Bicycles and Road Design

[NE2]

Too many motorists have a militant "your bike has fewer rights than my car dammit" mentality

But in the Netherlands, at one of these intersections, bikes would have right-of-way, de jure and de facto, over turning traffic. Here no motorists would yield, and courts would fail to convict.

[Brandon]

Too many motorists have a militant "your bike has fewer rights than my car dammit" mentality

But in the Netherlands, at one of these intersections, bikes would have right-of-way, de jure and de facto, over turning traffic. Here no motorists would yield, and courts would fail to convict.

Usually I find the opposite from the critical massholes.  Those morons ride bicycles through red lights, stop signs, and any other intersection with wanton disregard for anyone or anything (autos, peds, etc).  They even hold impromptu road rallies down city streets.  Sorry, but bikes need to follow the same laws as cars for consistency.  I'm more in favor of licensing bike riders once they hit 14-16 years of age and licensing bicycles so we can ticket these assholes finally.

[NE2]

What do the improper actions of some cyclists have to do with others' proper belief that they have the same rights and responsibilities as motorists? Do you look at a black guy and think "he's probably a rapist"? Or is your hatred reserved for those who prevent you from driving without a care in the world?

By the way, I assume you always stop to let pedestrians cross when they have right of way, including at an unmarked crosswalk. If I had to guess, I'd say that the percentage of motorists who do this is less than the percentage of cyclists who blow through a stop sign or red light without even yielding.

[NE2]

I'm going for a ride now. I'll try not to run over any motorists.

[realjd]

Too many motorists have a militant "your bike has fewer rights than my car dammit" mentality

But in the Netherlands, at one of these intersections, bikes would have right-of-way, de jure and de facto, over turning traffic. Here no motorists would yield, and courts would fail to convict.

I'll agree with that too. But there's a vocal minority of bikers who are very political about it (*cough*commuteorlando.com*cough*). Not that their info on vehicular bicycling safety is bad, they just seem to get a  certain pleasure when it comes to slowing down traffic. And they often forget that efficiency (i.e. not blocking traffic) is one of the two primary goals of a good transportation network along with safety.

I ride my bike to work once or twice a week, weather permitting - more often in the winter when the weather is nicer and there are no afternoon thunderstorms. But I still can't quite latch on to the political side of cycling.

And a bit OT, but WTF is up with those super tall bikes that hipsters have started riding?

[NE2]

I'll agree with that too. But there's a vocal minority of bikers who are very political about it (*cough*commuteorlando.com*cough*). Not that their info on vehicular bicycling safety is bad, they just seem to get a  certain pleasure when it comes to slowing down traffic.

I'm not sure where you're seeing that. There's certainly some "let them honk" when the alternative is sacrificing safety (it's called defensive driving when you're in a car), but (unless you're Kevin Love and have a fetish for Dutch designs) I haven't seen any delight in slowing down motorists for the purpose of slowing them down. The general feeling is more about peaceful coexistence:
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2010/11/29/helping-motorists-with-lane-positioning/
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2009/07/02/the-dreaded-busy-two-lane-road/

As for Critical Mass, I think this says it all: http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2010/08/25/first-friday-ride/#comment-9964

And a bit OT, but WTF is up with those super tall bikes that hipsters have started riding?

I'm a bit of a lone wolf socially, and live in a part of the county without much cycling, so can't help there. Have tall bikes (I assume you don't mean penny farthings) replaced fixed gears as the hipster conveyance of choice?

[realjd]

Commute Orlando isn't all bad. They do have some excellent road biking safety information. But they also post articles like this one:
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2011/03/23/not-so-free-parking/

My main gripe is their view that cities are "unlivable" and "unhuman" with cars (their words). And they also do things like have a protest ride to the local AAA office, but then refuse to use the perfectly good bike path next to the road on the way there.

As for tall bikes, they haven't replaced fixies as the hipster ride of choice - and I don't see them much here in CFL - but I've been seeing more and more of them when I travel to big cities.

[mightyace]

I wonder what those activists would do here?

Nashville has a few token bike lanes and paths, but no network.  Plus with the way people drive, biking on a public highway is literally taking your life in your hands.  And, in more rural areas, many of the back roads are narrow and have no shoulders at all.

[NE2]

Commute Orlando isn't all bad. They do have some excellent road biking safety information. But they also post articles like this one:
http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2011/03/23/not-so-free-parking/

The point is that using land for parking reduces density, which leads to increased trip times.

My main gripe is their view that cities are "unlivable" and "unhuman" with cars (their words).

I would tend to agree that cities designed around the car are crap.

And they also do things like have a protest ride to the local AAA office, but then refuse to use the perfectly good bike path next to the road on the way there.

You mean this path that doesn't provide access to AAA Drive (behind the camera)?

[realjd]

Ok, I'll give you the trail argument I didn't look at it that closely; I pulled that fact from the media - probably an Orlando Sentinel blog or something.

Why do they assume that high density, walkable, cities are more "livable" than more suburban, sprawly cities like Orlando or Los Angeles? Sure, they're not Manhattan, or San Francisco, or DC, or London, or any other super high density metropolis, but I'd argue that suburbia is just as "livable" and yields just as high of a quality of life, if not higher, than a true city. Is it as environmentally friendly? Probably not. But that's not what we're debating.

But I'm the kind of guy who couldn't stand living in a dense city. My own personal version of hell would be having a tiny apartment in Manhattan. I like quiet, privacy, and space. My dream house includes at least  5 acres with lots of trees. I definitely enjoy visiting cities, but I've yet to find one I'd like to live in.

I suspect that we both just look for different things in a place to live.

[agentsteel53]

now what can we do to get them to stop running four-way stops?  

the fact that he was grinning at me like an idiot, knowing full well that he made me slam on the brakes... well, I'm so sorry, asshole, that I assumed you had good sense and an instinct of self-preservation.

maybe I should've just held off on the brakes and creamed the little piece of shit.

[Zmapper]

maybe I should've just held off on the brakes and creamed the little piece of shit.

Only in America is violence against other road users who dare to travel by other modes accepted, tolerated, and encouraged.

But yeah, I almost always come to a complete stop at stop signs. The exceptions are quiet suburban streets where a yield sign should have been used and if I am making a right turn onto a road with a bike lane. For the latter if you think about it the only traffic I could conflict with are pedestrians and bicyclists coming from the other directions.

Here is another thing to consider. A bike travelling at 10mph that slows to 5 mph for a stop sign looks like he barely slowed down. A car travelling at 25 mph that slows to 5 mph looks like he slowed to a speed less than the bicyclist. Even though they both slowed to the same speed they were travelling at different speeds before, thus playing a trick on your mind.

To bring this thread which was originally about bicyclists and road design back on topic I have a question. Why did Portland use blue instead of red for their colored bike lane tests? I heard something about red being used for another purpose but that doesn't explain why NYC used red for their bus lane tests.

[agentsteel53]

Only in America is violence against other road users who dare to travel by other modes accepted, tolerated, and encouraged.

nothing to do with alternate means of transportation. I walk about 20-30 miles a week, and take the bus to work about 75% of the time.

my complaint was about the fact that not only did he blatantly disregard the laws of traffic, but then he threw me a condescending smile, knowing that he'd made my day just a bit more frazzled, that I had to slam on the brakes, swerve, and miss him only by about two feet.

it's the social equivalent of Nelson Muntz punching you in the face and doing his patented point and laugh.

But yeah, I almost always come to a complete stop at stop signs. The exceptions are quiet suburban streets where a yield sign should have been used and if I am making a right turn onto a road with a bike lane. For the latter if you think about it the only traffic I could conflict with are pedestrians and bicyclists coming from the other directions.

I was going straight through.  he was coming from my right and going straight through.  I was ahead of him at the sign by a good 1.5-2 seconds - i.e. a clear indication that he should stop and give way, as that is how four-way stops work.  He kept going, at maybe 15mph, and upon my acceleration (and, given my head start, my position halfway across the intersection) I noticed that he was way ahead of where his position should've been, had he stopped like a normal person.

Here is another thing to consider. A bike travelling at 10mph that slows to 5 mph for a stop sign looks like he barely slowed down. A car travelling at 25 mph that slows to 5 mph looks like he slowed to a speed less than the bicyclist. Even though they both slowed to the same speed they were travelling at different speeds before, thus playing a trick on your mind.

I dunno what the word "stop" means in your space-time continuum, but here I slow down to 0 mph.

[mightyace]

My main gripe is their view that cities are "unlivable" and "unhuman" with cars (their words).

I would tend to agree that cities designed around the car are crap.

To me, all cities are "unlivable" and "unhuman."

My main point is that what is a "livable" city is a highly subjective opinion.

Similar to what realjd, I like more open surroundings.  My house sits on just under 3 acres of land.

[agentsteel53]

it is not the city's design that is unlivable and unhuman.  it is the species in general.  always have to isolate the root cause.

there are no bad designs.  just bad designers.

[Tarkus]

To bring this thread which was originally about bicyclists and road design back on topic I have a question. Why did Portland use blue instead of red for their colored bike lane tests? I heard something about red being used for another purpose but that doesn't explain why NYC used red for their bus lane tests.

Actually, Portland's using green.  And they don't have FHWA permission to do so--only the Vermont DOT is currently authorized to experiment with colored paint on bike lanes.  I've thought about contacting the FHWA about it.

[Zmapper]

Portland originally used blue in their first experiments. They had to switch to green because FHWA said that blue was for handicapped parking.

Here is the original study from 1999
http://www.portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?a=58842&c=34772

[MichiganDriver]

A new a interim appproval was just issued allowing green for bike lanes

April 15, 2011 – Interim Approval for Optional Use of Green Colored Pavement for Bike Lanes (IA-14)

http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/interim_approval/ia14/ia14grnpmbiketlanes.pdf

[Zmapper]

Well somehow the people that made the video that I posted found this forum and have made a reply.

http://hembrow.blogspot.com/2011/05/state-of-art-bike-way-design-further.html

[Zmapper]

Ok, I changed the thread title into a more general "Bicycles and Road Design" to 1. attract members that are not in the United States and 2. make it less specific about the NACTO guide.

[NE2]

Bleh. I'll probably be avoiding this thread.

[corco]

Idaho has had the Idaho Stop law in effect since 82, which allows you to not come to a complete stop if there's no traffic. If you have the right of way, you can roll through. If you've ever ridden a bike in traffic (I use one to commute to school), it's pretty clear that a cyclist can slow to one or two miles an hour without putting their feet on the ground and have ample time to decide if the coast is clear. If you don't have the right of way you still have to stop.

Cars do that all the time too but 1 MPH on a bike feels like moving while 1 MPH in a car feels like being stopped.

Here's a blog post that advocates it from a Portland OR group. The key line:

While some folks may always view cyclists negatively, changing the law would eliminate the argument that cyclists are always breaking the law when they are actually acting in a very rational manner.

I do think that requiring bike registration is important, and I do think you should have to have a driver's license to ride a bike on a public roadway and I do think that bikes should be just as subject to getting a ticket as cars. Allowing minor concessions like the Idaho Stop isn't the end all be all- cars and bikes just need to drive like they're aware the other exists and not freak out when they see the other kind of vehicle on the road. Forcing bikers to somehow behave more predictably would help, but just like with drivers of cars it's really just a few bad apples that give cyclists a bad name. Those people will eventually be hit by a car and hopefully never bike again.

[agentsteel53]

I am not complaining about vehicles (car or bicycle) just slowing down to 1-2mph and assessing the situation before proceeding - the behavior which I refer to is just not slowing down at all, and roaring through an intersection doing about 15mph.

[Zmapper]

What the Idaho stop law shows us is that most stop signs are unnecessary and could safely be replaced by yield signs or no signs at all. There is absolutely no reason that the terminating road of a T intersection in a residential suburban neighborhood has to have a stop sign.

[agentsteel53]

most stop signs are unnecessary

you've got that right.  I've always maintained that having a four-way stop on the primary through route is poor design.  Having multiple consecutive ones, block after block, is just beyond the pale.