|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Protected Bike Lanes Must Become the New Normal
From StreetsBlog SF:
"Urban planners, at least when it comes to bikeway design, are still trying to undo the damage caused by vehicular cyclists in the 1970s and 80s ..." http://sf.streetsblog.org/2017/09/19...mal-for-bikes/ |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Protected Bike Lanes Must Become the New Normal
On Thursday, September 21, 2017 at 2:05:08 PM UTC-7, Bertrand wrote:
From StreetsBlog SF: "Urban planners, at least when it comes to bikeway design, are still trying to undo the damage caused by vehicular cyclists in the 1970s and 80s ..." http://sf.streetsblog.org/2017/09/19...mal-for-bikes/ These are not protected lanes. Just go to San Francisco and watch what happens there. Cars simply drive in the bike lanes and bikes will go over and ride in the bus lanes. I take the streets that don't have any of this crap and practice vehicular cycling and the drivers are FAR more polite than on the roads with green and yellow etc. lanes. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Protected Bike Lanes Must Become the New Normal
Lotta new asphalt out here for EM but yawl can use.
Many in town are freshly painted as bike lanes ...towns n villages |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Protected Bike Lanes Must Become the New Normal
On 9/21/2017 5:04 PM, Bertrand wrote:
From StreetsBlog SF: "Urban planners, at least when it comes to bikeway design, are still trying to undo the damage caused by vehicular cyclists in the 1970s and 80s ..." http://sf.streetsblog.org/2017/09/19...mal-for-bikes/ "Protected" bike lanes lose their protection at every intersection, including intersections with driveways. The speakers tout the usual "solution": magic paint. "We'll paint it green, and it will be safe. Oh, and this is a hotel parking lot, so we'll paint it with khaki paint!" And when this hasn't worked, they increase the kludge factor with warning signs, flashing lights, extra traffic light delays and more. (Hasn't worked? Yes, like the barely-legalized bike boxes in Portland that increased the right hooks they were supposed to prevent. Like the two-way cycle track in Columbus Ohio that recorded 15 car-bike crashes in its first year on streets that typically had seen one or two annual car-bike crashes.) And as Jay has said, "protected" bike lanes become cattle chutes infested with pedestrians. Here's one cyclist's method of dealing with that problem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ehh8ZdIMMj4 Here's a cycletrack in DC: http://vimeo.com/23743067 The author blames vehicular cyclists for delaying the currently fashionable vision. But here's what vehicular cyclists really did: First, they learned the laws that already existed and how they applied to riding bicycles. Second, they determined that those laws actually worked, when the cyclists knew how to properly ride; so they learned then taught others how to ride properly within those laws. Third, they determined that a lot of the hare-brained schemes designed to get cyclists out of the way of motorists actually increased danger and/or made cycling much slower and more frustrating. (Example: Multi-user paths shared with pedestrians that lost the cyclist's right-of-way at every driveway or intersection.) So they rejected the gospel that every bike facility is a good bike facility. And finally, they rode, safely and legally, to wherever they wished to go. They didn't wait for some fantasy world to become real. The bike segregation advocates pretend that it was vehicular cyclists who wrote the design manuals that discourage their fashionable fantasies; but instead those were written by traffic engineers who understood the interactions of traffic and the limitations of road users. Those traffic engineers took the radical step of saying, for example, that a straight-ahead bike lane should NOT be placed to the right of a right turn lane. Segregationists seem furious about that - but where in hell does it make sense to have a straight-ahead vehicle's path crossed by a turning vehicle? Traffic engineers also strongly recommended against two-way bike lanes on a road, for reasons they explicitly listed; but American segregationists are making those the new fashion, even though it's now essentially forbidden in places like Netherlands. Worst of all, in my opinion, is that the bike segregationists are promoting the myth that one cannot ride a bike safely until there are separate but equal facilities everywhere. They don't say what cyclists are supposed to do until their fairy tale becomes real. They don't say what a cyclist is supposed to do when an 8 foot truck comes up behind them in a ten foot lane. Bike segregationists promote fear and ignorance in service of their fantasy of a parallel universe of bike facilities, one where anyone can bumble to every destination on a bike with no interaction with motor vehicles. Vehicular cyclists enable and enjoy bicycling, safely and efficiently, in the real world. -- - Frank Krygowski |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Bike Facilities Report: Protected Bike Lanes a "Resounding Success" | jbeattie | Techniques | 32 | August 15th 14 06:09 PM |
Off Topic - Protected Bike Lanes | JR Namida | Techniques | 24 | January 25th 13 07:55 AM |
Bike lanes in MA, dangerous bike lanes and a possible news story | [email protected] | General | 130 | September 5th 07 05:16 PM |
Bike lanes in MA, dangerous bike lanes and a possible news story | [email protected] | Techniques | 152 | September 5th 07 05:16 PM |
Bike lanes in MA, dangerous bike lanes and a possible news story | [email protected] | Social Issues | 84 | August 21st 07 10:48 PM |