5 ms·

Examples like this are exactly why bike lanes are not the only change needed to make cycling more accessible. What stops drivers from doing any of these if ther

Examples like this are exactly why bike lanes are not the only change needed to make cycling more accessible. What stops drivers from doing any of these if there were protected bike lanes? Generally "protected" bike lines are not protected at intersections, which is where most problems occur. I live in Austin right now and I tend to avoid the protected bike lanes because drivers frequently turn across them without yielding to cyclists using them. The city put up signs saying to yield to oncoming cyclists, but in my experience those signs are followed less than 5% of the time. I'd rather ride in the normal traffic lane where I'm visible. Yes, I might be angering some drivers, but angering drivers is better than dying.

gugagore 8y ago
There's a certain burden to being vigilant and self-defensive on the road. Even if I'm not protected in intersections, a protected bike lane means that there's a lot less time I need to be worried that a car will hit me. However, you're bringing up the point that protected bike lanes may make intersections even more dangerous for cyclists. While your reasoning makes sense, do you know if there's anything to corroborate that claim?
- CydeWeys 8y ago
  They're not. Protected bike lanes are for sure safer than unprotected bike lanes. If there are problems at intersections, that means that the bike lanes aren't protected enough. Amsterdam for example doesn't have these kinds of issues because their design (and especially light signaling) is better.
  - btrettel 8y ago
    > If there are problems at intersections, that means that the bike lanes aren't protected enough. Amsterdam for example doesn't have these kinds of issues because their design (and especially light signaling) is better. I agree. The problem is that I have never seen those sorts of lanes in the US. The choice is between semi-protected lanes which may be worse or no lanes. I don't know precisely which is better, but I usually choose to not use the protected lanes due to issues at intersections.
    - CydeWeys 8y ago
      We have intersections like this in NYC. Look at 8th and 9th Avenues in Chelsea for one example. There are separate phases for bikes going straight and vehicles turning left across them.
    - celestialjeu 8y ago
      We also have a few of these kinds of lanes in Austin. There are a few downtown and a few in East Austin.
      - btrettel 8y ago
        Where specifically? I'm not aware of bike lanes that have a special light for vehicles turning across the bike lane in Austin.
    - fooblitzky 8y ago
      Seattle also has pretty good signage for their (very limited) protected bike lanes - typically a green-painted turning lane, with yield markings and signs. I still see drivers ignoring them from time to time - I think Mad-Eye Moody's mantra is a good one to keep in mind when riding a bike: "Constant Vigilance!".
  - u801e 8y ago
    > If there are problems at intersections, that means that the bike lanes aren't protected enough Unless you design the intersections properly, then you're never going to achieve that protection. The best way to design them would be to follow how limited access highways/motorways interact with surface streets. In other words, they use interchanges.
- btrettel 8y ago
  I'm not sure there's much clear data on this. I have plenty of anecdotes from myself and other cyclists, however. Here's what is clear: Many cyclists worry about getting rear-ended, which presumably is a major part of what bike lanes are supposed to eliminate, but those sorts of crashes are rare: http://bicyclesafe.com/#rearend2 http://bicyclesafe.com/#rearend2 I can recall a pro-bike-lane advocacy organization had some different data that said being rear-ended is actually common, but that seems very discordant with the remainder of the data, and they seem hardly unbiased. (The webmaster of the site I linked to seems neutral on bike lanes.) The main risks come from intersections, and most bike lanes, even protected ones, don't address that. My concern is that bike lanes may give inexperienced cyclists a false sense of security. These problems are relatively easily avoided if one is aware of them. See this website to learn about how to avoid the most common types of bike crashes: http://bicyclesafe.com/ http://bicyclesafe.com/
  - JohnFen 8y ago
    As a bicyclist, I can tell you what my greatest fear is: parked cars. Statistically speaking, I am far more likely to get hurt because someone opened their driver's side door without looking than from any other cause. As a result, when I ride by parked cars I make sure that I'm at least a car-door-length away from them when at all possible.
- acomjean 8y ago
  I live in Cambridge and agree with the reasoning as a driver and a cyclist. They put a bike lane inside the car parking area along the main drag (Cambridge street) i live on. It’s hard as a driver to make sure the lane is clear before turning, and when cycling through you still have to be careful and look before crossing the side streets. It’s still better and it’s been a year since I saw a bicyclist and a driver have words when the car failed to yield.
- z2 8y ago
  Ignorance of rules seem to be part of the issue. Using bike lanes (in Cambridge!), I've had turning drivers honk or yell nasty things at intersections as I went straight through, not knowing they are required to yield. Drivers are trained to be forgiving to pedestrians and the crazy jay-walking that happens in Boston, but still treat bikes like aberrations. I drive as well, and admit it felt very unnatural at first at check behind me for bikes when turning right.
madhadron 8y ago
You put up separate lights, where there is a red turn arrow for the cars and a light for the bicycles, just like Europe. It's taken a couple of years for drivers to figure them out, but at this point you almost never see someone turn against them, and when you do, it's usually someone with grey hair and an out of state plate who has no idea what to do. Another side of this puzzle is that we don't require drivers to update their education or competence on a recurring basis. If we required all drivers to update their education and demonstrate their physical fitness to drive safely every couple of years, this would all go more smoothly.
- u801e 8y ago
  > You put up separate lights, where there is a red turn arrow for the cars and a light for the bicycles The problem is that the time to wait for the signal to turn green starts taking longer and longer and people will start to ignore the signals. I see it all the time with pedestrian signals. That is, pedestrians will just start crossing on the don't walk sign rather than waiting for the next 2 minutes before it changes. The same thing will happen when the red phase starts taking more than a minute to change to green or people (whether when in a car or on a bike) will start running the red lights more if they know they're going to get stuck for multiple minutes at the signal otherwise.
- btrettel 8y ago
  I think this a needed change, but as I've said in the other comments, I am yet to encounter one of those sorts of intersections in the US. Though I have been told today on HN that they do exist in the US.
  - adrianmonk 8y ago
    Does this not fit the definition? https://austintexas.gov/news/new-central-austin-bicycle-signals-begin-operating https://austintexas.gov/news/new-central-austin-bicycle-sign... http://fitness.blog.austin360.com/2017/08/04/new-bicycle-traffic-signals-installed-in-downtown-austin/ http://fitness.blog.austin360.com/2017/08/04/new-bicycle-tra...
tooker 8y ago
THIS * 1000
TulliusCicero 8y ago
> Generally "protected" bike lines are not protected at intersections, which is where most problems occur. Then also build protected intersections? These are common in truly bike-friendly cities. I see them frequently here in Munich (admittedly not as bike-friendly as Dutch cities, but much better than any US city).
- u801e 8y ago
  Those are either actual interchanges (like how a highway/motorway interacts with a surface street), or a traffic light controlled intersection. Most protected infrastructure out there do not do either.
  - TulliusCicero 8y ago
    I'm not sure what you're saying here. Most of what I've seen called "protected intersections" do include traffic lights. Are you using a different definition?
    - u801e 8y ago
      I was referring to separate traffic light phases for different approaches to the intersection. For instance this protected intersection[1] does not have separate traffic light phases for two same direction approaches. While this intersection[2] does. The first one will have turning conflicts since turning traffic and through traffic is allowed to proceed through the intersection at the same time. The second one will not. [1] https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7631767,-111.8968873,3a,75y,177.62h,90.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syyYkDuFj1Sf96cVbxZhRoA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7631767,-111.8968873,3a,75y,... [2] https://www.google.com/maps/@37.306157,-79.97767,3a,75y,223.01h,82.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6kCsIldUp_FbYAipjKHZng!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 https://www.google.com/maps/@37.306157,-79.97767,3a,75y,223....

gugagore 8y ago

There's a certain burden to being vigilant and self-defensive on the road. Even if I'm not protected in intersections, a protected bike lane means that there's a lot less time I need to be worried that a car will hit me. However, you're bringing up the point that protected bike lanes may make intersections even more dangerous for cyclists. While your reasoning makes sense, do you know if there's anything to corroborate that claim?

CydeWeys 8y ago
They're not. Protected bike lanes are for sure safer than unprotected bike lanes. If there are problems at intersections, that means that the bike lanes aren't protected enough. Amsterdam for example doesn't have these kinds of issues because their design (and especially light signaling) is better.
- btrettel 8y ago
  > If there are problems at intersections, that means that the bike lanes aren't protected enough. Amsterdam for example doesn't have these kinds of issues because their design (and especially light signaling) is better. I agree. The problem is that I have never seen those sorts of lanes in the US. The choice is between semi-protected lanes which may be worse or no lanes. I don't know precisely which is better, but I usually choose to not use the protected lanes due to issues at intersections.
  - CydeWeys 8y ago
    We have intersections like this in NYC. Look at 8th and 9th Avenues in Chelsea for one example. There are separate phases for bikes going straight and vehicles turning left across them.
  - celestialjeu 8y ago
    We also have a few of these kinds of lanes in Austin. There are a few downtown and a few in East Austin.
    - btrettel 8y ago
      Where specifically? I'm not aware of bike lanes that have a special light for vehicles turning across the bike lane in Austin.
  - fooblitzky 8y ago
    Seattle also has pretty good signage for their (very limited) protected bike lanes - typically a green-painted turning lane, with yield markings and signs. I still see drivers ignoring them from time to time - I think Mad-Eye Moody's mantra is a good one to keep in mind when riding a bike: "Constant Vigilance!".
- u801e 8y ago
  > If there are problems at intersections, that means that the bike lanes aren't protected enough Unless you design the intersections properly, then you're never going to achieve that protection. The best way to design them would be to follow how limited access highways/motorways interact with surface streets. In other words, they use interchanges.
btrettel 8y ago
I'm not sure there's much clear data on this. I have plenty of anecdotes from myself and other cyclists, however. Here's what is clear: Many cyclists worry about getting rear-ended, which presumably is a major part of what bike lanes are supposed to eliminate, but those sorts of crashes are rare: http://bicyclesafe.com/#rearend2 http://bicyclesafe.com/#rearend2 I can recall a pro-bike-lane advocacy organization had some different data that said being rear-ended is actually common, but that seems very discordant with the remainder of the data, and they seem hardly unbiased. (The webmaster of the site I linked to seems neutral on bike lanes.) The main risks come from intersections, and most bike lanes, even protected ones, don't address that. My concern is that bike lanes may give inexperienced cyclists a false sense of security. These problems are relatively easily avoided if one is aware of them. See this website to learn about how to avoid the most common types of bike crashes: http://bicyclesafe.com/ http://bicyclesafe.com/
- JohnFen 8y ago
  As a bicyclist, I can tell you what my greatest fear is: parked cars. Statistically speaking, I am far more likely to get hurt because someone opened their driver's side door without looking than from any other cause. As a result, when I ride by parked cars I make sure that I'm at least a car-door-length away from them when at all possible.
acomjean 8y ago
I live in Cambridge and agree with the reasoning as a driver and a cyclist. They put a bike lane inside the car parking area along the main drag (Cambridge street) i live on. It’s hard as a driver to make sure the lane is clear before turning, and when cycling through you still have to be careful and look before crossing the side streets. It’s still better and it’s been a year since I saw a bicyclist and a driver have words when the car failed to yield.
z2 8y ago
Ignorance of rules seem to be part of the issue. Using bike lanes (in Cambridge!), I've had turning drivers honk or yell nasty things at intersections as I went straight through, not knowing they are required to yield. Drivers are trained to be forgiving to pedestrians and the crazy jay-walking that happens in Boston, but still treat bikes like aberrations. I drive as well, and admit it felt very unnatural at first at check behind me for bikes when turning right.

madhadron 8y ago

You put up separate lights, where there is a red turn arrow for the cars and a light for the bicycles, just like Europe. It's taken a couple of years for drivers to figure them out, but at this point you almost never see someone turn against them, and when you do, it's usually someone with grey hair and an out of state plate who has no idea what to do. Another side of this puzzle is that we don't require drivers to update their education or competence on a recurring basis. If we required all drivers to update their education and demonstrate their physical fitness to drive safely every couple of years, this would all go more smoothly.

u801e 8y ago
> You put up separate lights, where there is a red turn arrow for the cars and a light for the bicycles The problem is that the time to wait for the signal to turn green starts taking longer and longer and people will start to ignore the signals. I see it all the time with pedestrian signals. That is, pedestrians will just start crossing on the don't walk sign rather than waiting for the next 2 minutes before it changes. The same thing will happen when the red phase starts taking more than a minute to change to green or people (whether when in a car or on a bike) will start running the red lights more if they know they're going to get stuck for multiple minutes at the signal otherwise.
btrettel 8y ago
I think this a needed change, but as I've said in the other comments, I am yet to encounter one of those sorts of intersections in the US. Though I have been told today on HN that they do exist in the US.
- adrianmonk 8y ago
  Does this not fit the definition? https://austintexas.gov/news/new-central-austin-bicycle-signals-begin-operating https://austintexas.gov/news/new-central-austin-bicycle-sign... http://fitness.blog.austin360.com/2017/08/04/new-bicycle-traffic-signals-installed-in-downtown-austin/ http://fitness.blog.austin360.com/2017/08/04/new-bicycle-tra...

tooker 8y ago

THIS * 1000

TulliusCicero 8y ago

> Generally "protected" bike lines are not protected at intersections, which is where most problems occur. Then also build protected intersections? These are common in truly bike-friendly cities. I see them frequently here in Munich (admittedly not as bike-friendly as Dutch cities, but much better than any US city).

u801e 8y ago
Those are either actual interchanges (like how a highway/motorway interacts with a surface street), or a traffic light controlled intersection. Most protected infrastructure out there do not do either.
- TulliusCicero 8y ago
  I'm not sure what you're saying here. Most of what I've seen called "protected intersections" do include traffic lights. Are you using a different definition?
  - u801e 8y ago
    I was referring to separate traffic light phases for different approaches to the intersection. For instance this protected intersection[1] does not have separate traffic light phases for two same direction approaches. While this intersection[2] does. The first one will have turning conflicts since turning traffic and through traffic is allowed to proceed through the intersection at the same time. The second one will not. [1] https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7631767,-111.8968873,3a,75y,177.62h,90.7t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1syyYkDuFj1Sf96cVbxZhRoA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7631767,-111.8968873,3a,75y,... [2] https://www.google.com/maps/@37.306157,-79.97767,3a,75y,223.01h,82.3t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s6kCsIldUp_FbYAipjKHZng!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 https://www.google.com/maps/@37.306157,-79.97767,3a,75y,223....