On 4/26/2018 2:02 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, April 26, 2018 at 9:04:19 AM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 4/26/2018 8:59 AM, somebody wrote:

“On the one hand, these statistics are a bit deflating. On the other
hand, we can hope they serve as a wake-up call,” said Jake Nelson,
AAA’s director of traffic safety advocacy and research....

To improve safety, he said, pedestrians and cyclists need physical
barriers like protected bike lanes—an idea gaining popularity around
the U.S. but also causing fights in some places over reduced parking
or travel lanes.

This propaganda pushing barriers and segregated facilities is bull****.

Columbus, Ohio caved in to the propaganda and installed a "protected"
bike lane on Summit Street in 2016. Car bike crashes jumped from about
1.5 per year without "protection" to over 11 per year with "protection."

Of course, the crashes all happened where the cars' paths crossed the
bike lane. That's where these facilities generate complication and
surprises for both motorists and cyclists.

Some protection!

Well, it's hit and run statistics -- which doesn't say much about "hit and stay" or the usual accident where the participants remain at the scene. Really, the increased numbers tells us more about the frequency of bad behavior following an accident rather than the frequency bike/car accidents. It also says "car crashes" are up overall -- is that car versus bike? It's really a weird article.

Actually, my point had nothing to do with whether the crashes were hit
and run or not. I was addressing "to be safe we need barriers." That
meme is far too widespread.

Columbus saw FAR more crashes after installing barriers. Therefore,
"barriers give safety" is nonsense. And BTW, the article documenting
this covered one year, but the next year had about the same number of
crashes. But the data is being ignored.

https://www.dot.state.oh.us/engineer...oorhead_82.pdf


--
- Frank Krygowski