Peter Rosenfeld
Tue, 09 Jul 2002 05:40:20 -0700
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > If it isn't feasible to redesign the bike lane maybe all bikers could ride >against traffic where these lanes exist so that bikers could see parked drivers >through the windshield and anticipate a driver opening a door. Parked drivers >would be more likely to see bikers approaching from the front than seeing >bikers approaching in the limited field of view provided by the rear view >mirror. But that would be reducing one danger ( dooring) by increasing a much greater danger - getting hit in the intersections. Wrong-way bicyclists have a much, much greater probability of getting hit than right-way bicyclists. -Peter Rosenfeld > ----- Original Message ----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Monday, July 08, 2002 6:04 PM > Subject: Re: [bcp] Dooring death in Cambridge > > > In a message dated 7/8/02 5:22:54 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > > Sad an interesting at the same time. > > I wonder whether she would have been riding outside > the door zone had there been no bike lane. If not, > then the existence of the bike lane would seem to be > irrelevant, unless of course she took that particular > route because it had a bike lane and it made her feel > safe. Even if that were the case, the bike lane only > puts her on the "wrong street at the wrong time," but > it does nothing more to contribute to the particular > accident if she would have been riding in the door > zone, bike lane or not. > > > A facility when used as it was designed to be used should not encourage dangerous behavior. It would be like putting a sign on a freeway ramp that says "merge without looking." Many people do so, but the facility shouldn't encourage it. Instead, the sign warns against that behavior by saying "yield." These lanes indicate to the average bicyclist that they are safe when riding in them. As such, they are "attractive nuisances" and may even encourage bicyclists to ride on roads that they otherwise would not have ridden on as you mentioned. Perhaps without a bike lane she would have chosen another road with wider lanes or less traffic and been less likely to be doored.. > > Why put in such a lane anyway? What does it accomplish? If they don't attract people to ride on the road and get doored, what good are they? They add no safety whatsoever. > > Dooring is dangerous enough that bicyclists should be actively discouraged from riding in such a manner. Instead, the lanes reinforce a dangerous behavior. They are simply a dangerous design. No traffic engineer would ever support such a design. But unfortunately, these things are designed by amateurs and people die because of it. > > Either build these things outside the door zone, or don't build them and spend the paint money on educating bicyclists to avoid riding in the door zone. > > If one is a staunch advocate of "education by paint," then I would suggest putting bike symbols in the travel lane, about where a car's right tire would go, to indicate that this is the safe position for a bike. That way you get to keep the travel lane but encourage bikes to "take the lane" when necessary. > > -Peter R. -------------------------------original posting ------------------------------- You may have heard by now about the tragic death in Cambridge, MA. Dana Laird, while riding in a bike lane, was doored and fell under a passing bus. The Cambridge Civic Journal, at http://www.rwinters.com/ , has an article about the dooring, as well as pictures of the bike lane. The driver who opened the door has been ticketed for opening a door into traffic. But I feel, as do many people who have spent a very long time studying bicycling infrastructures, that a bike lane that is in dooring distance of parked cars is an accident waiting to happen. It's a horrible design that encourages people to bicycle in a manner that can result in serious injury and death. Ms. Laird was apparently experienced at city riding, but rode within the bike lane. This sort of lane design is what engineers refer to as a "single point of failure" design. If the driver does not check before opening his door, there is very little a bicyclist can do to avoid the door as the event happens too quick and an accident can occur from this one instantaneous mistake by the driver. If the bicyclist rides outside the "door zone" this can't occur. And no single action of a driver will result in hitting the cyclist when the cyclist is not riding in a door zone. It takes multiple mistakes by the auto driver and often the bicyclist for an accident to result. Additionally, riding so close to parked cars makes it difficult for cars crossing the street to see the bicyclist. A bad, bad design overall. I also feel that such bike lanes actually increase the probability that the driver will open the door without looking, as he knows he has a buffer between his door and auto traffic. That has been my experience in observing drivers opening their doors. Unfortunately, as far as I know no study has been done to see if bike lanes make a driver more or less likely to open a door without looking. The City of Cambridge and their bicycle facility organization will probably be liable for this sad event. Until today, I did not realize that Philadelphia had this design. I normally ignore bike lanes while riding due to other dangers that they induce. But today I noticed that the Spring Garden bike lanes are of exactly the same design as the one in Cambridge that caused the fatality. Properly parked cars are almost against the inner stripe of the bike lane and car doors open into the lane. The lane is only about 40 inches wide as measured by my bike wheelbase. This is about the width of the door of a four-door sedan. I observed the wider door of a two-door car open almost fully across the lane. The only safe place to ride in these lanes s slightly to the left of the left bike lane marking. I assume there are other lanes in the city like this. These lanes should be modified or removed immediately before the city is liable for a similar death. Sincerely, Peter Rosenfeld ---- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to the Bicycle Coalition of the Delaware Valley list named "bike." To subscribe or unsubscribe or for archive information, see <http://www.purple.com/list.html>.