Urban Cycling Developments

[JordanL]

Originally Posted by M II A II R II K

What about main streets that allow parking...

On one hand we know that cars wouldn't be driving in those lanes but then there are those unexpected doors opening on you and stuff.

Portland does this:







In the third picture, as you can see, a special green painted box exists to allow bicycles to turn left across traffic when the light crosses pedestrians.

[mwadswor]

Originally Posted by JordanL

IMO, this is the best way to do bike lanes. The parked cars provide a nice buffer with traffic and there's enough room to stay out of door range. The biggest problem as pointed out in the news story posted a bit ago, is that you're riding in a spot where cars turning right won't notice you if they aren't used to the street and paying good attention.

[urbanlife]

Originally Posted by mwadswor

IMO, this is the best way to do bike lanes. The parked cars provide a nice buffer with traffic and there's enough room to stay out of door range. The biggest problem as pointed out in the news story posted a bit ago, is that you're riding in a spot where cars turning right won't notice you if they aren't used to the street and paying good attention.

I can agree with that, often times when I am turning where this style of bike lane is I have found it to be hard to fully see if there were any bikes coming. I have never had an issue yet, but I can see where one would come from. Which I think it is the bikers responsibility to pay attention to their surroundings when coming up on these intersections.

This is actually a test, the other test street is Oak and Stark, where we reduced the lanes by one to create a bike lane that sits in between parked cars and moving cars. This idea also has its pluses and minuses, it is easier to see people on bikes, but you also have idiots who dont pay attention to paint and think their car can drive anywhere they want. Also you get an issue with people swerving into the bike lane to try to get a street parking spot. There is also an issue of cars using the bike lane as a turn lane, which is also wrong of car drivers.

[M II A II R II K]

The Sharrow


March 28, 2010



Read More: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2...cks-geraniums/

On the confirmation side, Trevor Haag, 22, who lives in University City, turned his cycling enthusiasm into a study of shared-lane markings on narrow streets — stylized arrows and bike symbols called “sharrows.” The question he tackled was whether driving and cycling behavior changes in the presence of these markings.

“I didn’t think it would have a significant effect on behavior,” Haag said, and therefore formal bicycle lanes would seem to be the safest way to separate cars from bikes.

Haag did his field work on Pacific Street in Oceanside, among the county’s first use of sharrows markings. He noticed that motorists tend to steer away from the space marked by the arrow and bike symbol and cyclists lean to the left side of the markings away from parked cars, when at any moment a driver could open a door and cause an accident with oncoming rider. Earlier, he surveyed users of the street, and few realized the markings were there

“I was really surprised how the surveys and field research contradicted each other,” he said. “I expected people would change their behavior if they noticed the markings, but I didn’t have a strong reporting of it.”

He checked narrow streets in Pacific Beach where there are no markings and found driving and bike-riding behavior were not as safe.

The conclusion: Caltrans engineers knew what they were doing when they painted the sharrows markings — motorists subconsciously look out for cyclists when there is a periodic reminder painted on the pavement.

“These findings contradict the popular belief that drivers and bicyclists are cognizant of their routine actions,” Haag said in his 21-page paper.

[niwell]

I find main streets with side parking (ie: 4 lanes but the 2 curb lanes have parking) are far better to bike on. Getting doored is always a concern, but one I feel is considerably overplayed. You need to keep your wits about you and not be afraid to ride near the edge of the lane.

For example, the east-west road I often (Dundas St W) has street parking for most of its length and I've never had any problems. On a few occasions I've ridden on King St W twhich prohibits street parking to allow for a full 4 lanes of traffic. It's far more dangerous having speeding cars / trucks right beside you than looking out for the odd door.

[KevinFromTexas]

This just happened in San Antonio the other day.

Web Posted: 02/22/2010 8:59 CST
Man riding bicycle collides with car

By Michelle Mondo - Express-News

A man riding on a motorized bicycle on the sidewalk in the Northeast Side was flown to a hospital Monday after he slammed into a woman's car, smashing his head through a window.

The man on the bike collided with the passenger side door. Officers at the scene said riding a bicycle on the sidewalk is illegal.

...

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/loc..._with_car.html

[Cirrus]

Interesting that it says "cyclist collides with car" rather than "driver of car collides with bike". From the (very) brief description, it sounds like the woman driving the car didn't look before she turned, which would make it her fault.

Anyway, if you are biking in the street and there isn't a bike lane (marked or unmarked), it is definitely safer to be in the middle of the lane. If there isn't enough room for a car to pass safely, it shouldn't pass at all.

[KevinFromTexas]

It wasn't her fault though. The idiot was riding a bicycle on the sidewalk with an engine on it that can go up to 35 mph. That is exactly the reason why riding bikes on sidewalks is a bad idea. It's not her fault. She wasn't looking on the sidewalk for a person riding a bike, because that's not where they belong. Especially not when they're able to go as fast as cars do. I'm familiar with that stretch of road. It's 4 lanes of traffic, plus a turning lane, with speed limits around 40 to 45 mph mph. Those are acceptable conditions for a bicycle with an engine.

[Cirrus]

Do you have more information than is in that article? If not, you are jumping to all sorts of pro-car/anti-cyclist conclusions.

1. It doesn't matter whether they were cyclists or not. They could have been pedestrians. It doesn't make any difference if the driver pulled in without looking to see if anyone was on the sidewalk.

2. Just because a bike has a motor does not mean the person is using the motor. A motorized bike is not the same as a motorcycle, nor even a scooter. Many people who have them leave the motor turned off except when they need a special boost (like when going up hills). It's possible the bike rider was using his motor inappropriately, but that information is not in the article.

[KevinFromTexas]

I have 11 bicycles and ride every day, so I'm not anti-cyclist. I'm actually anti-car, I'm just saying the guy shouldn't have been on the sidewalk. I'll admit, that I haven't rode a bike on that street, so I'm not sure what it's like on a bicycle, and I might even be inclined to take to the sidewalks if it wasn't good for bike riding. But if I had a motorized bicycle (I badly want one actually), then I would definitely ride it on the street, not the sidewalk. That stretch of road is also relatively level with few, if any hills. So maintaining a reasonable speed shouldn't be a big deal.

[fflint]

Dooring is the #1 cause of cyclist injury-accidents. Here in California, dooring is *always* the motorist's fault, even if done by a passenger. That's why cabbies don't want you entering/exiting on the left, and won't unlock the back doors until all is clear.

We don't really have bike lanes in San Francisco--there are a few here and there, but the NIMBYs have prevented their installation for years and years now and motorists block them where they do exist--so we don't face the bike lane/door zone conundrum as often as riders in more progressive cities. California law allows cyclists full use of the lane when riding to the side is unsafe, and dooring is certainly a danger, so you'll see cyclists a bit farther out on most SF streets.

And Kevin--11 bikes? What a junkie!

[Nowhereman1280]

Originally Posted by lawfin

Leave the lawyerin' to the lawyers

I'm not sure what this is in response to? This is the same municipal code I referenced before posting, I just didn't feel it necessary to copy and paste the whole thing into this thread. Also why did you bold those parts?

Originally Posted by Steely Dan

and if anyone wants to bring their bike to chicago and attempt to bike the stretch of sheridan road in question, you'll quickly see that it's a bit of a special case and that it is not just any old ordinary busy street. it's a freaking zoo at rush hours because of the overwhelming crush of cars trying to get on and off LSD right there at hollywood.

Also don't forget that it is usually crawling with ambulances and firetrucks that drive around picking up all the elderly that drop dead or are otherwise incapacitated. Delivery trucks also seem to think its super cool to just stop in the right lane and block traffic. Sheridan is the street from hell, I don't see why all those people in the highrises are against extending LSD around them to Evanston, it would radically change the nature of the street they live on and make it a vastly more pleasant place to live. As far as property values go, one needs look no further than where I live just south of Hollywood where Sheridan is nice and quiet to see that property values are much higher when the street you live on is completely messed up and you have a huge park with beaches in your back yard.

[lawfin]

Originally Posted by Nowhereman1280

I'm not sure what this is in response to? This is the same municipal code I referenced before posting, I just didn't feel it necessary to copy and paste the whole thing into this thread. Also why did you bold those parts?


.

Because you made a legal conclusion that is not in fact what the code says...any how enough about that

[M II A II R II K]

Brooklyn Welcomes Bike-Friendly Policy


04-14-2010

By Joan Lowy & Raanan Geberer



Read More: http://www.brooklyneagle.com/categor...id=31&id=34786

BROOKLYN – In Washington, D.C., Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, a weekend bicyclist, is facing a backlash after saying that the government is going to give bicycling and walking the same importance as cars in transportation planning and funding. The National Association of Manufacturers called the policy “dumb and irresponsible,” while Rep. Steve LaTourette (R-Ohio) suggested that the secretary’s thinking had been “clouded by drugs.”

But in Brooklyn, bicyclists have found a much friendlier atmosphere. The borough has miles and miles of bike paths – both dedicated paths like those in Prospect Park and on Ocean and Eastern parkways, and bike lanes in city streets like those on Bedford Avenue, Union Street, Third Avenue, Grand Avenue, Empire Boulevard and elsewhere. And, of course, this includes the bike paths over the Manhattan, Brooklyn and Williamsburg bridges.

The new policy is an extension of the Obama administration's livability initiative, which regards the creation of alternatives to driving — buses, streetcars, trolleys and trains, as well as biking and walking — as central to solving the nation's transportation woes. Many in Brooklyn welcome the policy, saying that federal funding accounts for the majority of financing for bike-path improvements.

[lawfin]

Originally Posted by fflint

Dooring is the #1 cause of cyclist injury-accidents. Here in California, dooring is *always* the motorist's fault, even if done by a passenger. That's why cabbies don't want you entering/exiting on the left, and won't unlock the back doors until all is clear.

I got doored at ashland and foster here in chicago this fall...broke my hand in multiple places, broke my ribs in multiple places, cracked my head, seriously bruised my hip....still feel it, bike was screwed up......lucky I am alicve given traffic level on ahsland

[Nowhereman1280]

^^^ Ouch! Did you sue the crap out of the person that doored you? That's why I never ride on Ashland (not the dooring, but the traffic as you mention), especially not up in that area, people treat the segment between Lawrence and Clark like a freaking freeway. That attitude continues on up Ridge/Peterson and Clark for quite a ways too.

I actually came within inches of destroying some moron on his bike with my car at the corner of Ridge and Clark because he completely blew a red light. He was going North on Clark and I was going NW on Ridge so he was coming at me from 45 degrees back and to my left so it was even harder to see him. He blew the light so badly that I had already begun accelerating into the green and had moved about 10 feet forward when he came tearing in front of the van in the left lane and I. That guy was a complete moron and will probably be dead within 6 months if he keeps riding like that, especially in intersections like Ridge and Clark.

Re: Posting the entire code, it doesn't take a lawyer to look up and read the Municipal code. But anyhow, the mistake I made was reading the section on Bike Messengers and seeing that they have to have an ID on them and not noticing it was in a subsection re: bike Messengers.

[fflint]

So Chicago guys (well, and anyone else in a transit-oriented city), I've got a question.

First an explanation: my cycling friends and I have noticed certain SF neighborhoods and districts we once considered remote or hard to access via public transit are now easily accessible. Biking has reordered our mental maps of the city's geography, and shaken up which areas/bars/parks/stores etc. are easy to get to. Has cycling altered your impression of your own city like that?

[KevinFromTexas]

Originally Posted by fflint

We don't really have bike lanes in San Francisco--there are a few here and there, but the NIMBYs have prevented their installation for years and years now and motorists block them where they do exist--so we don't face the bike lane/door zone conundrum as often as riders in more progressive cities. California law allows cyclists full use of the lane when riding to the side is unsafe, and dooring is certainly a danger, so you'll see cyclists a bit farther out on most SF streets.

I've read your posts before about the Nimbys, but gosh, I never would have guessed San Francisco would be so hard on bikes. Bike riding must be a test of your endurance and nerve anyway in that city with the hills. So I would have thought bike lanes would be encouraged to keep them out of the lanes.

We're getting a few nice things here. There are bike lanes on select streets all around town, even in the suburban areas. Of course, not all of the streets have them, and some of those streets are nearly impossible to ride on because of killer hills and higher speed limits, say above 35 miles an hour. Bikes are accepted on the streets here, since not all of them have bike lanes. From my house going into downtown, there's only one major street with bike lanes to downtown. So that's the one I take. There are 3 other streets that lead either into downtown, or near it. Those three don't have bike lanes, but two of those allow bicyclists to ride in the street and even take the full lane. The third street is pretty much off limits to bikes since the terrain goes up and down like a roller coaster. So we have bike lanes, bikes are allowed to take the full lane on at least some streets (where it's safe), and we're even getting some bike boulevards in downtown.

Originally Posted by fflint

And Kevin--11 bikes? What a junkie!

Yeah. Of course that's counting everything, including a frame of a 1968 Schwinn Collegiate that I'm wanting to put together, a 1985? GT Performer (BMX) bike that I rode when I was a teen, and a junkie Roadmaster I found that I use for late night trips to the convenience store. I only spent 5 dollars on it, getting the tubes replaced, it's a real piece of junk, so if it gets swiped I won't be crushed. 4 of them aren't quite ridable yet.

[lawfin]

Originally Posted by fflint

So Chicago guys (well, and anyone else in a transit-oriented city), I've got a question.

First an explanation: my cycling friends and I have noticed certain SF neighborhoods and districts we once considered remote or hard to access via public transit are now easily accessible. Biking has reordered our mental maps of the city's geography, and shaken up which areas/bars/parks/stores etc. are easy to get to. Has cycling altered your impression of your own city like that?

Most definitely......I am an avid cyclists from mid/ late MArch - November.....not the winter Rambo that Steely is. One of the greatest things about cycling around the city is seeing things / new places etc that I otherwise would blow by in a car at 40mph also I often take meandering routes where I "discover" places I never knew existed despite having been in those areas before.
\
Also one thing.....cycling has shown me how far the northside has come and how far parts of the southside and westsides need to go......god if we could just get those parts of the city as health as much of the northside Chicago would be really something else

[Steely Dan]

Originally Posted by fflint

So Chicago guys (well, and anyone else in a transit-oriented city), I've got a question.

First an explanation: my cycling friends and I have noticed certain SF neighborhoods and districts we once considered remote or hard to access via public transit are now easily accessible. Biking has reordered our mental maps of the city's geography, and shaken up which areas/bars/parks/stores etc. are easy to get to. Has cycling altered your impression of your own city like that?

cycling has definitely opened up crap loads more of my city to me, well, really more of my entire metro area, thanks to chicagoland's forest preserve system and our awesome commuter rail system that allows bicycles on the trains.

as one example, my sister lives WAY the hell out in the exburban boondock wastelands of lake county illinois, but i can ride my bike from my downtown home out to her house with all but about 10 of those 65 miles on off street bike paths. how freaking cool is that?

as for bars, i still use public transit and cabs for bar nights because riding a bike when i'm black-out drunk is just downright dangerous.