E
Earl Bollinger
Guest
"Mark Hickey" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Earl Bollinger" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>"Matt O'Toole" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news[email protected]...
>>> 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 here:"
>>>
>>> http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/pdf_reports/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
True I make some assumptions, but
http://www.flickr.com/photos/seth_holladay/178118680/ here is a typical
problem I remember encountering before.
Also the door hazard zone is to absolutely die for too.
Maybe this one shoes something I forgot about is that all the debris
accumulates in the bike lane
http://www.humantransport.org/bicycledriving/library/carystripes/carystripes.htm
and no one ever cleans it either.
Now this bike lane is pretty fascinating in of itself too
http://www.flickr.com/photos/seth_holladay/154965167/in/set-72157594154060175/
Here you can see Austin Texas the place this study was done in has some
interesting paradoxes too http://bicycleaustin.info/roadways/shoalcreek.html
Of course in Seattle they have this nice bike lane with parking too.
http://homepage.mac.com/bicycle_driver/PhotoAlbum20.html
I remember riding in California near a University once and the entire bike
lane was filled with vehicles, and delevery trucks double parking no less
too. The motorists were definitely upset about it too. They did not want to
share the road at all.
Now this maybe better, but you still have to watch the door hazard zone
though
http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/06/27/this-is-what-bike-safety-looks-like/
but at least the bike lane is more or less clear so someone could actually
use it.
Actually I hope they do have gasoline shortages, and if you can find
gasoline, it costs over $5.00 a gallon too, if I remember in Europe gas was
going for around $5.00 a liter.
Currently when you look at all the vehicles at rush hour, all you see is
thousands of people all driving alone, one person.
Then I won't have to worry so much about the idiot drivers on the roads.
Currently they'll spend a billion dollars to rebuild a freeway interchange,
making it bigger, but they won't spend a dime on helping someone not use a
car to get to work or elsewhere. Here in Texas you can buy a "share the Road
License plate" but almost none of the $30 dollars actually goes to helping
cycling at all, the State Legislature voted to take a few dollars to give to
the budget for cycling, and put all the rest in their general fund.
So yeah I do see the bike lane painting as a lame attempt at making it look
like the government is doing something.
news:[email protected]...
> "Earl Bollinger" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>"Matt O'Toole" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news[email protected]...
>>> 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 here:"
>>>
>>> http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/pdf_reports/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
True I make some assumptions, but
http://www.flickr.com/photos/seth_holladay/178118680/ here is a typical
problem I remember encountering before.
Also the door hazard zone is to absolutely die for too.
Maybe this one shoes something I forgot about is that all the debris
accumulates in the bike lane
http://www.humantransport.org/bicycledriving/library/carystripes/carystripes.htm
and no one ever cleans it either.
Now this bike lane is pretty fascinating in of itself too
http://www.flickr.com/photos/seth_holladay/154965167/in/set-72157594154060175/
Here you can see Austin Texas the place this study was done in has some
interesting paradoxes too http://bicycleaustin.info/roadways/shoalcreek.html
Of course in Seattle they have this nice bike lane with parking too.
http://homepage.mac.com/bicycle_driver/PhotoAlbum20.html
I remember riding in California near a University once and the entire bike
lane was filled with vehicles, and delevery trucks double parking no less
too. The motorists were definitely upset about it too. They did not want to
share the road at all.
Now this maybe better, but you still have to watch the door hazard zone
though
http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/06/27/this-is-what-bike-safety-looks-like/
but at least the bike lane is more or less clear so someone could actually
use it.
Actually I hope they do have gasoline shortages, and if you can find
gasoline, it costs over $5.00 a gallon too, if I remember in Europe gas was
going for around $5.00 a liter.
Currently when you look at all the vehicles at rush hour, all you see is
thousands of people all driving alone, one person.
Then I won't have to worry so much about the idiot drivers on the roads.
Currently they'll spend a billion dollars to rebuild a freeway interchange,
making it bigger, but they won't spend a dime on helping someone not use a
car to get to work or elsewhere. Here in Texas you can buy a "share the Road
License plate" but almost none of the $30 dollars actually goes to helping
cycling at all, the State Legislature voted to take a few dollars to give to
the budget for cycling, and put all the rest in their general fund.
So yeah I do see the bike lane painting as a lame attempt at making it look
like the government is doing something.