Traffic Calming Projects: Useful or a Waste of $?

[pderocco]

Traffic calming = driver enraging.

[Bruce]

Traffic calming = driver enraging.

Good news is that they can do less bodily harm if the engineering makes it more difficult to go at a higher speed without stopping them. I shouldn't have to walk around with body armor on the off chance a psycho tries to run me over.

[Rothman]

Traffic calming = driver enraging.

Good news is that they can do less bodily harm if the engineering makes it more difficult to go at a higher speed without stopping them. I shouldn't have to walk around with body armor on the off chance a psycho tries to run me over.

Wut.

[jakeroot]

Here is a street view of a completed section: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9699594,-86.1269664,3a,75y,170.77h,91.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRChKlw2f3fGaIJMvU9afkg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

and here is a street view of another section before conversion:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.972955,-86.1269981,3a,75y,12.43h,76.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7fipjYKpEafLsxUzvLEjow!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Sure looks like they reduced the vehicle capacity of that road. I doubt it was so deserted that that didn't matter.

Capacity likely hasn't changed. With the roundabouts, traffic can keep moving (more or less) at each intersection and there won't be as much backup along the arterials.

[michravera]

If your answer is a catch-all "I like all of them," or "I hate all of them," you haven't done the level of analysis required.  Every situation is different.

When two or three more-or-less parallel and more-or-less equal speed alternatives exist, putting calming on some of them results in increased traffic going faster on the road that isn't calmed. This could be a good thing, if the people who live on the uncalmed street accept it, but, often they don't.

On the other hand, when you have a pretty nearly perfect 25x25 grid of streets that are only interrupted by an occasional park, the only thing that calming does is cause people to drive over the obstructions or onto people's lawns or front porches.

I live in a city with a slightly different problem: Extremely wide bike lanes which are protected by pylons that virtually no bikes ever use (at least any time that I have been on them). I don't mind protecting people with every bit as much right to the roadway as I have, but ghosts don't need their own lane. If they exists, they are meant to be able to travel through solid matter.

[bing101]

If your answer is a catch-all "I like all of them," or "I hate all of them," you haven't done the level of analysis required.  Every situation is different.

I live in a city with a slightly different problem: Extremely wide bike lanes which are protected by pylons that virtually no bikes ever use (at least any time that I have been on them). I don't mind protecting people with every bit as much right to the roadway as I have, but ghosts don't need their own lane. If they exists, they are meant to be able to travel through solid matter.

Are the bike lanes painted green on the pavement? I been to areas there the bike lanes have pylons but are painted green apparently so both bikes and drivers can see them.

[SEWIGuy]

Bikers really don't like painted lanes. Can get too slippery when it rains.

[jeffandnicole]

Bikers really don't like painted lanes. Can get too slippery when it rains.

This is after bikers want painted lanes so they stand out more. The bike community has a hard time deciding what they want

[SEWIGuy]

Bikers really don't like painted lanes. Can get too slippery when it rains.

This is after bikers want painted lanes so they stand out more. The bike community has a hard time deciding what they want

🙄🙄🙄

[michravera]

Bikers really don't like painted lanes. Can get too slippery when it rains.

This is after bikers want painted lanes so they stand out more. The bike community has a hard time deciding what they want

🙄🙄🙄

I don't mind, if they are painted. I don't mind, if they are pyloned. -- If they are USED. I don't even mind giving 10% of the roadway to 5% of the users -- But not 0.02%! This is Fremont -- Not Amsterdam -- or even Davis!

If there are enough cyclists, giving them a lane (or even their own roadway as has been done in Sacramento, for instance) helps everyone. If there are not enough, it is elitist virtue signaling. When I lived in Sacramento, I used my bike for recreation and for transportation when I couldn't use my car. Back in the 1980s the bike lanes there and the rather extensive bike trail along the river worked wonderfully. Perhaps they should be tried elsewhere, but how about a separate roadway that takes me to the bay or along a river or a gully -- Not to the mall!

[SEWIGuy]

Oh FFS stop being so dramatic. "Virtue signaling?"   They're just bike lanes.

If we're gonna start using hackneyed political phrases to talk about innocuous traffic design choices, I'll start referring to the elimination of bike lanes as "cancel culture"  now.

[jeffandnicole]

Oh FFS stop being so dramatic. "Virtue signaling?"   They're just bike lanes.

If we're gonna start using hackneyed political phrases to talk about innocuous traffic design choices, I'll start referring to the elimination of bike lanes as "cancel culture"  now.

Again, bicyclists need to determine what bicyclists want. Some bicyclists want the entire lane and don't want their own lane.

[SEWIGuy]

Oh FFS stop being so dramatic. "Virtue signaling?"   They're just bike lanes.

If we're gonna start using hackneyed political phrases to talk about innocuous traffic design choices, I'll start referring to the elimination of bike lanes as "cancel culture"  now.

Again, bicyclists need to determine what bicyclists want. Some bicyclists want the entire lane and don't want their own lane.

Bicyclists aren't a collective.  Regardless, state and local DOTs determine the properties of bike lanes.

[vdeane]

^ This.  It's also important to remember that cyclists have varying ability and comfort levels.  That bit about "there aren't enough cyclists to justify infrastructure for them" is a chicken or the egg problem - since more casual riders aren't comfortable riding in the lane with traffic, you're not going to see them until you've already invested in a good bike network, and few places have the money or political will to build that all at once, so bike lanes and whatnot get done as they can.

[hotdogPi]

I still maintain that 5 to 6-foot shoulders are decent for regions between urban centers on roads with a single lane in each direction, like this, speed limit 35 (40 and 45 farther down the road) with businesses. They allow bicycles their own lane, which I occasionally see but not that often, but they also allow cars to pass other cars that are stopped waiting to turn left, and as a pedestrian, I can step into the shoulder and typically one of the first three cars will stop for me and let me cross.

I'm not sure how much this shoulder is encouraging biking, though; Lawrence gets more bikes on the roads than Methuen simply because it's a more urban area despite worse biking infrastructure. (The GSV above is in Methuen.)

[jeffandnicole]

Oh FFS stop being so dramatic. "Virtue signaling?"   They're just bike lanes.

If we're gonna start using hackneyed political phrases to talk about innocuous traffic design choices, I'll start referring to the elimination of bike lanes as "cancel culture"  now.

Again, bicyclists need to determine what bicyclists want. Some bicyclists want the entire lane and don't want their own lane.

Bicyclists aren't a collective.

And that's the issue. Motorists are, and have specific laws. Bicyclists have enough varying laws that they can pretty much get away with everything. There's even groups of that they need to follow all traffic laws, and some that say it's dangerous to remain stopped at red lights.

[Rothman]

^ This.  It's also important to remember that cyclists have varying ability and comfort levels.  That bit about "there aren't enough cyclists to justify infrastructure for them" is a chicken or the egg problem - since more casual riders aren't comfortable riding in the lane with traffic, you're not going to see them until you've already invested in a good bike network, and few places have the money or political will to build that all at once, so bike lanes and whatnot get done as they can.

If you build them, they will come...

I don't know.  In Syracuse, there is a big biking "lobby" through SOCPA and SMTC. Just sat through a meeting on how to stimulate economic development with the Empire State Trail (*facepalm*).

Just seems to me there needs to be more data collected on this supposed demand for bicycle related facilities, rather than just dreams and speculation.  There are a variety of methods (surveys, focus groups, town hall meetings...) and even funding available to do so (e.g.,, a whole lot of SPR funding).

[Scott5114]

^ This.  It's also important to remember that cyclists have varying ability and comfort levels.  That bit about "there aren't enough cyclists to justify infrastructure for them" is a chicken or the egg problem - since more casual riders aren't comfortable riding in the lane with traffic, you're not going to see them until you've already invested in a good bike network, and few places have the money or political will to build that all at once, so bike lanes and whatnot get done as they can.

The problem with this approach is then you get a mishmash of bike lanes that don't actually go anywhere, and so you never see anyone use them, which increases political opposition to expanding the system.

Norman is a good example of this. My street has a bike lane. It leads to another street with a bike lane. So far so good. That street–leads to a four-lane arterial with no bike lane. There's a bike lane on that same arterial on the other side of the OU campus, but there's no way to get between the two without riding in the street or on the sidewalk.

[hotdogPi]

I created a new thread (in Fictional) on my proposal for a connected set of bike lanes between certain cities. I figured ideas for specific roads was worth a thread split. (The thread is for anyone's proposals, not just mine.)

https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=32087

[SeriesE]

Bikers really don't like painted lanes. Can get too slippery when it rains.

This is after bikers want painted lanes so they stand out more. The bike community has a hard time deciding what they want

🙄🙄🙄

I don't mind, if they are painted. I don't mind, if they are pyloned. -- If they are USED. I don't even mind giving 10% of the roadway to 5% of the users -- But not 0.02%! This is Fremont -- Not Amsterdam -- or even Davis!

If there are enough cyclists, giving them a lane (or even their own roadway as has been done in Sacramento, for instance) helps everyone. If there are not enough, it is elitist virtue signaling. When I lived in Sacramento, I used my bike for recreation and for transportation when I couldn't use my car. Back in the 1980s the bike lanes there and the rather extensive bike trail along the river worked wonderfully. Perhaps they should be tried elsewhere, but how about a separate roadway that takes me to the bay or along a river or a gully -- Not to the mall!

Speaking of Fremont, they put bike lanes in some pretty dumb places, such as on the main road when there's a parallel residential frontage road, or on one lane roads that's already narrow enough. On the latter, it's not even comfortable to go the posted speed limit because the lane is too narrow

[cjw2001]

Here is a street view of a completed section: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.9699594,-86.1269664,3a,75y,170.77h,91.03t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sRChKlw2f3fGaIJMvU9afkg!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

and here is a street view of another section before conversion:
https://www.google.com/maps/@39.972955,-86.1269981,3a,75y,12.43h,76.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s7fipjYKpEafLsxUzvLEjow!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

Sure looks like they reduced the vehicle capacity of that road. I doubt it was so deserted that that didn't matter.

Traffic flows better now with the roundabouts than it ever did with traffic signals.

[SEWIGuy]

Oh FFS stop being so dramatic. "Virtue signaling?"   They're just bike lanes.

If we're gonna start using hackneyed political phrases to talk about innocuous traffic design choices, I'll start referring to the elimination of bike lanes as "cancel culture"  now.

Again, bicyclists need to determine what bicyclists want. Some bicyclists want the entire lane and don't want their own lane.

Bicyclists aren't a collective.

And that's the issue. Motorists are, and have specific laws. Bicyclists have enough varying laws that they can pretty much get away with everything. There's even groups of that they need to follow all traffic laws, and some that say it's dangerous to remain stopped at red lights.

[Bruce]

Oh FFS stop being so dramatic. "Virtue signaling?"   They're just bike lanes.

If we're gonna start using hackneyed political phrases to talk about innocuous traffic design choices, I'll start referring to the elimination of bike lanes as "cancel culture"  now.

Again, bicyclists need to determine what bicyclists want. Some bicyclists want the entire lane and don't want their own lane.

Bicyclists aren't a collective.

And that's the issue. Motorists are, and have specific laws. Bicyclists have enough varying laws that they can pretty much get away with everything. There's even groups of that they need to follow all traffic laws, and some that say it's dangerous to remain stopped at red lights.

Given the number of people who bomb through red lights now, it is dangerous. If I can move to the side or get across safely on my bike, I'm going for it.

[jeffandnicole]

And that's the issue. Motorists are, and have specific laws. Bicyclists have enough varying laws that they can pretty much get away with everything. There's even groups of that they need to follow all traffic laws, and some that say it's dangerous to remain stopped at red lights.

https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/law-and-life/should-it-be-legal-for-cyclists-to-roll-through-stop-signs/

https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/9/10/its-legal-to-run-lights-and-other-things-you-might-not-have-known-about-cycling

https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2021/01/27/dot-contemplating-revolutionary-pro-cycling-rule-changes/

[SEWIGuy]

And that's the issue. Motorists are, and have specific laws. Bicyclists have enough varying laws that they can pretty much get away with everything. There's even groups of that they need to follow all traffic laws, and some that say it's dangerous to remain stopped at red lights.

https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/law-and-life/should-it-be-legal-for-cyclists-to-roll-through-stop-signs/

https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2018/9/10/its-legal-to-run-lights-and-other-things-you-might-not-have-known-about-cycling

https://nyc.streetsblog.org/2021/01/27/dot-contemplating-revolutionary-pro-cycling-rule-changes/

None of this says "they can get away with anything."