Why the hate for Cyclists?

[BugI02]

You were going to do it in the morning?

I think he's up in lefty Minnesota. He might have to wait for adequate wind power or for the sun to be far enough above the arctic circle in order to power his laptop

 

[AndreusMaximus]

While I recognize the sarcasm, what you said is true, add some sprinkling rain and the oil in center is slicker than snot. As for nails, we once had a thread where folks posted the junk from the road they had gotten out of their tires. Why would it be any different for other road users, especially with those that don't have 10 ply tires?

Then there is the crown and or grooving in most roads it is not easy to stay on the crown or out of the grooves for any vehicle. That leads me to call BS on a lot of this whining about cyclists being in the middle of the road much of the time, it most often is not a practical place to ride.

Okay, so I'm gonna be honest, I genuinely thought this whole time you were saying your general strategy is to ride in the middle/far left of the lane in order to stop cars from passing you until you think it's safe.

If all you were really saying this whole time is that sometimes cyclists need a couple extra feet in case someone starts trying to squeeze them over, and they can't always ride precisely within inches of the right-most edge of the road, then it sounds like I've been seriously misunderstanding, and actually agree with you on this point.

 

[Ingomike]

Okay, so I'm gonna be honest, I genuinely thought this whole time you were saying your general strategy is to ride in the middle/far left of the lane in order to stop cars from passing you until you think it's safe.

If all you were really saying this whole time is that sometimes cyclists need a couple extra feet in case someone starts trying to squeeze them over, and they can't always ride precisely within inches of the right-most edge of the road, then it sounds like I've been seriously misunderstanding, and actually agree with you on this point.

I must not have articulated that point well.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

You were going to do it in the morning?

It's too dark and cold in the mornings now.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

I think he's up in lefty Minnesota. He might have to wait for adequate wind power or for the sun to be far enough above the arctic circle in order to power his laptop

Mooresville is most assuredly not in Minnesota. I mean, there might be a Mooresville in Minnesota, but it's not Hatin's Mooresville.

 

[jamil]

While I recognize the sarcasm, what you said is true, add some sprinkling rain and the oil in center is slicker than snot. As for nails, we once had a thread where folks posted the junk from the road they had gotten out of their tires. Why would it be any different for other road users, especially with those that don't have 10 ply tires?

Then there is the crown and or grooving in most roads it is not easy to stay on the crown or out of the grooves for any vehicle. That leads me to call BS on a lot of this whining about cyclists being in the middle of the road much of the time, it most often is not a practical place to ride.

It may be a more practical place to ride on some roads than others.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

Okay, so I'm gonna be honest, I genuinely thought this whole time you were saying your general strategy is to ride in the middle/far left of the lane in order to stop cars from passing you until you think it's safe.

If all you were really saying this whole time is that sometimes cyclists need a couple extra feet in case someone starts trying to squeeze them over, and they can't always ride precisely within inches of the right-most edge of the road, then it sounds like I've been seriously misunderstanding, and actually agree with you on this point.

That's how I read it as well.

 

[jamil]

What the heck is your ax grinding about. It is illogical that road design ONLY takes into account one class of users, obviously those users have diverging needs so there will be inevitable conflicts but all users are considered and accommodated as best for the entire spectrum of legal users.

What’s the difference between a road construction for multi-use and one not? A road grate, which isn’t even part of the road that carries traffic, that bikes can’t accidentally fall into?

 

[Ingomike]

What’s the difference between a road construction for multi-use and one not? A road grate, which isn’t even part of the road that carries traffic, that bikes can’t accidentally fall into?

You should ask those that insist roads are designed without any consideration for users other than motor vehicles…

 

[jamil]

Shhhh! I'm enjoying the fact that he doesn't even seem to think that the elimination of roadside parking for room, or in some cases the actual structural widening of roads, to accommodate bike lanes don't count as bicycles being taken into consideration during road design

I thought earlier that said we’re not talking about bike lanes. Because obviously roads that have bike lanes considered bikes.

 

[jamil]

You should ask those that insist roads are designed without any consideration for users other than motor vehicles…

I answered the question in that post.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

I thought earlier that said we’re not talking about bike lanes. Because obviously roads that have bike lanes considered bikes.

Here in Indy, just the painting of a white line on the side of the road without widening the road at all provides protection to cyclists from motor vehicles. It's magical! Paint white line a couple feet from the edge of the road - voila! Bike lane!

 

[jamil]

I must not have articulated that point well.

I think the point you articulated was that you do it because you believe inattentive drivers are more likely to see you in the middle than if you’re to the right. So what came to mind was that on narrower roads, you stay in the middle of the right lane for general preventative purposes.

 

[jamil]

Mooresville is most assuredly not in Minnesota. I mean, there might be a Mooresville in Minnesota, but it's not Hatin's Mooresville.

Might have that confused with someone else. Nonobaddog I think is in Minnesota. Speaking of, I haven’t seen him posting for awhile. I like reading his perspective on things.

 

[DoggyDaddy]

Might have that confused with someone else. Nonobaddog I think is in Minnesota. Speaking of, I haven’t seen him posting for awhile. I like reading his perspective on things.

Smokingman used to be up in Minnesota too, but he's back in Indiana now. But yeah, I haven't seen Nonobaddog in quite awhile either not that you mention it.

 

[BugI02]

What’s the difference between a road construction for multi-use and one not? A road grate, which isn’t even part of the road that carries traffic, that bikes can’t accidentally fall into?

If that part of the road ^^^ isn't meant to carry traffic, why are you so adamant that I should be required to ride there? I'll be happy to ride even further from the curb, since being classified as a vehicle I wouldn't want to ride on a part of the road that isn't meant to carry vehicular traffic, but I bet you'll still b****

 

[BugI02]

Apparently FedDOT has a whole book on it

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/about/fhwasa22017.pdf

16. ABSTRACT
Intersections are critical points of access to local and regional destinations for all roadway users. When designed with pedestrians and bicyclists explicitly in mind, all types of intersections can facilitate safe, accessible, convenient, and comfortable walking and bicycling. The purpose of this guide is to inform the state of the practice concerning intersection planning and design to implement solutions that help achieve the goal for zero fatalities and serious injuries while improving mobility for bicyclists and pedestrians.
The primary intersection types discussed in this guide include traditional signalized intersections, roundabouts, Median U-Turn (MUT) intersections, Reduced Crossing U-Turn (RCUT) intersections, Quadrant Roadway (QR) intersections, Displaced Left Turn (DLT) intersections, and Diverging Diamond Interchanges (DDI). This guide also includes discussion about stop-controlled and uncontrolled intersection crossings for bicyclists and pedestrians. This guide illustrates integration of bikeways and pedestrian pathways at and across traditional and alternative intersections, describes countermeasures applicable to pedestrian and bicyclist crossings at intersections,
and summarizes the application of intersection analysis methods for the safety and mobility of pedestrians and bicyclists.
This guide serves as a supplement to the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA’s) series of intersection informational guides and makes direct connections to other FHWA bikeway and pedestrian facility selection guides. Part I presents three foundational principles for planning and designing intersections for pedestrians and bicyclists. Part 2 presents design concepts for each of the intersection types discussed in this guide and illustrates options and design flexibility for incorporating a variety of pedestrian and bicycling facility types. This guide is intended to supplement, but not replace, design guidance, traffic control standards, and countermeasure selection criteria.

'Intersection planning isn't part of road planning' in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ... ?

 

[jamil]

View attachment 343034

If that part of the road ^^^ isn't meant to carry traffic, why are you so adamant that I should be required to ride there? I'll be happy to ride even further from the curb, since being classified as a vehicle I wouldn't want to ride on a part of the road that isn't meant to carry vehicular traffic, but I bet you'll still b****

Oh. That’s quite simple. I’m not.

 

[chipbennett]

You should ask those that insist roads are designed without any consideration for users other than motor vehicles…

Please note that, after having the drain grate design specification pointed out, I amended that statement to say that roads are designed generally and primarily for motor vehicles. So, I don't think there is anyone making that argument anymore?

Obviously, roads with bike lanes, by definition, have design intent that accommodates bicycles. And roads that have drain grates in non-through-traffic lanes have an accommodation for bicycles with respect to grate width specification. I even clarified what I meant by engineering design considerations related to roads: things like vehicular speed, lane width, surface materials of construction, signage, signage distances, etc. Those are meaningful design considerations. I'm sure there are others. If they exist for bicycles, feel free to point them out.

Unless/until then, I'll continue to say that citing only grate width specification for non-through-traffic lanes really actually proves my point.

 

[chipbennett]

Apparently FedDOT has a whole book on it

https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/intersection/about/fhwasa22017.pdf

16. ABSTRACT
Intersections are critical points of access to local and regional destinations for all roadway users. When designed with pedestrians and bicyclists explicitly in mind, all types of intersections can facilitate safe, accessible, convenient, and comfortable walking and bicycling. The purpose of this guide is to inform the state of the practice concerning intersection planning and design to implement solutions that help achieve the goal for zero fatalities and serious injuries while improving mobility for bicyclists and pedestrians.
The primary intersection types discussed in this guide include traditional signalized intersections, roundabouts, Median U-Turn (MUT) intersections, Reduced Crossing U-Turn (RCUT) intersections, Quadrant Roadway (QR) intersections, Displaced Left Turn (DLT) intersections, and Diverging Diamond Interchanges (DDI). This guide also includes discussion about stop-controlled and uncontrolled intersection crossings for bicyclists and pedestrians. This guide illustrates integration of bikeways and pedestrian pathways at and across traditional and alternative intersections, describes countermeasures applicable to pedestrian and bicyclist crossings at intersections,
and summarizes the application of intersection analysis methods for the safety and mobility of pedestrians and bicyclists.
This guide serves as a supplement to the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA’s) series of intersection informational guides and makes direct connections to other FHWA bikeway and pedestrian facility selection guides. Part I presents three foundational principles for planning and designing intersections for pedestrians and bicyclists. Part 2 presents design concepts for each of the intersection types discussed in this guide and illustrates options and design flexibility for incorporating a variety of pedestrian and bicycling facility types. This guide is intended to supplement, but not replace, design guidance, traffic control standards, and countermeasure selection criteria.

'Intersection planning isn't part of road planning' in 3 ... 2 ... 1 ... ?

What is the title of that document?

Oh, right: "Improving Intersections for Pedestrians and Bicyclists"

So, what does that imply about inherent design of those intersections? Why, pray tell, does the design of intersections need to be improved?

(Edit: this is actually an interesting document and I appreciate you posting it. I'm actually interested in reading through it to understand the recommended changes to the design of intersections.)