Came across this interesting post on usenet today, re: bike lanes:
-------------------
James Hodson wrote:
> The genreal feeling amongst the UK cyclists I've met or
> corresponded with is that cycle-specific lanes at the side
> of a road are more trouble than they're worth. I, myself,
> have several times been a target of similar comments to
> those you have mentioned. Or worse :-)
>
> My own opinion is that if everyone - cyclists, motorists,
> et al - were allowed to move in their own fashion along
> the highway, and if all the road users were aware of that
> fact, then there would be less friction between the various
> groups.
Hi James,
I think part of the reason people disagree so vehemently on this topic is
because bike lanes themselves vary so much from location to location. I
travel to London frequently and about a year ago I rented a bike for the
weekend and did a bit of riding -- the City to Greenwich, for example. The
experience was entirely different from that of riding in Chicago, and the
bike lanes in particular were far different. First, the "city of broad
shoulders" should really be called the city of broad curb lanes. There
tends to be room on most arterial roads to either share the lane or paint
a good, wide bike lane. In what I saw of London, there often wasn't room
for cyclists to do anything but take the lane with auto traffic, and the
narrow strips sometimes present that passed for bike lanes were alarming.
Second, in London it seemed impossible in many places to construct a bike
lane with any continuity. Streets are often quite short and the available
space changes as the route twists and turns. In Chicago, with its grid of
streets laid out when this was empty prairie, I often ride three or four
miles in a straight line. Where there's a bike lane on those streets, it
goes on and on with few or no difficult bits. In short, I did not care for
the bike lanes I tried in London, whereas I often find them useful at
home. (Obviously I don't mean to slam London with these observations. It's
all in the cities' differing histories, and in any event, I only saw a
tiny sample. I'm curious how the bike lanes I saw in tourist London
compare to those in the rest of the U.K.)
Similar differences exist within the U.S. I suspect that even the most
well traveled people nevertheless have in mind a picture formed by their
local environments when they comment on the pros and cons of bike lines. I
admit I do.
I don't want to sound like too much of an advocate because I don't think
bike lanes are all that important. I will certainly grant that a bad bike
lane is worse than none and an attempt to cram one in where it doesn't fit
is asking for trouble. Naturally I won't use a bike lane that places the
cyclist in the "door zone" or onto crumbling blacktop. I ride daily in
streets that have no bike lanes and where there is one I get out of the
lane to pass or turn or otherwise as needed. However, I really do think
they make cycling easier many of the places I ride, creating a laminar
flow of traffic with less turbulence in the boundary layer than wide curb
lanes alone. They act as a constant reminder to motorists that cyclists
are present, define a zone where cars are not permitted legally and few
venture in fact, and (on sufficiently wide streets) prevent auto traffic
from organizing itself into dual lanes of cars. They facilitate safely
bypassing long congested lanes of stopped cars, where some drivers would
otherwise try to squeeze through on the outside, others would pull over
enough to prevent them, and still others would drift over to try to get a
look ahead to see what the problem is. Where I have a choice of routes, I
often gravitate almost unconsciously to the streets with bike lanes. (I
suppose there is a chicken and egg issue there, as the characteristics
that caused the street to be selected for a bike lane are part of what
make it a pleasant ride, not just the striping itself.)
I'd be against bike lanes if I thought they were the first step down a
slippery slope, but I don't. That just doesn't seem to be where most
people draw the line. There is a big crowd out there that sees cycling as
a hobby or recreation to be pursued on bike paths, the way you ice skate
in a skating rink or play basketball on a basketball court, but those
folks don't want bikes in the street at all. The major demarcation is
between off-street mixed-use paths and the streets. The very existence of
bike lanes implies the sanctioning of transportation cycling, since such
lanes make no sense unless people are using the streets to get from place
to place by bicycle.
--
Paul Turner
posted by Brent Hugh at
Sunday, August 25, 2002 |
permanently archived here
