Page 28 of 72 FirstFirst ... 18262728293038 ... LastLast
Results 271 to 280 of 716

Thread: e-Bikes - Let's talk

  1. #271
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The forgotten corner of Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    2,471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by streetsmarts View Post
    VC is vehicular cycling, right?
    seg infra - is segregated cycling infrastructure?
    Learning

    Here is my understanding.

    VC is vehicular cycling (but note, some use it as I have above, to mean a style of riding "as a vehicle" while some also use it to mean an approach to bike policy that is skeptical of "seg infra")

    Seg infra is indeed any infrastructure that separates bikes from motor vehicles.

    MUT is a multi use trail - a trail, generally through a park (but not always - see the Metropolitan Branch Trail) that is reserved for and designed for use by bikes, pedestrians and similar (similar can vary - horses on the W&OD but not on most other trails) and is not alongside a road (it can be near a road, like Custis or MVT, but does not have regular crosswalks, share signals with the road, etc like a sidewalk (also called a sidepath) does.

    A MUP is a sidepath that is built to standards to make sharing between bikes and pedestrians easier. It has a more bike friendly surface than a sidepath is required to have, and is wider than even modern standard sidepaths are. And may be striped for two way traffic, and have better geometry than some sidepaths.

    Your question this AM of whether 4MRT between Shirlington Road and Walter Reed is a MUP or a MUT is a good one. Technically I guess it is a MUP, as it is immediately adjacent to Arlington Mill. However, in addition to being part of the 4MRT (which elsewhere is a MUT) it is MUT like in its characteristics - there are no street crossings between Shirlington Rd and Walter Reed. And its in a park.

    Note another difficult case is the W&OD by Virginia Lane. Where it passes right in front of single family houses and is not particularly wide. As well as crossing some driveways. There it is effectively a sidepath, though paved and stripped like a trail.

  2. Likes streetsmarts liked this post
  3. #272
    DismalScientist is offline I really need to log off the internet and go for a ride.
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Westover Beer Garden
    Posts
    2,508
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lordofthemark View Post
    I am confused (both by this and by other comments on this thread)

    And I play in traffic a lot more than some people here seem to think is safe or comfortable. From Maine Avenue in SW DC to King Street just south of Beauregard, to Braddock road either way to and from North Hampton. Have I been totally brainwashed by the VCers? (yet I am a big advocate for seg infra, and will even ride a sidewalk here and there, so I don't think so) Has my age and attitude made me more relaxed about physical danger?


    But as an advocate I definitely want alternatives to such routes (or appropriate seg infra on them). And yeah, I don't expect Isabella riding to her ice cream cone to ride like I do - but I am surprised that riders who I think are stronger, faster, and more experienced than me seem to be less VCish than me.
    No. VCers have been inappropriately maligned by "bike advocacy" establishment. It is perfectly reasonable to ride on most streets without dedicated infrastructure. Just follow the general traffic rules and flows and you should interact with drivers perfectly fine.

    It is Isabella that is the strawman. A 10 year old not knowing basic traffic patterns is potentially in danger riding with any speed on a sidewalk or protected bike lane (or in the street). The key to defensive cycling is knowing what to expect and how to react to different situations, not some infrastructure silver bullet.

  4. #273
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The forgotten corner of Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    2,471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DismalScientist View Post
    No. VCers have been inappropriately maligned by "bike advocacy" establishment. It is perfectly reasonable to ride on most streets without dedicated infrastructure. Just follow the general traffic rules and flows and you should interact with drivers perfectly fine.

    It is Isabella that is the strawman. A 10 year old not knowing basic traffic patterns is potentially in danger riding with any speed on a sidewalk or protected bike lane (or in the street). The key to defensive cycling is knowing what to expect and how to react to different situations, not some infrastructure silver bullet.


    Streetsmarts - this is an excellent example of how VC as an approach to safe road cycling tends to overlap with VC as an attitude towards seg infra and policy. Sometimes the connection is quite logical, and sometimes not so much. As you can tell, I am moderately VCish in my riding style, but do believe that more seg infra is important. I don't want to debate that again, though - Dismal and I have been over that before, and I think agreed to disagree? And is mostly off topic to even the tangent I went on - the question I had was not whether or not its good to stripe bike lanes or not for the sake of 12 YOs (and other living things) (btw, for more on this with dismal, me, steve o, etc chiming in, search on "Isabella") but why people who know traffic patterns very well, and who can ride faster than I do, etc seem to think that there are no safe alternatives to in park trails (note there are other reasons to prefer such trails - lovely views, some avoidance of auto emissions, etc) .

    (note also, at least in Alexandria most of the "bike establishment" is comfortable riding on a range of roads, and does so VC style, AFAICT, though still advocating for bike infra - at least if BPAC is the bike establishment)
    Last edited by lordofthemark; 08-02-2017 at 10:57 AM.

  5. Likes streetsmarts, dasgeh liked this post
  6. #274
    DismalScientist is offline I really need to log off the internet and go for a ride.
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Westover Beer Garden
    Posts
    2,508
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    As a rejoinder, I would like to say that I didn't say that there is no "safe" alternatives to riding in the street or off-street trails. What I said was that riding to fast in a PBL (or sidewalk) exposes one to turning conflicts that one might realize, particularly if one is unfamiliar with traffic flows. In particular, PBLs often give users a false sense of security. When confronted with the choice of a PBL or regular vehicle lane on a road, I will choose the one that seems safer to me and my riding style.

    Some folks on the forum have indicated that they wish Fairfax Drive and Clarendon/Wilson had PBLs carved out of the roadway (presumably on the right side of the parking lane). This would lead to narrow vehicular lanes, which I would not consider conducive to riding. This would, in effect, eliminate the fastest and most convenient, in MY opinion, bicycling route between Ballston and Rosslyn. Perhaps this is one example why you hear a sneer in my typing when it comes to the bike establishment.

  7. #275
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The forgotten corner of Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    2,471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DismalScientist View Post
    No. VCers have been inappropriately maligned by "bike advocacy" establishment. It is perfectly reasonable to ride on most streets without dedicated infrastructure. Just follow the general traffic rules and flows and you should interact with drivers perfectly fine.

    It is Isabella that is the strawman. A 10 year old not knowing basic traffic patterns is potentially in danger riding with any speed on a sidewalk or protected bike lane (or in the street). The key to defensive cycling is knowing what to expect and how to react to different situations, not some infrastructure silver bullet.
    When I was 12 YO I rode on sidewalks. VC was, IIRC, simply not a thing in NYC. I almost never saw adults riding, and certainly not in the streets in Brooklyn. I stopped at every street crossing (IIRC), just like a pedestrian. I rode slowly. Despite it being NYC, there were driveways (probably with worse visibility than the driveways around here) and rode carefully (IIRC) through them. I assume that is how Isabella rides on the sidewalk now, esp if a wise adult has taught her how to bike to get places (not the case for me, as I knew no adults who rode AT ALL, IIRC. Well except the guy who owned the LBS, I suppose). I expect Isabella will ride the same way in the PBL as she does on the sidewalk.

    And again, my point in referencing her here is that I don't expect her to ride on King Street from Walter Reed to North Hampton, as I do. Do you?

  8. Likes dasgeh liked this post
  9. #276
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The forgotten corner of Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    2,471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DismalScientist View Post
    As a rejoinder, I would like to say that I didn't say that there is no "safe" alternatives to riding in the street or off-street trails. What I said was that riding to fast in a PBL (or sidewalk) exposes one to turning conflicts that one might realize, particularly if one is unfamiliar with traffic flows. In particular, PBLs often give users a false sense of security. When confronted with the choice of a PBL or regular vehicle lane on a road, I will choose the one that seems safer to me and my riding style.

    Some folks on the forum have indicated that they wish Fairfax Drive and Clarendon/Wilson had PBLs carved out of the roadway (presumably on the right side of the parking lane). This would lead to narrow vehicular lanes, which I would not consider conducive to riding. This would, in effect, eliminate the fastest and most convenient, in MY opinion, bicycling route between Ballston and Rosslyn. Perhaps this is one example why you hear a sneer in my typing when it comes to the bike establishment.

    We have been over this before. If a vehicular lane is not wide enough to allow passing in lane, then the generally accepted (AFAICT) VC approach is to take the lane, riding in or near the center of the lane. Which is what I do when riding in such a lane. And which VC advocates generally advocate (AFAICT) as just as safe as riding to the right in a wide lane, if not as comfortable. And any lane which is wide enough to safely ride to the right, is so wide that it induces drivers to drive faster and more recklessly. Narrowing lanes is done for general traffic calming, not just to carve out space for cyclists. It benefits pedestrians and lawful drivers as well as full VC in road cyclists.

    Note also there is a valid debate about whether protections for PBLs should be parked cars, or things like flexposts, which provide less protection against out of control drivers, but make getting out of the PBL easier (and the choice is not always dictated by rider prefernces, but by the desire to retain parking, etc)

  10. #277
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The forgotten corner of Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    2,471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DismalScientist View Post
    As a rejoinder, I would like to say that I didn't say that there is no "safe" alternatives to riding in the street or off-street trails. What I said was that riding to fast in a PBL (or sidewalk) exposes one to turning conflicts that one might realize, particularly if one is unfamiliar with traffic flows.
    You did not say that, nor did anyone say it explicitly (not even solar bike car, who thinks that being able to do 20MPH uphill does not make it safe to "play in traffic") but several people seemed to imply it, to some degree.

    yes, riding too fast through a street crossing in a PBL is dangerous. I agree. (Its far worse on a sidewalk though). But then so is riding too fast on a trail that is shared with pedestrians. Riding too fast (but still lawfully) on a PBL exposes the cyclist to the risk of getting hit by cross traffic (where the intersection is not signaled) or by turning traffic (at a signaled intersection with conventional signalling, not Dutch style signalling designed to separate bike phases from turning car phases, as we have I think on 15th street). (though I note that when I ride on Eads PBL drivers seem to see me about as well as when I am taking the lane elsewhere, but perhaps I am mistaken - and of course I am not riding as fast as the folks under discussion, and I am very aware of right turning cars) Riding too fast on a MUT creates, among other dangers, the risk of killing a toddler walking with her parents. That, far more than getting right hooked, gives me the willies when I ride. And as a bike advocate, I dread that happening. We have had only one bike on ped fatal on a trail here in recent years - the one on the 4MRT - the cyclist (as far as we know) was not riding too fast, and it was a misunderstanding about "on your left" combined with the frailty of the elderly pedestrian that caused that tragedy. Nonetheless it is still sometimes thrown in our faces. Imagine what we will face if and when someone bombing along the MVT at over 20MPH kills a two year old.

    Now I could have said "instead of wanting more riders on the MUTs, we want more riders taking the lanes on parallel streets" but in addition to a debate on the comfort level of taking the lane on particular parallel streets, as intense as what we had on the comfort level of different bike lanes, Steve O might well have responded that if we followed that approach, most of the would be ebike riders would just drive instead. My point was that even if we take Steve Os approach of accommodating the desire for comfort of new and less confident riders, there are better alternatives to trying to get more of them on the most popular trails.
    Last edited by lordofthemark; 08-02-2017 at 11:32 AM.

  11. #278
    dasgeh's Avatar
    dasgeh is offline Queen of Family Biking & All Things Kidical
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,135
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DismalScientist View Post
    Some folks on the forum have indicated that they wish Fairfax Drive and Clarendon/Wilson had PBLs carved out of the roadway (presumably on the right side of the parking lane). This would lead to narrow vehicular lanes, which I would not consider conducive to riding. This would, in effect, eliminate the fastest and most convenient, in MY opinion, bicycling route between Ballston and Rosslyn. Perhaps this is one example why you hear a sneer in my typing when it comes to the bike establishment.
    I, for one, thank that Fairfax should have a two-way cycle track on the northside (to match up with the current two-way cycletrack by the Blue Goose, avoid the mess by the Metro, then connect to the nub of Fairfax that's a parking lot. To achieve this, you'd need to knock out the median on FFX and probably a few parking spaces, and realign the parking in the nub. I doubt you'd have to narrow lanes below 11'.

    On Clarendon/Wilson, I don't think you can achieve a PBL without taking out parking. So it's not a lane width issue.

    If these were built, you could still take the lane, and I'd have a place to ride with my kids. Win-win.

    The "false sense of security" you fear is not born out in the statistics.

  12. Likes Steve O, Dewey liked this post
  13. #279
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The forgotten corner of Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    2,471
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dasgeh View Post
    I, for one, thank that Fairfax should have a two-way cycle track on the northside (to match up with the current two-way cycletrack by the Blue Goose, avoid the mess by the Metro, then connect to the nub of Fairfax that's a parking lot. To achieve this, you'd need to knock out the median on FFX and probably a few parking spaces, and realign the parking in the nub. I doubt you'd have to narrow lanes below 11'.

    On Clarendon/Wilson, I don't think you can achieve a PBL without taking out parking. So it's not a lane width issue.

    If these were built, you could still take the lane, and I'd have a place to ride with my kids. Win-win.

    The "false sense of security" you fear is not born out in the statistics.

    Are the lanes 11 ft there now? If a bike is two feet wide, a car is 6 ft wide, and you need 3 feet to pass, isn't riding to the right barely safe in such a lane? Personally my understanding of VC is that in such a lane you ride in the center anyway (which you could do in a 10 ft lane) and only ride on the right in a lane of at least 12 feet or maybe wider.

    Do we have different understandings of what VC riding means?

    Here is what LAB says:

    Bikes can share the same lane with other drivers. If a lane is wide enough to share with another vehicle (about 14 feet), ride three feet to the right of traffic. If the lane is not wide enough to share, “take the lane” by riding in the middle.

    I thought this was VC.
    Last edited by lordofthemark; 08-02-2017 at 01:27 PM.

  14. #280
    dasgeh's Avatar
    dasgeh is offline Queen of Family Biking & All Things Kidical
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,135
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    It seems like we agree on quite a bit:
    * we'd be better off if there were a place to bike fast safely separate from where people walk
    * we need changes (mostly infrastructure) that will convince faster cyclists (on e- and regular bikes) off of trails, leaving trails to the people walking, jogging, kids riding, slow biking, etc.
    * what that changes are depend on the road -- maybe PBLs on Lee, Wilson, FFX, maybe wayfinding or streamlined stop-signs on neighborhood streets like Key, 5th St N, etc.

    So let's work on getting this done!

  15. Likes Dewey, streetsmarts, lordofthemark liked this post
    ELITE Dewey ELITED this post

Tags for this Thread

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
  •