Article: Why biking to work is a barrier for most Americans

[kwarkentien]

I’m a firm believer in taking the lane and I do it early and often. Plus, I’m a native NYer so I don’t give a flying f*@% what other people think anyway. 😎

I agree that hugging the right side of the lane almost encourages motorists to try to pass too closely or even “share the lane” as they think they can do it without having to cross the double yellow line in the middle of the road. Having been a motorcyclist, I learned that lane placement (and the variation of lane position to draw attention to oneself) is really important to your visibility and safety and I try to employ those same techniques as much as I can within the limitations of my speed, traffic conditions, and the like.

But even with all of that, plus a hypervigilance while riding, I still managed to get hit by a car last May. Luckily, because of that hypervigilance, I did see it coming and was able to take some evasive action that certainly mitigated but did not allow me to totally avoid the collision. But at least I lived to tell about it, the driver was charged and convicted of a criminal driving offense in court, and I was able to obtain two very nice settlements to cover my bicycle and my personal injury/pain and suffering. Just keep a weather eye, trust your gut, and don’t allow yourself to be bullied.

[bentbike33]

@dplasters 112219 wrote:

… I ride without a mirror because I don’t want a constant reminder of how big of a jerk is behind me. …

I ride with a mirror and find I spend very little time actually looking into it, especially in traffic. I only use it when I want to know what’s going on behind me.

ELITE cyclists, however, assume I’m always staring into my mirror so they have no need to call their passes, apparently.

[mstone]

@Tania 112192 wrote:

Really? I take the entire lane when I WANT to feel safer (as in, I ride right down the middle of the lane). I get on Gallows in Merrifield about a half mile before the start of the bike lane. I usually ride slowly on the sidewalk for that half mile (I know, I know but I yield to pedestrians) however this winter with all the snow, the side walk was impassible so I had to no choice but to ride in the (busy) road where I didn’t have a bike lane. I took the lane and pedaled hard. Granted, Gallows is two lanes each way.

If you’re in an area where the pickups will still pass between you and the oncoming traffic regardless of whether you’re in the middle of the lane, you’ll find it a bit more harrowing. Because you know that if a car comes up over the hill, the pickup will just move to the right rather than take the head-on collision.

[dplasters]

@bentbike33 112225 wrote:

I ride with a mirror and find I spend very little time actually looking into it, especially in traffic. I only use it when I want to know what’s going on behind me.

ELITE cyclists, however, assume I’m always staring into my mirror so they have no need to call their passes, apparently.

Inconsiderate behavior is not stifled by wheel count, it is true. You give them more credit than I would for even noticing you have a mirror.

[vvill]

@Phatboing 112202 wrote:

Oh yeah. And then if you’re in the middle of the lane you can drift right and put some distance between you and Captain Doofyhead. But after a point, crazies gonna crazy.

Unfortunately yeah, that’s been my experience lately. It’s a section on Westmoreland under I-66 where the bike lane is closed off due to construction so it’s also poorly lit and uphill (and then traffic merges from the right). So effectively there’s no shoulder to drift right into. Doesn’t help that the vehicle has often just turned off of I-66 – the driver is probably already just a little agitated.

I’ve always liked the concept of vehicular cycling but it doesn’t work when SUVs/minivans*… errrr… vehicles do crazy shiznit, and unfortunately I seem to have encountered a lot of dem cray-crays lately. Best solution in my mind is just ride a different route. One of the great things about bikes is you can often take many different routes and back roads. (*I was hit by a reversing minivan last winter, but stayed upright – driver left the scene.)

@dasgeh 112205 wrote:

THIS! When I’m being pessimistic, I wonder whether “regular” bike lanes are worse than nothing.

In many cases, yes. Sharrows actually might be better (and cheaper) and you avoid having the designated bike dooring zone. What annoys me also is the “[BIKE SYMBOL] MAY USE FULL LANE” signs as if bikes can’t do that almost everywhere anyway. It puts the wrong idea in the head of unknowledgeable/[most] drivers. And yeah I was definitely feeling pessimistic after my morning commute (had very slight run-ins with both cars and a bike, but both were sort of wilful ignorance, not just accidental) and it wasn’t helped when I arrived late at work: my preferred bike rack space was occupied by a dual suspension Mongoose with a cable lock!

[dkel]

@vvill 112247 wrote:

Unfortunately yeah, that’s been my experience lately. It’s a section on Westmoreland under I-66 where the bike lane is closed off due to construction so it’s also poorly lit and uphill (and then traffic merges from the right). So effectively there’s no shoulder to drift right into. Doesn’t help that the vehicle has often just turned off of I-66 – the driver is probably already just a little agitated.

I was following this discussion, and decided I didn’t have anything substantial to add, but when I saw this, I just had to chime in. Once a week I ride up to McLean for an allergy shot, and my experience is often sucktastic on those streets! I think it’s just McLean: I have had more bad automobile passes and close calls up there than anywhere else! To be fair, most of my other riding is on MUPs, but it’s not like I’m never on any other streets. I’m starting to dread Westmoreland. The worst was a very large construction truck that honked at me multiple times as it approached, passed me at speed with only about a foot of clearance, and then ran the red light right by Haycock Elementary! I just about plotzed.

Anyway, back on the topic of the OP, I tried to be a bike commuter in Wilmington, Delaware about 14 years ago, and gave it up for fear of dying on those streets: no bike infrastructure existed, and even on the back streets I felt like drivers wanted to make a point out of how much they didn’t want me there. I quit, and didn’t ride again until I moved here. It makes me sad to think that I missed out on years and years of cycling bliss (and its health benefits) because of (well-justified) fear.

[PotomacCyclist]

Those are all good points. But my experience was different. Bike commuting just never occurred to me until six years ago. I was already living in Arlington, which had decent bike infrastructure even then. (Not perfect, but the Mt. Vernon Trail was already in place.) It just never crossed my mind that I would bike, despite the health benefits, the fun factor and the money savings. I hadn’t ridden much since grade school. The real reason that I got into cycling and eventually bike commuting was watching the 2008 Summer Olympics and Michael Phelps’s record-setting performance. I got so fired up about it that I wanted to start training for something myself, even if I wouldn’t be anywhere close to his level. That led me to triathlons, then reading about local bike issues on The Washcycle (and the old Bike Washington website), and an interest in local bike advocacy and bike commuting.

I’ve mentioned this before on the forum, that I might be the one of the few people who started cycling and bike commuting because of Michael Phelps’s Olympic performance. (I know he’s a flawed individual and I don’t really consider him a personal hero of mine. But what he did that summer sparked something in me, and that led to triathlon, cycling, bike commuting and awareness of bike infrastructure and safety issues.

[DismalScientist]

My experience of 40+ years of general vehicular cycling is that infrastructure doesn’t matter much. What matters is acceptance of cyclists. 40 years ago, I had little problem with cars even with little bike-specific infrastructure. I worry that the insistence on more segregated infrastructure will lead to drivers thinking that cyclists should not be on shared infrastructure. My only recent confrontation with drivers has been that I was not using bike infrastructure. There is no way that bike infrastructure will ever be as extensive as shared infrastructure.

[vvill]

Agree with Dismal.

@dkel 112252 wrote:

I was following this discussion, and decided I didn’t have anything substantial to add, but when I saw this, I just had to chime in. Once a week I ride up to McLean for an allergy shot, and my experience is often sucktastic on those streets! I think it’s just McLean: I have had more bad automobile passes and close calls up there than anywhere else! To be fair, most of my other riding is on MUPs, but it’s not like I’m never on any other streets. I’m starting to dread Westmoreland. The worst was a very large construction truck that honked at me multiple times as it approached, passed me at speed with only about a foot of clearance, and then ran the red light right by Haycock Elementary! I just about plotzed.

It’s certainly possible/probable. I have had my share of incidents throughout Fairfax, Loudon, Arlington, DC, etc. In my generalized experience it’s mostly some magic formula involving SUVs, minivans, bad weather, school drop-off time, and rush hour in general. There are parts of DC I would characterize as worse than McLean, and Lee Hwy in Arlington is certainly worse too. They could all be drivers going to/from Mclean though!

The thing is, I’ve ridden Westmoreland hundreds of times and I often see other commuters on it – yet it seems worse lately. It’s the most direct way for me to get to the W&OD so I will still use it – but I will divert now during peak hour commutes northbound.

[Birdstrike]

@kwarkentien 112224 wrote:

I’m a firm believer in taking the lane and I do it early and often…[/quote] @kwarkentien 112224 wrote:

I don’t give a flying f*@% what other people think anyway…[/quote] @kwarkentien 112224 wrote:

I still managed to get hit by a car last May…[/quote]

Exactly.

[lordofthemark]

1, When I ride in a general travel lane, I ride in the middle of the lane, unless the lane is unusually wide. I am that much of a VCer.
2. There are lots of places where I am not comfortable taking the lane. In part because I don’t go that fast, but for all the usual reasons (and I am also a New Yorker) Where I feel comfortable is impacted by the speed of traffic, the volume of traffic, the number of general travel lanes, the nature of the center marking, the visibility for cars that would have to cross the center line to pass me, and the topography (since in addition to impacting visibility, that impacts my speed – see “climbing lanes”)
3. I am clearly more comfortable with mixed traffic than a lot of riders – at the last BPAC meeting, where we discussing a proposal to add (door zone) bike lanes in a quiet neighborhood for traffic calming, it was noted that the street is a slow, low volume neighborhood street (due to the geography there is also zero cut through traffic) I mentioned that if there were no traffic calming purpose, as a cyclist I would rather no paint at all on a street like that – no bike lanes and no center line. Someone replied that lots of cyclists are not like us, there are kids there who bike etc. I mumbled that I am really not particularly strong and fearless.
4. I think there are some drivers who are nice regardless, some who are jerks regardless, and some who will be less tolerant of sharing the lane when there is seg infra. I do not know how many of the latter there are – I don’t think anyone has ever studied it.

5. Most new riders are not only less comfortable with VC techniques, they are also going slower for various reasons.

[americancyclo]

@vvill 112247 wrote:

I’ve always liked the concept of vehicular cycling but it doesn’t work when SUVs/minivans*… errrr… vehicles do crazy shiznit, and unfortunately I seem to have encountered a lot of dem cray-crays lately. Best solution in my mind is just ride a different route.

I deal with this a lot when I come home from metro. Shreve Rd is a major cut-through with traffic volumes of over 10,000 cars per day. The speed limit on Shreve is 35 mph but the sections near my house and the W&OD crossing have an advised speed limit of 20 mph. Most drivers are double that. Coming off I-66 and an overly fast and downhill section of Route 7/Leesburg Pike , drivers are accustomed to speed, and slowing down to the advised speed limit rarely happens, even though there is a blind corner with two driveways and an industrial park with concrete mixing truck entering and exiting all day. It’s difficult for me to take the lane here, even though I know i should, since I’ve been passed recklessly more times that I can count, and once while my daughter was in tow behind me.

I’d like to take the lane and stand up for the bike community, but family and personal safety comes first, and people drive way too fast on this stretch for me to comfortably take the lane.

[dasgeh]

@DismalScientist 112255 wrote:

My experience of 40+ years of general vehicular cycling is that infrastructure doesn’t matter much. What matters is acceptance of cyclists. 40 years ago, I had little problem with cars even with little bike-specific infrastructure. I worry that the insistence on more segregated infrastructure will lead to drivers thinking that cyclists should not be on shared infrastructure. My only recent confrontation with drivers has been that I was not using bike infrastructure. There is no way that bike infrastructure will ever be as extensive as shared infrastructure.

I used to agree with you: there’s already so much shared infrastructure, our best bet was to focus on educating drivers of our right to be there, and getting enforcement to do their job.

But over time, between talking to lots of the “interested but concerned”, trying to work with police, talking to engineers, reading up on the studies about safety in numbers, etc, I’ve come around to a hybrid view: some “shared infrastructure”, namely low-volume, neighborhood streets, are great for bikes. All they need are wayfinding signs and signals to cross major roads and they’re golden (especially if they’re like Key Blvd – few stop signs by lots of traffic circles).

But the higher volume streets — Quincy, Wilson/Clarendon, Fairfax/10th, George Mason, Glebe, Constitiution, Independence, probably 19th — to name the ones from my daily life, need safe, protected, separated infrastructure. Because even though the data shows that you’re not very likely to get hit by a car on these roads, “normal people” won’t bike on them. And if they won’t bike on these roads, they can’t get where they want to go, so they won’t bike. And if they won’t bike, we’re all less safe, because the single biggest changes that makes people on bikes more safe is more people on bikes.

In other words, good, safe, protected, separated infrastructure isn’t as much about preventing collisions – it’s about getting more people out on bikes, which makes us all safer.

And to look at it another way, if you can’t imagine a 10-year-old biking to school on her own on the route, the route isn’t safe enough and needs improvements. Sharrows, painted bike lanes, crossing major streets without signals, etc aren’t safe enough for 10-year-olds biking alone. Conveniently, once it’s safe enough for the 10-year-old, it’s pretty much safe enough for everyone.

[PotomacCyclist]

I think the separated bike paths on most of the river crossings are important. The car traffic on all of the bridges can be fairly high-speed and intimidating to all but the hardiest of bike riders. Relatively few people are going to ride on the road while crossing those bridges. I would never cross the 14th St. Bridges in the main road lanes on a bike (other than special events where the roads are closed off to cars). Some people bike across Memorial Bridge in the road lanes but most won’t.

Even for land-based routes, some of the bike infrastructure can be important. 15th St. SW/NW would be unpleasant to ride on without the bikeway/cycletrack, especially going uphill/northbound. The road conditions would deter most casual cyclists. Connecticut Ave. is an awful experience, at least when I rode from downtown to Cleveland Park one day. I’d agree that on bridges and key routes, bike infrastructure can be important. I would also agree that on calmer, low-speed local streets, bike infrastructure isn’t really necessary. However, better bike signage for streets that are part of bike routes would be useful. (The first few times I rode along the W&OD through the on-street section near the East Falls Church Metro were very confusing. I’ve also gotten lost near the Washington Blvd.-Arlington Blvd. interchange, and while riding on the quiet streets in Lyon Park, trying to find the trail entrances. It’s more difficult than it should be.)

[dbb]

@dasgeh 112296 wrote:

I used to agree with you: there’s already so much shared infrastructure, our best bet was to focus on educating drivers of our right to be there, and getting enforcement to do their job.

…

And to look at it another way, if you can’t imagine a 10-year-old biking to school on her own on the route, the route isn’t safe enough and needs improvements. Sharrows, painted bike lanes, crossing major streets without signals, etc aren’t safe enough for 10-year-olds biking alone. Conveniently, once it’s safe enough for the 10-year-old, it’s pretty much safe enough for everyone.

Good point about the 10 year old test. I think that David Patton (ArCo DES) offered up his insight at a Arlington BAC meeting one evening when he highlighted the inertia of the “installed base” of motorists. Most of us haven’t done any motorist training since we were about 16 (YMMV) and we got our driver’s license. For some of us, that was quite a while ago – before the all powerful bike lobby invented sharrows and protected bike lanes. As a regulatory averse society, our elected leaders quake in fear when someone proposes some driver’s license renewal requirements more than an eye-test. There is a real need for some kind of continuing education requirement for motorists and there is no evidence (in my assessment), that merely not getting ticketed/in an accident/killing someone is any suggestion of motoring skills.

I think that some of the efforts of the Arlington Police are useful in training motorists such as the recent Lynn&Lee activities. Unfortunately, those efforts are pretty resource intensive so they get done as exceptions rather than a regular effort. Two days of training per year is probably not enough to change motorist/pedestrian/cyclist behaviors.

[Author]

Posts