[SDCBC] Pet peeve: cyclists have "no choice" but to be unsafe/crazy

[Serge Issakov]

On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 6:28 AM, Gene Carman <gcarman at san.rr.com> wrote:

>
> I wholeheartedly disagree...  While indeed roadways narrow, and often
> there are signs indicating so, often the narrowing of roads which diminish
> bike lanes is NOT noted by any signs.  Cyclist riding along may indeed be
> suddenly thrust into the other traffic without either that traffic
> understanding why or the cyclist having any warning.
>
> Such is the case on at least two bike lanes I ride...  one is Miramar
> Road, where the bike lane suddenly reverts to a Bike Route without warning
> and the extra space on the road is gone and cyclists are left with "taking
> the lane" in 50MPH traffic.  That 50MPH traffic has no idea why cyclists are
> now "in their lane," when just moments before there was a usable Bike
> Lane.   In spite of signaling, I have been buzzed by local trash trucks
> while taking the right most lane in that area on a quiet Saturday morning
> when there was more than adequate empty space for said trucks to move
> left.
>
> Another area I am aware of is on Camino Ruiz.  While not quite the traffic
> crush of Miramar road, again, as one heads north near Capricorn way, the
> Bike Lane disappears; cyclists must take the lane and there is no warning
> for either motorists or cyclists that this situation is about to occur.  The
> road DOES NOT NARROW...  no, the curbside space is dedicated to local
> transit short buses...  cyclists have no choice but to take the lane.
> Curbside space could be dedicated to these buses on the less busy
> perpendicular streets, but no, it is right on the main street.
>
> Now bear in mind that when a main traveled lane is about to dissappear,
> there is usually a sign or arrow, some indicator that traffic must move
> left.  But in the case of bike lanes, no such warning appears...  thus
> cyclists must negotiate with fast passing traffic without the usual warning
> that other traffic would have in similar situations.
>
> In the case of Miramar road...  I know the hazard exists, and I am still
> often caught by surprise.
>
> A similar situation also occurs on Genesee going south at Nobel.  Only in
> this case, I commute it often enough to remember and recall exactly where it
> occurs.  I take the middle lane in this case, as both the right lane and the
> bike lane are dropped as Genesee crosses Nobel.  In this situation there is
> no warning for either motorists nor cyclists.    Motorists are often upset
> by my relative slow progress in the right lane as I go from Nobel to Decoro,
> well out in the right most lane, to avoid the potential hazard of parked
> cars along Genesee.  (and this in spite of the 20+MPH that I move in this
> area).  Their frustration is often expressed in some manner.
>
> While Trevor is right that looking ahead is vital to a cyclist's safety,
> the road changes happen in such a way that one may not have enough road
> space to negotiate with fast heavy traffic...  which when moving fast, takes
> longer to respond to cyclists' signals.
>
> Even John Forester has noted that a 15MPH difference between cyclist and
> motorist can make lateral negotiation a bit more difficult.
>

But it's the bike lane stripe that is largely responsible for that high
speed differential in the first place.

John Forester can correct me if I'm wrong, but I suspect one of the reasons
he has recommended for decades that cyclists "ignore bike lane stripes" is
because of situations like the ones Gene notes above.

When bike lanes end, motorists in the adjacent lane understandably expect
cyclists to yield, and not cut in front of them.  Part of the reason the
speed differentials between motorists and the cyclist are so high at the
point where the bike lane ends is because of the stripe - which encourages
high speed differentials.  If the stripe ends earlier, then the cyclist is
effectively IN the motorist's traffic lane earlier and longer, and motorists
are more likely to notice and adjust accordingly (slow down, move left)
sooner.  Also, this gives the cyclist more time to look back, negotiate,
signal, as required, to make his left merge across.  What we're stuck having
to do now is, per Forester, ignore the stripe, and start merging left long
before it ends, including signaling/negotiating as required.  Otherwise, you
pretty much have to pull over and wait for a gap.

In the end, this just highlights yet another reason I try to avoid being in
the bike lane in the first place, whenever it's safe and practical to do so.

Serge

-- 
NOTE: Any opinions expressed above are mine and not necessarily shared by
any organization in which I am involved.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080225/c5481140/attachment.html