https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/a-person-was-spotted-biking-on-i-90-in-chicago-police-have-a-message-for-them/3413507/
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 4/18/2024 9:10 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/a-person-was-spotted-biking-on-i-90-in-chicago-police-have-a-message-for-them/3413507/

but He wasn't taking the lane.
--
Add xx to reply

On 4/18/2024 8:30 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> On 4/18/2024 9:10 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/a-person-was-spotted-biking-on-i-90-in-chicago-police-have-a-message-for-them/3413507/
>
> but He wasn't taking the lane.

He was taking the breakdown lane, in a dippy decision.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> On 4/18/2024 8:30 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>> On 4/18/2024 9:10 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/a-person-was-spotted-biking-on-i-90-in-chicago-police-have-a-message-for-them/3413507/
>>
>> but He wasn't taking the lane.
>
> He was taking the breakdown lane, in a dippy decision.

The M23 (motorway) which runs past Gatwick Airport is fairly notorious for
tourists getting confused and riding on it, in fairness the A23 that it
turns into a mile or so down the road is built to just about same standard
just not on motorway regulations, is a fairly awful bike lane in some parts
but as ever bypasses are generally less convenient even for leisure
cyclists.

Roger Merriman

On 4/18/2024 10:02 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
> AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>> On 4/18/2024 8:30 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>> On 4/18/2024 9:10 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/a-person-was-spotted-biking-on-i-90-in-chicago-police-have-a-message-for-them/3413507/
>>>
>>> but He wasn't taking the lane.
>>
>> He was taking the breakdown lane, in a dippy decision.
>
> The M23 (motorway) which runs past Gatwick Airport is fairly notorious for
> tourists getting confused and riding on it, in fairness the A23 that it
> turns into a mile or so down the road is built to just about same standard
> just not on motorway regulations, is a fairly awful bike lane in some parts
> but as ever bypasses are generally less convenient even for leisure
> cyclists.
>
> Roger Merriman
>

Above all the other poor cycling factors, the less traveled
lanes on an expressway are filled with debris of all sorts.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 4/18/2024 9:10 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/a-person-was-spotted-biking-on-i-90-in-chicago-police-have-a-message-for-them/3413507/

I (ahem!) know a few people (ahem!) who did something similar for a
short distance at a remote spot on one very long bike tour. They were
advised to do it by a bunch of friendly retirees, who said it was really
the only reasonable way to get where they were going by bike.

It was technically illegal, but it was extremely safe and disturbed
nobody. Your Chicago example seems different,

--
- Frank Krygowski

AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
> On 4/18/2024 10:02 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>> AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>>> On 4/18/2024 8:30 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>>> On 4/18/2024 9:10 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/a-person-was-spotted-biking-on-i-90-in-chicago-police-have-a-message-for-them/3413507/
>>>>
>>>> but He wasn't taking the lane.
>>>
>>> He was taking the breakdown lane, in a dippy decision.
>>
>> The M23 (motorway) which runs past Gatwick Airport is fairly notorious for
>> tourists getting confused and riding on it, in fairness the A23 that it
>> turns into a mile or so down the road is built to just about same standard
>> just not on motorway regulations, is a fairly awful bike lane in some parts
>> but as ever bypasses are generally less convenient even for leisure
>> cyclists.
>>
>> Roger Merriman
>>
>
> Above all the other poor cycling factors, the less traveled
> lanes on an expressway are filled with debris of all sorts.

The hard shoulders do tend to be! Which is drivers own problem ie they then
get caught in lane closures when the hard shoulders etc get litter cleared.

Roger Merriman

On 4/18/2024 10:35 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 4/18/2024 9:10 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/a-person-was-spotted-biking-on-i-90-in-chicago-police-have-a-message-for-them/3413507/
>
> I (ahem!) know a few people (ahem!) who did something
> similar for a short distance at a remote spot on one very
> long bike tour. They were advised to do it by a bunch of
> friendly retirees, who said it was really the only
> reasonable way to get where they were going by bike.
>
> It was technically illegal, but it was extremely safe and
> disturbed nobody. Your Chicago example seems different,
>

People crash into stopped cars, even police cars with the
lights going, in that lane with disturbing regularity.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Thu Apr 18 11:35:41 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 4/18/2024 9:10 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> > https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/a-person-was-spotted-biking-on-i-90-in-chicago-police-have-a-message-for-them/3413507/
>
> I (ahem!) know a few people (ahem!) who did something similar for a
> short distance at a remote spot on one very long bike tour. They were
> advised to do it by a bunch of friendly retirees, who said it was really
> the only reasonable way to get where they were going by bike.
>
> It was technically illegal, but it was extremely safe and disturbed
> nobody. Your Chicago example seems different,
>
> --
> - Frank Krygowski

Locally there are a couple of placedes where you can't get onto surface roads without riding on highway shoulders.

On one section it is a freeway exit where the road narrows down to barely one lane in the east bound and cars will exit here at 80 mph which is ther normal freeway speed here ijn the normal 65 mph freeway speed limit. So you have to time it so that you get through that section before the cars do. Once on the other side the shoulder is u8p to 20 feet wide.

Gavin Loathsome has taken the largest gas taxes in the nation and given himself and his legislature friends raises rather than repair the roads

Hope that you're getting along in your retirement.

Tom Kunich <cyclintom@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Thu Apr 18 11:35:41 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 4/18/2024 9:10 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/a-person-was-spotted-biking-on-i-90-in-chicago-police-have-a-message-for-them/3413507/
>>
>> I (ahem!) know a few people (ahem!) who did something similar for a
>> short distance at a remote spot on one very long bike tour. They were
>> advised to do it by a bunch of friendly retirees, who said it was really
>> the only reasonable way to get where they were going by bike.
>>
>> It was technically illegal, but it was extremely safe and disturbed
>> nobody. Your Chicago example seems different,
>>
>> --
>> - Frank Krygowski
>
>
>
>
> Locally there are a couple of placedes where you can't get onto surface
> roads without riding on highway shoulders.
>
> On one section it is a freeway exit where the road narrows down to barely
> one lane in the east bound and cars will exit here at 80 mph which is
> ther normal freeway speed here ijn the normal 65 mph freeway speed limit.
> So you have to time it so that you get through that section before the
> cars do. Once on the other side the shoulder is u8p to 20 feet wide.
>
>
> Gavin Loathsome has taken the largest gas taxes in the nation and given
> himself and his legislature friends raises rather than repair the roads
>
> Hope that you're getting along in your retirement.
>

One of the things about uk rights of ways being difficult to close, is
tends to be access bridges or subways maybe not the most lovely places or
well used but often less worrying or illegal than crossing a motorway, or
even some of the big trunk A roads that are motorways in all but name and
so on.

Roger Merriman

On 4/18/2024 4:33 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>
> Hope that you're getting along in your retirement.

I am, thanks.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 4/18/2024 11:35 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 4/18/2024 9:10 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/a-person-was-spotted-biking-on-i-90-in-chicago-police-have-a-message-for-them/3413507/
>
> I (ahem!) know a few people (ahem!) who did something similar for a
> short distance at a remote spot on one very long bike tour. They were
> advised to do it by a bunch of friendly retirees, who said it was really
> the only reasonable way to get where they were going by bike.
>
> It was technically illegal, but it was extremely safe and disturbed
> nobody. Your Chicago example seems different,
>
I don't know, Traffic wasn't moving. The only real risk to him would
be someone using the breakdown lane (besides another bike).

There's a stretch of elevated roadway in Cambridge MA called the McGrath
highway. It's limited access, but didn't have any posted usage
restrictions (when I was using it in the 90's). When I was working at
the Mass Eye and Ear Infirmary, the regular surface roads were dense
with traffic lights and stopped traffic during commuting hours. the
highway went over that part of cambridge and dropped off across the
charles river a few blocks from MEEI. It had a wide shoulder, and during
commuting hours traffic was ostensibly stopped. One day at work, someone
in my department commented that I had passed him that morning, and
commented on my sanity and intelligence for riding on a roadway with a
50 MPH speed limit. I asked him 'how fast were you going when I passed
you on my bike?'.

If traffic was flowing in Andrews example at the speeds it was designed
to flow, sure, there would be a safety issue. But safety of a competent
cyclist isn't really the point here, it's the safety of the incompetent
types - those that would infact ride on a limited use limited access
highway with traffic traveling at speed.

--
Add xx to reply

Zen Cycle <funkmaster@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On 4/18/2024 11:35 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 4/18/2024 9:10 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/a-person-was-spotted-biking-on-i-90-in-chicago-police-have-a-message-for-them/3413507/
>>
>> I (ahem!) know a few people (ahem!) who did something similar for a
>> short distance at a remote spot on one very long bike tour. They were
>> advised to do it by a bunch of friendly retirees, who said it was really
>> the only reasonable way to get where they were going by bike.
>>
>> It was technically illegal, but it was extremely safe and disturbed
>> nobody. Your Chicago example seems different,
>>
> I don't know, Traffic wasn't moving. The only real risk to him would
> be someone using the breakdown lane (besides another bike).
>
> There's a stretch of elevated roadway in Cambridge MA called the McGrath
> highway. It's limited access, but didn't have any posted usage
> restrictions (when I was using it in the 90's). When I was working at
> the Mass Eye and Ear Infirmary, the regular surface roads were dense
> with traffic lights and stopped traffic during commuting hours. the
> highway went over that part of cambridge and dropped off across the
> charles river a few blocks from MEEI. It had a wide shoulder, and during
> commuting hours traffic was ostensibly stopped. One day at work, someone
> in my department commented that I had passed him that morning, and
> commented on my sanity and intelligence for riding on a roadway with a
> 50 MPH speed limit. I asked him 'how fast were you going when I passed
> you on my bike?'.
>
> If traffic was flowing in Andrews example at the speeds it was designed
> to flow, sure, there would be a safety issue. But safety of a competent
> cyclist isn't really the point here, it's the safety of the incompetent
> types - those that would infact ride on a limited use limited access
> highway with traffic traveling at speed.
>
I’d agree for slow moving traffic isn’t particularly dangerous, clearly
need to be careful if filtering and so on.

Roger Merriman

On 4/19/2024 10:05 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> On 4/18/2024 11:35 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 4/18/2024 9:10 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>> https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/a-person-was-spotted-biking-on-i-90-in-chicago-police-have-a-message-for-them/3413507/
>>
>> I (ahem!) know a few people (ahem!) who did something
>> similar for a short distance at a remote spot on one very
>> long bike tour. They were advised to do it by a bunch of
>> friendly retirees, who said it was really the only
>> reasonable way to get where they were going by bike.
>>
>> It was technically illegal, but it was extremely safe and
>> disturbed nobody. Your Chicago example seems different,
>>
>  I don't know, Traffic wasn't moving. The only real risk to
> him would be someone using the breakdown lane (besides
> another bike).
>
> There's a stretch of elevated roadway in Cambridge MA called
> the McGrath  highway. It's limited access, but didn't have
> any posted usage restrictions (when I was using it in the
> 90's). When I was working at the Mass Eye and Ear Infirmary,
> the regular surface roads were dense with traffic lights and
> stopped traffic during commuting hours. the highway went
> over that part of cambridge and dropped off across the
> charles river a few blocks from MEEI. It had a wide
> shoulder, and during commuting hours traffic was ostensibly
> stopped. One day at work, someone in my department commented
> that I had passed him that morning, and commented on my
> sanity and intelligence for riding on a roadway with a 50
> MPH speed limit. I asked him 'how fast were you going when I
> passed you on my bike?'.
>
> If traffic was flowing in Andrews example at the speeds it
> was designed to flow, sure, there would be a safety issue.
> But safety of a competent cyclist isn't really the point
> here, it's the safety of the incompetent types - those that
> would infact ride on a limited use limited access highway
> with traffic traveling at speed.
>

OK, incompetent cyclists wandering across the lane stripe.
Then again the breakdown lane is full of auto pilot carnage
with some regularity:

https://cwbchicago.com/2024/04/chicago-drunk-driver-killed-former-marine-crash-stevenson-expressway.html
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 4/19/2024 11:38 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 4/19/2024 10:05 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>> On 4/18/2024 11:35 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>> On 4/18/2024 9:10 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>> https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/a-person-was-spotted-biking-on-i-90-in-chicago-police-have-a-message-for-them/3413507/
>>>
>>> I (ahem!) know a few people (ahem!) who did something similar for a
>>> short distance at a remote spot on one very long bike tour. They were
>>> advised to do it by a bunch of friendly retirees, who said it was
>>> really the only reasonable way to get where they were going by bike.
>>>
>>> It was technically illegal, but it was extremely safe and disturbed
>>> nobody. Your Chicago example seems different,
>>>
>>   I don't know, Traffic wasn't moving. The only real risk to him would
>> be someone using the breakdown lane (besides another bike).
>>
>> There's a stretch of elevated roadway in Cambridge MA called the
>> McGrath  highway. It's limited access, but didn't have any posted
>> usage restrictions (when I was using it in the 90's). When I was
>> working at the Mass Eye and Ear Infirmary, the regular surface roads
>> were dense with traffic lights and stopped traffic during commuting
>> hours. the highway went over that part of cambridge and dropped off
>> across the charles river a few blocks from MEEI. It had a wide
>> shoulder, and during commuting hours traffic was ostensibly stopped.
>> One day at work, someone in my department commented that I had passed
>> him that morning, and commented on my sanity and intelligence for
>> riding on a roadway with a 50 MPH speed limit. I asked him 'how fast
>> were you going when I passed you on my bike?'.
>>
>> If traffic was flowing in Andrews example at the speeds it was
>> designed to flow, sure, there would be a safety issue. But safety of a
>> competent cyclist isn't really the point here, it's the safety of the
>> incompetent types - those that would infact ride on a limited use
>> limited access highway with traffic traveling at speed.
>>
>
> OK, incompetent cyclists wandering across the lane stripe. Then again
> the breakdown lane is full of auto pilot carnage with some regularity:
>
> https://cwbchicago.com/2024/04/chicago-drunk-driver-killed-former-marine-crash-stevenson-expressway.html

Sure, but that isn't exclusive to breakdown lanes. A cyclist riding on
the shoulder of _any_ road faces the same risk.
--
Add xx to reply

On 4/19/2024 1:48 PM, Zen Cycle wrote:
> On 4/19/2024 11:38 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 4/19/2024 10:05 AM, Zen Cycle wrote:
>>> On 4/18/2024 11:35 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>>> On 4/18/2024 9:10 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>> https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/a-person-was-spotted-biking-on-i-90-in-chicago-police-have-a-message-for-them/3413507/
>>>>
>>>> I (ahem!) know a few people (ahem!) who did something
>>>> similar for a short distance at a remote spot on one
>>>> very long bike tour. They were advised to do it by a
>>>> bunch of friendly retirees, who said it was really the
>>>> only reasonable way to get where they were going by bike.
>>>>
>>>> It was technically illegal, but it was extremely safe
>>>> and disturbed nobody. Your Chicago example seems different,
>>>>
>>>   I don't know, Traffic wasn't moving. The only real risk
>>> to him would be someone using the breakdown lane (besides
>>> another bike).
>>>
>>> There's a stretch of elevated roadway in Cambridge MA
>>> called the McGrath  highway. It's limited access, but
>>> didn't have any posted usage restrictions (when I was
>>> using it in the 90's). When I was working at the Mass Eye
>>> and Ear Infirmary, the regular surface roads were dense
>>> with traffic lights and stopped traffic during commuting
>>> hours. the highway went over that part of cambridge and
>>> dropped off across the charles river a few blocks from
>>> MEEI. It had a wide shoulder, and during commuting hours
>>> traffic was ostensibly stopped. One day at work, someone
>>> in my department commented that I had passed him that
>>> morning, and commented on my sanity and intelligence for
>>> riding on a roadway with a 50 MPH speed limit. I asked
>>> him 'how fast were you going when I passed you on my bike?'.
>>>
>>> If traffic was flowing in Andrews example at the speeds
>>> it was designed to flow, sure, there would be a safety
>>> issue. But safety of a competent cyclist isn't really the
>>> point here, it's the safety of the incompetent types -
>>> those that would infact ride on a limited use limited
>>> access highway with traffic traveling at speed.
>>>
>>
>> OK, incompetent cyclists wandering across the lane stripe.
>> Then again the breakdown lane is full of auto pilot
>> carnage with some regularity:
>>
>> https://cwbchicago.com/2024/04/chicago-drunk-driver-killed-former-marine-crash-stevenson-expressway.html
>
> Sure, but that isn't exclusive to breakdown lanes. A cyclist
> riding on the shoulder of _any_ road faces the same risk.

OK, and that includes me a few times, but at city speeds
less likely to be fatal.

My daughter was doored ten days ago on Devon Avenue (north
side Chicago) and dumped into the traffic lane. Fortunately
traffic stopped for her. She's banged up but wasn't crushed
to death with a 65mph impact.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 4/19/2024 2:59 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>
> My daughter was doored ten days ago on Devon Avenue (north side Chicago)
> and dumped into the traffic lane. Fortunately traffic stopped for her.
> She's banged up but wasn't crushed to death with a 65mph impact.

I'll mention again: Dooring is a very dangerous type of crash, because
it often hooks the right handlebar, suddenly throwing the rider
leftward, possibly right in front of a car.

But dooring data is poorly captured. Most accident report forms treat it
the same as if the cyclist ran into something like a telephone poll.
It's not considered a crash with a "vehicle in transport."

And I'm told that Chicago did choose to record doorings - even though
many of their bike lanes actually promote dooring crashes, since they're
painted in the door zone. They found that something like 20% to 25% of
their car-bike crashes were doorings.

Don't ride in the door zone.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Fri, 19 Apr 2024 13:59:58 -0500,
AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:

> My daughter was doored ten days ago on Devon Avenue (north side
> Chicago) and dumped into the traffic lane. Fortunately traffic
> stopped for her. She's banged up but wasn't crushed to death
> with a 65mph impact.

Oof, sorry to hear that. Hope she heals up quickly!

--
Ted Heise <theise@panix.com> West Lafayette, IN, USA

On 4/19/2024 4:42 PM, Ted Heise wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Apr 2024 13:59:58 -0500,
> AMuzi <am@yellowjersey.org> wrote:
>
>> My daughter was doored ten days ago on Devon Avenue (north side
>> Chicago) and dumped into the traffic lane. Fortunately traffic
>> stopped for her. She's banged up but wasn't crushed to death
>> with a 65mph impact.
>
> Oof, sorry to hear that. Hope she heals up quickly!
>

Thank you. The worst has passed; she walked slowly with a
cane for several days.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Fri Apr 19 16:29:17 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 4/19/2024 2:59 PM, AMuzi wrote:
> >
> > My daughter was doored ten days ago on Devon Avenue (north side Chicago)
> > and dumped into the traffic lane. Fortunately traffic stopped for her.
> > She's banged up but wasn't crushed to death with a 65mph impact.
>
> I'll mention again: Dooring is a very dangerous type of crash, because
> it often hooks the right handlebar, suddenly throwing the rider
> leftward, possibly right in front of a car.
>
> But dooring data is poorly captured. Most accident report forms treat it
> the same as if the cyclist ran into something like a telephone poll.
> It's not considered a crash with a "vehicle in transport."
>
> And I'm told that Chicago did choose to record doorings - even though
> many of their bike lanes actually promote dooring crashes, since they're
> painted in the door zone. They found that something like 20% to 25% of
> their car-bike crashes were doorings.
>
> Don't ride in the door zone.
>
> --
> - Frank Krygowski
>

Frank, While I agree withg you that there are times that it is safest to take a lane, I have to disagree with your depiction of bike lanes as being dangerous. There are no standards for bike lanes and many of them are experimental.That is why Chicago decided to record problems with silly designed bike lanes. Also drivers have to be aware of bike lanes and you're pretending that there isn't a learning period. Not to mention a learning curve where bicyclists have to watch for people about to open streetside doors.

In just four cities here in the bay area, there is a vast difference in bike lanes up to and including putting the parking area out in the street and the bike lanes on the curbs. You generalizations simply are out of place.

On 4/20/2024 3:11 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
> On Fri Apr 19 16:29:17 2024 Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 4/19/2024 2:59 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>
>>> My daughter was doored ten days ago on Devon Avenue (north side Chicago)
>>> and dumped into the traffic lane. Fortunately traffic stopped for her.
>>> She's banged up but wasn't crushed to death with a 65mph impact.
>>
>> I'll mention again: Dooring is a very dangerous type of crash, because
>> it often hooks the right handlebar, suddenly throwing the rider
>> leftward, possibly right in front of a car.
>>
>> But dooring data is poorly captured. Most accident report forms treat it
>> the same as if the cyclist ran into something like a telephone poll.
>> It's not considered a crash with a "vehicle in transport."
>>
>> And I'm told that Chicago did choose to record doorings - even though
>> many of their bike lanes actually promote dooring crashes, since they're
>> painted in the door zone. They found that something like 20% to 25% of
>> their car-bike crashes were doorings.
>>
>> Don't ride in the door zone.
>>
>> --
>> - Frank Krygowski
>>
>
>
>
> Frank, While I agree withg you that there are times that it is safest to take a lane, I have to disagree with your depiction of bike lanes as being dangerous. There are no standards for bike lanes...

Actually, there are standards for bike lanes. One problem is that many
jurisdictions violate the standards. Another problem is that many of the
standards are themselves faulty.

> and many of them are experimental.

Which makes sense ... how??

What other transportation infrastructure "experiments" with the
unsuspecting public?

Let's propose an "experimental" car lane. It will be on a freeway.
Instead of having the rightmost lane serve those driving straight and
those exiting right, lets' say the rightmost lane is for those going
straight. The second rightmost lane will be the one to use before you
exit right. Got that? Let's experiment for a couple years and see if the
straight-ahead motorists run into the right turning motorists crossing
their path.

Should we subject motorists to that experiment?

Of course not. That would be an obvious crossing conflict. That's never,
ever done on freeway lanes.

Oh, but almost every bike lane is designed that way.

> Also drivers have to be aware of bike lanes and you're pretending that there isn't a learning period.

"Learning periods" should be safe! People learning to use roundabouts
stop before entering. It's inefficient, but no more dangerous than a
stop sign. That's not the case with things like "bike boxes" that tell
cyclists to pull out in front of cars at a red light, but come with no
warning to NOT do that just as the light is turning green.

> Not to mention a learning curve where bicyclists have to watch for people about to open streetside doors.

"Watch for people opening doors" makes roughly zero sense. In many cases
a cyclist can't see if anyone is inside a car. If they do see someone
they can't tell if they'll open the door.

The real solution to dooring is "Don't ride in the door zone." Even if
a bike lane stripe tells you it's safe.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 4/20/2024 9:20 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 4/20/2024 3:11 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>> On Fri Apr 19 16:29:17 2024 Frank Krygowski  wrote:
>>> On 4/19/2024 2:59 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>
>>>> My daughter was doored ten days ago on Devon Avenue
>>>> (north side Chicago)
>>>> and dumped into the traffic lane. Fortunately traffic
>>>> stopped for her.
>>>> She's banged up but wasn't crushed to death with a 65mph
>>>> impact.
>>>
>>> I'll mention again: Dooring is a very dangerous type of
>>> crash, because
>>> it often hooks the right handlebar, suddenly throwing the
>>> rider
>>> leftward, possibly right in front of a car.
>>>
>>> But dooring data is poorly captured. Most accident report
>>> forms treat it
>>> the same as if the cyclist ran into something like a
>>> telephone poll.
>>> It's not considered a crash with a "vehicle in transport."
>>>
>>> And I'm told that Chicago did choose to record doorings -
>>> even though
>>> many of their bike lanes actually promote dooring
>>> crashes, since they're
>>> painted in the door zone. They found that something like
>>> 20% to 25% of
>>> their car-bike crashes were doorings.
>>>
>>> Don't ride in the door zone.
>>>
>>> --
>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Frank, While I agree withg you that there are times that
>> it is safest to take a lane, I have to disagree with your
>> depiction of bike lanes as being dangerous. There are no
>> standards for bike lanes...
>
> Actually, there are standards for bike lanes. One problem is
> that many jurisdictions violate the standards. Another
> problem is that many of the standards are themselves faulty.
>
>> and many of them are experimental.
>
> Which makes sense ... how??
>
> What other transportation infrastructure "experiments" with
> the unsuspecting public?
>
> Let's propose an "experimental" car lane. It will be on a
> freeway. Instead of having the rightmost lane serve those
> driving straight and those exiting right, lets' say the
> rightmost lane is for those going straight. The second
> rightmost lane will be the one to use before you exit right.
> Got that? Let's experiment for a couple years and see if the
> straight-ahead motorists run into the right turning
> motorists crossing their path.
>
> Should we subject motorists to that experiment?
>
> Of course not. That would be an obvious crossing conflict.
> That's never, ever done on freeway lanes.
>
> Oh, but almost every bike lane is designed that way.
>
>> Also drivers have to be aware of bike lanes and you're
>> pretending that there isn't a learning period.
>
> "Learning periods" should be safe! People learning to use
> roundabouts stop before entering. It's inefficient, but no
> more dangerous than a stop sign. That's not the case with
> things like "bike boxes" that tell cyclists to pull out in
> front of cars at a red light, but come with no warning to
> NOT do that just as the light is turning green.
>
>> Not to mention a learning curve where bicyclists have to
>> watch for people about to open streetside doors.
>
> "Watch for people opening doors" makes roughly zero sense.
> In many cases a cyclist can't see if anyone is inside a car.
> If they do see someone they can't tell if they'll open the
> door.
>
> The real solution to dooring is "Don't ride in the door
> zone."  Even if a bike lane stripe tells you it's safe.
>

Or just throw all the bad ideas together and string them out
over a long avenue:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2AoDyIApQg
(3 minutes)

more:
https://chi.streetsblog.org/2023/12/15/goin-to-graceland-take-a-virtual-ride-on-the-nearly-finished-clark-pbls-between-montrose-and-irving-park
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On 4/21/2024 9:41 AM, AMuzi wrote:
> On 4/20/2024 9:20 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>> On 4/20/2024 3:11 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>> On Fri Apr 19 16:29:17 2024 Frank Krygowski  wrote:
>>>> On 4/19/2024 2:59 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> My daughter was doored ten days ago on Devon Avenue (north side
>>>>> Chicago)
>>>>> and dumped into the traffic lane. Fortunately traffic stopped for her.
>>>>> She's banged up but wasn't crushed to death with a 65mph impact.
>>>>
>>>> I'll mention again: Dooring is a very dangerous type of crash, because
>>>> it often hooks the right handlebar, suddenly throwing the rider
>>>> leftward, possibly right in front of a car.
>>>>
>>>> But dooring data is poorly captured. Most accident report forms
>>>> treat it
>>>> the same as if the cyclist ran into something like a telephone poll.
>>>> It's not considered a crash with a "vehicle in transport."
>>>>
>>>> And I'm told that Chicago did choose to record doorings - even though
>>>> many of their bike lanes actually promote dooring crashes, since
>>>> they're
>>>> painted in the door zone. They found that something like 20% to 25% of
>>>> their car-bike crashes were doorings.
>>>>
>>>> Don't ride in the door zone.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Frank, While I agree withg you that there are times that it is safest
>>> to take a lane, I have to disagree with your depiction of bike lanes
>>> as being dangerous. There are no standards for bike lanes...
>>
>> Actually, there are standards for bike lanes. One problem is that many
>> jurisdictions violate the standards. Another problem is that many of
>> the standards are themselves faulty.
>>
>>> and many of them are experimental.
>>
>> Which makes sense ... how??
>>
>> What other transportation infrastructure "experiments" with the
>> unsuspecting public?
>>
>> Let's propose an "experimental" car lane. It will be on a freeway.
>> Instead of having the rightmost lane serve those driving straight and
>> those exiting right, lets' say the rightmost lane is for those going
>> straight. The second rightmost lane will be the one to use before you
>> exit right. Got that? Let's experiment for a couple years and see if
>> the straight-ahead motorists run into the right turning motorists
>> crossing their path.
>>
>> Should we subject motorists to that experiment?
>>
>> Of course not. That would be an obvious crossing conflict. That's
>> never, ever done on freeway lanes.
>>
>> Oh, but almost every bike lane is designed that way.
>>
>>> Also drivers have to be aware of bike lanes and you're pretending
>>> that there isn't a learning period.
>>
>> "Learning periods" should be safe! People learning to use roundabouts
>> stop before entering. It's inefficient, but no more dangerous than a
>> stop sign. That's not the case with things like "bike boxes" that tell
>> cyclists to pull out in front of cars at a red light, but come with no
>> warning to NOT do that just as the light is turning green.
>>
>>> Not to mention a learning curve where bicyclists have to watch for
>>> people about to open streetside doors.
>>
>> "Watch for people opening doors" makes roughly zero sense. In many
>> cases a cyclist can't see if anyone is inside a car. If they do see
>> someone they can't tell if they'll open the door.
>>
>> The real solution to dooring is "Don't ride in the door zone."  Even
>> if a bike lane stripe tells you it's safe.
>>
>
> Or just throw all the bad ideas together and string them out over a long
> avenue:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2AoDyIApQg
> (3 minutes)

That's a 25 mph zone with plenty of pavement space for safe passing. Why
do they think they need the fake "protection" of plastic posts?

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 4/21/2024 10:19 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 4/21/2024 9:41 AM, AMuzi wrote:
>> On 4/20/2024 9:20 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
>>> On 4/20/2024 3:11 PM, Tom Kunich wrote:
>>>> On Fri Apr 19 16:29:17 2024 Frank Krygowski  wrote:
>>>>> On 4/19/2024 2:59 PM, AMuzi wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My daughter was doored ten days ago on Devon Avenue
>>>>>> (north side Chicago)
>>>>>> and dumped into the traffic lane. Fortunately traffic
>>>>>> stopped for her.
>>>>>> She's banged up but wasn't crushed to death with a
>>>>>> 65mph impact.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll mention again: Dooring is a very dangerous type of
>>>>> crash, because
>>>>> it often hooks the right handlebar, suddenly throwing
>>>>> the rider
>>>>> leftward, possibly right in front of a car.
>>>>>
>>>>> But dooring data is poorly captured. Most accident
>>>>> report forms treat it
>>>>> the same as if the cyclist ran into something like a
>>>>> telephone poll.
>>>>> It's not considered a crash with a "vehicle in transport."
>>>>>
>>>>> And I'm told that Chicago did choose to record doorings
>>>>> - even though
>>>>> many of their bike lanes actually promote dooring
>>>>> crashes, since they're
>>>>> painted in the door zone. They found that something
>>>>> like 20% to 25% of
>>>>> their car-bike crashes were doorings.
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't ride in the door zone.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> - Frank Krygowski
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Frank, While I agree withg you that there are times that
>>>> it is safest to take a lane, I have to disagree with
>>>> your depiction of bike lanes as being dangerous. There
>>>> are no standards for bike lanes...
>>>
>>> Actually, there are standards for bike lanes. One problem
>>> is that many jurisdictions violate the standards. Another
>>> problem is that many of the standards are themselves faulty.
>>>
>>>> and many of them are experimental.
>>>
>>> Which makes sense ... how??
>>>
>>> What other transportation infrastructure "experiments"
>>> with the unsuspecting public?
>>>
>>> Let's propose an "experimental" car lane. It will be on a
>>> freeway. Instead of having the rightmost lane serve those
>>> driving straight and those exiting right, lets' say the
>>> rightmost lane is for those going straight. The second
>>> rightmost lane will be the one to use before you exit
>>> right. Got that? Let's experiment for a couple years and
>>> see if the straight-ahead motorists run into the right
>>> turning motorists crossing their path.
>>>
>>> Should we subject motorists to that experiment?
>>>
>>> Of course not. That would be an obvious crossing
>>> conflict. That's never, ever done on freeway lanes.
>>>
>>> Oh, but almost every bike lane is designed that way.
>>>
>>>> Also drivers have to be aware of bike lanes and you're
>>>> pretending that there isn't a learning period.
>>>
>>> "Learning periods" should be safe! People learning to use
>>> roundabouts stop before entering. It's inefficient, but
>>> no more dangerous than a stop sign. That's not the case
>>> with things like "bike boxes" that tell cyclists to pull
>>> out in front of cars at a red light, but come with no
>>> warning to NOT do that just as the light is turning green.
>>>
>>>> Not to mention a learning curve where bicyclists have to
>>>> watch for people about to open streetside doors.
>>>
>>> "Watch for people opening doors" makes roughly zero
>>> sense. In many cases a cyclist can't see if anyone is
>>> inside a car. If they do see someone they can't tell if
>>> they'll open the door.
>>>
>>> The real solution to dooring is "Don't ride in the door
>>> zone."  Even if a bike lane stripe tells you it's safe.
>>>
>>
>> Or just throw all the bad ideas together and string them
>> out over a long avenue:
>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2AoDyIApQg
>> (3 minutes)
>
> That's a 25 mph zone with plenty of pavement space for safe
> passing. Why do they think they need the fake "protection"
> of plastic posts?
>

Daughter reported in December that once there was snow and
ice, cars and snowplows made short work of those things and
naturally they landed in the 'protected lane' along with all
the other street crud.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971