When Bike Lanes Hurt More Than Help
In NYC, there are some new bike lanes that some bikers would rather do without. Excellent video and a must-see for anyone thinking about future changes to Chicago streets.
Views: 371
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by h' Zerocats on
-
I think that it is not true that families should not be a welcome part of the bike commuter culture in the city.
Where did that come from?
When I lived in Munich I often rode across town and into the outer rings to work. Moving on and off the bike way to get from place to place was common and I was not menaced by cars off the road. Plenty of drivers are cyclists there.
When was this? I suspect it's changed.
Also we may be talking about different situations here-- e.g. the difference between traversing an urban area and trying to navigate between small towns.
When I lived there I only had isolated experiences with vigilante drivers trying to get me out of the road because there was purportedly a path somewhere nearby.
George Christiansen has very recent experience touring in Germany and it's apparently now a constant occurrence. He's been around the world and to Germany many times over the years and was pretty clear that it was different than it used to be.
-
Permalink Reply by David on
-
I'm curious, what exactly do you think is poorly-designed about this particular lane? The separated bike lane, with bikes between the car and the sidewalk, is pretty common in Europe, so it's not a new idea. The claim is made by one person in the video that the lane should have been on the right because more cars turn left on 1st ave., but there's no solid numbers to back up that claim. And city officials have reported that there's been a 50% reduction in injuries to street users with the new bike lane, a pretty significant spike in safety.
The fact that somebody is complaining just isn't evidence that the planners are "half-awake bean counters." That's a pretty harsh charge against people who are working hard for cyclists.
H3N3 said:Glad someone took the time to speak out about this.
I would not take it as a condemnation of all bike lanes but of one poorly-designed example.
Two problems jump out here:
1) Where bike lanes and bike paths are placed, driver intolerance of any cyclist not in that lane or on that path spikes to dangerous levels.
2) When bicyclists get planning or advocacy jobs, they frequently lose their enthusiasm for the cause of bicycling and morph into the type of half-awake bean counters that let this particular mistake happen.
-
Permalink Reply by Allen Wrench on
-
Just because a lane is separated doesn't mean that it's slow. You'd better not step out into one as a pedestrian. I used to commute in high gears in urban conditions similar to here and the parts on dedicated lanes went fast and worry-free. Yes, the cyclist in Germany (and, I think, Holland) is required to take the bike lane when present. No, I don't think that would limit Chicago cyclists if there were such a lane here, which there isn't. And yes, there is often some know-it-all yelling obscenities at you in both places. Nonetheless, it was much, much faster to get around the three cities I lived in there (for a decade) by bike than by car or tram thanks largely to the lanes. If that has changed I'd be surprised. My experiences riding in Holland occasionally are similar.
The vehicular cycling advocates here like John Allen make good points - that the lack of cyclists on the street makes drivers too dumb to see them when they are - but most are criticisms of specific faults in specific separated lanes such as traffic lights that put straight riding cyclists into a right turning car lane. Their approach may be the only one appropriate for our current infrastructure, but I don't see how supporting the infrastructure status quo is going to make anything better.
And say what they will about the not-quite-separated-enough lane in New York in the video )most complaints are about parking and pedestrian intrusion), if injuries are down 50% there, that's a lot of people who are well now who wouldn't have been under the former system.
Maybe we can try to advocate for a few completely separated bike highways in Chicago (I vote for a long stretch of Milwaukee as a contender) and see how it goes. I think you'd be surprised how fast it would go and how many less able cyclists would begin to view cycling as a real alternative to cars.
H3N3 said:I'm kind of surprised at this response.
Sure, the type of infrastructure you call for would be great, but what about the people who need to ride from Rogers Park to UIC every day, and would prefer not to spend more than 50 minutes doing so?
Are they "anti-kid" because they're not willing to add another 30 minutes each way to accept a different type of infrastructure designed for a different type of use?
Germany is an odd comparison; towns there are much more centralized in their business districts, and in larger cities each part of the city tends to have its own center-- it's much less likely that anyone's daily commute would be 8, 12, 14 miles like it may be in a city laid out like Chicago.
Additionally, Germany has sadly become the world capital in terms of drivers harrassing cyclists off the road because they know there's a path nearby.
Your solution is obviously not one-size-fits-all.
I wonder if you watched the film or are just responding to a few flippant comments here?
Allen Wrench said:Separated lanes and bike boulevards are the way to go to get everyone a place to ride for any purpose. It's fun to be a cowboy when you are not hauling your kids, a kid yourself, or old and staying on a bike. In Germany my ancient neighbors and kids going to school had a right to ride and place to do it on separated lanes.
As a parent who rides to school every morning with my kids I can say that moving in and out of traffic is really crappy, not fun. I ride a stretch of Milwaukee in the shared lane by the Polish triangle down to Wood because I have to and find it dangerous. I can't wait for my turn off. I find it irksome that my sons can't ride their own bikes on our commute because of the bad cycling infrastructure. Should I stay off the road just because I have kids? Anyone out there planning to have some and hang up their wheels?
-
Permalink Reply by Mark on
-
As soon as I saw this new design for a separated bike lane, I thought it was more dangerous than a regular bike lane next to traffic. There is no escape route if something unexpected happens in front of you. I'd rather ride next to traffic than be confined between a curb and a row of car doors. This design is dnangerous - whether it's on the left side or the right side. BTW - the bike lane in NYC is on the left because the bus lane is on the right. That's the same reason the bike lane on Dearborn is on the left side of the street.
-
Permalink Reply by Duppie on
-
I love the interwebs.
Overnight everybody became an experienced traffic engineer, qualified to discuss the design flaws of a bike lane....
-
-
David,
there are a variety of perspectives offered in this video, by people of obviously diverse experience and knowledge-- and also a variety of specific problems outlined.
Of course I watch it critically and make a judgment as to the veracity of each claim just like you do-- no idea why you're trying to reduce this to one or two points of minutia, and/or present things as if I would just swallow what any random person who gets in front of a camera might say, uncritically.
There's a clear theme that comes across-- the bike lane does not work for the riding style of the majority of people interviewed, who are just interested in passing through the space quickly on their way from A to B.
Curious-- are you David Gleason?
David said:I'm curious, what exactly do you think is poorly-designed about this particular lane? The separated bike lane, with bikes between the car and the sidewalk, is pretty common in Europe, so it's not a new idea. The claim is made by one person in the video that the lane should have been on the right because more cars turn left on 1st ave., but there's no solid numbers to back up that claim. And city officials have reported that there's been a 50% reduction in injuries to street users with the new bike lane, a pretty significant spike in safety.
The fact that somebody is complaining just isn't evidence that the planners are "half-awake bean counters." That's a pretty harsh charge against people who are working hard for cyclists.
H3N3 said:Glad someone took the time to speak out about this.
I would not take it as a condemnation of all bike lanes but of one poorly-designed example.
Two problems jump out here:
1) Where bike lanes and bike paths are placed, driver intolerance of any cyclist not in that lane or on that path spikes to dangerous levels.
2) When bicyclists get planning or advocacy jobs, they frequently lose their enthusiasm for the cause of bicycling and morph into the type of half-awake bean counters that let this particular mistake happen.
-
-
= unless you have a traffic engineering degree you are not qualified to express an opinion?
What degrees do you have Duppie? I need to know which of your opinions to discount.
Duppie said:I love the interwebs.
Overnight everybody became an experienced traffic engineer, qualified to discuss the design flaws of a bike lane....
-
-
Not sure how to respond-- you don't seem to be speaking to any of the points I raised or specific questions I posed, and you're ascribing me several positions I don't hold.
Allen Wrench said:Just because a lane is separated doesn't mean that it's slow. You'd better not step out into one as a pedestrian. I used to commute in high gears in urban conditions similar to here and the parts on dedicated lanes went fast and worry-free. Yes, the cyclist in Germany (and, I think, Holland) is required to take the bike lane when present. No, I don't think that would limit Chicago cyclists if there were such a lane here, which there isn't. And yes, there is often some know-it-all yelling obscenities at you in both places. Nonetheless, it was much, much faster to get around the three cities I lived in there (for a decade) by bike than by car or tram thanks largely to the lanes. If that has changed I'd be surprised. My experiences riding in Holland occasionally are similar.
The vehicular cycling advocates here like John Allen make good points - that the lack of cyclists on the street makes drivers too dumb to see them when they are - but most are criticisms of specific faults in specific separated lanes such as traffic lights that put straight riding cyclists into a right turning car lane. Their approach may be the only one appropriate for our current infrastructure, but I don't see how supporting the infrastructure status quo is going to make anything better.
And say what they will about the not-quite-separated-enough lane in New York in the video )most complaints are about parking and pedestrian intrusion), if injuries are down 50% there, that's a lot of people who are well now who wouldn't have been under the former system.
Maybe we can try to advocate for a few completely separated bike highways in Chicago (I vote for a long stretch of Milwaukee as a contender) and see how it goes. I think you'd be surprised how fast it would go and how many less able cyclists would begin to view cycling as a real alternative to cars.
H3N3 said:I'm kind of surprised at this response.
Sure, the type of infrastructure you call for would be great, but what about the people who need to ride from Rogers Park to UIC every day, and would prefer not to spend more than 50 minutes doing so?
Are they "anti-kid" because they're not willing to add another 30 minutes each way to accept a different type of infrastructure designed for a different type of use?
Germany is an odd comparison; towns there are much more centralized in their business districts, and in larger cities each part of the city tends to have its own center-- it's much less likely that anyone's daily commute would be 8, 12, 14 miles like it may be in a city laid out like Chicago.
Additionally, Germany has sadly become the world capital in terms of drivers harrassing cyclists off the road because they know there's a path nearby.
Your solution is obviously not one-size-fits-all.
I wonder if you watched the film or are just responding to a few flippant comments here?
Allen Wrench said:Separated lanes and bike boulevards are the way to go to get everyone a place to ride for any purpose. It's fun to be a cowboy when you are not hauling your kids, a kid yourself, or old and staying on a bike. In Germany my ancient neighbors and kids going to school had a right to ride and place to do it on separated lanes.
As a parent who rides to school every morning with my kids I can say that moving in and out of traffic is really crappy, not fun. I ride a stretch of Milwaukee in the shared lane by the Polish triangle down to Wood because I have to and find it dangerous. I can't wait for my turn off. I find it irksome that my sons can't ride their own bikes on our commute because of the bad cycling infrastructure. Should I stay off the road just because I have kids? Anyone out there planning to have some and hang up their wheels?
-
Permalink Reply by Anne Alt on
-
That's exactly how I felt looking at that left-side bike lane. The NYC situation pictured there looked a lot like some of our more congested areas (like Wells St. in Old Town, North/Milwaukee/Damen, etc.), where delivery drivers and cabs are often encroaching on our lane. The idea of being trapped with no escape route if a delivery driver suddenly cut me off with a loaded hand truck is a scary one. Going several miles on such a route would be even worse.
Mark said:As soon as I saw this new design for a separated bike lane, I thought it was more dangerous than a regular bike lane next to traffic. There is no escape route if something unexpected happens in front of you. I'd rather ride next to traffic than be confined between a curb and a row of car doors. This design is dnangerous - whether it's on the left side or the right side. BTW - the bike lane in NYC is on the left because the bus lane is on the right. That's the same reason the bike lane on Dearborn is on the left side of the street.
-
Permalink Reply by pjc jr on
-
My two cents is that this video was pretty well done...it includes lots of actual experience (video of riding in this particular lane) and several users opinions. Some techie (knows how to edit film on a computer) should put some informative pieces together similar to this regarding are cycling challenges in Chicago. This was done in a way that it was not overly critical of the system but showed major concern for new developments in the New York metro area to assist cyclists. Basically informative and a good attempt to bring to light opposition to current design. In my opinion, this is good news reporting that could help our community.
It is also my personal opinion that bike lanes don't always work and that it allows drivers an argument as to how cyclists should share the road. I am of the school that I pay taxes, I live here, I have the same right to road. So move over you gas loving piece of @#*^s.....go kill another American for greed!
Please do not respond to my extreme over the top behavior posting....unless your nuts like me!
-
-
Oh, I was just wondering what it was in the video that convinced you that the bike lane was so obviously poorly designed. You seemed to have accepted the thesis of the filmmakers as truth, even to the degree of suggesting their position was so obvious that the lane designers must not have cared. I was wondering if there were specific points made in the film that convinced you that this particular group of cyclists was correct and others were wrong. I haven't done or seen any polls, but it's my impression from visiting and talking with friends there that the 1st Ave. bike lane is extremely popular in most biking circles in NYC (certainly not all, but *nothing* is popular in all biking circles).
It was mostly your thinly-veiled personal attacks on the designers that led to my question. I was wondering whether you found something in the film to be overwhelmingly convincing or if you had some inside knowledge or additional information about the designers.
No, I'm not David Gleason.
H3N3 said:David,
there are a variety of perspectives offered in this video, by people of obviously diverse experience and knowledge-- and also a variety of specific problems outlined.
Of course I watch it critically and make a judgment as to the veracity of each claim just like you do-- no idea why you're trying to reduce this to one or two points of minutia, and/or present things as if I would just swallow what any random person who gets in front of a camera might say, uncritically.
There's a clear theme that comes across-- the bike lane does not work for the riding style of the majority of people interviewed, who are just interested in passing through the space quickly on their way from A to B.
Curious-- are you David Gleason?
David said:I'm curious, what exactly do you think is poorly-designed about this particular lane? The separated bike lane, with bikes between the car and the sidewalk, is pretty common in Europe, so it's not a new idea. The claim is made by one person in the video that the lane should have been on the right because more cars turn left on 1st ave., but there's no solid numbers to back up that claim. And city officials have reported that there's been a 50% reduction in injuries to street users with the new bike lane, a pretty significant spike in safety.
The fact that somebody is complaining just isn't evidence that the planners are "half-awake bean counters." That's a pretty harsh charge against people who are working hard for cyclists.
H3N3 said:Glad someone took the time to speak out about this.
I would not take it as a condemnation of all bike lanes but of one poorly-designed example.
Two problems jump out here:
1) Where bike lanes and bike paths are placed, driver intolerance of any cyclist not in that lane or on that path spikes to dangerous levels.
2) When bicyclists get planning or advocacy jobs, they frequently lose their enthusiasm for the cause of bicycling and morph into the type of half-awake bean counters that let this particular mistake happen.
-
Permalink Reply by Craig S. on
-
To be overly and stupidly professionally pedantic because the usage of the word in professional circles is to me like fingernails on a chalkboard, it ain't "film" PJ it's video or more precisely with what she probably took the images with, data.
I'm currently fairly underemployed, if someone or a group of folks wanted to shoot some video/data of these things you're talking about, they could play producer and I could throw it all together on my rig. I might charge a cold beer or eight for the use of my edit rig. Might make an interesting project.
pjc jr said:My two cents is that this video was pretty well done...it includes lots of actual experience (video of riding in this particular lane) and several users opinions. Some techie (knows how to edit film on a computer) should put some informative pieces together similar to this regarding are cycling challenges in Chicago. This was done in a way that it was not overly critical of the system but showed major concern for new developments in the New York metro area to assist cyclists. Basically informative and a good attempt to bring to light opposition to current design. In my opinion, this is good news reporting that could help our community.
It is also my personal opinion that bike lanes don't always work and that it allows drivers an argument as to how cyclists should share the road. I am of the school that I pay taxes, I live here, I have the same right to road. So move over you gas loving piece of @#*^s.....go kill another American for greed!
Please do not respond to my extreme over the top behavior posting....unless your nuts like me!
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
Groups
-
Critical Mass discussion
262 members
-
Chicagoland Beer Explora…
203 members
-
Chicago Randonneurs
269 members
-
Walk Bike Transit
63 members
-
British Bicycles of Chic…
172 members
© 2008-2016 The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.
Powered by
