For starters, the stats I have read indicate that about half of all car/bike crashes are caused by the cyclist. Second, I too would like to see adult bicyclists banned from sidewalks unless they are walking their bike. As for training, it seems contradictory that many parents send their child off to an “expert” to learn to swim, but Dad invariably teaches children how to ride a bike and most dads are ignorant about bike safety. I must admit, I’ve lost track of bike safety training options. There used to be Road 1 taught by LAB LCI’s (pretty simple), now there are “savvy cycling” classes, “effective cycling” classes, “traffic skills” classes and all that. I should try to sort it out because IMO it begins and ends with education. Not infrastructure. As for licensing, Lakewood requires bikes to be “licensed” but it is a very ineffective program that should be scrapped. Not one noteworthy goal is achieved by Lakewood’s licensing program, other than (because riding on an unlicensed bike is a primary offense) it permits Lakewood police to impound unlicensed bikes if they feel inclined. Will is your bike licensed?
Betsy….
I do have a little history with Lakewood’s bike ordinances. The OBF was able to convince Ohio legislators to pass modern bike legislation about six years ago that basically required municipalities to modernize their ordinances, which Lakewood did shortly thereafter (at my urging). And yes, bikes are required to ride as far right as “practicable” but there are numerous carveouts, one of which is that a bike can use the full lane if the lane width does not permit safe passing by motorists within the same lane. And there is not one street in Lakewood that fulfills that requirement. Franklin east of the high school might have if they had not put that silly stripe down to create a right “shoulder.” The upshot is that cyclists can ride down the middle of any Lakewood traffic lane, and should in many instances.
Ben….
Since you mention Los Angeles and New York City specifically….
As regards Los Angeles, I don’t know where you get your 2010 data from. Here’s what I found, all from 2011 and all from the Los Angeles DOT bike blog….
Click here: What are “Sharrows”?
“According the CA MUTCD, (sharrows) are meant to (1) Reduce the chance of bicyclists impacting open doors of parked vehicles on a shared roadway with on-street parallel parking, (2) alert road users within a narrow traveled way of the lateral location where bicyclists ride, (3) encourage safe passing of bicyclists by motorists, and (4) reduce the incidence of wrong-way bicycling.” (emphasis mine)
Also….
Click here: Sharrows are good. So let’s do them!
“The CA MUTCD requires that sharrows be placed at a minimum of 11 feet from the curb and must be present in conjunction with on-street parking, on a street with a posted speed limit not to exceed 35 mph. Sharrows must also be placed immediately following an intersection (in conjunction with parking) and should be spaced no more than 250 ft apart. The City of Los Angeles will be placing sharrows no less than 12 feet from the curb, per the recommendation of our sharrow study.” (emphasis mine)
Picture from the article (though the sharrows should be moved a foot or two to the left)….
And….
Click here: 20 miles of sharrows installed
“We are happy to report that this past weekend, LADOT work crews installed approximately 20 miles worth of (sharrows) on L.A. streets. All told, 797 sharrows were laid down, adding 20.61 miles of bicycle infrastructure to L.A. streets.
So what do sharrows do? According to the Bike Plan’s Technical Design Handbook (TDH), sharrows can be an effective tool for reminding bicyclists to ride further from parked cars to prevent incidents of “dooring”. Sharrows can also make motorists more aware as to the possible presence of bicyclists, and can help orient bicyclists in the correct direction of travel.
The fact is, Los Angeles favors sharrows where on-street parking is present. It looks to me like they won’t even consider dedicated lanes next to parked cars, but I have not dug into their information that deeply. My guess is that what they/you call “Class I” and “Class II” Los Angeles bike lanes are going in on the sort of major L.A. streets (like Wilshire Blvd.) that simply don’t exist in Lakewood. Streets like Chagrin Blvd. here in Northeast Ohio.
Lakewood is not Los Angeles. But if Madison were in Los Angeles, they would not put a dedicated bike lane on it. They would use sharrows. I think that’s pretty clear.
Now, as regards New York City….
You have to understand that most NYC segregated bike lanes were installed 10-12 years ago, before clearer heads prevailed. So today, you have the city saying one thing (having created that mess), but you have their cycling advocacy group, Bike New York, saying this….
Click here: Avoid the Door Zone
“Many NYC bike lanes, especially the older ones, are located in the ‘door zone’–that is, within 4-5 feet of parked cars. Riding that close to parked cars is dangerous, because it leaves you vulnerable to getting get ‘doored’ (hit by an opening car door). … Bike lanes that put cyclists in the door zone are unsafe.” (emphasis mine)
Also, from the NY Times….
Click here: On “Dooring” of Bicyclists…. (Oct. 2010)
“(Dooring has) always been a top complaint and, anecdotally, a major contributing factor to crashes in New York City,” he said. “If you talk to anyone who’s ridden a bike in New York, everyone has a story about, at best, narrowly avoiding a car door that’s been swung open in their path and bike riders quickly learn that one of the safest ways to ride is to (use the traffic lane), so they are not biking in the door zone.”
And finally….
Click here: DOT and TLC Unveil New Anti-Dooring Video and Decal (Sept. 2012)
“DOT noted that seven cyclists have been killed in dooring crashes in the past five years.”
Just imagine how many total doorings took place when seven resulted in death. Five hundred maybe? My guess is that if NYC had it to do over again they would not have installed door zone bike lanes back then. But instead of removing them, which is what they should do, NYC just launched a campaign featuring decals and a video (woo hoo!) to try to educate motorists to the harm than can befall a cyclist if motorists open their car door without first looking,
Honestly, I don’t know how much clearer it could be that bike lanes within parked car door zones are dangerous, and are these days largely discredited. Segregated bike lanes almost anywhere in Lakewood are a REALLY BAD IDEA, especially because of the near-ubiquitous presence of on-street parking (ex-Franklin). And such lanes on Detroit in Cleveland, their city officials will come to regret them, if they actually do get installed. There is way too much evidence and information these days that highlight their dangers. And this includes even novice cyclists who simply don’t understand the limitations of such lanes. That “false sense of security….”
By the way, some of the best cycling advocacy these days is being done by (believe it or not) Orlando (http://www.commuteorlando.com). Click here to see what they have to say about bike lanes in general.. I won’t cut and paste it here; I really encourage you to read it and to peruse their site.
One thing I also want to make clear is that I’m not even all that fond of sharrows, though they seem like a net positive as they help keep bikes out of door zones. All I am really saying is that if Lakewood wants to visibly “invite” bikes to ride on Madison, which is a laudable goal, sharrows are the best option I know of (even better if there are some “bikes may use full lane” signs). Plus of course what I am saying is that dedicated bike lanes on Madison would clearly be a disaster.
Thanks again for your time and attention….
