BVC-CHAT Bike Lanes Woo Hoo!

[Christopher Menzel]

Rebecca had intended to attach a PDF file of the B/CS Unified Design  
Manual, which she references in the msg below.  You can view/download  
the manual from the BVC web site by following this link.

-chris

On Nov 16, 2007 9:51 AM, Rebecca Riggs <ram1anne at gmail.com> wrote:
> Okay a few comments based on an engineer's perspective...
>
>> One thing that alarmed me a little -- there is talk about an off-road
>> trail system in the area.  When they talk about it they talk about it
>> as an alternative to on-street bike facilities.  We need to nip that
>> idea in the bud.  An off-road trail is good, but it is ADDITIONAL,  
>> not
>> INSTEAD OF, on street bicycling.  Otherwise we get into a situation
>> where you can ride your bike to ride your bike but not to actually
>> *go* anywhere -- not a problem if your main goal is
>> training/recreation, but a big problem for commuters and
>> errand-runners.
>
> Although I would love to have many more bikes on the roads than cars,
> in this town cyclists are a minority. Most City services are for the
> greater good of the majority. In that sense an off-road trail system
> would be good for the majority of people in the community who only
> ride bikes a little bit and are scared of and a danger to traffic
> (because many of these people do not follow traffic laws like
> stopping). I believe that commuters and most cyclists would continue
> to ride on roads even if bike facilities are not co-located. That
> being said, if the budget allowed I would like to to see on-road
> bicycling facilities with more of an emphasis on bike route signs and
> less of an emphasis on bike lanes on every road. Dedicated on-street
> bike lanes do best on lower traffic roadways, and ideally are located
> on roads parallel to major roadways to reduce the risk of injury to
> cyclists.
>
>>
>> We still need to get the city to update that BMP and to keep on the
>> engineers actually doing the work -- so please, put the Dec 13 City
>> Council meeting on your schedule.  I'm also going to be advocating
>> that all roads above the level of minor collector should  
>> automatically
>> be planned with bicycle accommodations unless someone can make an
>> argument for otherwise.  This was done recently by CAMPO (Capital  
>> Area
>> Metropolitan Planning Organization) in the Austin area.
>>
>
> I do not agree with this point. Dedicated bike lanes should not be on
> major arterials (Texas Ave is a major arterial), and are only
> appropriate on lower traffic roadways, as currently allowed by the
> B/CS Unified Design Manual (street section attached - see pages 16/17
> for roadway sections). I do agree that there is a problem with
> connectivity of the existing bike lanes, but this is due more to the
> lack of redundancy of roads parallel to major traffic areas. Ideally
> bike lanes should be on lower traffic parallel roads that allow you to
> access major traffic areas by side streets. Bike lanes on major
> arterials would pose a risk to both cyclists and motorists due to both
> the volume of traffic and conflicts between cyclists and motorists at
> driveways. Even though bike lanes would not be on major arterials, it
> is still legal to ride on them, but without the bike lanes this would
> not encourage unskilled cyclists from endangering themselves.
>
> Okay let the discussion begin (grin),
>
> Rebecca Riggs
>







-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://philebus.tamu.edu/mailman/private/bvc-chat/attachments/20071117/c0d16a2d/attachment.htm