--- In chainguard@yahoogroups.com, "Dan Gutierrez" <Dan.Gutierrez@...> wrote:
>

> Copenhagen summary data:
> http://www.ecf.com/files/2/12/16/070503_Cycle_Tracks_Copenhagen.pdf
>  .
> Maybe they do, or maybe the Danes are playing games with the numbers.

My first impression was also that there must be some number tricks.

>
> Does anyone on this list speak Danish?  And if so, would you be interested
> in helping me order the full report (only available in Danish) so we can
> extract the raw crash counts and do an independent analysis?
>
Is this still on the to-do list? I read Swedish, and Danish is practically a
dialect of Swedish. Simple traffic study language will  be a piece of cake. Dan,
just get the paper, send me a scan. I got OCR; it'll be no problem.

Kalle

Peter Rosenfeld wrote:
> Bob Shanteau wrote:
>> Peter Rosenfeld wrote:
>>> What about the Copenhagen study, that carefully measured accidents
>>> on "unimproved" roads and then after the various bicycle facilities
>>> were put in.
>>>
>>> It showed a degradation of safety in all cases, with the safety
>>> degradation increasing the greater the bike/car separation.
>> My question relates to studies that "prove" that bike lanes are safe,
>> not for that prove they are unsafe. The burden is on the proponents
>> of a new traffic control device to prove it is safe and effective,
>> just as a pharmaceutical company does with a new drug. Then, once the
>> proponents have successfully proven their case, the burden shifts to
>> opponents to prove the opposite. My point is that we are not there yet.
> The city of Copenhagen did conclude that these were good and
> successful facilities since they made the users feel more comfortable.
> Does that count?

Again, my question relates to actual safety, not perceived safety or
comfort. One battle at a time. First we win this one.

Bob Shanteau

Peter Rosenfeld wrote:
> What about the Copenhagen study, that carefully measured accidents on
"unimproved" roads and then after the various bicycle facilities were put in.
>
> It showed a degradation of safety in all cases, with the safety degradation
increasing the greater the bike/car separation.

My question relates to studies that "prove" that bike lanes are safe,
not for that prove they are unsafe. The burden is on the proponents of a
new traffic control device to prove it is safe and effective, just as a
pharmaceutical company does with a new drug. Then, once the proponents
have successfully proven their case, the burden shifts to opponents to
prove the opposite. My point is that we are not there yet.

Bob Shanteau

What about the Copenhagen study, that carefully measured accidents on
"unimproved" roads and then after the various bicycle facilities were put in.

It showed a degradation of safety in all cases, with the safety degradation
increasing the greater the bike/car separation.


--- On Fri, 6/5/09, Bob Shanteau <RMShant@...> wrote:

> From: Bob Shanteau <RMShant@...>
> Subject: [CG] [Fwd: RE: [apbp] Safety of Bicycle Facilities]
> To: "Chainguard" <chainguard@yahoogroups.com>
> Date: Friday, June 5, 2009, 1:06 PM
> I asked on the APBP listserv about
> studies indicating that roads with
> bike lanes are safer than roads without bike lanes, ALL
> OTHER THINGS
> BEING EQUAL, and here is Andy Clarke's response. It appears
> to be
> boilerplate, but it looks like the gauntlet has been thrown
> down. I will
> be posting critiques on each one of the studies he cites.
> If anyone has
> already done critiques, please let me know and whether I
> can paraphrase
> them.
>
> I am familiar with a few of these studies, and there are
> several areas
> in which they are deficient, including (1) they did not
> keep the travel
> lane widths constant, (2) non-random sampling, (3) improper
> definition
> of conflicts, and (4) incorrect statistical analysis.
>
> Bob Shanteau
>
>
> -------- Original Message --------
> Subject: RE: [apbp] Safety of Bicycle Facilities
> Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 16:24:45 -0400
> From: Andy Clarke <Andy@...>
> To: Bob Shanteau <rmshant@...>,
> APBP Listserv <members@...>
>
> See if this helps any:
>
> A few bike lane studies
>
> Texas lane width study – impact on lane positioning
> <http://www.utexas.edu/news/2006/09/18/engineering>
> <http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/pdf_reports/0_5157_1.pdf>
>
> Moritz adult bicyclists and RDI – relative danger index
> <http://www.bicyclinglife.com/Library/Moritz2.htm>
>
> Cambridge, Hampshire Street – impact on lane positioning
> <http://www.cambridgema.gov/cdd/et/bike/bike_hamp_study.pdf>
>
> Jennifer Dill, Commuting in Cities – overall impact on
> use
>
<http://www.contextsensitivesolutions.org/content/reading/bicycle-commuting/reso\
urces/4542-bicycle-commuting-and-facilities-in-major-us-cities>
>
>
>
> Florida Red Shoulder Study – impact on lane positioning
>
<http://www.dot.state.fl.us/safety/ped_bike/handbooks_and_research/research/reds\
tudy.pdf>
>
>
>
> Portland Blue Bike Lane study – impact on intersection
> behavior
> <http://www.portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?c=34826&>
>
> Ft Lauderdale Bike Lane Adjacent to Parking – impact on
> lane positioning
>
<http://www.dot.state.fl.us/safety/ped_bike/handbooks_and_research/research/ftla\
ud.pdf>
>
>
>
> Broward County WCL Conversions – impact on lane
> positioning
>
<http://www.dot.state.fl.us/research-center/Completed_Proj/Summary_SF/FDOT_05108\
09_BA784_rpt.pdf>
>
>
>
> San Francisco bike lane studies – various evaluations
> <http://www.sfmta.com/cms/rbikes/3172.html>
>
> Hunter et al, 1999 bike lane versus wide curb lane –
> comparison of
> facilities
> <http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/tfhrc/safety/pubs/99035/99035.pdf>
>
> Bicycle Forum 47 – bike lanes on 44 foot streets – what
> different cities do
> <http://www.bikeplan.com/narrow.htm>
>
> Some general stuff
> <http://www.ci.cambridge.ma.us/CDD/et/bike/bike_lanes.html#implanes>
> <http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/engineering/facilities-bikelanes.cfm>
>
> Bike lane design information
>
> Chicago
> <http://www.activelivingresources.org/assets/chicagosbikelanedesignguide.pdf>
>
>
>
> Davis Bike Plan
> <http://www.city.davis.ca.us/pw/pdfs/2006_BikePlan_withMaps.pdf>
>
> FHWA university course
> <http://www.tfhrc.gov/safety/pedbike/pubs/05085/chapt15.htm>
> <http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/PED_BIKE/univcourse/swless20.htm>
>
> Florida
>
<http://www.dot.state.fl.us/safety/ped_bike/handbooks_and_research/bhchpt4.pdf>
>
>
>
> Minnesota DOT
>
<http://www.dot.state.mn.us/bike/pdfs/Chapter%204%20On-Road%20Bikeways%20(Web).p\
df>
>
>
>
> Oregon design guide
> <http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/BIKEPED/docs/bp_plan_2_ii.pdf>
>
<http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/BIKEPED/docs/OBP_Plan/Chapter_1_On-road_bikeways\
.pdf>
>
>
>
> Seattle, bike plan chapter
> <http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/docs/bmp/AppendixF.pdf>
>
> Vermont
>
<http://www.aot.state.vt.us/progdev/Documents/LTF/FinalPedestrianAndBicycleFacil\
ity/Chap4.pdf>
>
>
>
> Washington DC
>
<http://www.ddot.dc.gov/ddot/cwp/view,a,1245,q,640118,ddotNav_GID,1761,ddotNav,|\
34416|.asp>
>
>
>
> Washington State
> <http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/EESC/Design/DesignManual/desEnglish/1020-E.pdf>
>
> Bike Boulevards
> <http://www.sccrtc.org/bikes/TechTransfer_BicycleBlvds.pdf>
>
> Andy Clarke
> President, League of American Bicyclists
> Be a Smart Cyclist: Join us at our 2009 Smart Cycling
> Conference this
> June in San Jose, Calif.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: members-bounces@...
> [mailto:members-bounces@...]
> On
> Behalf Of Bob Shanteau
> Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 8:35 AM
> To: APBP Listserv
> Subject: Re: [apbp] Safety of Bicycle Facilities
>
> Anderson, Eric wrote:
> > I just can't let the following statement stand:
> >> "Most studies seem to indicate that cycling
> facilities overall have
> >> not conclusively been shown to improve safety
> above and beyond the
> >> “safety in numbers theory”.
> > See the following reference for at least one example
> concluding that
> > bike lanes improve safety:
> > <http://www.cambridgema.gov/~CDD/et/bike/bike_safety.html>
> >
> > Also, the studies I've seen such as ones regarding
> Berlin sidepaths
> > and the Wachtel and Lewiston study were done on
> facilities that are
> > explicitly described BY THE AUTHORS as substandard.
> Come on - it's
> > obvious that a poorly designed facility may not
> improve safety!
> >
> > If we're going to start questioning the safety
> benefits of bikeways we
> > need better studies than these. Anyone?
> >
> > As others have pointed out, we must also look
> carefully at the data
> > used for any type of bikeway safety study. Most of the
> time there is
> > just not enough data to draw reliable conclusions,
> either because of
> > low cyclist volumes or because of rampant,
> institutionally-flawed
> > collision reporting.
>
> I would like to ask this question the other way around.
> Aside from that
> Cambridge study, what other studies show that bike lanes
> are safer than
> no bike lanes, ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL? I've seen lots
> of studies
> of restriping a road to move the lane lanes in order to
> create a bike
> lane, but none that first studies any safety improvement of
> changing the
> lane widths and then studies the effect of adding the bike
> lane.
>
> Also, can anyone point me to the study that led to the
> inclusion of bike
> lanes in the MUTCD and the AASHTO Guide for the Development
> of Bicycle
> Facilities?
>
> I have not been able to such a study, and no one on the
> mailing list of
> the ITE Traffic Engineering Council or on the Bicycle
> Technical
> Committee of the NCUTCD knows. There were a lot of bike
> lanes being
> installed in the late 1960's and early 1970's in
> California, and the
> Legislature subsequently included them in the CA Streets
> and Highways
> Code, but as far as I can tell this happened without such a
> study ever
> being done. In fact, the legislation that would have
> allocated money for
> such a study died in the California Assembly in 1976.
>
> This is unfortunate, because it has led to a lot of the
> disagreements
> between proponents of bikeways and their opponents that
> continue until
> this day. After all, isn't it up to the proponents of a
> proposed traffic
> control device to prove its safety and effectiveness and
> not up to
> others to prove otherwise? And doesn't this continue to
> hold true even
> if the traffic control device has been installed in
> thousands of
> locations and is now over 40 years old (i.e., experience
> does not equal
> proof)?
>
> Bob Shanteau
> Transportation Engineering Liaison
> California Association of Bicycling Organizations
>
> Robert M Shanteau, PhD, PE
> Consulting Traffic Engineer
> 13 Primrose Cir
> Seaside, CA 93955-4133
> Voice: (831) 394-9420
> Cell: (831) 917-0248
> FAX: (831) 394-6045
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> To change your delivery options, send a blank email to the
> corresponding address shown below:
>   Subscribe:    chainguard-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
>   Unsubscribe:  chainguard-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
>   Switch to Digest Mode: chainguard-digest@yahoogroups.com
>   Use Website Access/Hold Mode: chainguard-nomail@yahoogroups.com
>   Normal Mode: chainguard-normal@yahoogroups.com
> Mail the list manager(Jack Taylor): chainguard-owner@yahoogroups.com
>
> Chainguard site: http://probicycle.com
> To e-mail system:  http://yahoogroups.com/community/chainguard
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>     mailto:chainguard-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
>
>
>

http://www.nationaler-radverkehrsplan.de/eu-bund-laender/eu/brr/brr-007-1990-en.\
pdf


"In the Netherlands, the number of accidents involving motorists turning left
or right and cyclists riding straight ahead has been significantly reduced by
installing an extra traffic light phase for cyclists; this does not conflict
with
the signals for motorists. However, this reduction is in part offset by serious
accidents caused by going through the lights on red. This resulted from the
extra phase which led to longer waiting periods, which some cyclists found
unacceptable."

Kalle

I asked on the APBP listserv about studies indicating that roads with
bike lanes are safer than roads without bike lanes, ALL OTHER THINGS
BEING EQUAL, and here is Andy Clarke's response. It appears to be
boilerplate, but it looks like the gauntlet has been thrown down. I will
be posting critiques on each one of the studies he cites. If anyone has
already done critiques, please let me know and whether I can paraphrase
them.

I am familiar with a few of these studies, and there are several areas
in which they are deficient, including (1) they did not keep the travel
lane widths constant, (2) non-random sampling, (3) improper definition
of conflicts, and (4) incorrect statistical analysis.

Bob Shanteau


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [apbp] Safety of Bicycle Facilities
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 16:24:45 -0400
From: Andy Clarke <Andy@...>
To: Bob Shanteau <rmshant@...>, APBP Listserv <members@...>

See if this helps any:

A few bike lane studies

Texas lane width study � impact on lane positioning
<http://www.utexas.edu/news/2006/09/18/engineering>
<http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/pdf_reports/0_5157_1.pdf>

Moritz adult bicyclists and RDI � relative danger index
<http://www.bicyclinglife.com/Library/Moritz2.htm>

Cambridge, Hampshire Street � impact on lane positioning
<http://www.cambridgema.gov/cdd/et/bike/bike_hamp_study.pdf>

Jennifer Dill, Commuting in Cities � overall impact on use
<http://www.contextsensitivesolutions.org/content/reading/bicycle-commuting/reso\
urces/4542-bicycle-commuting-and-facilities-in-major-us-cities>


Florida Red Shoulder Study � impact on lane positioning
<http://www.dot.state.fl.us/safety/ped_bike/handbooks_and_research/research/reds\
tudy.pdf>


Portland Blue Bike Lane study � impact on intersection behavior
<http://www.portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?c=34826&>

Ft Lauderdale Bike Lane Adjacent to Parking � impact on lane positioning
<http://www.dot.state.fl.us/safety/ped_bike/handbooks_and_research/research/ftla\
ud.pdf>


Broward County WCL Conversions � impact on lane positioning
<http://www.dot.state.fl.us/research-center/Completed_Proj/Summary_SF/FDOT_05108\
09_BA784_rpt.pdf>


San Francisco bike lane studies � various evaluations
<http://www.sfmta.com/cms/rbikes/3172.html>

Hunter et al, 1999 bike lane versus wide curb lane � comparison of
facilities
<http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/tfhrc/safety/pubs/99035/99035.pdf>

Bicycle Forum 47 � bike lanes on 44 foot streets � what different cities do
<http://www.bikeplan.com/narrow.htm>

Some general stuff
<http://www.ci.cambridge.ma.us/CDD/et/bike/bike_lanes.html#implanes>
<http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/engineering/facilities-bikelanes.cfm>

Bike lane design information

Chicago
<http://www.activelivingresources.org/assets/chicagosbikelanedesignguide.pdf>


Davis Bike Plan
<http://www.city.davis.ca.us/pw/pdfs/2006_BikePlan_withMaps.pdf>

FHWA university course
<http://www.tfhrc.gov/safety/pedbike/pubs/05085/chapt15.htm>
<http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/PED_BIKE/univcourse/swless20.htm>

Florida
<http://www.dot.state.fl.us/safety/ped_bike/handbooks_and_research/bhchpt4.pdf>


Minnesota DOT
<http://www.dot.state.mn.us/bike/pdfs/Chapter%204%20On-Road%20Bikeways%20(Web).p\
df>


Oregon design guide
<http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/BIKEPED/docs/bp_plan_2_ii.pdf>
<http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/BIKEPED/docs/OBP_Plan/Chapter_1_On-road_bikeways\
.pdf>


Seattle, bike plan chapter
<http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/docs/bmp/AppendixF.pdf>

Vermont
<http://www.aot.state.vt.us/progdev/Documents/LTF/FinalPedestrianAndBicycleFacil\
ity/Chap4.pdf>


Washington DC
<http://www.ddot.dc.gov/ddot/cwp/view,a,1245,q,640118,ddotNav_GID,1761,ddotNav,|\
34416|.asp>


Washington State
<http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/EESC/Design/DesignManual/desEnglish/1020-E.pdf>

Bike Boulevards
<http://www.sccrtc.org/bikes/TechTransfer_BicycleBlvds.pdf>

Andy Clarke
President, League of American Bicyclists
Be a Smart Cyclist: Join us at our 2009 Smart Cycling Conference this
June in San Jose, Calif.


-----Original Message-----
From: members-bounces@... [mailto:members-bounces@...] On
Behalf Of Bob Shanteau
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 8:35 AM
To: APBP Listserv
Subject: Re: [apbp] Safety of Bicycle Facilities

Anderson, Eric wrote:
> I just can't let the following statement stand:
>> "Most studies seem to indicate that cycling facilities overall have
>> not conclusively been shown to improve safety above and beyond the
>> �safety in numbers theory�.
> See the following reference for at least one example concluding that
> bike lanes improve safety:
> <http://www.cambridgema.gov/~CDD/et/bike/bike_safety.html>
>
> Also, the studies I've seen such as ones regarding Berlin sidepaths
> and the Wachtel and Lewiston study were done on facilities that are
> explicitly described BY THE AUTHORS as substandard. Come on - it's
> obvious that a poorly designed facility may not improve safety!
>
> If we're going to start questioning the safety benefits of bikeways we
> need better studies than these. Anyone?
>
> As others have pointed out, we must also look carefully at the data
> used for any type of bikeway safety study. Most of the time there is
> just not enough data to draw reliable conclusions, either because of
> low cyclist volumes or because of rampant, institutionally-flawed
> collision reporting.

I would like to ask this question the other way around. Aside from that
Cambridge study, what other studies show that bike lanes are safer than
no bike lanes, ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL? I've seen lots of studies
of restriping a road to move the lane lanes in order to create a bike
lane, but none that first studies any safety improvement of changing the
lane widths and then studies the effect of adding the bike lane.

Also, can anyone point me to the study that led to the inclusion of bike
lanes in the MUTCD and the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle
Facilities?

I have not been able to such a study, and no one on the mailing list of
the ITE Traffic Engineering Council or on the Bicycle Technical
Committee of the NCUTCD knows. There were a lot of bike lanes being
installed in the late 1960's and early 1970's in California, and the
Legislature subsequently included them in the CA Streets and Highways
Code, but as far as I can tell this happened without such a study ever
being done. In fact, the legislation that would have allocated money for
such a study died in the California Assembly in 1976.

This is unfortunate, because it has led to a lot of the disagreements
between proponents of bikeways and their opponents that continue until
this day. After all, isn't it up to the proponents of a proposed traffic
control device to prove its safety and effectiveness and not up to
others to prove otherwise? And doesn't this continue to hold true even
if the traffic control device has been installed in thousands of
locations and is now over 40 years old (i.e., experience does not equal
proof)?

Bob Shanteau
Transportation Engineering Liaison
California Association of Bicycling Organizations

Robert M Shanteau, PhD, PE
Consulting Traffic Engineer
13 Primrose Cir
Seaside, CA 93955-4133
Voice: (831) 394-9420
Cell: (831) 917-0248
FAX: (831) 394-6045

More from Andy


-------- Original Message --------
Subject:     Re: [apbp] Safety of Bicycle Facilities
Date:     Thu, 4 Jun 2009 16:46:19 -0400
From:     Andy Clarke <Andy@...>
To:     APBP Listserv <members@...>

For an historical perspective you may want to read:
<http://drusilla.hsrc.unc.edu/cms/downloads/BikeSafetyResearchSynthesis1995.pdf>

especially the chapter beginning on Page 67.

This thesis on Davis:
<http://www.des.ucdavis.edu/faculty/handy/Davis_bike_history.pdf>

And this story from Davis' 40th Anniversary of Bike Lanes celebration:
<http://lda.ucdavis.edu/people/websites/francis/DavisEnterpriseBicycleAward.pdf>


Andy Clarke
President, League of American Bicyclists
Be a Smart Cyclist: Join us at our 2009 Smart Cycling Conference this
June in San Jose, Calif.

I asked on the APBP listserv about studies indicating that roads with
bike lanes are safer than roads without bike lanes, ALL OTHER THINGS
BEING EQUAL, and here is Andy Clarke's response. It appears to be
boilerplate, but it looks like the gauntlet has been thrown down. I will
be posting critiques on each one of the studies he cites. If anyone has
already done critiques, please let me know and whether I can paraphrase
them.

I am familiar with a few of these studies, and there are several areas
in which they are deficient, including (1) they did not keep the travel
lane widths constant, (2) non-random sampling, (3) improper definition
of conflicts, and (4) incorrect statistical analysis.

Bob Shanteau


-------- Original Message --------
Subject: RE: [apbp] Safety of Bicycle Facilities
Date: Thu, 4 Jun 2009 16:24:45 -0400
From: Andy Clarke <Andy@...>
To: Bob Shanteau <rmshant@...>, APBP Listserv <members@...>

See if this helps any:

A few bike lane studies

Texas lane width study � impact on lane positioning
<http://www.utexas.edu/news/2006/09/18/engineering>
<http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/pdf_reports/0_5157_1.pdf>

Moritz adult bicyclists and RDI � relative danger index
<http://www.bicyclinglife.com/Library/Moritz2.htm>

Cambridge, Hampshire Street � impact on lane positioning
<http://www.cambridgema.gov/cdd/et/bike/bike_hamp_study.pdf>

Jennifer Dill, Commuting in Cities � overall impact on use
<http://www.contextsensitivesolutions.org/content/reading/bicycle-commuting/reso\
urces/4542-bicycle-commuting-and-facilities-in-major-us-cities>


Florida Red Shoulder Study � impact on lane positioning
<http://www.dot.state.fl.us/safety/ped_bike/handbooks_and_research/research/reds\
tudy.pdf>


Portland Blue Bike Lane study � impact on intersection behavior
<http://www.portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?c=34826&>

Ft Lauderdale Bike Lane Adjacent to Parking � impact on lane positioning
<http://www.dot.state.fl.us/safety/ped_bike/handbooks_and_research/research/ftla\
ud.pdf>


Broward County WCL Conversions � impact on lane positioning
<http://www.dot.state.fl.us/research-center/Completed_Proj/Summary_SF/FDOT_05108\
09_BA784_rpt.pdf>


San Francisco bike lane studies � various evaluations
<http://www.sfmta.com/cms/rbikes/3172.html>

Hunter et al, 1999 bike lane versus wide curb lane � comparison of
facilities
<http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/tfhrc/safety/pubs/99035/99035.pdf>

Bicycle Forum 47 � bike lanes on 44 foot streets � what different cities do
<http://www.bikeplan.com/narrow.htm>

Some general stuff
<http://www.ci.cambridge.ma.us/CDD/et/bike/bike_lanes.html#implanes>
<http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/engineering/facilities-bikelanes.cfm>

Bike lane design information

Chicago
<http://www.activelivingresources.org/assets/chicagosbikelanedesignguide.pdf>


Davis Bike Plan
<http://www.city.davis.ca.us/pw/pdfs/2006_BikePlan_withMaps.pdf>

FHWA university course
<http://www.tfhrc.gov/safety/pedbike/pubs/05085/chapt15.htm>
<http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/PED_BIKE/univcourse/swless20.htm>

Florida
<http://www.dot.state.fl.us/safety/ped_bike/handbooks_and_research/bhchpt4.pdf>


Minnesota DOT
<http://www.dot.state.mn.us/bike/pdfs/Chapter%204%20On-Road%20Bikeways%20(Web).p\
df>


Oregon design guide
<http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/BIKEPED/docs/bp_plan_2_ii.pdf>
<http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/BIKEPED/docs/OBP_Plan/Chapter_1_On-road_bikeways\
.pdf>


Seattle, bike plan chapter
<http://www.seattle.gov/transportation/docs/bmp/AppendixF.pdf>

Vermont
<http://www.aot.state.vt.us/progdev/Documents/LTF/FinalPedestrianAndBicycleFacil\
ity/Chap4.pdf>


Washington DC
<http://www.ddot.dc.gov/ddot/cwp/view,a,1245,q,640118,ddotNav_GID,1761,ddotNav,|\
34416|.asp>


Washington State
<http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/EESC/Design/DesignManual/desEnglish/1020-E.pdf>

Bike Boulevards
<http://www.sccrtc.org/bikes/TechTransfer_BicycleBlvds.pdf>

Andy Clarke
President, League of American Bicyclists
Be a Smart Cyclist: Join us at our 2009 Smart Cycling Conference this
June in San Jose, Calif.


-----Original Message-----
From: members-bounces@... [mailto:members-bounces@...] On
Behalf Of Bob Shanteau
Sent: Thursday, June 04, 2009 8:35 AM
To: APBP Listserv
Subject: Re: [apbp] Safety of Bicycle Facilities

Anderson, Eric wrote:
> I just can't let the following statement stand:
>> "Most studies seem to indicate that cycling facilities overall have
>> not conclusively been shown to improve safety above and beyond the
>> �safety in numbers theory�.
> See the following reference for at least one example concluding that
> bike lanes improve safety:
> <http://www.cambridgema.gov/~CDD/et/bike/bike_safety.html>
>
> Also, the studies I've seen such as ones regarding Berlin sidepaths
> and the Wachtel and Lewiston study were done on facilities that are
> explicitly described BY THE AUTHORS as substandard. Come on - it's
> obvious that a poorly designed facility may not improve safety!
>
> If we're going to start questioning the safety benefits of bikeways we
> need better studies than these. Anyone?
>
> As others have pointed out, we must also look carefully at the data
> used for any type of bikeway safety study. Most of the time there is
> just not enough data to draw reliable conclusions, either because of
> low cyclist volumes or because of rampant, institutionally-flawed
> collision reporting.

I would like to ask this question the other way around. Aside from that
Cambridge study, what other studies show that bike lanes are safer than
no bike lanes, ALL OTHER THINGS BEING EQUAL? I've seen lots of studies
of restriping a road to move the lane lanes in order to create a bike
lane, but none that first studies any safety improvement of changing the
lane widths and then studies the effect of adding the bike lane.

Also, can anyone point me to the study that led to the inclusion of bike
lanes in the MUTCD and the AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle
Facilities?

I have not been able to such a study, and no one on the mailing list of
the ITE Traffic Engineering Council or on the Bicycle Technical
Committee of the NCUTCD knows. There were a lot of bike lanes being
installed in the late 1960's and early 1970's in California, and the
Legislature subsequently included them in the CA Streets and Highways
Code, but as far as I can tell this happened without such a study ever
being done. In fact, the legislation that would have allocated money for
such a study died in the California Assembly in 1976.

This is unfortunate, because it has led to a lot of the disagreements
between proponents of bikeways and their opponents that continue until
this day. After all, isn't it up to the proponents of a proposed traffic
control device to prove its safety and effectiveness and not up to
others to prove otherwise? And doesn't this continue to hold true even
if the traffic control device has been installed in thousands of
locations and is now over 40 years old (i.e., experience does not equal
proof)?

Bob Shanteau
Transportation Engineering Liaison
California Association of Bicycling Organizations

Robert M Shanteau, PhD, PE
Consulting Traffic Engineer
13 Primrose Cir
Seaside, CA 93955-4133
Voice: (831) 394-9420
Cell: (831) 917-0248
FAX: (831) 394-6045

kalle.mustonen wrote:
>
>
>
> On Dutch Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management's
> website
> (http://www.verkeerenwaterstaat.nl/english/topics/road_traffic_safety/
> <http://www.verkeerenwaterstaat.nl/english/topics/road_traffic_safety/>)
> under "Road and traffic safety" you find five subcategories:
>  > * Alcohol, drugs and driving
>  > * Blind spot
>  > * Safety in and around your car
>  > * Safety in and around lorries
>  > * Seat belts and child booster seats
>
> Here's an excerpt of what you find under "Blind spot":
>
>  >Blind spot
>  >History
>  >
>  >The blind spot has been a problem for cyclists and pedestrians for
>  >years. Too many road users die every year because drivers do not see
>  >them when turning. In 1998, twenty moped riders and cyclists died in
>  >blind-spot accidents. Relatives and next of kin are devoting
>  >themselves to solving the problem.
>  >
>  >Writer Anna Enquist wrote an open letter to Tineke Netelenbos, the
>  >minister at the time, when she lost her daughter in a traffic
>  >accident in 2001. This received a lot of media attention. In 1999 >the
> effectiveness of blind-spot mirrors and camera systems was
>  >investigated. When it was found that these systems are effective, a
>  >subsidy scheme was created. However, the scheme still did not equip
>  >enough Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) with blind-spot mirrors.
>  >This was why in spring 2002 minister Netelenbos made the blind-spot
>  >mirror mandatory, a law which came into effect on 1 January 2003.
>  >Between 2000 and 2003 the number of blind-spot victims decreased, >but
> since then the number of deaths has again increased. New >technologies
> and solutions are therefore still required.
>
> The pages are in English, but the Dutch versions have more info, like
> this statistic (babel fished):
>
>  >Table 1.1 numbers died cyclists as a result of accident with
>  >Right-refuseeing freight car
>  >Year died cyclists:
>  >1997 20
>  >1998 16
>  >1999 15
>  >2000 16
>  >2001 19
>  >2002 6
>  >2003 7
>  >2004 16
>  >2005 15
>  >2006 19



Garbage in, garbage out. If facilities intended to make the naive feel
safe (dupe them into a lower level consciousness) but also result in
them being in a vulnerable location, then the correct solution is to
remove the source of the problem.





>
>  >From elsewhere on the same site:
>
>  >Bicycles
>  >
>  >Bicycles are fast � in the city, they are often faster than cars.

If that is the case, why must bicyclists be segregated?


Wayne

Yeah, there's no convincing him. He's a zealot. I only respond for the benefit
of readers who might not think it through and think his offerings look
wonderful. His intention is to try and convince my readers that pigs have been
made to fly.

I found it interesting that he had no comments about the post on the St Pete
cycletrack boondoggle.

KC
commuteorlando.com



--- In chainguard@yahoogroups.com, P M SUMMER <pmsummer@...> wrote:
>
> I noticed he has a blocked I.D. I don't think you can respond to those people,
because they have set up an interaction that is designed to be one way.
>
> Geez, though, he is an annoying thing.
>
>  P. M. Summer
> simul justus et peccator
>
>
> www.cycledallas.org
>
>
> http://coffeemugshots.blogspot.com
> http://pops-hat.blogspot.com
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Keri Caffrey <keribird@...>
> To: chainguard@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Thursday, June 4, 2009 10:50:22 AM
> Subject: Re: [CG] Dutch blind spot
>
>
>
>
>
> Many thanks to both Kalle and Michael for the links to the Dutch Ministry and
the Paris video (respectively) .
>
> I've written a post using the Paris video and will be publishing it later this
afternoon.
>
> In the meantime, if anyone has time on their hands and would like to spar with
a Pucher Parrot, I've got a relentless one:
>
> <http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2009/06/03/mindful-bicycling/#comments>
>
> KC
> Orlando
>
> --- In chainguard@yahoogro ups.com, Michael Poplawski <michael.poplawski@ ...>
wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 2:02 PM, kalle.mustonen <kalle.mustonen@ ...> wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > On Dutch Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management's
website
> > > (http://www.verkeere nwaterstaat. nl/english/ topics/road_
traffic_safety/)
> > > under "Road and traffic safety" you find five subcategories:
> > >> * Alcohol, drugs and driving
> > >> * Blind spot
> >
> > Speaking of blind spots, I'll submit this--maybe some will find this
> > interesting.
> >
> > http://www.youtube. com/watch? v=gAethD1Io_ Y
> >
> > It's a year in the life of a Parisian cyclist and their discriminatory
> > facilities, although the videographer seems to take their frustration
> > out on motorists (and their evil cars) rather than the road engineers
> > that have promised cyclists false safety and convenience.
> >
> > As for certifying mopeds in the Netherlands, how about certifying
> > cyclists to allow them to use the road instead of the mandatory-use
> > facilities which potentially set them up for disaster? I have to
> > believe that the danger moped riders faced using cycle tracks was not
> > due to conflicts with slower-moving cyclists, but at intersections
> > where they could not get into a good position to deal with normal
> > traffic.
> >
> > --
> > Michael Poplawski
> > Victoria, BC
> >
>

--- In chainguard@yahoogroups.com, "fred_dot_u" <fred_dot_u@...> wrote:

>
> The ending video clip brought tears to my eyes!
>
>
The ending scene shows the Seine motorway that is closed to motor traffic on
sundays. Another example of bread crumbs from motorists's table thrown to
cyclists; we are so nice that we let you use this roadway when we don't need it;
we are so friendly that we give you half a meter of door zone from our roadways.

What should make you cry, is that these people think that they can get on their
bikes and enjoy cycling in their city only when the motorists are removed.

Kalle

--- In chainguard@yahoogroups.com, Michael Poplawski <michael.poplawski@...>
wrote:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAethD1Io_Y
>
This video was a finely crafted piece of anti-motoring cyclists-inferiority
propaganda. The message was: "Cycling on the streets with or without bikeways is
so terrible that no-one should do it. Only after all motor vehicles are banned;
people can cycle safely without worry in the world."

Good thing about it was that it potrayed urban bikeway cycling realistically.

Noticed that Parisians use side-of-the-road facilities for parking and loading
vehicles. That's the proper use for them.

Drivers also had noticed the pointlesness of ASL:s and ignored them. Good.
Cyclists should too.

Kalle

Michael Poplawski wrote:
>
> Speaking of blind spots, I'll submit this--maybe some will find this
> interesting.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAethD1Io_Y
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAethD1Io_Y>
>
> It's a year in the life of a Parisian cyclist and their discriminatory
> facilities, although the videographer seems to take their frustration
> out on motorists (and their evil cars) rather than the road engineers
> that have promised cyclists false safety and convenience.

That's intense. Quite a professionally made video too. It really
captures the real world problems of putting bike facilities in a dense
urban environment. Really bad facilities add further insult.

Wayne

Many thanks to both Kalle and Michael for the links to the Dutch Ministry and
the Paris video (respectively).

I've written a post using the Paris video and will be publishing it later this
afternoon.

In the meantime, if anyone has time on their hands and would like to spar with a
Pucher Parrot, I've got a relentless one:

<http://commuteorlando.com/wordpress/2009/06/03/mindful-bicycling/#comments>

KC
Orlando


--- In chainguard@yahoogroups.com, Michael Poplawski <michael.poplawski@...>
wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 2:02 PM, kalle.mustonen <kalle.mustonen@...> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Dutch Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management's website
> > (http://www.verkeerenwaterstaat.nl/english/topics/road_traffic_safety/)
> > under "Road and traffic safety" you find five subcategories:
> >> * Alcohol, drugs and driving
> >> * Blind spot
>
> Speaking of blind spots, I'll submit this--maybe some will find this
> interesting.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAethD1Io_Y
>
> It's a year in the life of a Parisian cyclist and their discriminatory
> facilities, although the videographer seems to take their frustration
> out on motorists (and their evil cars) rather than the road engineers
> that have promised cyclists false safety and convenience.
>
> As for certifying mopeds in the Netherlands, how about certifying
> cyclists to allow them to use the road instead of the mandatory-use
> facilities which potentially set them up for disaster? I have to
> believe that the danger moped riders faced using cycle tracks was not
> due to conflicts with slower-moving cyclists, but at intersections
> where they could not get into a good position to deal with normal
> traffic.
>
> --
> Michael Poplawski
> Victoria, BC
>

That was a frightening video, and a great presentation of why on-grade
segregated and integrated facilities won't work. The near-dooring
performed by what appeared to be a law-enforcement officer was just
perfect. So many near-collisions in the video, I'm surprised no crashes
were recorded. Clearly the camera-carrier has to ride with extreme
caution at all times. I realize it was a year's experience, but that's
too many experiences for a lifetime!

All the recent activity I've seen regarding licensing cyclists ignores
the fact that licensed motorists are not educated enough to safely
operate on the streets and no amount of licensing of cyclists is going
to change that. The motor vehicle operators in the video demonstrate
that well enough.

The ending video clip brought tears to my eyes!


--- In chainguard@yahoogroups.com, Michael Poplawski
<michael.poplawski@...> wrote:
>
> Speaking of blind spots, I'll submit this--maybe some will find this
> interesting.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAethD1Io_Y
>
> It's a year in the life of a Parisian cyclist and their discriminatory
> facilities, although the videographer seems to take their frustration
> out on motorists (and their evil cars) rather than the road engineers
> that have promised cyclists false safety and convenience.
>
> --
> Michael Poplawski
> Victoria, BC
>

--- In chainguard@yahoogroups.com, John Forester <forester@...> wrote:
> "This changed when it was demonstrated that the
> significant difference in speed compared to cyclists resulted in a
> relatively large number of accidents involving mopeds." In short,
> cycle tracks are too dangerous for use at speeds much greater than
> Dutch
> cycling speeds. We vehicular cyclists, who tend to ride faster than
> Dutch urban cyclists, should be allowed to operate safely on the
> roadway

To those of you who are unawere of characteristics of euro mopeds; they have
maximum 50 cubic centimeter engine and maximum speed of 45 kph.

But thats not all. In Netherlands the urban speed limit for mopeds used to be 30
kph (and still is if the mopedist chooses to use a bikepath
http://www.verkeerenwaterstaat.nl/english/news/newsitems/newtrafficregulationsas\
of1april.aspx)

Kalle

On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 2:02 PM, kalle.mustonen <kalle.mustonen@...> wrote:
>
>
> On Dutch Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management's website
> (http://www.verkeerenwaterstaat.nl/english/topics/road_traffic_safety/)
> under "Road and traffic safety" you find five subcategories:
>> * Alcohol, drugs and driving
>> * Blind spot

Speaking of blind spots, I'll submit this--maybe some will find this
interesting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAethD1Io_Y

It's a year in the life of a Parisian cyclist and their discriminatory
facilities, although the videographer seems to take their frustration
out on motorists (and their evil cars) rather than the road engineers
that have promised cyclists false safety and convenience.

As for certifying mopeds in the Netherlands, how about certifying
cyclists to allow them to use the road instead of the mandatory-use
facilities which potentially set them up for disaster? I have to
believe that the danger moped riders faced using cycle tracks was not
due to conflicts with slower-moving cyclists, but at intersections
where they could not get into a good position to deal with normal
traffic.

--
Michael Poplawski
Victoria, BC

Sometimes Dutch officials publish material that we in the USA really
need to emulate. The following quotations from the Ministry of Transport
official site provide information that vehicular cyclists ought to
publish, loudly, proudly, in effective forums. This is information that
I produced almost forty years ago, but those in charge choose to ignore
it, or jeer at it. Now, here it is in official form from that fount of
bikeway knowledge, the Ministry of Transport ... of the Kingdom of the
Netherlands.

The Ministry has stated one of the essential limitations of any American
bikeway program: lack of competitive speed.

The Ministry states that typical Dutch bicycles, ridden by typical Dutch
people of all ages and both genders, in typical Dutch cities, provide
fast transportation. "Bicycles are fast -- in the city, they are often
faster than cars." When one considers the small proportion of trips in
American cities for which bicycle travel would be faster than automobile
travel, one realizes that no bikeway program is likely to attract many
motor trips to bicycle trips.

The Ministry has provided evidence for protecting us from the dangers of
cycle tracks.

The Ministry has now provided us with solid evidence for protecting our
rights as drivers of vehicles, the official form of the evidence that I
demonstrated almost forty years ago at considerable risk of car-bike
collision. In the Netherlands "in the past mopeds would normally have to
use cycle tracks. This changed when it was demonstrated that the
significant difference in speed compared to cyclists resulted in a
relatively large number of accidents involving mopeds." In short, cycle
tracks are too dangerous for use at speeds much greater than Dutch
cycling speeds. We vehicular cyclists, who tend to ride faster than
Dutch urban cyclists, should be allowed to operate safely on the roadway
in accordance with the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles.
Requiring us us to use cycle tracks is to impose dangers on us simply to
accommodate the incompetent and lazy bicycle riders who will use cycle
tracks.

This is all information that we need to use, openly, loudly, proudly.


================================
Kingdom of the Netherlands
Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management
circa 2008

Road and traffic safety

Bicycles

Bicycles are fast � in the city, they are often faster than cars.
Cycling is healthy. Bicycles are environmentally friendly. So the
Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management is promoting
this means of transportation, particularly indirectly through provinces
and municipalities, which will then build cycle paths and provide
bicycle racks. There are many benefits to bicycles, both for you and for
the country.


Mopeds/motorised bicycles
Convenient but dangerous

In the Netherlands, mopeds are only allowed to use regular roadways in
built-up areas. For some people this is still confusing because in the
past mopeds would normally have to use cycle tracks. This changed when
it was demonstrated that the significant difference in speed compared to
cyclists on cycle tracks resulted in a relatively large number of
accidents involving mopeds.
However, outside of built-up areas, where cars drive faster, mopeds
again have to use cycle paths. That is, if there is a cycle path. If
not, mopeds still have to use the regular roadway.

--
John Forester, MS, PE
Bicycle Transportation Engineer
7585 Church St. Lemon Grove CA 91945-2306
619-644-5481    forester@...
www.johnforester.com

On Dutch Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management's website
(http://www.verkeerenwaterstaat.nl/english/topics/road_traffic_safety/) under
"Road and traffic safety" you find five subcategories:
>    * Alcohol, drugs and driving
>    * Blind spot
>    * Safety in and around your car
>    * Safety in and around lorries
>    * Seat belts and child booster seats

Here's an excerpt of what you find under "Blind spot":

>Blind spot
>History
>
>The blind spot has been a problem for cyclists and pedestrians for >years. Too
many road users die every year because drivers do not see >them when turning. In
1998, twenty moped riders and cyclists died in >blind-spot accidents. Relatives
and next of kin are devoting >themselves to solving the problem.
>
>Writer Anna Enquist wrote an open letter to Tineke Netelenbos, the >minister at
the time, when she lost her daughter in a traffic >accident in 2001. This
received a lot of media attention. In 1999 >the effectiveness of blind-spot
mirrors and camera systems was >investigated. When it was found that these
systems are effective, a >subsidy scheme was created. However, the scheme still
did not equip >enough Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) with blind-spot mirrors.
>This was why in spring 2002 minister Netelenbos made the blind-spot >mirror
mandatory, a law which came into effect on 1 January 2003. >Between 2000 and
2003 the number of blind-spot victims decreased, >but since then the number of
deaths has again increased. New >technologies and solutions are therefore still
required.

The pages are in English, but the Dutch versions have more info, like this
statistic (babel fished):

>Table 1.1 numbers died cyclists as a result of accident with
>Right-refuseeing freight car
>Year died cyclists:
>1997 20
>1998 16
>1999 15
>2000 16
>2001 19
>2002 6
>2003 7
>2004 16
>2005 15
>2006 19


From elsewhere on the same site:

>Bicycles
>
>Bicycles are fast � in the city, they are often faster than cars. >Cycling is
healthy. Bicycles are environmentally friendly. So the >Ministry of Transport,
Public Works and Water Management is >promoting this means of transportation,
particularly indirectly >through provinces and municipalities, which will then
build cycle >paths and provide bicycle racks. There are many benefits to
>bicycles, both for you and for the country.
>
>
>Mopeds/motorised bicycles
>Convenient but dangerous
>
>Many younger and older people in the Netherlands ride scooters or >mopeds. For
them mopeds are a convenient or fun means of transport. >However, they are also
dangerous. Every year around one hundred >people � mostly young people � die
because of moped accidents. This >makes riding a moped one of the most dangerous
means of transport. >The government has devised several measures to reduce the
number of >people killed and injured as a result of moped accidents. Examples
>include the moped certificate, moped registration plates and >allowing mopeds
to use the roadway.
>
>In the Netherlands, mopeds are only allowed to use regular roadways >in
built-up areas. For some people this is still confusing because >in the past
mopeds would normally have to use cycle tracks. This >changed when it was
demonstrated that the significant difference in >speed compared to cyclists on
cycle tracks resulted in a relatively >large number of accidents involving
mopeds.


Kalle

Hi all,

John Brooking wrote:

>>>> that "Bikes may use full lane" sign (which I'm of two minds about
because it implies that that is *not* the case everywhere) <<<<

to which I reply:

I had the same concern, but got talked out of worring about it.

When this sign was being discussed by the National Committee on Uniform
Traffric Control Devices Bicycle Technical Committee, I raised that
same question.

Several people reminded me that lots of signs are used that same way.
A few examples of signs that remind us of general conditions but are
not posted everywhere:   Yield to pedestrians in crosswalk, no
littering, some speed limit signs (we have no unlimited speed roads,
and default speed limits on unposted roads), emergency stopping only

There is a cultural difference with bike-specific signs, since some
portion of the public wants to believe cyclists have no rights.  That
we have to address through education.

John Schubert

If they want to do effective on-rode education through markings and signage, how
about tweaking that "Bikes may use full lane" sign (which I'm of two minds about
because it implies that that is *not* the case everywhere) to say "Through bikes
use full lane", with a bicycle stencil smack in the middle, where the rightmost
lane serves both through and right turns?

--- In chainguard@yahoogroups.com, "P. M. Summer" <pmsummer@...> wrote:
>
> Back to Schubert's original post: It is by far the best overview I've read,
warts and all. Certainly better than anything Bicycling magazine would print.
The author actually seemed to interview some folks, and even though he picked up
some of the obvious myths of the segregationists, he seems uncomfortable enough
with them to not declare them gospel. I suspect Andy will sic his flying monkeys
on them for straying from the Ciclipolitburo's official position.
>

Back to Schubert's original post: It is by far the best overview I've read,
warts and all. Certainly better than anything Bicycling magazine would print.
The author actually seemed to interview some folks, and even though he picked up
some of the obvious myths of the segregationists, he seems uncomfortable enough
with them to not declare them gospel. I suspect Andy will sic his flying monkeys
on them for straying from the Ciclipolitburo's official position.

Ah yes, "Foresterites," often tossed around by those in the other camp a bit
like the new "F-word" when they have run out of intellectual ammunition, which
means it gets tossed by some early and often.

Offered as though an insult (Not being afraid of new concepts?) and generally
accompanied by attacks on Vehicular Cycling as a program of old white men - out
of touch with the modern world and new ideas.  Ironic that it is those making
that claim who are themselves promoting the exact same principles and programs
as their own grandparents, from long before any formalization of the concepts of
vehicular-style bicycle operation.   The exact same paradigm of separation of
bicycles from cars that their grandchildren are demanding today as though it
were the creation of a revolutionary new concept by the "today" generation. 
What a laugh.  They missed by maybe 100 years.

It is Vehicular Cycling's concept of integrating the bicyclist as a vehicle
operator that is offers a "new and exciting" bicycling alternative to the
attempts to salvage the rolling-pedestrian programs with roots in the early
1900's and the dawn of the age of the automobile.

Jack
Hoping they don't find out about outhouses.

From: John Schubert [Schubley@aol.com]

> http://www.bicycletimesmag.com/content/cyclists-find-no-safety-numbers
________________________________________

Since when do followers of John Forester call themselves (ourselves) "Foresterites"? I thought I was a follower, but have never used that term.

I thought I recollected that Mike Dahmus performed a "thought experiment" not an anecdotal study, claiming that some motorists passed closer without a stripe. My experience and real anecdotal study (i.e. small sample size at one location with one observer) did not show any dangerously close passes without a stripe, but did show closer passes with a stripe.

Bob Bayn LCI#685
Cache Valley Utah

-- John Forester, MS, PE
Bicycle Transportation Engineer
7585 Church St. Lemon Grove CA 91945-2306
619-644-5481 forester@...
www.johnforester.com

Well, I've never referred to myself as a "Foresterite", but I have been called
such by the PnP Brigade and Bicili Fashionistas.

As for passing distances, a story that bemoans the lack of scientific evidence,
and then uses one person's anecdotal evidence as illustrative of something, is
mildly shameful. The only "studies" I've seen ( two US, one UK) arrived at
differeing results... with Ian Hallett's pro-bike lane study showing that cars
pass both closer and faster to cyclists in a bike lane than outside of one (the
study's author conclusion was that was good).

--- In chainguard@yahoogroups.com, Bob Bayn <bob.bayn@...> wrote:
>
> From: John Schubert  [Schubley@...]
>
> > http://www.bicycletimesmag.com/content/cyclists-find-no-safety-numbers
> ________________________________________
>
> Since when do followers of John Forester call themselves (ourselves)
"Foresterites"?  I thought I was a follower, but have never used that term.
>
> I thought I recollected that Mike Dahmus performed a "thought experiment" not
an anecdotal study, claiming that some motorists passed closer without a stripe.
My experience and real anecdotal study (i.e. small sample size at one location
with one observer) did not show any dangerously close passes without a stripe,
but did show closer passes with a stripe.
>
> Bob Bayn      LCI#685
> Cache Valley Utah
>

I do not consider myself a "follower of John Forester" because of the way I ride
my bike anymore than I consider myself a "follower of Leonhard Euler" because I
passed maths in high school.

The "Foresterites" or "Foresterians" label is just a stratagem by the
segregationist camp to paint us as some kind of sect. I know I live in the
reality: the sect is *them*.

Txarli
Wisdom is out to get me
but in the bike lane I am safe!
http://bicilibre.wordpress.com

--- In chainguard@yahoogroups.com, Bob Bayn <bob.bayn@...> wrote:
>
> From: John Schubert  [Schubley@...]
>
> > http://www.bicycletimesmag.com/content/cyclists-find-no-safety-numbers
> ________________________________________
>
> Since when do followers of John Forester call themselves
> (ourselves) "Foresterites"?  I thought I was a follower,
> but have never used that term.
>

From: John Schubert  [Schubley@...]

> http://www.bicycletimesmag.com/content/cyclists-find-no-safety-numbers
________________________________________

Since when do followers of John Forester call themselves (ourselves)
"Foresterites"?  I thought I was a follower, but have never used that term.

I thought I recollected that Mike Dahmus performed a "thought experiment" not an
anecdotal study, claiming that some motorists passed closer without a stripe. 
My experience and real anecdotal study (i.e. small sample size at one location
with one observer) did not show any dangerously close passes without a stripe,
but did show closer passes with a stripe.

Bob Bayn      LCI#685
Cache Valley Utah