Thinking about how this would play out in the hilly and curvy rural roads near me.
Perhaps not so well.Reply
This is basically a paint manifestation of the "share the road" idea which is already common policy in North America on bidirectional roads without a bike lane.
It is darkly amusing to see a lot of motorists being upset by finally seeing this arrangement in a format they can understand - dashed and solid painted lines.Reply
> The center lane is dedicated to, and shared by, motorists traveling in both directions.
This seems like a great way to produce head on collisions.Reply
At first blush, it looks like a nicely done international resource:
Depending on the country and the governing agency, this roadway type can have different names. Examples include: 2-minus-1 roads (New Zealand, Denmark), Edge Lane Road (Denmark, US), Advisory Shoulders (U.S. Federal Highway Administration), Schutzstreifen (Germany), Suggestiestrook (Netherlands), and Advisory Bike Lanes (US).Reply
Interesting as I am trying to get conversations about bike protections started in my rural US community.
E-bikes are going to change the dynamic, but you’re taking a huge risk on the roads around here for the time being.Reply
ITT: People who've never done any research on this issue making very American conclusions.
Confusion about how these roads work is actually good. It may seem paradoxical at first, but easy to understand roads with ample signage actually breed high speeds, congestion, complacency, and dead pedestrians. Many dangerous intersections have found that removing signage and leaving it up to drivers drastically reduces speeds and improves safety.
Mentally taxing roads slow cars down, make people take alternate routes, and force people to look for pedestrians. You can't juggle your Starbucks and your iPhone when you're navigating unfamiliar roads - AND THAT IS GOOD.
The purpose of a city is not to breed cars, nor is it to allow lazy car drivers a chance to justify their miserable commute.
I mean what, if the drive to work sucks people might just find work closer to home, or lobby for public transportation. Who wants that?Reply
These seem work a lot like "bidirectional single lane with passing places" (mountain or very low traffic country roads). Except that you pass by pulling in behind a bike. It seems to me that it relies a lot on people understanding how they work. If most people have experience with the "passing place" version, these would work. If they don't, it would seem like they would need a lot of user education. Where I live, I almost never encountered a passing place road and they always made me very nervous when I did.Reply
As a Seattleite who uses a bicycle as the primary means of transportation (but not a bike enthusiast or “bike person”): these are nice (experienced them a bit in Ann Arbor) but the only way to truly make biking safe is going to be to remove cars from the equation in 90%+ of circumstances. No bike gutters (a derogatory word for bike lanes that are only protected by paint), dedicated bike infrastructure.Reply
I recently did a few consecutive full day bicycle trips around the Netherlands and rode on many roads like this. I felt safe and drivers were respectful and patient when passing.
I would never ride on one of these in the US. I can already imagine the Amazon delivery van or work truck parked in the bicycle section, forcing me into the center. I can also imagine the impatient drivers accelerating way beyond the speed limit to try to pass me while I'm riding in the center. I was a bike commuter in NYC for years, and am a regular recreational cyclist in the Bay Area and LA. So I have pretty significant experience riding in the US, and all of that experience is telling me that this is a bad idea for US cities.Reply
"Exciting new" contradicts the over 50 years of experience in NLReply
New York has a lot of wide shouldered roads in snow country that effectively work like these. They are meant to limit plow damage and heaving at the edge of the road bed. They are also a superior alternative to demarcated bicycle ghettoes because you get much less grief when you aren't "where you belong" when conditions necessitate it.Reply
omg this sounds like a terrible idea: speeding motorists passing each other and taking out bikes.
...or distracted or impaired motorists drifting out of the center and taking out motorists?
teenagers using both lanes to race each other...
the list goes on and on...Reply
As a staunch supporter of everything that reduces the amount of cars, I can't say that I'm particularly excited about this particular type of bicycle infrastructure. What benefits does it have over a configuration with a properly separated bicycle path? Are the benefits purely economical/space-related? If someone knows more, I'm more than happy to hear you out.Reply
Use sharrows. Changing the meaning of stripes for one special type of road is a terrible idea.
There also really needs to be more aggressive standards for participation in transportation planning. I see way too many “ideas guys” playing engineer. I’m looking at you, landscape architects!Reply
Interesting. My first response is to assume these would cause a lot of car crashes, but apparently the data says otherwise. If there are other features to ensure drivers are going slow (speed bumps, chicanes, etc) these seem nice as a cyclist too. I’m going to have to gif die the one in Boulder, which looks like a poor example because they allow street parking, so seemingly had enough room for a normal road + bike lane: https://goo.gl/maps/8KZQbB7rDB81Ryjx5Reply
Maybe better instead of wasting our tax money on a secondary priorities, Ottawa should really invest on fixing the asphalt roads itself (yes, in Ottawa city), you can't drive for a few minutes in Ottawa without potholes, bumps, and forever lasting constructions.. Those are the priority that should be focused on, as it's just not about damaging the car (tires/ suspensions/etc.) that none are covered by insurance, but also might harm people could be causing an accident avoiding it or caused by it. Get your priories right, Ottawa!Reply
> This roadway configuration originated in the Netherlands where they have over 50 years and many hundreds of road-kilometers of experience with this facility.
Well yeah, but we use this specific configuration with the shared centre lane only on the lowest tier of rural roads where traffic is limited and the speed limit is 60 km/h (roughly 40 mph), and some select urban streets where they act as a traffic calming measure¹. Most arterial and collector roads have segregated cycleways, both within and without city limits. That is the basis of our road system. Cyclists and motorists mostly share only local roads/streets (30 km/h (20 mph) speed limit within city limits, 60 km/h without). The exceptions are roads where limited space means cyclists have dedicated cycle lanes which motorists may not use for overtaking, but in those cases motorized traffic won't share lanes with oncoming traffic either.
This specific set up is not uncommon, but certainly not meant as a solution for high traffic roads. It is one small trick to use in a system that mostly keeps cyclists and pedestrians on dedicated ways segregated by greenery or kerbs parallel to arterial or collector roads. Taking it out of that context seems risky.
(The trick with the single shared lane and wide 'gutters' meant for passing oncoming traffic are common in the 60 km/h local road variety in the Netherlands, but mostly they lack a cycle lane, and cyclists share the single lane between the dashed lanes².)Reply