Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski
I just realized, you are my "bike lane" expert. In TCOTU, on the avenues, the central lanes are driving of course. Then you have a parking lane, then the bike lane. Then the sidewalk.
My little burb put a main road on a diet- 4 lanes to 2. But it is drive/bike/park which seems really dangerous. To park you have to cross the bike lane? Why isn't one arrangement settled?
|
More “aficionado” than “expert” but it’s settled. The Dutch don’t mix bikes and cars unless car traffic is calmed to 30kph, I think. Otherwise, bike facilities are grade-separated at sidewalk height.
Having built out our transportation networks to prioritize car throughout and storage, it’s really hard for us to replicate that, especially if we’re not entirely rebuilding the right of way. This leaves us trying to figure out how to put bikes on the existing roadway and making compromise choices. They range from simple buffered bike lanes (in my view fine if wide enough) or “protected” with plastic sticks (“delineators” , meh) or cement curbs (yeah!) or parked cars. The latter is a mixed bag, providing protection mid-block but perhaps increasing conflicts at intersections because it’s harder for drivers to see bikes approaching them.
Locally, I understand that our bike advocacy group (co-founded by our now city council president) was sparked by opposition to a parking-protected bike lane through downtown. Always seemed fine to me, as a slow biker, but it was true that turning cars didn’t always pay attention to people on bikes. It’s gone now.
Meanwhile, elsewhere, people park in bike lanes that are supposed to be parking-protected, which is a pain. Really, we should just all copy the Dutch.
In sum, if the road is being seal-coated or restriped, it should get buffered bike lanes (with or without plastic sticks). If it’s getting rebuilt, the curb should be moved and bike facilities should be at sidewalk levels.
If you live where there aren’t sidewalks, move.
