The latest bike lane research

From the Bikeleague newsletter today:

"By studying the interactions of drivers and bicyclists on Texas roads,
transportation engineers at The University of Texas at Austin have
discovered that having painted bike lanes on streets and roads helps both
commuters stay in safer, more central positions in their respective lanes.
The results are posted he"

http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/p...s/0_5157_1.pdf

Anyone care to engage in a little peer review?

Matt O.

Matt O'Toole wrote:

From the Bikeleague newsletter today:

"By studying the interactions of drivers and bicyclists on Texas roads,
transportation engineers at The University of Texas at Austin have
discovered that having painted bike lanes on streets and roads helps both
commuters stay in safer, more central positions in their respective lanes.
The results are posted he"

http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/p...s/0_5157_1.pdf

Anyone care to engage in a little peer review?

Matt O.

I'm currently working on a critique. The study is garbage.

Wayne

On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 20:46:06 -0400, Matt O'Toole wrote:

"By studying the interactions of drivers and bicyclists on Texas roads,
transportation engineers at The University of Texas at Austin have
discovered that having painted bike lanes on streets and roads helps both
commuters stay in safer, more central positions in their respective lanes.
The results are posted he"

What I like about bike lane lines is that I can practise my balance by
riding along them without coming off. It probably reduces rolling
resistance and tyre wear a bit, too :-)

--
Home page: http://members.westnet.com.au/mvw

"Matt O'Toole" wrote in message
news
From the Bikeleague newsletter today:

"By studying the interactions of drivers and bicyclists on Texas roads,
transportation engineers at The University of Texas at Austin have
discovered that having painted bike lanes on streets and roads helps both
commuters stay in safer, more central positions in their respective lanes.
The results are posted he"

http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/p...s/0_5157_1.pdf

Anyone care to engage in a little peer review?

Matt O.

My impression is it is a way for the goverment to save money and make it
appear they are doing something positive.
Thus they get a study supported their side, and they get off cheap with it
only costing them paint and painting crews to go implement it.
It doesn't really do anything, as painted bike lanes quickly become useless
in a urban environment where all the motorists park on them, forcing a
cyclist out into the roadway anyway. Plus they are totally useless with the
typical inattentive motorist (think using a cell phone, and or eating at the
same time they are driving).

Earl Bollinger wrote:
"Matt O'Toole" wrote in message
news
From the Bikeleague newsletter today:

"By studying the interactions of drivers and bicyclists on Texas roads,
transportation engineers at The University of Texas at Austin have
discovered that having painted bike lanes on streets and roads helps both
commuters stay in safer, more central positions in their respective lanes.
The results are posted he"

http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/p...s/0_5157_1.pdf

Anyone care to engage in a little peer review?

Matt O.

My impression is it is a way for the goverment to save money and make it
appear they are doing something positive.
Thus they get a study supported their side, and they get off cheap with it
only costing them paint and painting crews to go implement it.
It doesn't really do anything, as painted bike lanes quickly become useless
in a urban environment where all the motorists park on them, forcing a
cyclist out into the roadway anyway. Plus they are totally useless with the
typical inattentive motorist (think using a cell phone, and or eating at the
same time they are driving).

$3 + per gallon didn't do it, perhaps scarce fuel will...take people
out of their 10 mpg SUVs and into smaller, fewer autos...plus a POTUS
that is concerned would be nice.

"Earl Bollinger" wrote:

"Matt O'Toole" wrote in message
news
From the Bikeleague newsletter today:

"By studying the interactions of drivers and bicyclists on Texas roads,
transportation engineers at The University of Texas at Austin have
discovered that having painted bike lanes on streets and roads helps both
commuters stay in safer, more central positions in their respective lanes.
The results are posted he"

http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/p...s/0_5157_1.pdf

Anyone care to engage in a little peer review?

My impression is it is a way for the goverment to save money and make it
appear they are doing something positive.
Thus they get a study supported their side, and they get off cheap with it
only costing them paint and painting crews to go implement it.
It doesn't really do anything, as painted bike lanes quickly become useless
in a urban environment where all the motorists park on them, forcing a
cyclist out into the roadway anyway. Plus they are totally useless with the
typical inattentive motorist (think using a cell phone, and or eating at the
same time they are driving).

You make some assumptions that don't hold water everywhere. For
example, here in the Phoenix, Arizona east valley, the specs for bike
lanes on roads calls for 6' / 2m wide lanes that are NOT for parking.
They're also on roads that aren't particularly narrow, so it's not
like the space is coming out of driving lane. In a word, it works,
and makes for a more pleasant cycling experience (I've ridden in urban
environments all over the world, and this is a LOT better).

But the thing I don't understand is the very common argument that cars
can drift across the bike lane's marking anyway and run over us. Does
that get BETTER if there's no lane stripe for them to drift over, and
we're riding to the left (in the US) of the one line they use as a
boundary (instead of to the right of it)? Never figured out that
argument, never will apparently.

Mark Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame

http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/p...s/0_5157_1.pdf

Anyone care to engage in a little peer review?


I never bothered reading the report (yet), but I have lived in cities
with and without bike lanes. As a beginning cyclist, a dedicated lane
made me more comfortable being on the road. Now that I have more
experience, I would definitely do without the lanes. Not only do I see
some serious safety issues, but bike lanes can send the wrong message
to the public....that cyclists should only be on the road if a bike
lane exists.

Generally, I prefer slightly wider lanes to a dedicated bike lane
(narrow lanes tend to encourage motorists to do particularly
stupid/unsafe manouvers).

I will qualify that, however. I live in a small city that has no bike
lanes, and the population isn't well-educated w.r.t. cyclists. This is
compounded by the fact that a large chunk of the 'cyclists' around here
use the sidewalk, travel without lights at night, and often act in
unpredictable manner. The addition of a few bike lanes would (1) help
get more cyclists on the road and (2) improve public awareness that
cyclists actually belong on the roads.

Now to read the report....

Earl Bollinger wrote:
"Matt O'Toole" wrote in message
news
From the Bikeleague newsletter today:

"By studying the interactions of drivers and bicyclists on Texas roads,
transportation engineers at The University of Texas at Austin have
discovered that having painted bike lanes on streets and roads helps both
commuters stay in safer, more central positions in their respective lanes.
The results are posted he"

http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/p...s/0_5157_1.pdf

Anyone care to engage in a little peer review?

Matt O.

My impression is it is a way for the goverment to save money and make it
appear they are doing something positive.
Thus they get a study supported their side, and they get off cheap with it
only costing them paint and painting crews to go implement it.
It doesn't really do anything, as painted bike lanes quickly become useless
in a urban environment where all the motorists park on them

Depends, cannot park in the bike lane here in the 'republic'...anything
is better than going toe to toe with a car in a shared lane.

, forcing a
cyclist out into the roadway anyway. Plus they are totally useless with the
typical inattentive motorist (think using a cell phone, and or eating at the
same time they are driving).

"qui si parla Campagnolo" wrote in message
oups.com...

Earl Bollinger wrote:
"Matt O'Toole" wrote in message
news
From the Bikeleague newsletter today:

$3 + per gallon didn't do it, perhaps scarce fuel will...take people
out of their 10 mpg SUVs and into smaller, fewer autos...plus a POTUS
that is concerned would be nice.


Again, the evil SUV is the problem!

qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:

$3 + per gallon didn't do it, perhaps scarce fuel will...take people
out of their 10 mpg SUVs and into smaller, fewer autos...plus a POTUS
that is concerned would be nice.

I'd settle for a POTUS that could stay upright on a bike.

Austin