Likes Likes:  35
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
ELITE ELITE:  0
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 46

Thread: Protected Bike Lane on Quincy btwn 9th and Wilson

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    The banks of Lubber Run
    Posts
    477
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    According to DOT sign standards white signs indicate requirements (speed limit, one way, etc.), yellow signs indicate advice (curve ahead, reduce speed ahead, etc.). By using a white sign they are saying that it is required for bikes to use the bike lane.

  2. Likes scoot liked this post
  3. #22
    lordofthemark's Avatar
    lordofthemark is offline I really need to log off the internet and go for a ride.
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The forgotten corner of Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    3,301
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brendan von Buckingham View Post
    According to DOT sign standards white signs indicate requirements (speed limit, one way, etc.), yellow signs indicate advice (curve ahead, reduce speed ahead, etc.). By using a white sign they are saying that it is required for bikes to use the bike lane.
    It IS a requirement that cars not enter the bike lane, so a yellow sign would not be appropriate.

  4. Likes dasgeh liked this post
  5. #23
    dasgeh's Avatar
    dasgeh is offline Queen of Family Biking & All Things Kidical
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,715
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Brendan von Buckingham View Post
    According to DOT sign standards white signs indicate requirements (speed limit, one way, etc.), yellow signs indicate advice (curve ahead, reduce speed ahead, etc.). By using a white sign they are saying that it is required for bikes to use the bike lane.
    What law would a bicycle violate by taking the lane? Seriously. I don't know of any Virginia law, but you seem to have thought about this, so...

  6. #24
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    534
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lordofthemark View Post
    It IS a requirement that cars not enter the bike lane
    Just curious, can you cite this law for Alexandria? Someone I know tried to look it up recently, and couldn't find it. (The bike lane violators were parked PD cruisers in Carlyle.)

  7. Likes scoot liked this post
  8. #25
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Arlington
    Posts
    650
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    For sake of discussion, this is one of the new signs (looking northbound on N Quincy Street from the intersection with 5th Rd N):

    Name:  IMG_0546.jpg
Views: 60
Size:  96.5 KB

  9. #26
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Arlington
    Posts
    650
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    I think (hope?) we all agree that Arlington cannot legally prohibit bicyclists from taking the lane on Quincy. However, that is precisely the message communicated by this sign. If you interpret this sign as an indication that motorists are forbidden to use the bike lane, then by symmetry the sign also indicates that bicyclists are forbidden to use the general lane.

    Many cyclists will not want to use the separated facility. Signage like this could encourage harassment from aggressive or uninformed drivers, possibly including police. If such a sign is needed to keep motorists out of the bike lane, then the left side should be depicted for cars and bikes, with the right side for bikes only. Also it would be helpful to paint sharrows in the general travel lane to emphasize that message.

  10. #27
    lordofthemark's Avatar
    lordofthemark is offline I really need to log off the internet and go for a ride.
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The forgotten corner of Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    3,301
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scoot View Post
    I think (hope?) we all agree that Arlington cannot legally prohibit bicyclists from taking the lane on Quincy. However, that is precisely the message communicated by this sign. If you interpret this sign as an indication that motorists are forbidden to use the bike lane, then by symmetry the sign also indicates that bicyclists are forbidden to use the general lane.

    Many cyclists will not want to use the separated facility. Signage like this could encourage harassment from aggressive or uninformed drivers, possibly including police. If such a sign is needed to keep motorists out of the bike lane, then the left side should be depicted for cars and bikes, with the right side for bikes only. Also it would be helpful to paint sharrows in the general travel lane to emphasize that message.
    I think painting BOTH sharrows in the general travel and bike symbols in a bike lane would be confusing to inexperienced riders, if it is done anywhere in the country I am not aware of it, and I am not sure there are models for that in NACTO or AASHTO guides.

    I think most riders who would be inclined to take the lane in lieu of a PBL such as the ones mentioned know the law and understand what the signs mean.

    I am not sure a sign with bikes and cars on the left, and bikes on the right, would not also be confusing, but welcome both images of such signs in place and positive experiences with them.

    As for harassment, I have yet to see evidence that its impacted by the presence of segregated infrastructure (we all have our anecdotes).


    As for police, there is a simple policy answer, which is to educate the police about the bike laws. Police leadership who take this seriously and are bike riders themselves can accomplish this, I think.
    Last edited by lordofthemark; 05-31-2019 at 02:27 PM.

  11. #28
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    4,274
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    main problem I see is that I'm not sure it's a legal sign. The should have gone with a standard marking instead.

  12. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    740
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ginacico View Post
    Just curious, can you cite this law for Alexandria? Someone I know tried to look it up recently, and couldn't find it. (The bike lane violators were parked PD cruisers in Carlyle.)
    https://library.municode.com/va/alex...0-4-45PAPRBILA

    Sec. 10-4-45 - Parking prohibited in bike lanes.
    Where the city has designated a bicycle lane, a motor vehicle may cross a bicycle lane for the purpose of the vehicle entering or exiting adjacent property, for making a turn, or for the purpose of parking, but no person shall stop, stand or park a motor vehicle in a bicycle lane. (Ord. No. 5185, 12/15/18, Sec. 1)
    Last edited by CaseyKane50; 05-31-2019 at 02:15 PM. Reason: The wording is based on Arlington’s code.

  13. Likes ginacico liked this post
  14. #30
    baiskeli's Avatar
    baiskeli is offline I really need to log off the internet and go for a ride.
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Posts
    2,562
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by scoot View Post
    I think (hope?) we all agree that Arlington cannot legally prohibit bicyclists from taking the lane on Quincy. However, that is precisely the message communicated by this sign. If you interpret this sign as an indication that motorists are forbidden to use the bike lane, then by symmetry the sign also indicates that bicyclists are forbidden to use the general lane.
    I see the sign as simply an indicator of which lanes are which, not requirements. At least that's the intent that I perceive. They are like painted lane markers in that regard. Of course, now we can ponder whether lane markers are legal requirements....

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •