John Allen: When the Marketing Dept. Plays Traffic Engineer

The product shown in the picture below, small raised barrier lane dividers designed to be installed between bike lanes and regular travel lanes, are critiqued on John Allen's bicycling page. These are marketed as "...a smart, safe solution that provides a visual separation between vehicle and bicycle lanes. ...."

The raised protuberances are marketed as "a smart, safe solution that provides a visual separation between vehicle and bicycle lanes."

But the design seems to add a (not so) hidden hazard.

Keeping cars out of the bike lane in itself is not always a good idea, since in this case the fix also keeps cyclists from merging into traffic to make left turns or for any other reason that requires leaving the bike lane (obstructions, overtaking, etc). It could also force cyclists and motorists into "coffin corner" situations at intersections if applied right to the intersection. It also makes street cleaning difficult. At least for the bike lane.

More seriously, raised features such as these, which are somewhat analogous to shoulder paving lips, could induce diversion falls if hit at a grazing angle. The two sides of the small barriers are advertised as asymmetric, but I'd hate to hit one at a glancing angle nonetheless (did anyone do an experiment?). Striking these at a glancing angle might possibly cause a cyclist to lose steering and balance (in the same way a shoulder lip can do so) and topple over into the travel lane.  John Allen discusses this possibility in his own post, citing MUTCD sources that warn against installing such features.

Anyway, its important to ask the questions in advance. It seems to me that if someone INSISTS on a passive barrier more compelling than a paint stripe along the edge of the bike lane, something like a narrow rumble strip would be preferable. A rumble strip is negative in profile rather than positive and would be aggravating but not dangerous, seemingly far less of a problem. Plus, it would have the same effect--a warning to a distracted motorist, perhaps, that he/she is encroaching on a bike lane. These barriers are certainly not going to stop a car but could have unintended consequences to a cyclist.

With Trinity Drive reconstruction on the table, I'd hate to see something like this suggested by a non-cyclist.

Riding on the sidewalk in a business district

There were some comments at last night’s council hearing to the effect that its against the law to ride on a sidewalk in a business district in Los Alamos. Here is the actual code. (A) does not prohibit sidewalk riding, it simply says to do so safely.  Note that in (b), there used to be some private signs in town prohibiting sidewalk riding on private property. A private posting doesn’t have force of law under 38-553, but could result in the landowner asking you to leave the premises. I am not aware of any County signs prohibiting sidewalk riding under authority of 38-553. I will copy Kyle and Charlie Trask to check.

Sec. 38-553. - Riding on sidewalks.

(a) No person shall ride a bicycle upon a sidewalk within a business district with careless or reckless disregard for pedestrians or other vehicles.

(b) No person shall ride a bicycle on any sidewalk or street when signs are posted prohibiting bicycles on the sidewalk or street.

(c) When signs are posted requiring bicycles to use sidewalks or paths adjacent to a street, no person shall ride a bicycle on the street adjacent to the sidewalks or paths.

(d) Whenever any person is riding a bicycle upon a sidewalk, the person shall yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian and shall give an audible signal before overtaking and passing a pedestrian.

(e) A person propelling a vehicle by human power across a roadway upon and along a crosswalk shall yield to pedestrians in the crosswalk.

(Ord. No. 85-218, § 2, 1995; Code 1985, § 10.11.013)

Roadway Design by Petition?

Sent this to Council

Dear Council

I'll start out by saying I am sending you this in my capacity as a voter and resident, speaking for myself.

The Sunday Monitor reported that you will discuss on Tuesday the recent petition drive(s) on Trinity Drive design since approximately 500 people signed petition(s) on its design.

First, I don't think I need to remind Council that 500 people don't make for a majority. I respect those who are alarmed enough to sign petitions, but I also looked up the results of the last election that resulted in the present Council:

County Council (2010), votes for each candidate

James Hall (R)                 4,952
Ronald Selvage (R)         4,750
Geoffrey Rodgers (R)      4,454
Frances Berting (R)         4,368
Kenneth Johnson (D)      4,027
Deborah Gill (D)             3,939
Betty Ann Gunther (D)   3,222

(based on the State House District 43 race (local results), at least 8647 people in LAC voted in the election).

Ref: http://losalamoscountyviews.blogspot.com/2010/11/county-election-results.html

Even the seventh place Council candidate (who lost) had roughly six times the votes as these petitions have signatories; those who won had over eight times the votes.  So if Council decides that we need to make a decision on Trinity by referendum rather than by our professional staff, Council vote, and multiple county board advice to Council, then we really ought to first screen the designs to ensure that only those designs which meet professional engineering standards (and meet design guidelines Council recently adopted for county streets) are put forward, and then put the successful ones to a vote.

Different designs will require different compromises. A 35 mph four or more lane highway will need more ped overpasses, underpasses, or stoplights in order to ensure that we can safely cross the street. I think that is one of the issues that consistently gets glossed over. No design that successfully meets our recently accepted design criteria (i.e., that provides good pedestrian crossing connectivity and serves motorists, bus riders, and others with adequate throughput) and serves development South of Trinity will escape compromise.

I see that the petitioners have mandated four travel lanes and bike lanes. This may result in some pretty serious design flaws (i.e., bike lanes that result in a high likelihood of intersection crashes) if done wrong. Roadway design, like brain surgery, should not be performed by amateurs. This could lead to disaster.

Finally, I was sent this following link on signalized intersection non-compliance. Makes for interesting viewing. Mind you, I'm not convinced that any roadway design is completely foolproof unless citizens respect the law and respect each other's safety. But when signalized intersections are criticized for providing high risk types of crashes, this is what is being discussed:

http://www.trafficsafetycoalition.com/stoponred


cheers,

Khalil J. Spencer

I'm shocked, shocked...

Had to take a shower after watching 60 Minutes. Others were bored. Can anyone think that the epidemic levels of professional doping that went on in pro cycling could happen without all levels of team and management being complicit? And then there was that question of a Swiss doping control lab and donations to the doping control authorities...hmm...I suspect there will be more shoes to fall before this is over.

Subaru to Customers: Hang Up and Drive

The following was in the most recent Subaru e-newsletter I found in my Inbox.  I wish more companies would get on this particular bandwagon rather than showing insane driving to the tune of fine print such as "Closed Course, Don't (wink-wink, nudge-nudge) Try This At Home".

If you have a Subie, make sure your dealership knows you read the post below, and as a cyclist, thank them. I did, and got a company response.

Their email address is "insider at subaru dot com"

INSIDER TIPS: Hang Up and Drive!

 You see it all too often: ­ drivers swerving, running red lights or narrowly missing collisions because they're paying more attention to their cell phones than their driving. "Still, people consistently assume that they can drive and text or talk at the same time," writes U.S. Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood in the Orlando Sentinel (September 19, 2010). "The results are preventable accidents." Study after study testing the effects of distracted driving come to the same conclusion that talking and texting behind the wheel impair driving ability. Tougher laws, more effective enforcement, and public education are positive steps toward changing dangerous behaviors.


What You Can Do. Resist the temptation to use your cell phone for any reason while driving. Put it in silent mode or turn it off altogether. Wait until you reach your destination to pick up texts and voice messages, or pull off the road to a safe location. "The safest way to get from one place to another is to hang up and drive," LaHood writes. "Powering down your cell phone when you're behind the wheel can save lives, maybe even your own."


"People consistently assume that they can drive and text or talk at the same time. Powering down ... can save lives." ­ Ray LaHood, U.S. Secretary of Transportation

Santa Fe Century: Happily Blowin' in the Wind

The New Mexican covered the Santa Fe Century.  
This is their picture. Go read the article.

Nice article in the Santa Fe New Mexican about the Century yesterday.

So, to paraphrase Bob Dylan, how many roads must a cyclist ride down, constantly blowin' in the wind? The answer, my friends, in a New Mexico springtime, is "a lot". Nonetheless, those of us who enjoy organized century rides dodged some bad luck this year when Charlie Loesch took over from an apparently ailing Willard Chilcott and made sure the ride went off as planned after it looked like it might be canceled.

Many thanks to Charlie for stepping into the breach and to all the aid station volunteers. Also to the motorcycle police presence, the National Guard sag Humvees, and all the others who pulled this off. All we did was ride! Finally, best wishes to Mr. Chilcott, who has directed this ride for over a quarter century, for renewed good health.