personal safety & signed bike routes in residential neighbourhoods

[Crankin]

I do get this in the situations you describe, as it allows you to safely get to where you want to go. I guess I probably wouldn't even be riding, even in the protected lanes in that type of crazy.

[Owlie]

I'm also in Tucson, though in a different part of the city. I haven't done much recreational riding since I got here (that will change as soon as I pass my comprehensive exams!) but the absolute worst part of my commute is a residential street. 2-lane, no shoulder for part of it, and people seem to use it as a shortcut to get to the north-south route with less traffic than the major north-south road on this side of town. Now, I'm also trying to get to this road. It's got a wide bike lane all the way down to the bike path access point, and it's new pavement. I see plenty of cyclists on it on my way to work (not so many on the way back), so drivers are pretty good about it. The Loop isn't such a great option on weekends unless I leave early and it's winter, but it's fine on weekdays. Except winter afternoons, when you get the packs of roadies who use it as a shortcut and take up the entire path.

[Eden]

It's been shown that riding against traffic, even in a protected lane leads to more conflicts with turning traffic - both traffic turning off of the main road and crossing the bike lane and people turning from the side street across the protected lane. Motorists - and *especially* US motorists do not expect a fast moving vehicle to come from the opposite direction. I don't have time to search it down again right now, but I read somewhere that even the Dutch have decided that protected cycling lanes should only be one way and always travel in the direction of the lane of motor vehicle travel. IMHO using a 2 way protected cycling lane is little better than using a sidewalk, which is one of the most dangerous things you can do…

As far as the lane in the U district goes it has *tons* of serious problems. I refuse to get anywhere near it and won't be surprised when someone is hit using it.

[rebeccaC]

As far as the lane in the U district goes it has *tons* of serious problems. I refuse to get anywhere near it and won't be surprised when someone is hit using it.

I thought the University pbl isn’t even completely finished until they do repaving work this fall when it will add 20 more blocks, bus islands etc. Has that already happened? My understanding is that the first part was done with community support because that short section of road had a lot of bike/car incidents which has lessened substanially since the lane went in.

[Eden]

I don't know what the plans are, just what I've seen there as of now - from 45th (I think) down to the U bridge. Nearly every time I've been down that street since the separated lane was put in, I've seen something (most often a Fred Hutch shuttle bus) blocking it… just that plus the number of parking garages that dump out into it are enough to make me not want to use it, but then there's the transition…. OMG it is so incredibly dangerous. There's only a few feet to merge into traffic after the protected bike lane ends and if you can't merge you'll crash into some other immovable object. Cars are going fast down there, and it's downhill so bikes are going fast. I don't even *drive* in the right hand lane - because I know that if a cyclist were to catch up to me going down that hill and pop out of that bike lane I probably couldn't stop… As a cyclist I feel much, much safer just taking the right hand lane in the first place. I can go just as fast as traffic down that street and if I control the lane I don't have to worry about being wiped out in the merge. If they are going to add 20 more blocks to that project I can only hope it isn't as poorly designed as the first section...

[rebeccaC]

I don't know what the plans are, just what I've seen there as of now - from 45th (I think) down to the U bridge. .

Be patient….

A friend who works at SDOT replied this morning to an email I sent. She wrote the lane now is just an interim one until repaving. It was asked for by the community for safety now on just the worst part of that road, which is what I thought and to me seems like the SDOT is responding well to community requests.

“The final pbl after repaving will create a complete connection to the University Bridge bike lanes instead of the shared traffic lane merge right before the bridge now. Planned transit islands will keep shuttles and buses out of the bike lane.”

She also wrote that community organizations know that and until the repaving is done and the lane extended to 65th they and SDOT have gotten the message out that riders just need to just be careful until the repaving. Sounds reasonable to me....

Wasn't the garage problem worked out on the 2nd ave lane with visibility, signage and initial enforcement There's also a continuing education aspect to it. My friend at SDOT also wrote that they are looking at raising a bike lane at garage entrances/exits so drivers also have a slightly raised painted lane as a visual clue and reminder that there is a bike lane they have to drive over.

[OakLeaf]

riders just need to just be careful until the repaving. Sounds reasonable to me....

IOW, for the time being, riders need to control the whole lane and avoid the dangerous bike lane. So if riders can be educated to do that "for the time being," why do they need the lane at all?


I think enforcement is a part of the equation we haven't talked about. Enforcement is really the only education most people get about traffic laws! In your areas, are police aggressive about ticketing cyclists who ride on the sidewalk, against traffic, etc.? In my area, not at all.

[rebeccaC]

IOW, for the time being, riders need to control the whole lane and avoid the dangerous bike lane. So if riders can be educated to do that "for the time being," why do they need the lane at all?

let me think about this......a temporary protected bike lane, asked for by the community and done with their input, that you just have to be reasonably careful on for a short time until repaving or trying to take the lane on a section of a street that has tied for the most bicycle/car incidents in the city...hmmmmmm

i'm taking the first option ....others can do what they want to.

[buffybike]

I live in the Atlanta suburbs and for the most part, don't have issues with cars. Yes, I get honked at probably once a week, but it doesn't really bother me. Whatever. I use hand signals and act just like a car with regard to obeying traffic laws. I also stay far to the right (as long as it's safe for me to do so), make sure to let other drivers know of my intentions and give a friendly wave when they give me the right of way or let me go ahead of them. Beyond that, I trust my guardian angel.

[PamNY]

One type of bike lane I will not use -- that's a painted (not protected) bike lane that runs between two car lanes. The one I tried to use routes cyclists around a right-turn-only lane. The cars are turning onto a fairly wide road, and it's quite possible, even easy, for cars not in the turn lane to turn anyway. Which one did right in front of me. It's a large, busy intersection, and I now get off the bike and walk. Perhaps not an elegant solution, but I'm alive to complain about it.

[rebeccaC]

I live in the Atlanta suburbs and for the most part, don't have issues with cars. Yes, I get honked at probably once a week, but it doesn't really bother me. Whatever. I use hand signals and act just like a car with regard to obeying traffic laws. I also stay far to the right (as long as it's safe for me to do so), make sure to let other drivers know of my intentions and give a friendly wave when they give me the right of way or let me go ahead of them. Beyond that, I trust my guardian angel.

+1

[lph]

In my experience, visibility is key, not separation from other traffic. But visibility depends on terrain and speed as well. On larger roads with higher speed limits, drivers don't have as much time to spot you and react to you as on city streets at lower speeds. And of course there's other traffic, intersections, the number of lanes etc. On the other hand, on quiet residential streets people can be very wandery and inattentive, so that fast bike riding is not a good choice. And my choice of route is usually a compromise between the fastest and the safest route. All in all i can't say that in general I would choose a bike lane over the road, depends on too many factors. Really good and separate and efficient bike paths are wonderful, and about as rare as white rhinos.

[OakLeaf]

Most of you have probably already seen this, but it's a great illustration of why I feel the way I do about "bike lanes."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...nes/?tid=sm_tw

I don't dispute that there are places where segregated bike facilities are best. Bridges and on/off ramps, primarily. But infrastructure can never be a substitute for people knowing the law and obeying it.

My perspective might be a little different from some of yours, since the last three years (since my injury) I've run more miles than I've bicycled, and in the one town where there are "some" segregated bike facilities, people on bikes endanger both me AND themselves just about every. single. day by riding on the sidewalk (barely wide enough for single cruiser handlebars), including in places where there's a ten foot wide shoulder that's regularly swept and completely free of potholes and grates.

Segregated roads for bikes will never go everywhere that people need to go ... so if we want more people to ride bikes, we need them to know how to ride where they're mainstreamed into the rest of traffic. Education and enforcement might be harder to implement than segregated roads, but as soon as officials understand the comparative cost, I think we could have state-subsidized bicycle courses just the same as most states subsidize motorcyclist education.

[ny biker]

Most of you have probably already seen this, but it's a great illustration of why I feel the way I do about "bike lanes."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...nes/?tid=sm_tw

I don't dispute that there are places where segregated bike facilities are best. Bridges and on/off ramps, primarily. But infrastructure can never be a substitute for people knowing the law and obeying it.

My perspective might be a little different from some of yours, since the last three years (since my injury) I've run more miles than I've bicycled, and in the one town where there are "some" segregated bike facilities, people on bikes endanger both me AND themselves just about every. single. day by riding on the sidewalk (barely wide enough for single cruiser handlebars), including in places where there's a ten foot wide shoulder that's regularly swept and completely free of potholes and grates.

Segregated roads for bikes will never go everywhere that people need to go ... so if we want more people to ride bikes, we need them to know how to ride where they're mainstreamed into the rest of traffic. Education and enforcement might be harder to implement than segregated roads, but as soon as officials understand the comparative cost, I think we could have state-subsidized bicycle courses just the same as most states subsidize motorcyclist education.

I agree with this. And I live in a "bike friendly" suburb of DC and drive in the city every couple of weeks.

The bike lanes in my town tend to be on busy streets. The streets were re-striped to narrow the motor vehicle lanes and add bike lanes. Many of those streets allow on-street parking and usually most/all of the street parking spaces are taken. So you're riding in a very long door zone. One street with a bike lane that I've used goes past an elementary school, and when there are events at the school people typically park on the street, wait for the motor vehicle traffic to pass and then step into the bike lane with their children despite the fact that they can see cyclists coming straight at them. And this is on a big hill so the cyclists are going at a good clip.

I typically avoid the streets that have bike lanes and go through the residential neighborhoods instead. It's much safer, in my experience.

Within DC, I simply don't understand the bike facilities. There are green crosswalks with bikes painted on them -- I have idea what they're supposed to be used for. When they put a bike lane on Pennsylvania Ave they had to put a video online to show people how to use it. If I need to access the internet in order to watch a video, then it does me no good.

Jan Heine (Bicycle Quarterly editor) has written some interesting things on separated bike lanes in his blog. Here is one item.

https://janheine.wordpress.com/2013/...ths-a-summary/

[Blueberry]

Within DC, I simply don't understand the bike facilities. There are green crosswalks with bikes painted on them -- I have idea what they're supposed to be used for. When they put a bike lane on Pennsylvania Ave they had to put a video online to show people how to use it. If I need to access the internet in order to watch a video, then it does me no good.

Is that the one that goes down the middle of the road? That completely confused me, and I actually didn't ride that way since I had seen it as a pedestrian. People *seem* to use it - but I wasn't about to! I couldn't figure out how to get out of it!