Nevertheless, you typed and hit ‘post’ as fast as you could when you realized no-one was ahead of you, and saved your disdain for a follow-up. Same thing ‘firsters’ do time and again.
No, I didn’t. I actually refreshed the page before posting, giving someone else the chance to be first if they wanted it. Truly and honestly. No disdain, either; merely stating that, personally, I still don’t understand the thrill that some get by posting first. But thank you for playing. Our next contestant is a domestic engineer from Hohocus, New Jersey…
I said that to a guy once – pointing out his hypocrisy for suggesting bicycles should be restricted to bike lanes and sidewalks. He didn’t thank me for enlightening him. I still don’t understand why not.
I don’t run in the bike lane, but I do sometimes run on MUPs, and I always ignore bells because it’s up to cyclists to slow down and pass me safely. Just like cars ‘n’ bikes. Don’t like it, then stay on the road.
The bell is a courtesy, just to let you know we’re coming up from behind you. And sure I’ll slow down and pass safely – I share the path just like I expect drivers to share the road. What gets me are the pedestrians who block the whole path and don’t react to the sound of the bell. Do they think they own the world?
When I bell a pedestrian it’s always because he’s blocking the whole lane. Simply step to your right (or left in Brit style countries) and it’s good. I get some people rushing off the sides of the path into the mud, when I really just need one half of it.
If you are blocking cyclists coming up behind you while running in the bike lane (or the car lane), YOU are wrong and are behaving dangerously and irresponsibly. If you’re not paying attention to approaching oncoming traffic while running in the street, such that traffic must be unnecessarily impeded to avoid a collision with you, YOU are wrong and are behaving dangerously and irresponsibly.
My comment was not intended to be taken seriously (hence the emoticon). Real bikes come in all shapes and sizes. Having said that, I’ve never had any problem making long commutes (e.g., 25 miles each way) without drop bars. They certainly are not a “defining feature” of a real bike. In fact, the vast majority of the world’s bicycle commuters don’t use drop bars. Personally, I’m not willing to trade the greater comfort of an upright riding position for the aerodynamic benefit of drops. YMMV.
I like drops because they give me the option of switching between several different hand positions, which I do frequently on all but my shortest rides. On the rare occasions that I want to be more upright than the top-of-bar position on my drops allows, I just ride “no hands” for a while.
Unless of course you have a medical reason to use straight bars instead of drops?
Getting older may be such a reason and after my heart-attack, I forget to breath when I bend over sometimes – that’s why I took the drops off the tandem. I prefer drops for longer rides and am thinking of returning the Pollard to them, if I can sort it out.
When I get the Trandem back from the conversion to 3-wheels, I will think about the NiVinci that is being fitted and consider using it on the Pollard too. Using a twistgrip with drops may be slightly problematical?
I liked the idea of an upright ride for shopping and commuiting so much after my last trip to Italy that I immediately converted my drop bar fixie to a psuedo-VS single-speed upon my return to the US. My wife’s hometown in Venato is aswarm with old road bikes turned town bikes; a true bike culture.
That is not correct. Power generating plants are typically more efficient than internal combustion car engines. Further, it is much easier to clean up the pollutants when they primarily occur at a centralized location.
Not most. Just a lot. In some parts of the country, the electricity is close to being carbon neutral (hydropower). And more importantly, electricity is getting *more* efficient and less carbon-y while fuel stays the same. That said, it would not be possible to replace all fossil fuel engines with electrics with batteries – there isn’t actually enough Lithium on earth.
I wonder how much ‘carbon’ is wasted cleaning what might be the worlds biggest toilet: The Yangtse 3-gorges dam!
Having been there, I can tell you that the waterborne waste and effluent of the Yangtse is collected behind the dam that is supposed to give great Hydro power to China. Floating in the pool above the dam is all sorts of stuff I would rather not describe, but could smell on a cruise that took us through the amazing lock system after travelling through a wonderful country and seeing many terrific things. Shame. They must be working to clean up any water etc that goes in there, I hope?
“You are not stuck in traffic, you are traffic. Free yourself ride a bike”
“Driving in urban environments seriously compromises your street cred”
Copenhagenize.com
haha I took my inner frustration out on a few occasions yesterday. A car was weaving about between lanes and not indicating, he was also tailgating a cyclist. The traffic stopped and I noticed his window was open so I yelled ‘INDICATORS’ as I filtered past. he looked shocked.
Then going over a railway bridge, there were hundreds of peds wandering like sheep (think they were going to a Neil Diamond concert), and they weren’t responding to my bell so I used my 115dB Air Zound on em to clear the way for myself and other cyclists behind me.
Air Zound for the win. Or I’ll just yell ‘on ya right/left’. Joggers that think it’s fine to use the middle of a cycle path with headphones on deserve a tire enema.
I often don’t see joggers logic, there are 3 traffic lanes, 2 wide ones, one bicycle width, and a sidewalk, so why do joggers feel the need to jog in the bicycle width lane, with head phones on or ear buds with the volume set to 11, and then boy does the cyclist who challenge one get a dirty look. Don’t say it has to do with paving materials, even when the cycling path and walking path are both asphalt they will job in the cycling path. I feel like putting one of those pixel signs on the rear rack that says <<< JOGGING LANE pointing to the car lane….
As for the wider lanes, I think the ideal is this, the right half of the lane is for bicycles, the left half of the lane for motorcycles, the junk yard is for cars…..
Wait a minute. I have a deep and abiding love for running. First off, there is a difference between running and jogging. Don’t lump them all in your term “joggers”- it shows your ignorance. Most sidewalks are made of concrete which is terrible on the joints so most runners will opt for asphalt. Secondly, running in a pedestrian path is as frustrating for runners as it is for cyclists. If a runner stays well over on a bike lane and loses the ear buds (which I agree are an irritant), cyclists should not complain.
Joggers and runners DO NOT belong in the bike lane. Personally, when I encounter pedestrians in bike lanes or on bike paths (not to be confused with MUP’s), I give no warning, and give only enough space to avoid crashing. Sometimes there is some contact, but usually I’ll leave an inch or two of clearance and only scare them. If they are not smart enough to select an appropriate path and to learn a proper running technique that won’t cause damage to their joints, that’s their problem. If they must use the bike lane for running/walking, they should at least have the good sense to face oncoming traffic, just as pedestrians are supposed to do on any other vehicle traffic lane.
When I ride on MUP’s or sidewalks, I ALWAYS yield the right of way to pedestrians, even if that means slowing my bike to walking speed until I can safely pass. I have a very high tolerance for pedestrians, including runners. I have a very low tolerance for stupid people.
I think if you actually read my comment, you’ll find that I never said anything resembling “just to scare them.” My behavior in no way resembles “gashole behavior.” (Your use of that term, btw, serves to illuminate your own arrogance.) It is clear from my post that I extend every courtesy to pedestrians, including runners, when they are where they are supposed to be, e.g, sidewalk or MUP. “Gasholes,” as you call them, don’t respect cyclists on the roads, despite cyclists’ right, and sometimes their obligation, to be there. It is truly unfortunate if you cannot recognize the obvious difference.
Was a cyclist first, started running in the last two months. I’d be happy to provide insight (if you actually care – which sometimes when people complain “why do they do that” they don’t actually want to know why…if you don’t, you can ignore this comment).
Sidewalks are not good for joggers for some of the same reasons they aren’t for cyclists, but specifically – every time you go up and down a driveway or curb, there’s a potential for an ankle twist. If you’re running 20 miles a week, you can see how that adds up. Running on the flat street is easier on your joints and minimizes injury. Bike lane is better than sidewalk and actually possible compared to the street.
Why headphones? Joggers are usually out recreationally, near home, doing the same route over and over. That’s boring. You need entertainment.
Why 11? Because traffic is fucking loud and you can’t hear your headphones.
For myself, I listen to podcasts, audiobooks, and other spoken word audio – it’s a less consistent noise and it’s easier to hear ambient noise over it without having to drowned it out.
Anyway, I understand your frustration, but I ask you to look at it the way you’d like cars to look at you – at the very worst it’s a momentary inconvenience that increases their safety a heck of a lot and know that any time you lost slowing down to go around a jogger is almost certainly entirely swallowed up by the wait time at the next red light.
Do you run barefoot or pseudo-barefoot (e.g. wear Vibram Five Fingers)? Doing so is “is easier on your joints and minimizes injury” compared to using running shoes. Barefoot running also prevents risk compensation associated with wearing running shoes, and encourages runners to pay attention to the terrain on which they run, significantly reducing the dangers associated with driveways and curbs that you cite. It also promotes overall better running technique, itself easier on the body.
“Why headphones? Joggers are usually out recreationally, near home, doing the same route over and over. That’s boring. You need entertainment. Why 11? Because traffic is fucking loud and you can’t hear your headphones. ”
That sounds similar to excuses I hear people use to justify surfing the Web, texting, or talking on the phone while they drive. If one is going to use the public roads/sidewalks/MUP’s, one has a responsibility to maintain awareness of other traffic around them, even if doing so burdens one with boredom. Failure to do so is unsafe and arrogant.
If you want to run without having the responsibility to pay attention to traffic (of all kinds) around you or to turn the volume up on your audio player to the point that the sounds of traffic are drowned out, then run on an indoor or outdoor running track or some other place where you won’t be endangering people who choose to use the roads/sidewalks/MUP’s responsibly and safely.
Indicators? You mean turn signals or is this a British term? It would seem that there is an extremely high defect rate in the production of turn signals. It seems to be across all brands.
” . . . there were hundreds of peds wandering like sheep (think they were going to a Neil Diamond concert), and they weren’t responding to my bell so I used my 115dB Air Zound on em to clear the way for myself and other cyclists behind me.”
Some obnoxious mv drivers have about the same attitude. It’s no less disgusting when held by a cyclist.
Same problem here in Indy on the multi-use paths, ranks of the self-deafened wandering zombie-like all over the path, having tuned out all but the bliss of their iPods. I actually passed one the other day I thought was drunk or ahvign a stroke; she was weaving all over the path, arms extended, head bobbing. But as I passed her I saw that she was only wandering along with her eyes closed, grooving to the tunes.
In the UK drivers are advised not to indicate unless there are other road users who will benefit by seeing their indicators. Pretty much without exception, this seems to be taken to mean other drivers of motorised vehicles. Pedestrians and cyclists don’t count as road users.
You are wrong Alan – the use of indicators is required BY LAW and you will fail your test if you don’t use them, correctly!
However – many/most motorists seem to think they are optional…
(I was training to be a driving instructer before my heart-attack)
Highway Code #117 etc – nb: A failure to comply with the code is not an offence as such, but leaves you open for a careless/dangerous driving indictment (RTA sec 38)
@Alan & Tencon, Indicate what and by what means? Seriously have no clue what is meant by this. Brake lights, hazard signals, turn signals, parking lights…?
Brake lights come on when applying brakes, not neccesarily on when stopped.
Hazard (or 4 ways) for emergencies or when driving so slowly that approaching traffic needs to be alerted.
Turns signals for indicating an impending turn or lane change.
Parking lights… no longer used, archaic.
Exactly – I try to make my comments as universal as possible but I often forget the adage ‘The English and the Americans are two peoples seperated by a common tongue’ (Or something lke that!)
I’m not a Brit, I am Australian… I suppose we inherited some terminology from the Brits… but seems a bit dense for people to not put it into context – I was talking about lane changes that were not signalled.
That behaviour is illegal in the UK – 3 points on your licence. The perp is likely to lose their licence as that behaviour is the inconsiderate drivingthat has possibly got them points before? The rule is that you have to use the road AS IF the road is currently being used to it’s full capacity. So indicating your intentions is required even is nobody is there to benefit. You might not be able to see them?
Traffic Calming Devices… I had to look that term up having never ever heard it before. Lo and behold , the name is BS/PC. Speed bumps and the rest of the crap described do not calm traffic but instead aggravate it. Pissing off drivers isn’t a good thing. I suspect most road rage is caused by traffic being impeded, not “calmed”.
totally agree, and in some cases these traffic ‘calming’ devises cause accidents because someone travelling at excessive speed hits them, get some air, loses traction and plows into whatever is on the side of the road. Without the traffic islands the speeder might have got through without causing any damage to cars or himself.
This says it all. We are many that are heard by few.
We are community. We floW through tight spaces. And in the end the car wins
there is no rational thought to sex or cars. We are screwed
Just like the string of boards they put up on the approach to a junction, so you can’t see approaching traffic as you come up to the line (and race them!
When they also curve the lane so you have to use your mirror to see approaching cars this is DANGEROUS and similar to blindfolding drivers!
No, A string of 1M-wide plastic boards about 3M high and about a metre apart. Unless you look at 90 degrees/side-on you can’t see past them. The last few yards, less than a semi-truck length, is left clear. Lorries/Semis may be able to see over them but car drivers can’t and HAVE to slow down until they can see if it is clear to proceed. In practical terms, there is no difference from the wall you speak of!
As has already been mentioned, instead of calming traffic it angers drivers. I suppose it is meant to reduce the incidents where a car leaving the motorway to join the crossing road may not slow down enough and try to match speeds with the traffic on the ‘Island’ already. After travelling at 70mph for a while, merging with 40mph traffic is hard for inexperienced drivers and difficult for the rest of us. Bikes have no problem as they are going so slow already and may merge without stopping.
Since my heart attack I have problems turning my head. I made things worse by getting a new car that has sight-obstructing pillars in just the right place to cause problems at that type of junction in particular I got around it tonight by turning the car as if changing lane to see approaching traffic more easily. Low/no traffic. In heavy traffic, I would have had to use the trick of keeping a lorry between me and the cars coming up, or copying a car alongside!
I don’t know anything about British calmers (do you have pictures of these plastic boards? They seem absolutely bizarre), but American calmers, in case after case, consistently reduce the number of dangerous collisions of all types and are probably most responsible for the significant reductions in motorist fatalities over the past 10 years (25%). I have never, EVER, heard of sight obstructions being used as a traffic calming strategy.
SDMSS – I just used Google Earth street view to see if it had the pics but the images were taken before the boards went up, sorry. There is healthy vegetation doing the same job for most of the approach that you can see there but the final bit is missing the boards that went up less than a year ago. Note that vegetation is used for this purpose a lot in my part of the world! Check out where the ‘Cheylsmore Bypass’ joins the ‘London Road’ when returing to Coventry on the A46 – shrubbery blocks the view to the right until you are waiting at the white line there! Good job too, in a 40mph zone it is rare to have locals driving at less than 50 unless limited by traffic etc, We know where the speed cameras are! I use ‘cruise control’ to set my speed at/below the limit to avoid getting points and allow me to concentrate on traffic, not the speedo!!!
The boards – Look for ‘Kenilworth’ in Warwickshire, UK. Then check the A46 from Coventry to Warwick. Where the road from Kenilworth to Leamington Spa crosses the A46 is where I approach from Coventry on Wednesday evening taking my wife to a meeting that side of Leamington on the Berington Road. The slip road from the A46 has greenery on the divide until where the footpath alongside the Leamington road crosses the slip road (Poor peds, no help whatever to cross a busy road with fast-moving traffic!) I think the boards bridge the gap from the end of the trees etc to the Leamington road but am not sure when they end. I will pay more attention next time there and report back… We are looking forward to getting our Tandem back so we can make the journey by bike (on parallel, safer, roads)
Yehuda puts more trust in drivers than I do, I don’t feel comfortable acting as a traffic calming device when there’s a chance I might become a speed bump.
I have natural traffic calming devices. Trees, birds all types of wildlife as I ride down the logging roads to work. My only traffic is the occasional deer in the way. I moved from the cities to the northwoods of Wisconsin.
America is like the Ozarks of the world. This country is filled with way too many mouth breathing, lazy, over consuming rednecks to ever accept the bicycle as a real means of transportation. We will have places like Portland, Madison, NYC. But even with a great man like Ray Lahood in office it’s hard to move an entire country….now I’ll tell you how I really feel
But watch that change in a heartbeat if/when there is a revolution in Saudi Arabia and their car driving comes to an abrupt end. To quote former US President L.B. Johnson, “When you’ve got them by the balls, their hearts and minds will inevitably follow.”
KLove~ I work with some folks so addicted to cars they would live on crackers and water before they give up their cars. I am secretly ok with $6.00+ gas. America was built around the car, which is why our government gave billions to GM and Chrysler so they didn’t disappear. I was ready for the companies to become part of Americas history books.
What secret? Active transportation conference specifically stated “Higher gas prices would be better for us.” I always feel a pang of liberal guilt, though, because it’s the poorer people who don’t have the resources to make changes (like moving) to make non-SOV transportation possible.
Indicators, Turn Signals; whatever you call them and wherever you live, the one international constant is that taxi drivers are unaware of their existence….
If you don’t like my riding…STAY OFF THE PAVED, SEPARATE BIKE TRAIL. That includes walkers (who spread out over both lanes), skateboarders, motorcyclists, and 4 wheelers! Runners I don’t mind so much. They are at least courteous enough to move out of the way when I pass thru.
The runners in my parts usually indicate as well! I LOVE RUNNERS. The problem I have is with masses of old doddery peds who get off a train headed to an event (like a big concert) who don’t think that life is continuing on around them and people are trying to make their way home from work.
How about if you don’t like following road rules don’t ride a bike! If you are in a lane and going way slower than cars can go YOU are a hazard! If there is a bike lane or shoulder use it. If there is no bike lane find a different route. I do take the lane when there is no other choice, and the law allows but purposfully slowing traffic is putting yourself at risk and antagonizing people who drive leathal wepons. When I ride I like to remember I am out gunned so to speak and put MY saftey first.
Bicyclists are not equal users of the road to cars. WE ARE SUPERIOR. A motorist’s use of the road is derived from is being licensed and registered by the State; a cyclists’ is based on his constitutional & common law right to travel.
Sorry Rzar not everyone lives in Portland, Copenhagen, or any other such place that HAS bike lanes. In my town, the vast majority of roads don’t even have painted shoulders. Following your logic, to get to the hardware store I would have to drive 3 miles in my imaginary car, park it illegally on the side of a highway, ride the shoulder for 2 miles, teleport my still imaginary car to my new location then drive the remaining .5 miles then park it in the ashpalt mausoleum (parking lot).
In reality, bicycles have as much right to be on the road as any other slow moving vehicle. What many cyclists don’t understand, however, is that that right, like every right, comes with responsibilities and rules that guide ones conduct. I’m not going to list them here because they are easily available on the innerwep. If every cyclist on the road followed these rules it would be a lovely thing but they don’t. How about this for an idea: Little paper pamphlets with cycling laws in them at bike shops given away with every bicycle sale. There aren’t that many, they aren’t hard to do, and if everybody followed them we’d all be much safer and predictible.
Portland doesn’t have that many bike lanes. We have roads that you’re expected to share with cyclists. All roads (except limited access freeways) are fair game for bikes. What’s nice is that there are heavy-traffic arterials that kind of suck to ride on but may of them have parallel side streets indicated as “bike boulevards” with traffic calming infrastructure to make it nice for bicycles and annoying for cars that need anything more than local access.
I live in Seattle now. Seattle has bike lanes. Bike lanes that don’t really help you in the slightest. They’re too narrow.
I could ride my recumbent trike in Portland and never get scared. Now Flash only comes out once a year or so.
Since violating the traffic laws costs the same for me whether i’m in a car or on a bike, I take the lane. It’s my lane. I pay for it same as you, I’m held to it’s rules same as you, so I’m taking ALL of it same as you. The “impeding traffic” argument only applies if i’m traveling slow for *the type of vehicle i’m driving*, so if you don’t like it, you may consider yourself invited to take a long walk on a short pier. Thank you, California.
Unless there’s a very good reason to do so, I don’t “take the lane,” even though I have the right to do so, because it’s rude to get in other people’s way unnecessarily. It’s just as rude as those pedestrians who amble slowly down the center of the sidewalk, forcing those of us who like to walk briskly to slow down or else to step off the curb into the street to get around them. Whether walking, riding or driving it’s polite for slower traffic to keep to the right (or to the left, depending on the customs of the country) whenever possible. Having the right to do something does not always make it the right thing to do.
Rzar — When I read your comments I sense an uncertainty on whether you want to look at the issue from the perspective of a car driver or a cyclist. And you often have such a discomfort in your posts. I find it refreshing, because most of us are both drivers and cyclists, yet people tend to behave as if they are only one or the other, and talk about rights, and act as if these rights should just be exercised to the hilt all the time, common sense be damned.
I understand that you are in areas where there isn’t bike infrastructure — in such places, I think the best way to ride is to follow Vehicular Cycling precepts to the T. It’s safer, and it’s designed for your situation.
The way you describe your riding is much more dangerous — you are hugging the side of the road, so you aren’t visible to traffic. And you are riding in the debris area of the roadway, so you are likely to hit something and puncture your tire or worse. So you are going back and forth across the road, depending on whether there’s a bike lane or shoulder or debris to avoid, so your motion isn’t predictable.
I don’t know what road rules say where you live but here in France they generally don’t prevent you from using roads (other than highways) unless there is a compulsory bike lane siding it (marked with a round roadsign as opposed to optional bike lanes marked with a square road sign). What law says is that you must stick to the right and that two bikes must not ride side-to-side, and that’s about all.
I don’t mind using bike lanes when they are physically on the road, because they’re usually clean from debris (and pedestrians… grin). To use separate bike lanes here you have too often to jump sidewalks, pay attention to pot holes and bumps caused by roots (the asphalt is often too thin), slalom among pedestrians, pay attention to broken glass and branches…
Riding on the shoulder combines the disadvantages of the road and the separated bike lane.
Without being an olympic-level athlete a trained cyclist using the road doesn’t really impede the traffic anyway. In the city traffic is already quite slow especially when it’s a bit dense. When you get outside the traffic gets more fluid but cars can pass you more easily as well.
@jx75 in austria you’re even allowed to ride side by side on road bikes during a group ride/training session. its safer coz motorists are not tempted to pass while traffic is oncoming and the group is more compact too. roadies also dont have to use bike lanes
With rare exceptions, I take the whole lane when riding in the street. Many years of riding has taught me that motorists are more likely to exit the lane to pass if I’m near the middle of the lane. If I’m at the side of the lane, motorists will often try to share the lane with me, which is not safe on most of the roads on which I ride. Plus, if there is a curb, I do not want to be riding next to it, because it effectively removes one of my best outs in the event I have to make some sort of evasive maneuver. I often see people riding next to the curb at the far right of a road and always wonder if they’ve considered the potential consequences of their choice.
When you’re riding on a two-lane highway with a speed limit of 55 mph and heavy traffic, taking the whole lane isn’t an option unless you want to inconvenience (and possibly anger) hundreds of people. I ride to the right of the white line at the edge if there’s at least a foot of smooth pavement there, or a few inches to the left of the line otherwise. Most people give me a fair amount of clearance when they pass, but even the ones who pass closely don’t bother me. “A miss is as good as a mile,” as the old saying goes, and as long as they don’t hit me or run me off the road, I’m happy to share the lane with them.
@Widsith
I agree, and such situations would be among the rare exceptions that I mentioned. I try very hard to not choose routes that put me in such situations, but at times it is unavoidable. I used to have a ~17 mile stretch of four lane 65 mph highway that I had to ride each way on my commute, because there wasn’t a better route available. Mostly I was able to ride on the shoulder. I did go out of my way to avoid busy times, which meant riding during the hottest part of the day and late at night (the latter being my favorite time to ride). Still, in such situations, I think it is about making the best of a bad situation rather than riding on the edge being a generally good practice.
You make different choices than I would I could do that on a daily basis, it’d be too unpleasant. I’d much prefer to design my life with a less than 5 mile bike commute each day and save my breves for the weekends.
At times my commute has been a couple miles round trip. Other times it has been about 25 miles each way. Living close to every regular destination is not always an option. Just as owning/operating a car has inherent inconveniences, so does being car-free.
Of course, I don’t consider 50 miles (in Florida, so hills were minimal to non-existant) round trip to be a particularly long, challenging, or unpleasant ride, either. 25 miles at night (the return trip) is especially relaxing. Quite literally, YMMV.
Sure, cities are putting funds towards traffic ‘calming’ – here in Long Beach they are taking away traffic lanes on some streets to facilitate bike lanes, making curbs extend farther into the street at intersections, etc, etc, to reduce traffic speeds. But more often, cities rely on cyclists themselves for traffic ‘calming’ as Yehuda knows. The problem is that traffic as a whole is ‘calmed’ but a significant minority of drivers are irritated and angry when they are expected to share the road, and they do things to show their displeasure. (You can pass laws banning such harrassment, but that’s no help when you are being harrassed in the street and trying to cycle safely and not get hit.) This is OK when the cyclists are people like me, who take the lane and are not intimidated by drivers revving their engines, honking, passing too closely, etc.
The problem is that most cyclists are NOT willing participants in the city’s decision to throw cyclists into the mix as traffic ‘calming’ devices. I think this is a fundamental problem with the way cities try to manage traffic. There is RARELY a frank discussion with citizens in general, and drivers iand cyclists in particular, about the goals of cities with regard to traffic. If cities DID have these discussions, they’d get a bunch of negative blowback from drivers, of course, which is why these things aren’t done, but the problem remains — the city wants cyclists to ride in the street and ‘calm’ traffic but the drivers aren’t being told anything about the city’s preference and desire for livable streets, just presented with cyclists in ‘their’ lane or with reduced traffic lanes, extended curbs, etc, and given no explanation of what’s happening.
I’m not sure if that’s necessarily true – I don’t know about other parts of the country, but in the PNW there’s a high level of at least potential knowledge about transportation policy, how it works, what traffic calming (especially road diets) do for all road users. There are lots of public meetings about it, Portland and Seattle mayors give speeches about it – but it falls on deaf ears because human brains are particularly bad at assessing systems of things. We reflect on our driving experience and ask the question, “What made you late, today?” and you think of the 3 block stretch you were behind a cyclist, even though that delay was a fraction of the delay from one round of signal failure. We remember the things that re-inforce the narrative we already have and forget the things that don’t.
Road diets make the road safer for cyclists and pedestrians. But they also make the road’s car traffic flow more smoothly over all because people turning left do not back up other cars. Still, people only see “One less lane for me” and assume that means less smoothly. They’re just bad at seeing it – whether that can be overcome with public communication, I’m just not convinced.
From what I’ve seen of public meetings and speeches, they are geared towards advocacy groups and livable city meetings, etc, not to the general public.
I can give or take bicycle infrastructure. There are plenty of good pro and con arguments for bicycle infrastructure. But traffic calming is critical and necessary and has been proven to save lives by seriously minimizing the number of pedestrian, bicycle and motorist fatalities.
OK…so…what exactly is a “Traffic Calming Device”? Never heard of it, unless they are referring to getting out of your pickup truck with a shotgun, after having someone sit behind you blowing their horn…instant calmness from the guy with the horn at that point of course. Not that I have ever done this. Or that anyone could prove it. Just saying.
Certainly keeps me calm.
Incidentally…being first to comment is anti-climactic as I thought it would be.
Anti-climatic means you didn’t get stimulated by it enough then, next time let someone else come first.
Nevertheless, you typed and hit ‘post’ as fast as you could when you realized no-one was ahead of you, and saved your disdain for a follow-up. Same thing ‘firsters’ do time and again.
No, I didn’t. I actually refreshed the page before posting, giving someone else the chance to be first if they wanted it. Truly and honestly. No disdain, either; merely stating that, personally, I still don’t understand the thrill that some get by posting first. But thank you for playing.
Our next contestant is a domestic engineer from Hohocus, New Jersey…
Oh, snap!
(Both Tee and Yehuda.)
OK, disdain was too strong a word…
We are not blocking traffic, we are traffic : )
I’d add that we are not Whiny either… (I typically YELL)
If you don’t like how I ride…. STAY OUT OF BIKE LANE!!!
I beg to differ:
If you don’t like how I ride…. STAY OUT OF LANE!!!
I beleave that is what said “STAY OUT OF bike LANE”
Or how about: “if you don’t like following the road rules, STOP DRIVING”
If you don’t want to deal with bicycles, stay on the freeway!
I said that to a guy once – pointing out his hypocrisy for suggesting bicycles should be restricted to bike lanes and sidewalks. He didn’t thank me for enlightening him. I still don’t understand why not.
What gets me is when I come up on joggers and skateboarders in the bike lane.
And when the joggers have their earbuds in and don’t hear my bell. Or even when they don’t and ignore it.
I don’t run in the bike lane, but I do sometimes run on MUPs, and I always ignore bells because it’s up to cyclists to slow down and pass me safely. Just like cars ‘n’ bikes. Don’t like it, then stay on the road.
The bell is a courtesy, just to let you know we’re coming up from behind you. And sure I’ll slow down and pass safely – I share the path just like I expect drivers to share the road. What gets me are the pedestrians who block the whole path and don’t react to the sound of the bell. Do they think they own the world?
When I bell a pedestrian it’s always because he’s blocking the whole lane. Simply step to your right (or left in Brit style countries) and it’s good. I get some people rushing off the sides of the path into the mud, when I really just need one half of it.
if you get a ding and you’re not blocking the path, it’s just audio advance warning so you know there’s going to be a bike whizzing by shortly.
1st ring
2nd shout
3rd airzound
Hey – going up and down sidewalks while jogging is dangerous! If you don’t like it, you can wait until it’s safe and pass me
If you are blocking cyclists coming up behind you while running in the bike lane (or the car lane), YOU are wrong and are behaving dangerously and irresponsibly. If you’re not paying attention to approaching oncoming traffic while running in the street, such that traffic must be unnecessarily impeded to avoid a collision with you, YOU are wrong and are behaving dangerously and irresponsibly.
Ha!
Yehuda’s back on the Van Sweringen!
It’s good to see the VS again… Now is it the same one from the days of old (bike shop)? Or is it a new one?
The top of the seat tube is lugged – new frame? The original had no lug…
Although by the third strip, there is a hint of a lug there?
Real bikes don’t have drop bars!
Drop bars are the defining feature of a “real bike”, bro. Even for commuting, if you ride more than walking distance.
My comment was not intended to be taken seriously (hence the emoticon). Real bikes come in all shapes and sizes. Having said that, I’ve never had any problem making long commutes (e.g., 25 miles each way) without drop bars. They certainly are not a “defining feature” of a real bike. In fact, the vast majority of the world’s bicycle commuters don’t use drop bars. Personally, I’m not willing to trade the greater comfort of an upright riding position for the aerodynamic benefit of drops. YMMV.
I like drops because they give me the option of switching between several different hand positions, which I do frequently on all but my shortest rides. On the rare occasions that I want to be more upright than the top-of-bar position on my drops allows, I just ride “no hands” for a while.
Unless of course you have a medical reason to use straight bars instead of drops?
Getting older may be such a reason and after my heart-attack, I forget to breath when I bend over sometimes – that’s why I took the drops off the tandem. I prefer drops for longer rides and am thinking of returning the Pollard to them, if I can sort it out.
When I get the Trandem back from the conversion to 3-wheels, I will think about the NiVinci that is being fitted and consider using it on the Pollard too. Using a twistgrip with drops may be slightly problematical?
It’s that time of year when drop bars allow women to share their lovely gifts with those of us less blessed. I personally appreciate it.
I liked the idea of an upright ride for shopping and commuiting so much after my last trip to Italy that I immediately converted my drop bar fixie to a psuedo-VS single-speed upon my return to the US. My wife’s hometown in Venato is aswarm with old road bikes turned town bikes; a true bike culture.
Normally I pass the cars while they are in a traffic jam! The real traffic calming devices would be even more cars! Electric ones of course!
Even electric cars are traffic jams!
Yes, that’s why they will help calming down the traffic…
And, since most electricity is generated from burning coal, electric cars are just as polluting.
That is not correct. Power generating plants are typically more efficient than internal combustion car engines. Further, it is much easier to clean up the pollutants when they primarily occur at a centralized location.
Not most. Just a lot. In some parts of the country, the electricity is close to being carbon neutral (hydropower). And more importantly, electricity is getting *more* efficient and less carbon-y while fuel stays the same. That said, it would not be possible to replace all fossil fuel engines with electrics with batteries – there isn’t actually enough Lithium on earth.
I wonder how much ‘carbon’ is wasted cleaning what might be the worlds biggest toilet: The Yangtse 3-gorges dam!
Having been there, I can tell you that the waterborne waste and effluent of the Yangtse is collected behind the dam that is supposed to give great Hydro power to China. Floating in the pool above the dam is all sorts of stuff I would rather not describe, but could smell on a cruise that took us through the amazing lock system after travelling through a wonderful country and seeing many terrific things. Shame. They must be working to clean up any water etc that goes in there, I hope?
“You are not stuck in traffic, you are traffic. Free yourself ride a bike”
“Driving in urban environments seriously compromises your street cred”
Copenhagenize.com
haha I took my inner frustration out on a few occasions yesterday. A car was weaving about between lanes and not indicating, he was also tailgating a cyclist. The traffic stopped and I noticed his window was open so I yelled ‘INDICATORS’ as I filtered past. he looked shocked.
Then going over a railway bridge, there were hundreds of peds wandering like sheep (think they were going to a Neil Diamond concert), and they weren’t responding to my bell so I used my 115dB Air Zound on em to clear the way for myself and other cyclists behind me.
Air Zound for the win. Or I’ll just yell ‘on ya right/left’. Joggers that think it’s fine to use the middle of a cycle path with headphones on deserve a tire enema.
Ah yes, meat pylons…..
I often don’t see joggers logic, there are 3 traffic lanes, 2 wide ones, one bicycle width, and a sidewalk, so why do joggers feel the need to jog in the bicycle width lane, with head phones on or ear buds with the volume set to 11, and then boy does the cyclist who challenge one get a dirty look. Don’t say it has to do with paving materials, even when the cycling path and walking path are both asphalt they will job in the cycling path. I feel like putting one of those pixel signs on the rear rack that says <<< JOGGING LANE pointing to the car lane….
As for the wider lanes, I think the ideal is this, the right half of the lane is for bicycles, the left half of the lane for motorcycles, the junk yard is for cars…..
Wait a minute. I have a deep and abiding love for running. First off, there is a difference between running and jogging. Don’t lump them all in your term “joggers”- it shows your ignorance. Most sidewalks are made of concrete which is terrible on the joints so most runners will opt for asphalt. Secondly, running in a pedestrian path is as frustrating for runners as it is for cyclists. If a runner stays well over on a bike lane and loses the ear buds (which I agree are an irritant), cyclists should not complain.
Joggers and runners DO NOT belong in the bike lane. Personally, when I encounter pedestrians in bike lanes or on bike paths (not to be confused with MUP’s), I give no warning, and give only enough space to avoid crashing. Sometimes there is some contact, but usually I’ll leave an inch or two of clearance and only scare them. If they are not smart enough to select an appropriate path and to learn a proper running technique that won’t cause damage to their joints, that’s their problem. If they must use the bike lane for running/walking, they should at least have the good sense to face oncoming traffic, just as pedestrians are supposed to do on any other vehicle traffic lane.
When I ride on MUP’s or sidewalks, I ALWAYS yield the right of way to pedestrians, even if that means slowing my bike to walking speed until I can safely pass. I have a very high tolerance for pedestrians, including runners. I have a very low tolerance for stupid people.
I agree, runners should face on coming traffic when running in the street.
“just to scare them”? Wow. Please look at that again and realized you’re exhibiting gashole behavior from the back of a saddle.
I think if you actually read my comment, you’ll find that I never said anything resembling “just to scare them.” My behavior in no way resembles “gashole behavior.” (Your use of that term, btw, serves to illuminate your own arrogance.) It is clear from my post that I extend every courtesy to pedestrians, including runners, when they are where they are supposed to be, e.g, sidewalk or MUP. “Gasholes,” as you call them, don’t respect cyclists on the roads, despite cyclists’ right, and sometimes their obligation, to be there. It is truly unfortunate if you cannot recognize the obvious difference.
They are using the bike path because they don’t want to collide with slow walkers …?
Was a cyclist first, started running in the last two months. I’d be happy to provide insight (if you actually care – which sometimes when people complain “why do they do that” they don’t actually want to know why…if you don’t, you can ignore this comment).
Sidewalks are not good for joggers for some of the same reasons they aren’t for cyclists, but specifically – every time you go up and down a driveway or curb, there’s a potential for an ankle twist. If you’re running 20 miles a week, you can see how that adds up. Running on the flat street is easier on your joints and minimizes injury. Bike lane is better than sidewalk and actually possible compared to the street.
Why headphones? Joggers are usually out recreationally, near home, doing the same route over and over. That’s boring. You need entertainment.
Why 11? Because traffic is fucking loud and you can’t hear your headphones.
For myself, I listen to podcasts, audiobooks, and other spoken word audio – it’s a less consistent noise and it’s easier to hear ambient noise over it without having to drowned it out.
Anyway, I understand your frustration, but I ask you to look at it the way you’d like cars to look at you – at the very worst it’s a momentary inconvenience that increases their safety a heck of a lot and know that any time you lost slowing down to go around a jogger is almost certainly entirely swallowed up by the wait time at the next red light.
Do you run barefoot or pseudo-barefoot (e.g. wear Vibram Five Fingers)? Doing so is “is easier on your joints and minimizes injury” compared to using running shoes. Barefoot running also prevents risk compensation associated with wearing running shoes, and encourages runners to pay attention to the terrain on which they run, significantly reducing the dangers associated with driveways and curbs that you cite. It also promotes overall better running technique, itself easier on the body.
“Why headphones? Joggers are usually out recreationally, near home, doing the same route over and over. That’s boring. You need entertainment.
Why 11? Because traffic is fucking loud and you can’t hear your headphones. ”
That sounds similar to excuses I hear people use to justify surfing the Web, texting, or talking on the phone while they drive. If one is going to use the public roads/sidewalks/MUP’s, one has a responsibility to maintain awareness of other traffic around them, even if doing so burdens one with boredom. Failure to do so is unsafe and arrogant.
If you want to run without having the responsibility to pay attention to traffic (of all kinds) around you or to turn the volume up on your audio player to the point that the sounds of traffic are drowned out, then run on an indoor or outdoor running track or some other place where you won’t be endangering people who choose to use the roads/sidewalks/MUP’s responsibly and safely.
Indicators? You mean turn signals or is this a British term? It would seem that there is an extremely high defect rate in the production of turn signals. It seems to be across all brands.
” . . . there were hundreds of peds wandering like sheep (think they were going to a Neil Diamond concert), and they weren’t responding to my bell so I used my 115dB Air Zound on em to clear the way for myself and other cyclists behind me.”
Some obnoxious mv drivers have about the same attitude. It’s no less disgusting when held by a cyclist.
Same problem here in Indy on the multi-use paths, ranks of the self-deafened wandering zombie-like all over the path, having tuned out all but the bliss of their iPods. I actually passed one the other day I thought was drunk or ahvign a stroke; she was weaving all over the path, arms extended, head bobbing. But as I passed her I saw that she was only wandering along with her eyes closed, grooving to the tunes.
“The traffic stopped and I noticed his window was open so I yelled ‘INDICATORS’ as I filtered past. he looked shocked.”
In the UK, Audi cars only have indicators as an optional extra. 100% OF FACT[1].
[1] May not actually be a fact.
In the UK drivers are advised not to indicate unless there are other road users who will benefit by seeing their indicators. Pretty much without exception, this seems to be taken to mean other drivers of motorised vehicles. Pedestrians and cyclists don’t count as road users.
You are wrong Alan – the use of indicators is required BY LAW and you will fail your test if you don’t use them, correctly!
However – many/most motorists seem to think they are optional…
(I was training to be a driving instructer before my heart-attack)
Highway Code #117 etc – nb: A failure to comply with the code is not an offence as such, but leaves you open for a careless/dangerous driving indictment (RTA sec 38)
@Alan & Tencon, Indicate what and by what means? Seriously have no clue what is meant by this. Brake lights, hazard signals, turn signals, parking lights…?
Brake lights come on when applying brakes, not neccesarily on when stopped.
Hazard (or 4 ways) for emergencies or when driving so slowly that approaching traffic needs to be alerted.
Turns signals for indicating an impending turn or lane change.
Parking lights… no longer used, archaic.
Indicators?
“Indicators” is Brit-speak for what we would call ‘turn signals,’ IIRC.
Exactly – I try to make my comments as universal as possible but I often forget the adage ‘The English and the Americans are two peoples seperated by a common tongue’ (Or something lke that!)
I’m not a Brit, I am Australian… I suppose we inherited some terminology from the Brits… but seems a bit dense for people to not put it into context – I was talking about lane changes that were not signalled.
That behaviour is illegal in the UK – 3 points on your licence. The perp is likely to lose their licence as that behaviour is the inconsiderate drivingthat has possibly got them points before? The rule is that you have to use the road AS IF the road is currently being used to it’s full capacity. So indicating your intentions is required even is nobody is there to benefit. You might not be able to see them?
Many speed bumps in the suburbs, more rarely chicanes, a few atypic stop signs (on the main way instead of the smaller one).
Inside Paris they have a cheaper solution : they just leave pot holes.
Traffic Calming Devices… I had to look that term up having never ever heard it before. Lo and behold , the name is BS/PC. Speed bumps and the rest of the crap described do not calm traffic but instead aggravate it. Pissing off drivers isn’t a good thing. I suspect most road rage is caused by traffic being impeded, not “calmed”.
totally agree, and in some cases these traffic ‘calming’ devises cause accidents because someone travelling at excessive speed hits them, get some air, loses traction and plows into whatever is on the side of the road. Without the traffic islands the speeder might have got through without causing any damage to cars or himself.
Not just in Paris!
This says it all. We are many that are heard by few.
We are community. We floW through tight spaces. And in the end the car wins
there is no rational thought to sex or cars. We are screwed
Traffic calming device is another name for dangerously narrowed blind corner. I hate my council.
Just like the string of boards they put up on the approach to a junction, so you can’t see approaching traffic as you come up to the line (and race them!
When they also curve the lane so you have to use your mirror to see approaching cars this is DANGEROUS and similar to blindfolding drivers!
Why? Is your council building 8 foot brick walls next to corners as a traffic calming device?
No, A string of 1M-wide plastic boards about 3M high and about a metre apart. Unless you look at 90 degrees/side-on you can’t see past them. The last few yards, less than a semi-truck length, is left clear. Lorries/Semis may be able to see over them but car drivers can’t and HAVE to slow down until they can see if it is clear to proceed. In practical terms, there is no difference from the wall you speak of!
I got around it tonight by turning the car as if changing lane to see approaching traffic more easily. Low/no traffic. In heavy traffic, I would have had to use the trick of keeping a lorry between me and the cars coming up, or copying a car alongside!
As has already been mentioned, instead of calming traffic it angers drivers. I suppose it is meant to reduce the incidents where a car leaving the motorway to join the crossing road may not slow down enough and try to match speeds with the traffic on the ‘Island’ already. After travelling at 70mph for a while, merging with 40mph traffic is hard for inexperienced drivers and difficult for the rest of us. Bikes have no problem as they are going so slow already and may merge without stopping.
Since my heart attack I have problems turning my head. I made things worse by getting a new car that has sight-obstructing pillars in just the right place to cause problems at that type of junction in particular
I don’t know anything about British calmers (do you have pictures of these plastic boards? They seem absolutely bizarre), but American calmers, in case after case, consistently reduce the number of dangerous collisions of all types and are probably most responsible for the significant reductions in motorist fatalities over the past 10 years (25%). I have never, EVER, heard of sight obstructions being used as a traffic calming strategy.
And frequently improve water quality
SDMSS – I just used Google Earth street view to see if it had the pics but the images were taken before the boards went up, sorry. There is healthy vegetation doing the same job for most of the approach that you can see there but the final bit is missing the boards that went up less than a year ago. Note that vegetation is used for this purpose a lot in my part of the world! Check out where the ‘Cheylsmore Bypass’ joins the ‘London Road’ when returing to Coventry on the A46 – shrubbery blocks the view to the right until you are waiting at the white line there! Good job too, in a 40mph zone it is rare to have locals driving at less than 50 unless limited by traffic etc, We know where the speed cameras are! I use ‘cruise control’ to set my speed at/below the limit to avoid getting points and allow me to concentrate on traffic, not the speedo!!!
The boards – Look for ‘Kenilworth’ in Warwickshire, UK. Then check the A46 from Coventry to Warwick. Where the road from Kenilworth to Leamington Spa crosses the A46 is where I approach from Coventry on Wednesday evening taking my wife to a meeting that side of Leamington on the Berington Road. The slip road from the A46 has greenery on the divide until where the footpath alongside the Leamington road crosses the slip road (Poor peds, no help whatever to cross a busy road with fast-moving traffic!) I think the boards bridge the gap from the end of the trees etc to the Leamington road but am not sure when they end. I will pay more attention next time there and report back…
We are looking forward to getting our Tandem back so we can make the journey by bike (on parallel, safer, roads)
F-yeah! LOL.
Yehuda puts more trust in drivers than I do, I don’t feel comfortable acting as a traffic calming device when there’s a chance I might become a speed bump.
its been a while since yehuda opened up a bike digest
everytime someone opened it, it’ll shine gold
I have natural traffic calming devices. Trees, birds all types of wildlife as I ride down the logging roads to work. My only traffic is the occasional deer in the way. I moved from the cities to the northwoods of Wisconsin.
Yehuda should be very slow. Usually cagers are in my way while i speed…
It’s nice to see Joe and Yehuda in agreement for a change.
America is like the Ozarks of the world. This country is filled with way too many mouth breathing, lazy, over consuming rednecks to ever accept the bicycle as a real means of transportation. We will have places like Portland, Madison, NYC. But even with a great man like Ray Lahood in office it’s hard to move an entire country….now I’ll tell you how I really feel
Erick,
But watch that change in a heartbeat if/when there is a revolution in Saudi Arabia and their car driving comes to an abrupt end. To quote former US President L.B. Johnson, “When you’ve got them by the balls, their hearts and minds will inevitably follow.”
KLove~ I work with some folks so addicted to cars they would live on crackers and water before they give up their cars. I am secretly ok with $6.00+ gas. America was built around the car, which is why our government gave billions to GM and Chrysler so they didn’t disappear. I was ready for the companies to become part of Americas history books.
What secret? Active transportation conference specifically stated “Higher gas prices would be better for us.” I always feel a pang of liberal guilt, though, because it’s the poorer people who don’t have the resources to make changes (like moving) to make non-SOV transportation possible.
Indicators, Turn Signals; whatever you call them and wherever you live, the one international constant is that taxi drivers are unaware of their existence….
If you don’t like my riding…STAY OFF THE PAVED, SEPARATE BIKE TRAIL. That includes walkers (who spread out over both lanes), skateboarders, motorcyclists, and 4 wheelers! Runners I don’t mind so much. They are at least courteous enough to move out of the way when I pass thru.
The runners in my parts usually indicate as well! I LOVE RUNNERS. The problem I have is with masses of old doddery peds who get off a train headed to an event (like a big concert) who don’t think that life is continuing on around them and people are trying to make their way home from work.
How about if you don’t like following road rules don’t ride a bike! If you are in a lane and going way slower than cars can go YOU are a hazard! If there is a bike lane or shoulder use it. If there is no bike lane find a different route. I do take the lane when there is no other choice, and the law allows but purposfully slowing traffic is putting yourself at risk and antagonizing people who drive leathal wepons. When I ride I like to remember I am out gunned so to speak and put MY saftey first.
Bicyclists are not equal users of the road to cars. WE ARE SUPERIOR. A motorist’s use of the road is derived from is being licensed and registered by the State; a cyclists’ is based on his constitutional & common law right to travel.
Sorry Rzar not everyone lives in Portland, Copenhagen, or any other such place that HAS bike lanes. In my town, the vast majority of roads don’t even have painted shoulders. Following your logic, to get to the hardware store I would have to drive 3 miles in my imaginary car, park it illegally on the side of a highway, ride the shoulder for 2 miles, teleport my still imaginary car to my new location then drive the remaining .5 miles then park it in the ashpalt mausoleum (parking lot).
In reality, bicycles have as much right to be on the road as any other slow moving vehicle. What many cyclists don’t understand, however, is that that right, like every right, comes with responsibilities and rules that guide ones conduct. I’m not going to list them here because they are easily available on the innerwep. If every cyclist on the road followed these rules it would be a lovely thing but they don’t. How about this for an idea: Little paper pamphlets with cycling laws in them at bike shops given away with every bicycle sale. There aren’t that many, they aren’t hard to do, and if everybody followed them we’d all be much safer and predictible.
Portland doesn’t have that many bike lanes. We have roads that you’re expected to share with cyclists. All roads (except limited access freeways) are fair game for bikes. What’s nice is that there are heavy-traffic arterials that kind of suck to ride on but may of them have parallel side streets indicated as “bike boulevards” with traffic calming infrastructure to make it nice for bicycles and annoying for cars that need anything more than local access.
I live in Seattle now. Seattle has bike lanes. Bike lanes that don’t really help you in the slightest.
They’re too narrow.
I could ride my recumbent trike in Portland and never get scared. Now Flash only comes out once a year or so.
Since violating the traffic laws costs the same for me whether i’m in a car or on a bike, I take the lane. It’s my lane. I pay for it same as you, I’m held to it’s rules same as you, so I’m taking ALL of it same as you. The “impeding traffic” argument only applies if i’m traveling slow for *the type of vehicle i’m driving*, so if you don’t like it, you may consider yourself invited to take a long walk on a short pier. Thank you, California.
Unless there’s a very good reason to do so, I don’t “take the lane,” even though I have the right to do so, because it’s rude to get in other people’s way unnecessarily. It’s just as rude as those pedestrians who amble slowly down the center of the sidewalk, forcing those of us who like to walk briskly to slow down or else to step off the curb into the street to get around them. Whether walking, riding or driving it’s polite for slower traffic to keep to the right (or to the left, depending on the customs of the country) whenever possible. Having the right to do something does not always make it the right thing to do.
Rzar — When I read your comments I sense an uncertainty on whether you want to look at the issue from the perspective of a car driver or a cyclist. And you often have such a discomfort in your posts. I find it refreshing, because most of us are both drivers and cyclists, yet people tend to behave as if they are only one or the other, and talk about rights, and act as if these rights should just be exercised to the hilt all the time, common sense be damned.
I understand that you are in areas where there isn’t bike infrastructure — in such places, I think the best way to ride is to follow Vehicular Cycling precepts to the T. It’s safer, and it’s designed for your situation.
The way you describe your riding is much more dangerous — you are hugging the side of the road, so you aren’t visible to traffic. And you are riding in the debris area of the roadway, so you are likely to hit something and puncture your tire or worse. So you are going back and forth across the road, depending on whether there’s a bike lane or shoulder or debris to avoid, so your motion isn’t predictable.
Rzar – riding on the shoulder is unpredictable and dangerous, therefore I don’t do it. Case closed.
I don’t know what road rules say where you live but here in France they generally don’t prevent you from using roads (other than highways) unless there is a compulsory bike lane siding it (marked with a round roadsign as opposed to optional bike lanes marked with a square road sign). What law says is that you must stick to the right and that two bikes must not ride side-to-side, and that’s about all.
I don’t mind using bike lanes when they are physically on the road, because they’re usually clean from debris (and pedestrians… grin). To use separate bike lanes here you have too often to jump sidewalks, pay attention to pot holes and bumps caused by roots (the asphalt is often too thin), slalom among pedestrians, pay attention to broken glass and branches…
Riding on the shoulder combines the disadvantages of the road and the separated bike lane.
Without being an olympic-level athlete a trained cyclist using the road doesn’t really impede the traffic anyway. In the city traffic is already quite slow especially when it’s a bit dense. When you get outside the traffic gets more fluid but cars can pass you more easily as well.
@jx75 in austria you’re even allowed to ride side by side on road bikes during a group ride/training session. its safer coz motorists are not tempted to pass while traffic is oncoming and the group is more compact too. roadies also dont have to use bike lanes
sure, rzar, blame the victim..
With rare exceptions, I take the whole lane when riding in the street. Many years of riding has taught me that motorists are more likely to exit the lane to pass if I’m near the middle of the lane. If I’m at the side of the lane, motorists will often try to share the lane with me, which is not safe on most of the roads on which I ride. Plus, if there is a curb, I do not want to be riding next to it, because it effectively removes one of my best outs in the event I have to make some sort of evasive maneuver. I often see people riding next to the curb at the far right of a road and always wonder if they’ve considered the potential consequences of their choice.
Share the road, not the lane.
When you’re riding on a two-lane highway with a speed limit of 55 mph and heavy traffic, taking the whole lane isn’t an option unless you want to inconvenience (and possibly anger) hundreds of people. I ride to the right of the white line at the edge if there’s at least a foot of smooth pavement there, or a few inches to the left of the line otherwise. Most people give me a fair amount of clearance when they pass, but even the ones who pass closely don’t bother me. “A miss is as good as a mile,” as the old saying goes, and as long as they don’t hit me or run me off the road, I’m happy to share the lane with them.
@Widsith
I agree, and such situations would be among the rare exceptions that I mentioned. I try very hard to not choose routes that put me in such situations, but at times it is unavoidable. I used to have a ~17 mile stretch of four lane 65 mph highway that I had to ride each way on my commute, because there wasn’t a better route available. Mostly I was able to ride on the shoulder. I did go out of my way to avoid busy times, which meant riding during the hottest part of the day and late at night (the latter being my favorite time to ride). Still, in such situations, I think it is about making the best of a bad situation rather than riding on the edge being a generally good practice.
You make different choices than I would
I could do that on a daily basis, it’d be too unpleasant. I’d much prefer to design my life with a less than 5 mile bike commute each day and save my breves for the weekends.
At times my commute has been a couple miles round trip. Other times it has been about 25 miles each way. Living close to every regular destination is not always an option. Just as owning/operating a car has inherent inconveniences, so does being car-free.
Of course, I don’t consider 50 miles (in Florida, so hills were minimal to non-existant) round trip to be a particularly long, challenging, or unpleasant ride, either. 25 miles at night (the return trip) is especially relaxing. Quite literally, YMMV.
Any one notice how you can see the titles for the next 5 comics?
Yep. April begins strangely: the 1st follows the 2nd.
didnt you read them ?
Sure, cities are putting funds towards traffic ‘calming’ – here in Long Beach they are taking away traffic lanes on some streets to facilitate bike lanes, making curbs extend farther into the street at intersections, etc, etc, to reduce traffic speeds. But more often, cities rely on cyclists themselves for traffic ‘calming’ as Yehuda knows. The problem is that traffic as a whole is ‘calmed’ but a significant minority of drivers are irritated and angry when they are expected to share the road, and they do things to show their displeasure. (You can pass laws banning such harrassment, but that’s no help when you are being harrassed in the street and trying to cycle safely and not get hit.) This is OK when the cyclists are people like me, who take the lane and are not intimidated by drivers revving their engines, honking, passing too closely, etc.
The problem is that most cyclists are NOT willing participants in the city’s decision to throw cyclists into the mix as traffic ‘calming’ devices. I think this is a fundamental problem with the way cities try to manage traffic. There is RARELY a frank discussion with citizens in general, and drivers iand cyclists in particular, about the goals of cities with regard to traffic. If cities DID have these discussions, they’d get a bunch of negative blowback from drivers, of course, which is why these things aren’t done, but the problem remains — the city wants cyclists to ride in the street and ‘calm’ traffic but the drivers aren’t being told anything about the city’s preference and desire for livable streets, just presented with cyclists in ‘their’ lane or with reduced traffic lanes, extended curbs, etc, and given no explanation of what’s happening.
I’m not sure if that’s necessarily true – I don’t know about other parts of the country, but in the PNW there’s a high level of at least potential knowledge about transportation policy, how it works, what traffic calming (especially road diets) do for all road users. There are lots of public meetings about it, Portland and Seattle mayors give speeches about it – but it falls on deaf ears because human brains are particularly bad at assessing systems of things. We reflect on our driving experience and ask the question, “What made you late, today?” and you think of the 3 block stretch you were behind a cyclist, even though that delay was a fraction of the delay from one round of signal failure. We remember the things that re-inforce the narrative we already have and forget the things that don’t.
Road diets make the road safer for cyclists and pedestrians. But they also make the road’s car traffic flow more smoothly over all because people turning left do not back up other cars. Still, people only see “One less lane for me” and assume that means less smoothly. They’re just bad at seeing it – whether that can be overcome with public communication, I’m just not convinced.
From what I’ve seen of public meetings and speeches, they are geared towards advocacy groups and livable city meetings, etc, not to the general public.
Traffic calming isn’t about appeasing whiny cyclists; it’s about reducing the fatality rate of pedestrians, motorists AND cyclists, but whatever.
I can give or take bicycle infrastructure. There are plenty of good pro and con arguments for bicycle infrastructure. But traffic calming is critical and necessary and has been proven to save lives by seriously minimizing the number of pedestrian, bicycle and motorist fatalities.
OK…so…what exactly is a “Traffic Calming Device”? Never heard of it, unless they are referring to getting out of your pickup truck with a shotgun, after having someone sit behind you blowing their horn…instant calmness from the guy with the horn at that point of course. Not that I have ever done this. Or that anyone could prove it. Just saying.
There’s some excellent info on traffic calming available at http://www.trafficcalming.org/