Blog on Protected Bike Lanes
Saw this blog post just now by Jan Heine, editor of Bicycle Quarterly:
http://janheine.wordpress.com/2013/05/15/bike-to-work-3-separate-or...
Thought some here might find it interesting as well.
Views: 799
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by spencewine on
-
I much prefer Quarterly Bicycle (AKA Randonneur Poseur Guide):
http://quarterlybicycle.wordpress.com/
-
Permalink Reply by Tricolor on
-
Protected bike lanes were invented by Nazis, so protected bike lanes are bad.
Design it properly and I think they work well enough. Other than width and drainage Dearborn is actually pretty good with signaling to ensure if everyone pays attention to signals they won't cross one another's path.
-
Permalink Reply by Kevin C Dormant on
-
I not only think the blog post is interesting, I think it's absolutely accurate.
-
Permalink Reply by Jeremy on
-
I can take or leave protected bike lanes, but the link (in the link posted) to the story about "Reasonably Polite Seattleites" installing a section of their own guerrilla protected lane was pretty great. I'd be completely in favor of more of that happening.
-
-
-
-
Terrible. There's a reason this reductionist drivel is relegated to some dudes blog. That being said, I expect to see a similar article pop up in the NYT or some other "highly regarded" news source very soon.
-
Permalink Reply by Skip Montanaro 0mi on
-
I'm not sure what "reductionist drivel" is, but Jan Heine is well-respected within the cycling community. I wouldn't have referenced his blog post if I thought he was just a bozo with an axe to grind.
-
-
I know you have a discerning and unbiased eye for the truth, Skip. But, you said some here might find it interesting. I didn't expect you to be offended when I offered my thoughts on the piece, just as Kevin and others have done. I still hate the post.
-
-
I'm not so much offended by disagreement, as disappointed that you didn't state what you don't like about the author's opinions. I would welcome a discussion on the concept of protected bike lanes, so I will start one.
In my mind, the important thing to consider is how the various common risks change as you move between each of the three common configurations: no bike lanes, normal bike lanes, protected bike lanes. Let me consider each one. (I do not have "twenty seven eight-by-ten color glossy photographs with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each," but I will make occasional use of headings and bullet lists, so as to make my argument more convincing and authoritative. :-) (Obviously, not really... I just want to structure things a bit.)
The Risks
In my mind, if you ride in a typical urban setting, you are exposed to the following risks:
- (A) cars moving parallel to your direction of travel
- (B) drivers or passengers entering or exiting parallel parked cars
- (C) right hooks at intersections
Those seem to be the three main risks to me. There are others (such as pedestrians using the bike lane as an extension of the sidewalk), but I think they tend to be lower risk and are changed less by the various street configurations, so I will ignore them for now. If you disagree, please add yours to the list.
Riding Directly in Traffic
If you ride on a street with no bike lanes, your opportunity to mitigate risks is minimized. You will sometimes be squeezed between moving traffic and parked cars with no space to call your own. The best way to mitigate these risks seems to be to move left and ride in traffic when you can. I realize this maneuver is not for everyone. The longer you ride in urban settings, the more comfortable you will likely be with it, however.
Regular Bike Lanes
If you ride in a regular bike lane, you are still exposed to all three risks, but you now have a place to call your own, so you can more easily mitigate them. (In fact, I would argue that most of the time they are lessened, even if you take no steps on your own.) If you need to, you can move toward the right (when there are no parked cars) or the left (when there is little or no moving traffic), and you can still move out into traffic if necessary. If you hear or see a car coming, you can move left to discourage the driver from cutting you off while turning right. You have the extra problem of cars stopping to load or unload passengers in the bike lane, but I will ignore it, considering that in the typical case you can slow down and stop, if necessary.
Riding in Protected Bike Lanes
For the sake of this discussion, I consider protected bike lanes to be those where you have a row of parallel parked cars between you on your bike and moving vehicles. The Dearborn PBL in the Loop and a chunk of Church St in Evanston typify this setup. There are other protections (curbs, bollards, pylons), but I don't know where around Chicagoland they might exist. I doubt they will ever be widely used either, as cities are too strapped for cash not to create pay parking wherever they can.
If you ride in a protected bike lane, you effectively remove Risk a from consideration altogether. Risk b is reduced substantially most of the time. Most cars seem to only carry a driver, though when cars do carry passengers, they are likely less watchful than drivers. Still, if you get doored by a passenger exiting a car on its right, your risk of serious injury is much less than on the left.
As I see it, Risk c is the real problem with most protected bike lanes. You are much less visible to right turning cars at intersections. You are hiding from them behind a row of parked cars. In Jan Heine's blog he points this out in one picture. The cyclist is difficult to see, even though there is a blank zone between the minivan and the crosswalk (looks to be about one car length). A possible solution to this problem would seem to be to take away two or three parking spaces in the region approaching intersections. I don't think Evanston did this when they installed the Church St protected bike lane. They appear to have simply moved all existing parking places to the left. I don't know if Chicago reduced the number of parking spaces when building the Dearborn PBL. (Maybe they had to in order to add turn points.) In Evanston, the few times I have turned right onto Maple or Sherman from Church, I have either forgotten to look for bikes (and I'm a bikie!), or when I have, felt frustrated that I couldn't see who might have been behind the row of cars.
Summary
I am comfortable riding in most urban settings, having commuted off-and-on for more than 30 years. As a result, I don't mind riding with vehicular traffic around me, turning left with cars, that sort of thing. I realize not everybody will agree. For me, both as a driver and a bike rider, I find the increased risk of a right hook at intersections the most unnerving aspect of protected bike lanes. That contributes significantly to my unease about their construction. I would prefer that regular bike lanes be the norm, and unlike the Dearborn PBL, just move in the direction of existing auto traffic on one-way streets.
I welcome others' insights on the issues.
Skip
-
Permalink Reply by Lisa Curcio on
-
My perspective is: I am 58 years old, I started commuting and riding regularly just over a year ago after not having ridden a bike for all intents and purposes since I was a young teenager, my pace is relatively slow, and I am a chicken.
A year ago, the streets scared me to death. I vastly preferred ANY kind of protection, and a left turn without making a "box turn" was out of the question. My bike handling skills were less than great.
Today, a few streets scare me to death. I still like protected lanes. I make left turns from the left lane in almost all circumstances. I still ride at a relatively leisurely pace. My bike handling skills have vastly improved. I love riding my bike almost every day and prefer it to other modes of transportation in most circumstances.
I appreciate the problems inherent in PBLs the way they are built here. I just deal with them. I slow down (even more than my normal slow pace) when I approach intersections where a car might turn right across my path because it cannot see me. I look right and left a lot as I approach intersections of any type.
My point is that I think people like me are more willing to get out and ride when there is some sort of protected route available. Once one is comfortable riding it is easier to make the transition to dealing with traffic issues. It is easier to understand what the traffic issues are. I hope the city keeps building infrastructure to encourage cycling among the general population. I also hope they do a better job of thinking it through rather than racing to get things done just so they can say they are done.
-
-
Jan Heine's latest blog post: Bike to Work 4: Best of all worlds, together, in which he indicates that one size doesn't fit all.
Groups
-
Chicagoland Beer Explora…
203 members
-
Chicago Ride of Silence
118 members
-
Critical Mass discussion
262 members
-
Chicago Randonneurs
269 members
-
Walk Bike Transit
63 members
© 2008-2016 The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.
Powered by
