that any motorist using such an on ramp does NOT expect to see a bicyclist there. I use the through traffic lane in those areas and ignore the painted bicycle lane entirely. That's also not to mention painted bicycle lanes that end suddenly especially those that do it on a downhill. Cheers Perhaps the solution is to go the other way and build motor vehicle only lanes. This would do essentially the same thing as the bicycle only lanes of separating the big fierce motor vehicles from the small meek bicycles. -- cheers, John B. Or just let the bicycles share the lane with the motor vehicles? Cheers |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Making "protected" bike lanes safe
On 4/10/2019 8:04 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Wednesday, April 10, 2019 at 7:48:01 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote: On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 10:40:28 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, April 10, 2019 at 1:01:00 PM UTC-4, wrote: On Tuesday, April 9, 2019 at 11:39:10 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: For six or seven years, the loudest and best financed bike lobbying organizations have been saying we need "protected" bike lanes everywhere. They say it's obviously inadequate to have just a paint stripe separating bikes from cars; we need at _least_ posts, and preferably a line of parked cars. You know, so the bicyclists are totally hidden from motorists until the motorist crosses the bike lane to access a street or driveway. Segregation skeptics have been saying for just as long that the "protection" vanishes precisely where the conflicts are worse. And the design adds new surprises to traffic interactions. Surprises in traffic are NOT good. And there have been crashes, just as predicted. A mile of "protected" bike lane put in Columbus, Ohio a few years ago went from 1.5 car-bike crashes per year to 13 crashes (IIRC) in the year it was installed. And here's the latest one: https://sf.streetsblog.org/2019/04/0...e-mixing-zone/ The solution? "Protected" intersections everywhere! https://vimeo.com/86721046 I haven't seen any cost estimates for this new cycling nirvana. That would be interesting. - Frank Krygowski Bike lanes have sufficient "protection" by lines on the street. In many places you have broken glass in the lane and you have to pull out into the full lane. Yesterday there were heavy gusting winds and on the downhills I had to use the entire lane to be able to retain full control. The problem with far too many painted strip bike lanes is that they put the bicyclist smack dab in the door zone of parked cars. I've seen bike lanes that go partway onto the on ramp of a 100 kph 60 mph highway where bicycles are NOT permitted. The problem is that any motorist using such an on ramp does NOT expect to see a bicyclist there. I use the through traffic lane in those areas and ignore the painted bicycle lane entirely. That's also not to mention painted bicycle lanes that end suddenly especially those that do it on a downhill. Cheers Perhaps the solution is to go the other way and build motor vehicle only lanes. This would do essentially the same thing as the bicycle only lanes of separating the big fierce motor vehicles from the small meek bicycles. -- cheers, John B. Or just let the bicycles share the lane with the motor vehicles? It's legal here. It's what I do. It works. Remember, I'm the guy who doesn't have cars cut across my path, despite the lack of magic DRLs. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Making "protected" bike lanes safe
On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 17:04:35 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot
wrote: On Wednesday, April 10, 2019 at 7:48:01 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote: On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 10:40:28 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, April 10, 2019 at 1:01:00 PM UTC-4, wrote: On Tuesday, April 9, 2019 at 11:39:10 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: For six or seven years, the loudest and best financed bike lobbying organizations have been saying we need "protected" bike lanes everywhere. They say it's obviously inadequate to have just a paint stripe separating bikes from cars; we need at _least_ posts, and preferably a line of parked cars. You know, so the bicyclists are totally hidden from motorists until the motorist crosses the bike lane to access a street or driveway. Segregation skeptics have been saying for just as long that the "protection" vanishes precisely where the conflicts are worse. And the design adds new surprises to traffic interactions. Surprises in traffic are NOT good. And there have been crashes, just as predicted. A mile of "protected" bike lane put in Columbus, Ohio a few years ago went from 1.5 car-bike crashes per year to 13 crashes (IIRC) in the year it was installed. And here's the latest one: https://sf.streetsblog.org/2019/04/0...e-mixing-zone/ The solution? "Protected" intersections everywhere! https://vimeo.com/86721046 I haven't seen any cost estimates for this new cycling nirvana. That would be interesting. - Frank Krygowski Bike lanes have sufficient "protection" by lines on the street. In many places you have broken glass in the lane and you have to pull out into the full lane. Yesterday there were heavy gusting winds and on the downhills I had to use the entire lane to be able to retain full control. The problem with far too many painted strip bike lanes is that they put the bicyclist smack dab in the door zone of parked cars. I've seen bike lanes that go partway onto the on ramp of a 100 kph 60 mph highway where bicycles are NOT permitted. The problem is that any motorist using such an on ramp does NOT expect to see a bicyclist there. I use the through traffic lane in those areas and ignore the painted bicycle lane entirely. That's also not to mention painted bicycle lanes that end suddenly especially those that do it on a downhill. Cheers Perhaps the solution is to go the other way and build motor vehicle only lanes. This would do essentially the same thing as the bicycle only lanes of separating the big fierce motor vehicles from the small meek bicycles. -- cheers, John B. Or just let the bicycles share the lane with the motor vehicles? Cheers Oh No! Thaqt is dangerius which is why politicians are building bike lanes :-) -- cheers, John B. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Making "protected" bike lanes safe
On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 21:25:24 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 4/10/2019 8:04 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, April 10, 2019 at 7:48:01 PM UTC-4, John B. wrote: On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 10:40:28 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, April 10, 2019 at 1:01:00 PM UTC-4, wrote: On Tuesday, April 9, 2019 at 11:39:10 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: For six or seven years, the loudest and best financed bike lobbying organizations have been saying we need "protected" bike lanes everywhere. They say it's obviously inadequate to have just a paint stripe separating bikes from cars; we need at _least_ posts, and preferably a line of parked cars. You know, so the bicyclists are totally hidden from motorists until the motorist crosses the bike lane to access a street or driveway. Segregation skeptics have been saying for just as long that the "protection" vanishes precisely where the conflicts are worse. And the design adds new surprises to traffic interactions. Surprises in traffic are NOT good. And there have been crashes, just as predicted. A mile of "protected" bike lane put in Columbus, Ohio a few years ago went from 1.5 car-bike crashes per year to 13 crashes (IIRC) in the year it was installed. And here's the latest one: https://sf.streetsblog.org/2019/04/0...e-mixing-zone/ The solution? "Protected" intersections everywhere! https://vimeo.com/86721046 I haven't seen any cost estimates for this new cycling nirvana. That would be interesting. - Frank Krygowski Bike lanes have sufficient "protection" by lines on the street. In many places you have broken glass in the lane and you have to pull out into the full lane. Yesterday there were heavy gusting winds and on the downhills I had to use the entire lane to be able to retain full control. The problem with far too many painted strip bike lanes is that they put the bicyclist smack dab in the door zone of parked cars. I've seen bike lanes that go partway onto the on ramp of a 100 kph 60 mph highway where bicycles are NOT permitted. The problem is that any motorist using such an on ramp does NOT expect to see a bicyclist there. I use the through traffic lane in those areas and ignore the painted bicycle lane entirely. That's also not to mention painted bicycle lanes that end suddenly especially those that do it on a downhill. Cheers Perhaps the solution is to go the other way and build motor vehicle only lanes. This would do essentially the same thing as the bicycle only lanes of separating the big fierce motor vehicles from the small meek bicycles. -- cheers, John B. Or just let the bicycles share the lane with the motor vehicles? It's legal here. It's what I do. It works. Remember, I'm the guy who doesn't have cars cut across my path, despite the lack of magic DRLs. Well, I had supposed that building bike lanes was actually beneficial to the cyclist. Otherwise why would your duly elected leaders build them? Rather like the great Wall of America that your leader is intent on building will make the U.S. safe from those poor misbegotten people in South America. Strangely we don't have those things here and I don't find it difficult to ride here :-) In fact, as I have written, the only time I have felt in real danger was when I ran a stop sign and someone was coming the other way. It was a three way cross and I didn't see anyone so just kept going.... I hadn't noticed a pickup which came over the brow of a little rise. I went off the road (very quickly) and crashed in a bed of nettles :-) -- cheers, John B. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Making "protected" bike lanes safe
On Wednesday, April 10, 2019 at 6:48:01 PM UTC-5, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 10 Apr 2019 10:40:28 -0700 (PDT), Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Wednesday, April 10, 2019 at 1:01:00 PM UTC-4, wrote: On Tuesday, April 9, 2019 at 11:39:10 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote: For six or seven years, the loudest and best financed bike lobbying organizations have been saying we need "protected" bike lanes everywhere. They say it's obviously inadequate to have just a paint stripe separating bikes from cars; we need at _least_ posts, and preferably a line of parked cars. You know, so the bicyclists are totally hidden from motorists until the motorist crosses the bike lane to access a street or driveway. Segregation skeptics have been saying for just as long that the "protection" vanishes precisely where the conflicts are worse. And the design adds new surprises to traffic interactions. Surprises in traffic are NOT good.. And there have been crashes, just as predicted. A mile of "protected" bike lane put in Columbus, Ohio a few years ago went from 1.5 car-bike crashes per year to 13 crashes (IIRC) in the year it was installed. And here's the latest one: https://sf.streetsblog.org/2019/04/0...e-mixing-zone/ The solution? "Protected" intersections everywhere! https://vimeo.com/86721046 I haven't seen any cost estimates for this new cycling nirvana. That would be interesting. - Frank Krygowski Bike lanes have sufficient "protection" by lines on the street. In many places you have broken glass in the lane and you have to pull out into the full lane. Yesterday there were heavy gusting winds and on the downhills I had to use the entire lane to be able to retain full control. The problem with far too many painted strip bike lanes is that they put the bicyclist smack dab in the door zone of parked cars. I've seen bike lanes that go partway onto the on ramp of a 100 kph 60 mph highway where bicycles are NOT permitted. The problem is that any motorist using such an on ramp does NOT expect to see a bicyclist there. I use the through traffic lane in those areas and ignore the painted bicycle lane entirely. That's also not to mention painted bicycle lanes that end suddenly especially those that do it on a downhill. Cheers Perhaps the solution is to go the other way and build motor vehicle only lanes. This would do essentially the same thing as the bicycle only lanes of separating the big fierce motor vehicles from the small meek bicycles. -- cheers, John B. Oh, you're not an American obviously. If you were from the USA you would know that Interstates are only for motor vehicles. Bicycles are not allowed on Interstates. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Protected Bike Lanes Must Become the New Normal | Bertrand[_2_] | Techniques | 3 | September 22nd 17 04:32 AM |
Bike Facilities Report: Protected Bike Lanes a "Resounding Success" | jbeattie | Techniques | 32 | August 15th 14 06:09 PM |
"Dedicated Bike Lanes Can Cut Cycling Injuries in Half" | sms | Techniques | 3 | August 1st 13 12:36 AM |
Off Topic - Protected Bike Lanes | JR Namida | Techniques | 24 | January 25th 13 07:55 AM |
Motorbikes and "bike lanes" or I took stupid pills when? | Zebee Johnstone | Australia | 64 | April 4th 06 02:17 PM |