Most efforts to encourage cycling involve putting bike lanes on streets. But the lanes disappear at most intersections, which is where most bicycle-auto accidents take place. Now, some Dutch cycling advocates have developed a new intersection design that protects cyclists without unduly interfering in auto traffic.
According to Streetsblog, several American cities, including Boston, Davis, and Salt Lake, are installing such intersections on an experimental basis. A variation has also been used in Vancouver, BC. As a cyclist who has been struck by autos, both when they were turning right and when they ran a red light, I can imagine that these intersections could greatly improve safety, though I hope the cities do comparative before-and-after or with-and-without studies to prove it.
Today these medications buy viagra online have found a dominating position in various markets. viagra generic In addition, males, who watch online adult content, also engage in excessive hand practice. This is the specific hour when they feel low and the negative thoughts cross their minds. viagra pfizer pharmacie According to some of the people who have angima (chest pain/chest tightening), heart disease and conditions like high/low buy cialis in canada blood pressure.
These intersections take advantage of the principle that shared infrastructure is more cost-effective than dedicated infrastructure. This makes me wonder if the improved intersections alone could improve safety even without being accompanied by special bike lanes on the approaching streets. A modification of the intersections could also be used when bicycle boulevards, which I think are better than adding bike lanes to busy streets at the expense of constricting auto space, cross busy arterials or collectors. The point is to make bicycle riding safe and compatible with driving, not competitive with road space for cars.
Bicycle riders should pay for the cost of their infrastructure, just like auto drivers should, and will step forward to do so, right? Ha, ha, ha, I’m pretty funny this morning, not?
In addition to being scofflaw menaces on the road, always willing to run a stop sign or light, they are the most self righteous cheapskates on the planet. Except for vegans.
Hippies delenda est.
As a cyclist, pedestrian and driver I certainly agree that there are some cyclists who have no respect for any others on the road, including pedestrians. However there are many of us cyclists who are respectful of others, share the road, take our turns at stop signs, etc. I am certainly skeptical of expensive dedicated bicycle lanes but I do pay property taxes, gas taxes and am in favor of minor changes, such as encouraging some low traffic side roads to be used by cyclists instead of major roads.
Just because there are irresponsible cyclists on the road doesn’t mean we all our. I am all in favor of getting the irresponsible cyclists off the road.
Ye ol’ bicyclist versus motorist debate. Topic ad nauseam.
On a Saturday afternoon, about 500 cars per hour cross the arterial intersection where I have the misfortune of living. You know how many of those drivers come to a full and complete stop? Extremely few. How many slow from 30 to 10-15 mph? Many. How many blow through at 20-30 mph? A few.
So Fred, your name calling and ridicule should be directed generally at all people (including drivers) who don’t follow traffic rules rather than just at bicyclists, who do not hold a monopoly on rule breaking.
@Fred_Z:
Fred, five out of six trips I take are on my bike, the 6th in my pickup. And you almost describe me to a T. I am willing to run stop signs and red lights and I’m a cheapskate. But I always yield the lawful right of way. What’s frustrating to me are drivers at a four way stop who won’t take their turn just because there’s a bicycle at one of the four points. They instead wave me through, pi$$ing off the other people waiting to get through. I don’t want any special right of way. OTOH if there’s no other vehicles/pedestrians in the intersection I do blow through stops signs…at all of 3mph, which is probably the average “stop” that cars make.
I agree that bicyclists should pay for the capital and operational costs commensurate to the damage that they inflict on roads. Here’s my nickle for the year.
To compare the relative stresses different vehicles place on roadways, one uses the sum of the cube of the axle weights. When comparing bikes to cars, a nickel would be several orders of magnitude too much for even a decade of use.. Taking a Honda Accord as the comparison vehicle to a bicycle. An Accord weighs 3000 lbs, so cubing the axle weight gives you a value of 3.4 billion per axle times two axles = 6.8 billion for the entire vehicle. Compare that to a 250 lbs combined bike and rider. You get a value of 1.9 million times two axles = 3.8 million for the bike. Comparing the two, an Accord creates 1789 times the wear and tear on a road as a bike and rider. A dedicated concrete bike lane will never wear out from use by bike riders. The elements and geological forces will destroy it before any number of cyclists will. Dedicated bike lines are good values for tax payers.
It is true that pavement wear is due almost entirely due to heavy axle loads. Even personal vehicles inflict trivial damage to pavement. Trucks and other heavy vehicles cause almost all of the pavement wear and tear.
However, this does not mean a bicycle lane is necessarily a good bargain. If one removes a multipurpose lane to put in a bicycle lane one has removed a lane that may serve more than 1000 vehicles per hour and replaced it with one that might serve a handful of travelers. This is not a good bargain regardless of pavement wear considerations.
You want that protected intersection without a bike lane leading up to it? Are you asking for bikers going straight to swerve to the right to get into the green lane and then after the intersection merge back into the travel lane?
“The point is to make bicycle riding safe and compatible with driving, not competitive with road space for cars.”
If a bike is on a street it is competing for road space with cars whether it is in a bike lane or not. Though many American cyclist disagree with me, I find bike lanes like the ones in Amsterdam much safer and more comfortable to use than holding a lane on a busy American street. I think the Dutch have made a great intersection design and would love to see it implemented here in Austin, where ghost bikes are becoming more and more common.
http://ghostbikes.org/austin
Even if motorists pay for the costs of their infrastructure, they don’t pay for the costs of the externalities they impose. Yearly injuries and deaths, the opportunity cost associated with space that could have been used for something other than extra lanes or complementary parking, air pollution, water pollution associated with fracking and oil sands extraction, alliances with countries like Saudi Arabia, mandatory low density development that increases travel time and reduces walkability, etc. Your gas taxes don’t even begin to cover the cost of ANY of this. Your accusation is the epitome of hypocrisy.
As for your veganism quip, the price that you pay for meat and animal products, all of which is subsidized by the way, certainly doesn’t cover the externality of suffering imposed upon sentient life.
@Jardinero1: I think you mean cube of the axle size. Weight is proportional to the cube of the dimension. There is no physical measurement or test of which I am aware to which the cube of the weight would be relevant. Do you have a reference or a link for your calculation?
”
Bicycle riders should pay for the cost of their infrastructure, just like auto drivers should, and will step forward to do so, right? Ha, ha, ha, I’m pretty funny this morning, not?
”
It should be up to the owner of the property to determine whom may use it and at what cost.
I do like the idea presented in the video except for the left turns for bikes. There’s no reason why bicycles can’t make left turns in the automobile left turn lane. The convoluted method in the video would just frustrate bike riders more than anything else.
In reality in Amsterdam, the biggest vehicle has the right-of-way. I frequently get honked at by bicyclists, motor scooters, and cars when walking through Centrum. They may talk a good game, but walking through central Amsterdam is very much like walking through Saigon. The more mass, the greater the right-of-way.
FredZ,
Road wear is the result of a force applied to the road. Force per unit value is a calculable value. Definitions and formulas for force per unit value are all over the internet. I am not actually trying to establish the specific pound force applied by any specific vehicle. I only want to compare the pound forces of different vehicles. Since force density is a cubic value; it is a crude, but reasonable, back of the envelope method, to compare the cubes of the axle weights. The actual formula for comparing values is not cubic but 4th power and slightly more complex. It is explained here.
http://www.pavementinteractive.org/article/equivalent-single-axle-load/
FredZ,
If you google “Load Equivalency Factor” you will find a great deal on the topic.
“In reality in Amsterdam, the biggest vehicle has the right-of-way. I frequently get honked at by bicyclists, motor scooters, and cars when walking through Centrum. They may talk a good game, but walking through central Amsterdam is very much like walking through Saigon. The more mass, the greater the right-of-way.”
I didn’t realize this, but from my own personal experience walking and biking in Amsterdam is several orders of magnitude more comfortable and safer than walking or biking in any Texas city. They may talk a good game, but they walk a good game too. Maybe the rules of the road aren’t as important if ample infrastructure is available for all modes?
Centrum is a unique place that’s been around since the 1600s. Freight was carried via canals so the roads are narrow. The canals aren’t used for freight much anymore so all the traffic is jammed into those narrow roads. It’s not terrible walking around Centrum but you have to keep your eyes and ears open. I don’t feel any safer or more comfortable walking around Centrum than the downtowns of big US cities (although I have no experience walking in TX cities.) Certainly there are many more pedestrian/traffic signals in the US cities then in Centrum. Outside the Centrum canal districts there are more traffic signals but you have to be very, very careful as a pedestrian due to bikes, cars, and trains crossing your path. It’s hardly a leisurely stroll unless you’re walking through a park.
Biking in much of Amsterdam is easier due to 1) the narrow, often crowded roads in Centrum mean that bikes frequently make better time than cars and 2) dedicated bike paths adjacent to roads outside of Centrum. As I said, I think the bike lanes in the video of the is a good idea especially for dense city centers.