From: stek@alcvax.pfc.mit.edu
Subject: RE: U.S. Federal Bicycle  Policy
Organization: MIT PLASMA FUSION CENTER
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 15:29:54 GMT

From: John_-_Forester@cup.portal.com
Date: 26-JUL-1992 22:41:22
Description: U.S. Federal Bicycle  Policy






          In  the  context  of  this  discussion  Paul  Stek  says  that  a
          combination of good design and effective exclusion of pedestrians
          make it  possible to have a safe and  effective urban transporta-
          tional bike path system. He offers Davis, California, and Holland
          as the  examples,  and  adds that  drivers in  these  places  are
          instructed in how to drive when bicycles are present.

          I  have cycled quite a lot in Davis and  have made a study of the
          behavior  of cyclists there. The  city of  Davis does not  have a
          bike path  system.  Most  of the  paths  that exist  are  on  the
          university  campus, an  entirely  different  situation  from  the
          typical city in layout, traffic,  and population. The major  off-
          campus bike  path runs west from Davis alongside  a rural highway
          and has  the typical problems with turning traffic. Regardless of

I agree that there are problems on the path running West from campus.  I 
suggest you look at the area north of Covell.  There there is a system
of "green belts" that run behind the houses.  Here people can bike for a mile
before hitting an intersection.  There is a problem with pedestrians
that may force you to slow down now and then, but it is far more 
relaxing to ride here than on the streets.  



          what  instruction Davis motorists have been given (something that
          I don't know about), they have a very high rate  of turning right
          from the motor lane across the bike lane, even when cyclists were
          present. I measured 8 out of 10 doing so directly across the road
          from the police station.

Students at Davis High are taught specifically how to deal with the
bike lanes running along the main roads.  If everyone were given these
instructions, things would work. 


          The  Dutch  have not  solved  the problem  of  traffic  conflicts
          between traffic on roads and on bike paths. It is  true that they
          have  complicated designs for such intersections, but the designs
          make the inevitable trade-off between safety and speed. To reduce
          the added danger produced  by the bike  paths the Dutch slow  and
          delay both  cyclists and motorists to an extent  that is entirely
          unnecessary when  cyclists operate  as drivers  of vehicles.  The
          typical speed on  Dutch bike paths, and  it is also close  to the
          maximum safe speed, is about 6 mph, far too slow for commuting in
          American cities.

Come on now.  6 miles per hour is about the speed of cars downtown in
most cities.  I think we need not insist on going faster than cars.  I think
you are falling into the same trap that the drivers that harrass us are in.
The speed at which you travel is not that important in getting around town.  
The time consuming thing is waiting for lights, changing clothes, locking
your bike and all that.  Between towns the speed on bike paths is far more 
than 6 miles an hour, more like 12.  And the paths are usually wide enough
that you can pass easily if you are going faster.  The paths also allow you 
to ride next to a friend as you are commuting.  If commuting by bike is
relaxing or a social, wouldn't more people do it?  

          Regardless of  what the Dutch may do, we  will get bikeways built
          according to the designs in the AASHTO *Guide for the Development
          of Bicycle Facilities*. These designs increase the number of car-
          bike conflicts and make these conflicts more difficult  to handle
          relative  to those that  exist on  the normal  road. As  I wrote,
          these designs were not  produced to reduce accidents to cyclists,
          so it  is unreasonable  to expect  them to  do so.  Nobody has  a
          design  for such intersections that reduces accidents to cyclists
          while allowing them  to maintain the speeds  typical when on  the
          road.

          As  for  the  exclusion  of pedestrians  and  beginning cyclists,
          nowhere  in the U.S. has  this been accomplished and  there is no
          reason to suspect that it will be accomplished.

What a pessimist!  Again this works great in Holland.  Why not here?  
You have to provide suitable pedestrian paths along with the bike paths,
but if you are cursing being slowed occasionally by a runner or 
pedestrian, you are no better than the car drivers who curse us. A change in
attitude is needed by all concerned.  If we all elimintated 5 wasted minutes 
each day (ex. not reading rec.bic) we could commute without getting so 
upset.   


          Given  the   unsolved,  and   probably  unsolvable,   problem  of
          intersections   and   the  politically   unsolvable  problem   of
          pedestrians it is  silly to try to  produce an urban  transporta-
          tional bike path system. 

          JForester@cup.portal.com               John Forester
                                                 726 Madrone Ave
          408-734-9426                           Sunnyvale CA 94086 USA


Paul Stek
Stek@alcvax.pfc.mit.edu