Physically separated bike lanes

[PonderInc]

Tulsa has a lot of bike advocates who poo-poo bike lanes.  While I agree with many of their concerns, I think they fail to realize that "not all bike lanes are equal."  I also don't think they appreciate the reality that most people aren't going to "take a lane" on Harvard Ave and just bike with traffic travelling 40-50 MPH (on major arterials).  And they sure as heck aren't going to let their kids ride there.

There are good examples and bad examples of bike lanes.  Tulsa really doesn't have any good ones.

Here's a cool video (8 1/2 minutes) that explains how "physically separated bike lanes" work.

The idea: Traffic on street, then parallel parking, then physical barrier, then then bike lane, then sidewalk.

Something like this...


Here's one in Boulder...

[Ed W]

Copenhagen style bike lanes reduce bicycle/motor vehicle collisions at mid-block, but they increase them at intersections.  Worse, collisions between cyclists and pedestrians exiting buses increase enormously.  Yet cyclists like them because they believe they're safer.  When belief and reality conflict (surprise!) reality is the loser.  

As I've said before, it's simply wrong to install some infrastructure intended to make the road safer for one type of user while making it less safe for another.  In the case of Copenhagen style separated bicycle tracks, there is no real benefit aside from the warm, fuzzy feeling they provide.  Now, I ask you, is that a responsible use of public funds?

[pfox]

There are probably few places that the separated bike pathways would work here in Tulsa.

The real answer is, in order to have total accommodation for all cyclists, we need to make our arterial streets places that cyclists can ride, and we need alternate routes on streets with fewer vehicles.

I am an advocate for properly designed bike lanes, for what it is worth.  The evidence is out there for examination.  Since implementing their bikeway system, Portland has seen an increase in daily bicycle ridership increase by double digit percentage points, with most of the gains being for commuters.  To date, 12% of the commuters entering the downtown core are on bikes.  The kicker is that their safety statistics regarding bike/vehicle accidents have remained relatively flat over that same time.  

This is attributable, not just to the engineering solutions they have implemented, but also to the general awareness that drivers and cyclists have to each other.  When cyclists and motorists behave in predictable, law abiding ways, the likelihood of a conflict occurring decreases dramatically.

The concern over the "right hook" is real and legitimate.  In Portland, there were two prominent accidents in which a cyclist was killed due to a large truck turning right in front of them.  As a cyclist, I hate to hear about this tragedy, but I also know that as the more vulnerable mode, I need to be more aware of potential dangerous situations.   The trucks need better mirrors, the cyclist needs to view a large vehicle as an additional threat, and both of them need to obey the rules of the road.  Another thread mentioned the bike box.  The bike box was designed to give cyclists the primary position at a signaled or signed intersection, to avoid the right turn into a cyclists traveling through an intersection.  I don't know if they have released statistics on the effectiveness of the bike box yet, but they will.  They measure everything.

[TheArtist]

Not all streets are equal, and I for one dont want to settle for the ones we have now, but with bike lanes stuck on them.

I believe that even thinking about "bike lanes" clouds more important issue and takes away energy from what we should be considering... Namely our "built space" in general. Including: mixed use zoning, placement of buildings, sidewalks in some areas, (heck just having sidewalks in some areas) parking, amount of parking, urban nodes and mass transit, trails, parks, half mile streets or other through streets, etc.

Sticking a bike lane on a crappily designed street and ignoring the design of the street itself, parking and buildings in relation to that street, sidewalks, etc. is ridiculous. Would be nice for the street to be worth biking down. Would be nice to have more places worth biking to and have those places be bike and pedestrian friendly when you get there. Those streets in those pictures are nothing like anything on Harvard for instance. And frankly I dont like the way those pics look for I think we can do better.

We need a complete redesign, rezoning, rethinking of the city imo and piddling around with bike lanes on top of the current mess we have is wasted money and energy, a distraction from other things. Things that if taken care of, would make the city more bike/pedestrian friendly by default.  THEN if you still feel that you want a bike lane here or there, fine. Would you want to put a bike lane down 6th street? No, because they are going to make the street into a Woonerven street. Why add bike lanes if it can be redesigned better without them? Lets redesign as many streets as we can and make them better, period, not tag on bike lanes to crappy ones. It may be an improvement in a few instances, but for many it would be like giving up and saying, this is the best we can do, this is the way the street is, the way its gonna stay, here ya go. I think we can do better and should spend our time, effort and money thinking more holistically and end up with far better results.

[sauerkraut]

Copenhagen style bike lanes reduce bicycle/motor vehicle collisions at mid-block, but they increase them at intersections.  Worse, collisions between cyclists and pedestrians exiting buses increase enormously.  Yet cyclists like them because they believe they're safer.  When belief and reality conflict (surprise!) reality is the loser.  

As I've said before, it's simply wrong to install some infrastructure intended to make the road safer for one type of user while making it less safe for another.  In the case of Copenhagen style separated bicycle tracks, there is no real benefit aside from the warm, fuzzy feeling they provide.  Now, I ask you, is that a responsible use of public funds?

It's tuff to compair U.S. bike lanes with those of Copenhagen or other nations, for one thing we are more of a car driving nation, we have cheaper fuel and little mass transit. Everything in the USA revolves around the car. Europe also has $7.00 a gallon gasoline forcing people to find other mods of transport.