Uncategorized23 Mar 2008 09:39 am
Physically Separated Bike Lanes
Though this video is NYC-centric in nature, all lessons and video easily apply to cities across the U.S.
Physically Separated Bike Lanes
Though this video is NYC-centric in nature, all lessons and video easily apply to cities across the U.S.
Someone in this video commented that more people on bicycles would mean less traffic. Well, not unless these people stop going places period. Bicycles are traffic. Five cyclists and five motorists versus one cyclist and nine motorists is still 10 people on the road in both cases.
One cyclist here comments that cars parked in the bike lane force cyclists to “swerve into traffic.” No cyclist, for that matter no vehicle operator period should ever “swerve” anywhere. As a cyclist, you’re a vehicle operator and you therefore have the responsibility to scan the road ahead for obstacles and prepare for them far enough in advance that you have time to signal your intention and smoothly merge into the line of traffic when need be.
Of course, if there was no bike lane in the first place, chances are a lane change wouldn’t even be necessary; it’s much easier to maintain your position if every vehicle is using the same system of lanes and is subject to the same system of rules; segregating by vehicle type just complicates the picture (and whenever something gets complicated, that just means more things can go wrong; in other words, bike lanes can actually cause collisions rather than prevent them). On a bicycle you are traffic; you have the same right to be there as everyone else.
It is this feeling that a cyclist is somehow “intruding” on a road that causes most of these misconceptions. Misguided cyclists like bike lanes because they have the mistaken belief that they must “stay out of the way of cars.” No; it is the motorist’s responsibility to avoid hitting you, a rightful user of the road.
It’s true you shouldn’t delay traffic unnecessarily; if you can let someone overtake without compromising your safety, then of course you should. It’s when you can’t let them pass, when the choice comes down to your safety versus their convenience, that you have every right to delay them until there is a safe opportunity to pass.
That, if you’ll pardon the pun, is also a two way street. On those occasions when the cyclist is going faster than motor traffic (particularly common on a long descent or in a strong tailwind), the cyclist is also responsible for overtaking the motorist safely and must slow down to the motorist’s speed if it is not safe to pass (cyclists must also yield to pedestrians as well).
Why do we need all this extra paint and infrastructure when we can accomplish the same thing just by squashing this ridiculous notion that cyclists are somehow “second class” road users?
Hi John
It’s nice to know there are people in rural new brunswick/NS who have opinions on the urban cycling conditions we face here every day. But from the previous post and discussion, I’m feeling unsympathetic to your point of view and regard the video referred to here as very helpful – like a LOT of major cities seem to have these facilities, so are they all wrong?
I don’t think so.
“[A] LOT of major cities seem to have these facilities, so are they all wrong?”
In my opinion, yes. The mere fact that a lot of cities have something doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a good idea.
Don’t forget, there was a time when a vast majority thought the world was flat; the fact that that majority believed it didn’t make that true, either.
John, your flatness argument is not an apt comparison to the situation with cyclists and bike lanes.
You’ve been shown statistics that demonstrate your views are incorrect. You are on the flat Earth side of the discussion here.
John,
You want your six year old riding in those conditions? Knowing that too many motorisist are busy talking on their cellphones, adjusting their radios, texting and using their blackberries, trying to figure out where they are with their GPS, and running far too late because there was a crash on the highway which slowed them down? Some of the delivery trucks on the roads are HUGE and my kids are small. I don’t want my kids them mixing with those trucks. That’s the point Enrique was talking about. If you feel comfortable letting your grandmother/mother/kids ride on those roads then you will see everybody out on those roads, not just elite cyclists like yourself.
Yes, motorists must take more responcibilty for their actions, but when the courts only give two years of house arrest for murdering and maiming of people with a car http://therecord.blogs.com/take_the_lane/2008/03/kill-two-cyclis.html you won’t get change in motorists behaviour.
[...] watch the video by clicking here, I think you’ll be pleasantly surprised. Is a separate dedicated bike lane something you [...]
“You want your six year old riding in those conditions?”
Of course not. Of course, I wouldn’t want that self same six year old driving a car in that traffic, either.
As far as the six year old goes, the bike lane isn’t even relevant. Bike lane or no, I would never take any inexperienced cyclist, much less a six year old, into any street where there’s significant traffic (unless they were in a trailer or trail-a-bike, which effectively makes them a passenger).
Just like when one learns to drive a car, one must first learn the rules of traffic negotiation on quieter roads and work their way up to more complex traffic situations. You don’t just throw cyclists onto a busy road and hope they learn the rules; that’s like throwing someone into the water and expecting them to figure out how to swim.
That, in fact, is probably one of the greatest dangers of bike lanes; they encourage cyclists onto busy streets who may not be ready for busy streets.
There’s nothing “elite” about what I do. The basic rules of the road are simple; anyone can learn them. Therefore, anyone who can balance and pedal a bike, who gains enough experience and practice, can do what I do.
there’s basic equity involved – safe side streets that go to many destinations just don’t exist, or are too infrequent and haphazard to make using them regularly a good option. we don’t have distinct grades of sidewalks for novice pedestrians.
and we do have to ensure better walking for pedestrians by providing safe passage for bikes on the roads, or other parts of the road.
is it time to post things about shared sidewalks as is done in parts of Europe too – though we probably know the reaction.
europeans aren’t without reason. their cities have certain features with cause.
A physically separated bike lane on Bloor would be ideal and look more beautiful than a row of parked cars, there’s room for it and it would be safer for both motorists and cyclists.
A compromise would be to have a 2 metre wide painted lane each way, a very reasonable request.
[...] (original release date: February 17, 2007), is enjoying a renaissance this week. First, a post on TaketheTooker featured the film and sparked a discussion about the merits of bike lanes compared to riding in [...]
the vehicular/”integrated” cyclist (slash engineer, slash bike nerd, slash predominantly fit, white male) camp cares nothing about getting more people to bike. otherwise they would have realized a long time ago that their ideology bears no connection to reality.
John,
A six year old riding her bike in a bike lane is relevant. My six year old rides her own bike. She’s been riding since he was three, giving almost three years of “experience”. How long must one ride before one becomes “experienced”?
But just as importantly, how is she to gain experience? How did you learn learn to ride in traffic without actually riding in traffic? And why should we tolerate streets so unsafe that only “experienced” users can be on them?
Do you think for a moment that I expect her to ride in busy traffic situations by herself? No, I ride with her. And as we ride together I am coaching her, teaching her.
She may not yet be old enough to out unsepervised, but in a couple of years when she will be old enough. She will rider her bike to the store, school, or to visit her freinds. She will ride to the park, the pool, the museum, or to any one of the many destintations that we _all_ want to go to. How will she get there without going on busy streets when most of the destnations are either on these busy streets, or are only accessable by travelling on these busy streets?
And how am I to teach anyone the complex skills of navigating on _any_ street without actually coaching them while doing it? How does one learn to use and to read the “body language” of motorists and cyclists to negotiate through intersections without actually participating in the negotiation? How is anyone to actually fully appreciate the constantly changing, dynamic, situation that is traffic, and learn to to be both a reactive and proactive participant with it?
Even newly licenced motorists are not allowed to drive by themseleves; they must drive with an experienced driver beside them to coach them.
CAN-BIKE does teach some theory in a classroom, but most of the learning for these “inexperienced” cyclists occurs out in real live traffic. Dynamic situations demand dynamic judgement. Feedback is constantly being given by the instructors, and by the other cyclists.
Untilimately “experience” come from doing. Autonomy and judgement does not start at the age of 16, 18, 19, or 21. It actually starts when we first learn to speak, when we learn to ask for food and drink. And it is something that most of us continue to learn for most of lives.
But the other problem is that there are too many who don’t negotiate, motorists who take but won’t give. The video was full of examples. When a motorist makes a mistake, or does not give room to a cyclists, the results can be disasterous for the cyclist.
The discussion over treehugger http://www.treehugger.com/files/2008/03/physically-separated-bike-lanes.php is a great example of the attitude which we seem to be unable to remove: that a motorists “rush” some how overrides the cylists right to use the road; or that the speed “limit” should actually be the speed at which all traffic moves on the street. As long as we cannot remove this mentality from motorists, the only other option is to remove some space from the motorists and hand it over to the cyclists.
John, if you see another option, I’d love to hear about it.
“My six year old rides her own bike. She’s been riding since he was three, giving almost three years of ‘experience’.”
In bicycle handling yes; not in traffic negotiation.
“How long must one ride before one becomes ‘experienced’?”
In traffic? Depends on the age and the individual person. Some people are more capable than others and pick it up quickly; others need more time. Younger people generally need more time than older people.
On average, IMHO, most children younger than 12 are cognitively equipped to handle the highest density traffic situations. A few particularly talented riders MAY be ready at 11 or 10, but then only if they’ve been practicing their traffic negotiation skills on quieter streets from day one of riding. This, by necessity, must be left to the judgment of the parents.
As for adults I’d say, with formal instruction, one can be ready to handle the highest density traffic in two to three months. Without formal instruction, six to eight.
These are averages only based on my personal observations; again, results may vary from person to person, each having different strengths and weaknesses.
“But just as importantly, how is she to gain experience?”
By practicing her skills on low traffic residential streets first, migrating up to more and more complex streets as her skills improve. It’s the same thing car drivers need to do, and for the same reasons.
“How did you learn learn to ride in traffic without actually riding in traffic?”
I did it the hard way by doing everything wrong in the beginning, ending up over someone’s hood once in a process (when I was foolishly riding on the sidewalk).
I recommend the skills I learned, but I emphatically do not recommend learning them the way I learned them.
“And why should we tolerate streets so unsafe that only ‘experienced’ users can be on them?”
For the same reason we must tolerate overcrowding in general; it’s an unavoidable side effect of the excessive population of Humans on this planet.
“She may not yet be old enough to out unsepervised, but in a couple of years when she will be old enough. She will rider her bike to the store, school, or to visit her freinds. She will ride to the park, the pool, the museum, or to any one of the many destintations that we _all_ want to go to. How will she get there without going on busy streets when most of the destnations are either on these busy streets, or are only accessable by travelling on these busy streets?”
She won’t. Either you need to make sure she has the necessary skills to handle the streets in question or, if they’re simply beyond her abilities at her young age, you’ll just have to resign yourself to escorting her until she hits 12 and is ready to handle the responsibility (or, if she’s one of those gifted ones I mentioned earlier, perhaps when she hits 11 or 10, if you’re lucky).
Alternatively, she could walk her bike on the busiest streets that are beyond her abilities and ride on the quieter streets; overall, the trip would still take her less time than straight walking.
This is one of the unfortunate drawbacks of raising children in an urban area, and probably explains in part why many people try so hard to find a place in a suburb or in the country to raise children.
“And how am I to teach anyone the complex skills of navigating on _any_ street without actually coaching them while doing it?”
You don’t; you just can’t start that coaching on the most difficult streets. You have to start on the easy ones first and work up to the hard ones. It takes time, yes, but it’s unavoidable, at least if the skills are to be taught properly and safely.
“Even newly licenced motorists are not allowed to drive by themseleves; they must drive with an experienced driver beside them to coach them.”
I agree; why do you think I suggested supervising her?
[Society's general attitude seems to be] that a motorists “rush” some how overrides the cylists right to use the road; or that the speed “limit” should actually be the speed at which all traffic moves on the street. As long as we cannot remove this mentality from motorists, the only other option is to remove some space from the motorists and hand it over to the cyclists.”
This mentality must be removed for the safety of all road users, motorists and cyclists alike; if it is allowed to stand, all users of the road are in unnecessary danger.
Doing as you propose, in my view, is just raising the white flag and surrendering. This is something we cannot afford to do.
I find that during rush hour trucks that do deliveries on the right lane are both hazardous to cyclist and motorist because one has to make a sudden lane change in congested traffic. When I was in Europe many city centers would not allow delivery trucks to obstruct traffic during rush hour in congested areas.
However city centers which had pedestrian only cores would allow exclusive entry to deliver trucks to make there deleveries before 8am after then it became a pedestrian/cyclist only space. I think this is a great idea because it makes road users use busy city centres at different times avoiding blockages and additional congestion at rush hour. I thought this plan worked out for all parties.