FLCC> Proposed State Street Bike Lane

[Rick Manning]

Thanks Kent - very informative and congratulations.  In the bike plan we
suggested that odd-even parking be eliminated on selected streets, which
effectively keeps parking supply the same, but allows more room for bike
lanes or shared lanes.  Some people would have to cross the street to their
car, but that seems a small compromise.  Cayuga Street, Tioga and other two
way streets would be potential candidates.  We also suggested that Green and
Seneca have the centerline shifted and a bike lane striped, with no loss of
parking.  I understand NYSDOT may have been resistant to this, but perhaps
this is changing as they become more open to accommodating other modes.  

Travel lanes on main collectors and arterials should be narrowed to create
bike lanes.  It is a simple policy shift that should just happen now.  I
have seen route 13 restriped more than once since the bike plan was
completed with no bike lanes or wide outside lanes (other than the route 96
work/octopus construction).  I think that 12' lanes are just too wide to
effectively channel traffic and moderate speeds.  This is the best way to
raise the visibility of biking in the community, has no impact on parking,
and incorporates the destinations that everyone needs to access.  Again,
NYSDOT may be resistant, but the City should push the envelope hard on this
matter.  Even Binghamton and the surrounding communities have done a much
better job of adding bike lanes on new projects.  I just drove though Owego
on 96 and they even have them there, though granted they seem a bit odd as
they sort of just disappear at intersections due to turning lanes.  

How does the cycling community feel about the improvements along Triphammer
at the malls?  For me, this is a major improvement as coming south from
triphammer into the village was always a nightmare.  

My two cents.
Rick

-----Original Message-----
From: flcc-bounces at icycle.org [mailto:flcc-bounces at icycle.org] On Behalf Of
Kent Johnson
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 12:16 PM
To: Andrejs Ozolins
Cc: Jennifer Dotson; Daniel Cogan; flcc at icycle.org
Subject: Re: FLCC> Proposed State Street Bike Lane

Hello -

Yes, Andrejs, you are quite correct. 

First, I hope that the two Common Council members receiving this email will
forward information onto other Council members if they deem it necessary -
I'm trying to avoid sending a stream of email to CC members ....

Second, Common Council passed the resolution in favor of funding the
implementation of the Bike Plan. Thanks to all of those who
spoke/wrote/showed up in favor of this issue, that support was very good for
CC members to see/hear. 


OK, now onto the topic of bike facilities (bike lanes in particular):

A frequently asked questions (FAQ) sheet has been created ... it gives a
good overview of bike lanes and their inherent limitations (see the attached
file). 

Bike lanes are one possible traffic control device to consider. Bike lanes
are similar in analogy to "left turn only lanes" and "stop signs" ... like
left turn only lanes, bike lanes are only sometimes warranted and would be
inappropriate in many circumstances. Like stop signs, the appropriate
application of bike lanes can improve road user behavior, can clarify right
of way rules and can improve safety - improper application (like the
improper application of stop signs) can actually reduce safety and can
contribute to user conflicts. 

As noted in the attached FAQ sheet, the primary purpose of a bike lane is to
allow bicyclists and motorists to travel at different speeds without
impeding one another. There are other potential benefits and purposes as
well, such as safety. 

A small percentage of cyclists are strongly opposed to bike lanes for a
number of very legitimate reasons. A few of these reasons include (1) the
feelings that riding in bike lanes may be more hazardous than riding in a
wide curb lane, (2) that bike lanes discourage proper riding - such as
cyclists making left turns from a bike lane rather than first moving to the
left-hand side of the left-most travel lane, and (3) that cyclists, through
effective education and practice, can attain a skill level at which bike
lanes are not desired. There are other reasons, too. 

A very large percentage of bicyclists, and potential bicyclists, desire to
have well-designed and convenient bike lanes available as a choice to ride
within when appropriate - despite the potential, perceived and actual
shortcomings of bike lanes.    

>From a practical perspective, it is very unlikely that bike lanes are ever
going to be installed in more than a handful locations within the City of
Ithaca. This is largely the case for two primary reasons: (1) they are
unnecessary in most locations because traffic volumes and speeds are rather
low on most City streets, and (2) insufficient street width exists given the
broad community desire for on-street parking - in some locations it may be
politically feasible to remove some on-street parking, but this is not
likely going to be feasible to remove large amounts of on-street parking. Of
course, the above conditions could change, and bike lanes could be installed
in very many locations - but indications are that this is not likely in the
near future.

It seems more likely that a few uphill bike lanes may be created to allow
bicyclists to travel at their own pace and to allow cars to pass without
crossing the centerline. In some other locations, contra-flow bike lanes may
be applicable (perhaps on the 200 block of Prospect St. for example). Bike
lanes and/or paved shoulders may be more appropriate outside of the City (in
the Town of Ithaca for example) where extra street width is available and
where traffic speeds are greater - sharing a travel lane on higher speeds
roads can be very unnerving. 

I am optimistic that the Shared Lane Marking project (aka Sharrow project)
planned (hopefully to be installed this summer) for Cayuga Street will be
successful. See
http://bpac.rockwren.us/wiki/index.php?title=Shared_lane_pavement_markings
and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shared_lane_marking for more information. I
think that this type of traffic control device will prove to be more
effective and feasible than standard bike lanes for the City on streets that
could otherwise warrant standard bike lanes. Though SLM's can currently only
be used with special FHWA permission, indications are that this device will
soon be approved for general use. 

To address some of Bill's concerns regarding the proposed uphill bike lane
on State St. directly:

1. The bike lane will be at least 5 ft wide and will meet all of the
applicable design requirements. As with all bike lanes, cyclists may choose,
or have to, exit the bike lane to avoid hazards, to pass slower cyclists,
etc. Yes, wrong-way cycling could be a problem - each bike symbol will
include a supplementary directional arrow and signage will be installed to
discourage wrong-way riding. In the future, we will consider installing
SLM's on the north side of the street in the westbound direction. 

2. Good question, no. Bicyclists will need to leave the bike lane and merge
to the left of the left-most lane to turn left (or may stop at a side street
and then cross perpendicular to State St.). To encourage bicyclists to merge
properly (and to alert motorists to the fact that bicyclists may be
merging), the bike lanes will be dashed for certain distances prior to
intersections as per accepted standards. 

3. On the question of maintenance ...  after the initial installation, the
facility will be maintained in the same manor as other City streets. Though
specific funding will likely not be set aside for maintaining this
particular facility, if hazards present themselves it would be rather easy
to remove them. I realize that this could be a problem and we will just have
to address this if and when it comes up.  

I hope that this email has provided some useful information and helps to
start a productive dialog on the topic of appropriate bike facilities.
Though I have tried to be thorough, I have left out some of the finer points
in the interest of time - I would be happy to further elaborate if needed.

Thanks for your interest in this topic.

Take care,
Kent





Kent Johnson
Transportation Engineering Technician
Office of the City Engineer
City of Ithaca
108 E. Green St.
Ithaca, New York 14850
(607) 274-6528, (607) 327-0316 (cell)
kjohnson at cityofithaca.org


>>> Andrejs Ozolins <andrejs at ozolins.com> 5/7/2008 5:24 PM >>>
Kent, Bill,

On the other hand, this is a discussion that is of great interest to the 
entire cycling community and I would like to know what considerations 
are brought to the matter. Long emails aren't a problem if they are 
substantive.

I assume that whoever represents cycling expertise in the city's street 
and traffic planning is well acquainted with the huge literature of 
disputes about bike lanes. I hope that these persons are also acquainted 
with the more limited landscape of successfully bike-friendly and 
bike-active cities. The most recent occurrence of both sides is in the 
current issue of Adventure Cycling Magazine, where one expert excoriates 
Portland, Oregon, for having what he regards as virtually homicidal bike 
facilities; and another expert, Portland's head of cycling stuff, 
responds with a rebuttal. It's well worth reading. I hope that Ithaca 
won't get into that kind of stalemate, a paralysis of all action --- again.

In evaluating the issue for myself, I have been fortunate to actually 
visit Portland, Oregon, and spend a few days there on foot and bike. To 
prevent a "very long email" let me summarize: If the choice is between a 
coherent system of bike lanes and bike routes like Portland's on one 
hand, or the unachievably perfect bike lanes Bill is calling for, I 
unhesitatingly choose Portland.

It isn't a choice between Bill's bike lanes and Elmira's -- I'm 
certainly with him on Elmira. But, the policy in Portland goes well 
beyond just lanes and paths. It's an intelligent, integrated attitude 
toward how a community can get around on the streets where it lives. 
Among its goals has been not only the separation of traffic streams, but 
also the creation of a cycling population, of neighborhoods that feel 
like they are neighborhoods, etc. In this endeavor, the cycling (and 
walking) facilities are only an important part. This is the journey that 
Ithaca needs to begin, and I see the bike plan, however ridiculously 
puny it is, as our humble beginning.

I want to hear what factors guide our city leaders; I hope that what I 
hear will inspire me and others to pitch in and finally make this city 
resemble its ideals.

Andrejs




Kent Johnson wrote:
> Hello all -
>
> William, thanks for your comments regarding bicycle lanes. This type of
feedback is very helpful in ensuring that we produce the best project
possible. I think that the best way to address your comments would be via a
phone call - otherwise it will be a VERY long email. Feel free to give me a
call anytime at 607-327-0316. 
>
> Take care,
> Kent
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>   
>>>> William Lodico <wlodico at stny.rr.com> 5/7/2008 2:47 PM >>>
>>>>         
> Dear Mayor and Council,
>
> Here is a posting I made today on the Finger Lakes Cycling Club list  
> serve in response to Mr. Johnson's indication that funding may be  
> approved for the State Street bike lane.  I think it is important for  
> the Common Council to know that there are strong arguments to be made  
> against bike lanes from the cyclist's perspective.  More often than  
> not, they make things worse for cyclists, not better.  Please note  
> that this opinion is addressed to bike lanes, and does not extend to  
> other marking or signing, such as sharrows.
>
> William J Lodico
>
> Kent Johnson wrote:
>
>   
>> * * *
>>
>> The $50,000 (if approved) should be enough to implement both the  
>> uphill bike lane on E. State St.
>>
>> * * *
>>     
>
>
> Kent,
>
> As just about everyone on the Finger Lakes Cycling List serve knows,  
> I'm the regional anti-bike-lane cycling advocate.  I suppose bike  
> lanes can be done right, but I've never seen them done right.
>
>   I won't be at the Common Council meeting.  Although I'm a native  
Ithacan, I now live in Elmira; and I focus my bike advocacy energies  
on Chemung County.  I'm pushing close to 100,000 miles bicycling on  
roads, so I think I can lay claim to some experience and expertise on  
the subject at hand.   I range far and wide,  and I spend a fair bit  
of both driving and cycling time in the Ithaca area.  I have ridden  
my bike up State Street several times.

If the up hill State Street bike lane goes in, I will be out with  
camera and tape measure, hoping to add to my "bad bike lanes"  
collection.

It's important to have some really grotesque examples of bad bike  
lanes to point to when public officials propose them.  It's nice when  
these bad bike lanes are not in my own county, so that when I point  
out all the things wrong with them I'm not hurting the feelings of  
the people who put them in.

Here are some of the things I'll be looking for:

1.  Is the bike lane too narrow?

Does it allow at least the three or four feet of clearance (as  
suggested in NYSDOT's Share the Road pamphlet) between the bike wheel  
and the curb, or any intrusive grates, manhole covers, etc., and  
perhaps yet more space on steep climbs where cyclists will tend to  
wobble back and forth going up hill?

How about telephone poles, signs, and other hazards that create a  
risk of collision for the cyclist's upper body?  Remember, the  
cyclist's right shoulder and elbow track a path extending about a  
foot to the right of the wheel?  Are you allowing a couple feet of  
clearance between the cyclists upper body and any such vertical "air  
space" hazards?  Or is the cyclist expected to "thread the needle"  
between poles, signs, mailboxes and the traffic coming behind him on  
the left?

Assuming the cyclist is tracking within the bike lane his three or  
four feet from the curb, and a passing vehicle is tracking to the  
left of the bike lane, where (by virtue of the lane) motorist is  
assured assured that the road will be free of bikes, how close to the  
cyclist will the vehicle pass?  My calculations show that vehicle may  
very likely not pass the cyclist at all, but instead collide with  
him, since if the cyclist is tracking within the bike lane, his left  
arm, shoulder, leg, and handlebar, could be to the left the bike lane  
marker, intruding into the air space the motorist thinks should be his.

Is the bike lane going to be wide enough to allow stronger cyclists  
to pass slower cyclists on this uphill?  Or are the stronger cyclists  
just going to have to get out in traffic and force the issue of their  
right to be in the traffic lane, at considerable risk to life and  
limb at the hands of motorists who expect/insist he be in the bike lane?

If the bike lane goes by a parking lane, is there space to allow  
cyclists to ride sufficiently to the left to avoid opening car doors  
without coming unsafely close to, or actually intruding into, the  
traffic lane?

In the likely event that the up hill cyclist encounters a cyclist  
speeding downhill in the bike lane, going the wrong way on the left  
side of the street, is there enough room in the bike lane to allow  
the up hill cyclist to avoid the possibility of collision with this  
law-breaker without having to intrude into the supposedly-closed-to- 
cyclists traffic lane?

Clearly the four foot standard can't meet these safety concerns.  Is  
there in fact sufficient room to put in a bike lane that would  
actually be wide enough to meet them?  If there isn't enough room,  
shouldn't the idea of a bike lane be abandoned and other alternatives  
such as improved signage and law enforcement be pursued instead?

2.  Does the bike lane make it more difficult for cyclists to make  
turns?   There are lots of opportunities for left turns uphill of  
State Street.   Is the bike lane going to make this any easier?  Or  
is it going to make it a whole lot harder?  What kind of signage is  
posted letting motorists, and cyclists, know how to manage cyclist's  
uphill left turns?

3.  Hazards and maintenance?  After the paint is down, what kind of  
funding is actually going to be committed to keeping the bike lane  
free of glass, gravel, sand, cinders and other debris?  What  
commitment is going to be made to prioritizing repair of cracks and  
holes?  What commitment is going to be made to keeping the bike lane  
clear of parked or standing cars or trucks?   Of cyclists racing  
DOWNHILL on the wrong side of the street in the bike lane? You've got  
sidewalks on State Street, so maybe you don't have to worry about  
pedestrians, including those walking dogs, in the bike lane;  or  
maybe you do?

Here in Chemung County we have three bike lanes.  They are all  
unmitigated disasters.   Luckily two are very short and nobody pays  
much attention to them.  The other longer one, for most of the year,  
is so heavily overgrown by vegetation that it's hard to even begin to  
consider it a bike lane.

Tompkins County's batting average is not much better.  I'm very  
nearly 100% sure that a State Street bike lane will not improve it.

Bill Lodico