Bicycle Lanes

[winkybiker]

Seattle has an abundance of these at the behest of a politically active local cycling club. We do have isolated two-way lanes that parallel sidewalks and roadway. Watching clueless cyclists ignore oncoming, turning cars is both horrific and amusing at the same time. I'm still loving the moment when a jerk in a Tesla and a precious "racer" on his Cervelo are holding up traffic arguing over whom had the right of way. One block away from this arterial (and most of the major "bike lanes") is a quiet side street that sensible riders should take. Most commuting cyclists are sharp, sensible riders that can deal with cars but the dedicated lanes seem to be more of a Darwinian funnel of fun...

Those two-way lanes are a menace. No-one expects the traffic interactions that they cause. Just dangerous.

The picture above is of a footpath, not a bike route. A footpath by another name is still a footpath. I don't ride on footpaths if I can possibly avoid it.

 

[wrinklyvet]

Those two-way lanes are a menace. No-one expects the traffic interactions that they cause. Just dangerous.

The picture above is of a footpath, not a bike route. A footpath by another name is still a footpath. I don't ride on footpaths if I can possibly avoid it.

Obviously this "footpath" as you call it is not well thought out, with its little chicane. The cost of moving the street light must have been too great or it involved another organisation!

However, in the UK, this kind of separate route for bikes is becoming more common (with or without lamp posts and sometimes shared with pedetrians!) and they serve a purpose.

Many people who don't do any "sports cycling" as it might be called do not feel safe on the roads but they will be tempted onto bikes to do short journeys to the shops, to school and so on, if they have such a route.

As the law presently stands, the use of them is not compulsory so most enthusiasts do stay on the normal road, leaving the cycle path to children, shoppers and the less confident. I do sneak on them when they avoid traffic lights and suchlike!

The problem with them is that the routes are not usually continuous, they have various hazards on them, they are sometimes not swept clean and some of the people who use them have little sense when interacting with others.

But at the end of the day they remain a useful addition to the cycling infrastructure and, to apply the old cliché , "the more the merrier."

 

[BeachBum]

I was just in Washington DC in October and they have coned off bike lanes downtown.





Looks great for commuting.

 

[Oldman]

I was just in Washington DC in October and they have coned off bike lanes downtown.





Looks great for commuting.[/QUOTe

Those are the chaos zones we're talking about. Very false sense of security combined with cyclist sense of entitlement.

 

[Jspear]

I was just in Washington DC in October and they have coned off bike lanes downtown.





Looks great for commuting.

Those are the chaos zones we're talking about. Very false sense of security combined with cyclist sense of entitlement.

Also it's not like that everywhere in DC...

 

[winkybiker]

I was just in Washington DC in October and they have coned off bike lanes downtown.





Looks great for commuting.

Until you get squashed by a turning or entering vehicle that does not expect you to be riding on the wrong side of the street. The two-way bike lanes are a menace.

 

[frenchfry]

Until you get squashed by a turning or entering vehicle that does not expect you to be riding on the wrong side of the street. The two-way bike lanes are a menace.

Plus the sign says yield to PEDs. I thought PEDs were supposed to be bad for cyclists!

 

[winkybiker]

But at the end of the day they remain a useful addition to the cycling infrastructure and, to apply the old cliché , "the more the merrier."

Nope. Poorly designed and executed cycling infrastructure such as this footpath with a painted line in the middle is worse than none. It gives the motorists another thing to complain about (either the money spent or the fact that cyclists won't use it - usually both), and fuels their hatred and rage. They never ponder why it actually might be that cyclists won't use such useless and dangerous infrastructure. They assume the cyclists do it (ride on the road instead of the aforementioned re-named footpath) just to **** them off, and that they (cyclists) therefore deserve scorn and punishment.

And besides, they wear lycra and wear silly hats. Who do they think they are? Lance f$%#ing Armstrong?

 

[wrinklyvet]

Nope. Poorly designed and executed cycling infrastructure such as this footpath with a painted line in the middle is worse than none. It gives the motorists another thing to complain about (either the money spent or the fact that cyclists won't use it - usually both), and fuels their hatred and rage. They never ponder why it actually might be that cyclists won't use such useless and dangerous infrastructure. They assume the cyclists do it (ride on the road instead of the aforementioned re-named footpath) just to **** them off, and that they (cyclists) therefore deserve scorn and punishment.

And besides, they wear lycra and wear silly hats. Who do they think they are? Lance f$%#ing Armstrong?

Motorists will complain anyway. No, I remain of the view that (except when cycle tracks like this footpath are ridiculously short or lead nowhere) they are of use to youngsters, lady shoppers, other casual cyclists and people who are afraid of traffic or want to avoid mixing with it.

What is needed is a greater understanding on the part of the authorities who build them about how it should be done. In Denmark, for instance, the cyclists don't keep having to give way.

Nobody in the Netherlands complains about cycle tracks, do they? Cyclists have achieved a critical mass and almost everyone cycles. Partly it's because they have few hills, partly it's in the culture but especially it's because they have a good infrastructure of smooth safe tracks as well as understanding motorists (most of whom also cycle when not driving).

How to get to that ideal situation - that's the question.

 

[winkybiker]

Motorists will complain anyway. No, I remain of the view that (except when cycle tracks like this footpath are ridiculously short or lead nowhere) they are of use to youngsters, lady shoppers, other casual cyclists and people who are afraid of traffic or want to avoid mixing with it.

What is needed is a greater understanding on the part of the authorities who build them about how it should be done. In Denmark, for instance, the cyclists don't keep having to give way.

Nobody in the Netherlands complains about cycle tracks, do they? Cyclists have achieved a critical mass and almost everyone cycles. Partly it's because they have few hills, partly it's in the culture but especially it's because they have a good infrastructure of smooth safe tracks as well as understanding motorists (most of whom also cycle when not driving).

How to get to that ideal situation - that's the question.

We're pretty much in agreement. I think it's not just the authorities who need to understand. Motorists need to take a good hard look at why they are so annoyed by cyclists. Cyclists barely affect them in any material way, but yet many are enraged. Why? Conflict with a sense of fairness (or entitlement) explains some of it (however irrational), but.....

Personally, I think there's a fair bit of jealousy going on. Motorists, sitting trapped in their expensive cages (that aren't the status symbol they thought they'd be) would really like to be out there, enjoying themselves, getting some exercise, having a little adventure and perhaps even making their way through traffic like cyclists. But deep down, they know they are too lazy and well, boring, to get off their a$$e$ to do it.

Stress is the difference between what we do and what know we should do. I think this is what is happening.

 

[RedheadDane]

Plus the sign says yield to PEDs. I thought PEDs were supposed to be bad for cyclists!

That's why you should yield. Get out of the way! I would too if some giant PED was coming towards me.

As for bike lanes. Seems like a lot of places people think there are only two options:

1: A "bike lane" separated only from the motorist by a painted line on the road. Frequently with random lightpoles or other things being placed in the middle of the supposed bike lane.

2: A section of the road separated from the motorists but where cyclists, pedestrians, roller-blade-people, skateboarders, you-name-it have to somehow get by each other without any collisions.

 

[DL9999]

Nobody in the Netherlands complains about cycle tracks, do they?

Maybe not, but any cyclist who is serious about his or her sport is likely to move abroad, or at least away from the Randstad area, as soon as possible, partly because of the damp climate, but primarily because of the near impossibility of doing any serious training on most Dutch cycle tracks.

 

[Oldman]

That's why you should yield. Get out of the way! I would too if some giant PED was coming towards me.

As for bike lanes. Seems like a lot of places people think there are only two options:

1: A "bike lane" separated only from the motorist by a painted line on the road. Frequently with random lightpoles or other things being placed in the middle of the supposed bike lane.

2: A section of the road separated from the motorists but where cyclists, pedestrians, roller-blade-people, skateboarders, you-name-it have to somehow get by each other without any collisions.

....as DL9999 points out; they somewhat work in the flat Netherlands.
In hilly Seattle the lanes are placed in the flattest areas to encourage more people to use them. Inevitably these are not the most experienced riders and the roads are also crossing, parallel or part of major commercial vehicle arterials. Mass transit busses run next to many of these screening the lane from view as well.
A smart rider would pick a quieter, less active street and spend a few more minutes on their commute. City traffic planners take the easiest route because it is politically easier rather than engage a contentious neighborhood group of NIMBYs. End product: many tax dollars spent on semi-useful and dangerous social experiments based on an inapplicable Euro model.

 

[wrinklyvet]

Maybe not, but any cyclist who is serious about his or her sport is likely to move abroad, or at least away from the Randstad area, as soon as possible, partly because of the damp climate, but primarily because of the near impossibility of doing any serious training on most Dutch cycle tracks.

That's interesting, and you are obviously "in the know."

However, I am not sure that cycle tracks anywhere are designed for people who are serious about their sport.

In the Netherlands the most impressive use of them (that I have seen) is by tall blonde girls riding effortlessly on tall bikes, texting their boyfriends as they ride!

 

[Arnout]

We're pretty much in agreement. I think it's not just the authorities who need to understand. Motorists need to take a good hard look at why they are so annoyed by cyclists. Cyclists barely affect them in any material way, but yet many are enraged. Why? Conflict with a sense of fairness (or entitlement) explains some of it (however irrational), but.....

Personally, I think there's a fair bit of jealousy going on. Motorists, sitting trapped in their expensive cages (that aren't the status symbol they thought they'd be) would really like to be out there, enjoying themselves, getting some exercise, having a little adventure and perhaps even making their way through traffic like cyclists. But deep down, they know they are too lazy and well, boring, to get off their a$$e$ to do it.

Stress is the difference between what we do and what know we should do. I think this is what is happening.

Well I rage at cyclists too when they misbehave when I'm driving. And I own two bikes that I use frequently (one for casual going-to-the-shop trips, one for riding like any real Cyclingnews forummember does)... It's simple, cyclists are part of the traffic system and the traffic system is a delicate balance between directions and speeds. Anything that helps untangle the chaos is a good thing, in my opinion.

In fact in the Netherlands the only time motorists are really held up by cyclists is on roundabouts in cities or villages. Other than that, they usually use separate bike paths or painted lines with enough space for both cyclist and car. It's only on less-traveled roads that cyclists and cars truly mix in The Netherlands. Because of this road cyclists, the speedy ones, are unpopular in The Netherlands because they tend to break the traffic rules more frequently than any other users. The Netherlands is not some cycling paradise where everyone has an after you approach to traffic, it's just a country with a different allocation of space.

Motorists will complain anyway. No, I remain of the view that (except when cycle tracks like this footpath are ridiculously short or lead nowhere) they are of use to youngsters, lady shoppers, other casual cyclists and people who are afraid of traffic or want to avoid mixing with it.

What is needed is a greater understanding on the part of the authorities who build them about how it should be done. In Denmark, for instance, the cyclists don't keep having to give way.

Nobody in the Netherlands complains about cycle tracks, do they? Cyclists have achieved a critical mass and almost everyone cycles. Partly it's because they have few hills, partly it's in the culture but especially it's because they have a good infrastructure of smooth safe tracks as well as understanding motorists (most of whom also cycle when not driving).

How to get to that ideal situation - that's the question.

How to get to that situation: in my opinion start by creating some trunk routes. North - South, East - West on some important corridors, from there-on you can try to start working on good infrastructure alongside roads when completely separated routes are not viable anymore. I linked to Bogota in this topic, it's my understanding that this is exactly what they're doing. You have to channel the cyclists so that they have enough volume to keep the cycle-path free of other users and at the same time financially viable for city councils.

Maybe not, but any cyclist who is serious about his or her sport is likely to move abroad, or at least away from the Randstad area, as soon as possible, partly because of the damp climate, but primarily because of the near impossibility of doing any serious training on most Dutch cycle tracks.

Well, that's more due to lack of hills probably. I know of very few people who do what we'd call road cycling in English in inner cities or even suburbs.

 

[wrinklyvet]

Because of this road cyclists, the speedy ones, are unpopular in The Netherlands because they tend to break the traffic rules more frequently than any other users. The Netherlands is not some cycling paradise where everyone has an after you approach to traffic, it's just a country with a different allocation of space.

I like all of your post. With regard to the above section, I did not mean to make the Netherlands sound like a cycling utopia where all motorists are benevolent gentle people. But it's at least partially true, at least where I have visited!

 

[DL9999]

Well I rage at cyclists too when they misbehave when I'm driving.

That's worrying. Anybody who rages at another road user, whatever the reason, isn't really fit to be driving a motor vehicle.

 

[wrinklyvet]

That's worrying. Anybody who rages at another road user, whatever the reason, isn't really fit to be driving a motor vehicle.

You are of course absolutely right.

But hopefully it was an exaggeration! The raging only matters when it affects behaviour. It is upsetting when you see cyclists behaving in a way that gives motorists an excuse to think badly of all riders. A bit of internal rage about that need not affect the driving.

 

[Arnout]

That's worrying. Anybody who rages at another road user, whatever the reason, isn't really fit to be driving a motor vehicle.

Driving is the easiest thing in the world to be honest. The only thing you need is concentration and a bit of raging (of course I'm not flapping my arms, I do it in silence, I'm not a moron) is catharis and makes me drive better afterwards

I like all of your post. With regard to the above section, I did not mean to make the Netherlands sound like a cycling utopia where all motorists are benevolent gentle people. But it's at least partially true, at least where I have visited!

It's certainly true that drivers in The Netherlands generally expect cyclists to be everywhere and will patiently wait at roundabouts. That's the thing, everyone has their space and if everyone behaves normally the moments the spaces intersect it will all be fine. Where are we all going anyway? Ok end of existentialist musings.

 

[Archibald]

We're pretty much in agreement. I think it's not just the authorities who need to understand. Motorists need to take a good hard look at why they are so annoyed by cyclists. Cyclists barely affect them in any material way, but yet many are enraged. Why? Conflict with a sense of fairness (or entitlement) explains some of it (however irrational), but.....

Personally, I think there's a fair bit of jealousy going on. Motorists, sitting trapped in their expensive cages (that aren't the status symbol they thought they'd be) would really like to be out there, enjoying themselves, getting some exercise, having a little adventure and perhaps even making their way through traffic like cyclists. But deep down, they know they are too lazy and well, boring, to get off their a$$e$ to do it.

Stress is the difference between what we do and what know we should do. I think this is what is happening.

here the tradies are the worst - mostly because at 6-7am they're off to work when we're riding out having fun riding.
then again, it's incredibly easy to be brave and harrass/bully more vunerable people from the comfort within your little metal capsule...

That's worrying. Anybody who rages at another road user, whatever the reason, isn't really fit to be driving a motor vehicle.

what about some infuriation at other cyclists blowing lights and road rules when riding yourself?

 

[DL9999]

what about some infuriation at other cyclists blowing lights and road rules when riding yourself?

No. They're adults. They're not my concern.

That said, I would intervene if I saw someone doing something life-threateningly stupid, e.g. passing a juggernaut on the inside at a red light.

 

[Catwhoorg]

Obviously this "footpath" as you call it is not well thought out, with its little chicane. The cost of moving the street light must have been too great or it involved another organisation!

However, in the UK, this kind of separate route for bikes is becoming more common (with or without lamp posts and sometimes shared with pedetrians!) and they serve a purpose.

Many people who don't do any "sports cycling" as it might be called do not feel safe on the roads but they will be tempted onto bikes to do short journeys to the shops, to school and so on, if they have such a route.

As the law presently stands, the use of them is not compulsory so most enthusiasts do stay on the normal road, leaving the cycle path to children, shoppers and the less confident. I do sneak on them when they avoid traffic lights and suchlike!

The problem with them is that the routes are not usually continuous, they have various hazards on them, they are sometimes not swept clean and some of the people who use them have little sense when interacting with others.

But at the end of the day they remain a useful addition to the cycling infrastructure and, to apply the old cliché , "the more the merrier."

There are about a dozen of those little chicanes in the span of half a mile.

The same trail goes alongside a creek,crossing it several times,and has some pretty serious money spent on bridges.

http://www.runningahead.com/logs/2d...workouts/bb37b7a539654199ab7dfb9a763dd89c/map

All told the route is about 4.5 miles long, but at the West end connects onwards to other trails along side main roads.
As I normally ride it with my wife and daughter in her trailer bike, we tend not to carry onto those sections.

 

[Archibald]

No. They're adults. They're not my concern.

the motorists?

That said, I would intervene if I saw someone doing something life-threateningly stupid, e.g. passing a juggernaut on the inside at a red light.

I've given some jip to some red light runners and even nearly ended up in a fight with one turkey. Just asked him at the next set as to how his red light running was working for him, and then why he wasn't blowing the set we were sitting at. He went off his tree and followed me for the next few K's to continue his tirade...
f**k 'em now - let Darwinism remove the idiots from the roads

 

[wrinklyvet]

There are about a dozen of those little chicanes in the span of half a mile.

The same trail goes alongside a creek,crossing it several times,and has some pretty serious money spent on bridges.

All told the route is about 4.5 miles long, but at the West end connects onwards to other trails along side main roads.
As I normally ride it with my wife and daughter in her trailer bike, we tend not to carry onto those sections.

Yes, that looks like big money indeed. It sounds like a good trail. They probably had no money left to move the lamp posts! Or it may be that the designer never rides a bike. If he does, he's just including some variety and a challenge for you perhaps.

Actually, though it's a bit shoddy I don't think I would complain. You are, in a way, lucky with what there is. We have very similar problems here with bits of "street furniture" in the way, but you don't see many riders lying spreadeagled in the road as a result.

Where I live, the shortest cycle path is about three yards. I saw a photo of a cycle lane marked out in a road that must have been one of the shortest, at less than the length of a car. In these cases there must have been better ways of spending the time and the money (though in the latter case it must have been very little!).

 

[Jspear]

the motorists?



I've given some jip to some red light runners and even nearly ended up in a fight with one turkey. Just asked him at the next set as to how his red light running was working for him, and then why he wasn't blowing the set we were sitting at. He went off his tree and followed me for the next few K's to continue his tirade...
f**k 'em now - let Darwinism remove the idiots from the roads

Lol post of the year!
Gonna use that in my sig...don't worry I'll give you credit.