![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Bike lanes
Jul. 28th, 2005 01:55 pmI found an interesting subtitle in the newspaper article For Cyclists, Wider Isn't Always Safer: "UT researchers try to determine best size for bike lanes."
It has never occurred to me to wish for wider bike lanes. That's so weird. I am happy for any kind of lane at all, even if it disappears at intersections. My expectations are so low that I've never even fantasized about wider lanes. That's pathetic!
Now that you mention it, bike lanes are pretty narrow. But the article says that the white line painted to form a bike lane is typically placed four feet from the curb. I would have guessed closer, but that might be because the four feet includes the gutter.
Although wider bike lanes sound pretty good to me, the article says they may not actually be better because cyclists tend to ride closer to the line than to the gutter when they have more space, and this makes drivers want to swerve out of the way more. (Sounds better for bicyclists, worse for people in cars.)
But I do agree with the finding that having those white lines is a good idea on streets with any kind of traffic at all.
If you're interested, the article has a few other interesting, though only vaguely related, points. I enjoyed a quote from one of the cyclists who participated in the research: "When I got here [Austin], I realized what an a**hole I had become on my bike after riding in Boston; the motorists here give you a much better chance to get across the street."
And for a vivid picture of what he's talking about, I recommend the first part of Neil Stephenson's Zodiac, which is all about a Bostonian a**hole cyclist (who you can't help liking).
It has never occurred to me to wish for wider bike lanes. That's so weird. I am happy for any kind of lane at all, even if it disappears at intersections. My expectations are so low that I've never even fantasized about wider lanes. That's pathetic!
Now that you mention it, bike lanes are pretty narrow. But the article says that the white line painted to form a bike lane is typically placed four feet from the curb. I would have guessed closer, but that might be because the four feet includes the gutter.
Although wider bike lanes sound pretty good to me, the article says they may not actually be better because cyclists tend to ride closer to the line than to the gutter when they have more space, and this makes drivers want to swerve out of the way more. (Sounds better for bicyclists, worse for people in cars.)
But I do agree with the finding that having those white lines is a good idea on streets with any kind of traffic at all.
If you're interested, the article has a few other interesting, though only vaguely related, points. I enjoyed a quote from one of the cyclists who participated in the research: "When I got here [Austin], I realized what an a**hole I had become on my bike after riding in Boston; the motorists here give you a much better chance to get across the street."
And for a vivid picture of what he's talking about, I recommend the first part of Neil Stephenson's Zodiac, which is all about a Bostonian a**hole cyclist (who you can't help liking).