Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Richard on December 5, 2012 at 9:05am

Let's for a moment forget cycling. As a pedestrian, I can't count how many times drivers turning right (on red or green) fail to look in all directions. I've come very close to being hit on too many occasions.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Thunder Snow on December 5, 2012 at 10:30am

Yes, it makes sense that if you ride to the right of right-turning cars, you're setting yourself up to get right-hooked.  There are a number of areas in which the "CyclingSavvy" "vehicular cyclist" "John Franklin/John Forester" types are correct and this is one of them.  Another, is not to ride in the door zone, ever.  Where they are dead wrong is their complete opposition to any and all cycling infrastructure that can make cycling possible for younger/older/less experienced riders.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Reba 4.0 mi on December 8, 2012 at 8:22am

In my mind, this has little to nothing to do with bike lanes and everything to do with the basic dilemma we face when cycling in traffic. We are a kind of non-vehicular traffic that is required to follow the rules of the road. Aside from any cultural biases against bicyclists, the fact remains that we ride with traffic, as traffic (either by choice or by circumstance).

Therefore, when I have to stop for a red light, my preferred strategy is always to be first at an intersection and avoid the right hook. If I can't be first (I can't ride up to the white lines through the row of waiting cars), I wait my turn and yield to cars in line, taking the lane when I'm certain that the car next to/behind me knows I'm going through the intersection. In other words, I choose to be a bike when I can scoot ahead of other cars, and I'm traffic when I can't and have to wait my turn. 

Bike lane or not, it's the rider's actions that make them work. It never occurred to me that a bike lane gave me the freedom to ride without yielding. Do I always do this? Of course not, but I don't look back and think, "I almost died there!" when I follow this. 

If this must be about infrastructure, then the best improvement is better signage. Yield to Pedestrians and Bicycles (actually incorrect), or Bicycles Have Right of Way (again, wrong). Watch for Pedestrians and Bicycles (?) 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Brent Cohrs on December 9, 2012 at 4:09am

Thanks to everyone for taking the time to add comments to this discussion.

I think Reba hit it on the head - there are times when it is more effective and safer to utilize dedicating infrastructure and other times when it works better to ride like you were driving a car.  Having the flexibility to react to whatever situation we find ourselves in is key to staying safe.

The more I read up about the Dutch, the more I realize that a key component to their safety is the fact that cyclists in the Netherlands have attained critical mass.  When 85% of the residents of Amsterdam ride a bike at least once per week, you have the majority of citizens fully aware of the rights and vulnerabilities of cyclists.

While most of us tend to think that it's the Dutch infrastructure that keeps cyclists safe, there isn't infrastructure built in to every street and there are plenty of circumstances where cars and bikes come together and share the road.  In these instances, the sheer number of cyclists on the road and the empathy toward cyclists from drivers ensures cyclist safety.

We have a long way to go before we reach that tipping point.  As infrastructure continues to improve, more people will be emboldened to ride.  We need to continue to push for more and better infrastructure, thank our advocacy groups for their continued successes, and keep riding in a safe, predictable, and lawful manner.  We're still earning our respect one motorist at a time. 

Again, thanks for reading the 3-part series and my first post about incomplete infrastructure that kicked it off.  Feel free to share your comments directly after each post!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Todd Nelson on December 9, 2012 at 12:54pm

Thanks, Thunder Snow, for your agreement with CyclingSavvy et al. on the right hook and dooring issues.  However, please don't generalize CS adherents as "they", including them with other "vehicular cyclists", Franklin or Forrester.  I am a CyclingSavvy instructor and we are not in agreement with Forester (haven't followed Franklin) on everything.  We are not completely opposed to facilities.  They have their place, as you indicated, if they are properly engineered at conflict areas, but most of the time you cannot engineer away human limitations or let paint think for you, as John Brooking did a very excellent job of pointing out.

Be Smart, Skilled and Safe!

Todd Nelson

CyclingSavvy Instuctor

Illinois

Thunder Snow said:

Yes, it makes sense that if you ride to the right of right-turning cars, you're setting yourself up to get right-hooked.  There are a number of areas in which the "CyclingSavvy" "vehicular cyclist" "John Franklin/John Forester" types are correct and this is one of them.  Another, is not to ride in the door zone, ever.  Where they are dead wrong is their complete opposition to any and all cycling infrastructure that can make cycling possible for younger/older/less experienced riders.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Todd Nelson on December 9, 2012 at 1:27pm

Brent, thanks for pointing out the difference in culture and the fact that infrastructure isn't everywhere in countries, like the Netherlands, that support it so well.  We have a long way to go to that tipping point.  Hopefully, we won't need the 85% that the Dutch have.  We may see Hell freeze over first.

Todd Nelson, CSI

• ▶ Reply