Moving Van in Bike Lane

[lordofthemark]

@hozn 124568 wrote:

I don’t see this as qualitatively different than a car double parked in a double lane (i.e. blocking the right lane). Pretty frequent occurrence (granted, especially in the city). It’s not like the bike is left without any options here (take the damn lane like any other vehicle or walk on the sidewalk!). I rather doubt the behavior of the police would be any different.

The difference is that for a driver, driving in the right lane or the left lane is not a different experience. For many people on bikes, riding in a bike lane and pulling into a general travel lane IS a very different experience. We can insult such people all we want, but I think it is a reality.

And for most drivers if they get sick of double parked cars, there are few options. Maybe transit (which local govts encourage) or to take their business elsewhere (which is a problem, and a reason local govts do enforce against double parked cars. In the case of cyclists, they can simply decide to drive. Which defeats the whole policy of encouraging more people to bike.

I stand by the assertion that this here is simply “not a big deal”.

Someone noted it and asked here who to call. I see no problem with them asking, and someone giving them the information. No one is seriously organizing a protest.

[lordofthemark]

@americancyclo 124574 wrote:

Stopping for Breakfast? Van won’t fit in a parking garage? Not enough parking to accommodate a 23′ moving truck?

But this parking spot won’t accommodate the truck either. As the picture shows. And why do they need to park it other than at the loading dock where they are loading or unloading? And get breakfast while it is there. Don’t want to violate the loading dock time window, but the bike lane is okay? Because someone will enforce the loading dock time window, but …..

[scoot]

@hozn 124543 wrote:

that looks like a pretty calm street; riding around the van — into the actual lane [shudder!] — looks like it would probably not result in instant death. At least in this one case.

Haha. In fact, the previous block (Arlington Mill to Campbell) is an especially egregious door-zone bike lane: the median there makes it impossible for most vehicles to pass bicyclists with three feet of clearance if those bicyclists are riding out of the door zone. So riders using this road should ideally have already been using the lane.

@hozn 124568 wrote:

I don’t see this as qualitatively different than a car double parked in a double lane (i.e. blocking the right lane). Pretty frequent occurrence (granted, especially in the city). It’s not like the bike is left without any options here (take the damn lane like any other vehicle or walk on the sidewalk!). I rather doubt the behavior of the police would be any different.

You think the police would not place a higher priority on clearing a blocked car lane than a blocked bike lane? http://whosblockinglsttoday.tumblr.com/ (Side note: I’m surprised to see that blog apparently has not been updated in over a year.)

@lordofthemark 124573 wrote:

As for needing lanes everywhere – no we do not need lanes on every single quiet residential street. This street is not that. As I pointed out above it connects Shirlington, one of Arlington’s “urban villages” with North Fairlington (and I think some take it to get to South Fairlington, and it is an alternative to I395 to get to Park Center) and it has several bus routes. There are lots of people who can ride on a quiet residential street, who will appreciate a bike lane on street like this.

I doubt there’s any more traffic on this block than there is on 31st just past Randolph. I’d guess that people coming from Randolph are more likely to turn right than left (and vice versa for the opposite direction). Yet that’s a sharrows with a substantial hill climb. So those who will use bike lanes but not sharrows aren’t likely to be riding here anyway. Plus, in my judgment, relative to other similar facilities in Arlington, traffic is already extremely calm on this stretch of S Quincy / 31st.

@TwoWheelsDC 124569 wrote:

And frankly, I think there comes a point where having a lot of bike lanes–particularly on roads that don’t really need them to ensure cyclists’ safety–sends the wrong message, namely that bikes need to stick to the small strips of pavement expressly provided for them and not ride anywhere else. Traffic calming, speed enforcement, and education are actual solutions to the problem. Bike lanes are (mostly) a band-aid.

Based on the photos above, the bike lane probably wasn’t put there out of any necessity…that lane is wide as hell and traffic speeds are relatively low. That bike lane almost certainly was put there because it was easy (economically and politically), and then the county gets to say it’s expanding bike infrastructure.

This!

[hozn]

@lordofthemark 124576 wrote:

For many people on bikes, riding in a bike lane and pulling into a general travel lane IS a very different experience. We can insult such people all we want, but I think it is a reality.

My intent was not to insult anyone. I simply believe that if you are going to ride in the street, you have to be comfortable riding in the street. What happens when the bike lane inevitably ends?!

But sure, I have no issue with someone asking who to call (and it has been noted above). My issue is with the heightened sense of entitlement that ensues in these threads — and what I perceive to be a fairly inconsistent stance when it comes to tolerance and patience.

What would Pete do?

[lordofthemark]

@scoot 124579 wrote:

I doubt there’s any more traffic on this block than there is on 31st just past Randolph. I’d guess that people coming from Randolph are more likely to turn right than left (and vice versa for the opposite direction). Yet that’s a sharrows with a substantial hill climb. So those who will use bike lanes but not sharrows aren’t likely to be riding here anyway. Plus, in my judgment, relative to other similar facilities in Arlington, traffic is already extremely calm on this stretch of S Quincy / 31st.

31st street badly, badly, badly needs a climbing lane. It’s absence is a major impediment to bike friendliness in Fairlington and the Park Center area of Alexandria. I do not think allowing the short segment of bike lane leading toward that hill to become less useful will advance that cause.

Note riders can use the bike lane to get to Windsor, or to a crosswalk to the Shirlington Transit Station.

[lordofthemark]

@hozn 124580 wrote:

My intent was not to insult anyone. I simply believe that if you are going to ride in the street, you have to be comfortable riding in the street. What happens when the bike lane inevitably ends?!

But sure, I have no issue with someone asking who to call (and it has been noted above). My issue is with the heightened sense of entitlement that ensues in these threads — and what I perceive to be a fairly inconsistent stance when it comes to tolerance and patience.

What would Pete do?

I would never ask a driver to be tolerant and patient of a cyclist doing something that was both illegal, AND an inconvenience to the driver.

When a bike lane ends at a quiet residential street there is no issue – the folks who will only ride in bike lanes on relatively busy roads, do not have a problem on a cul de sac where driver behavior is different (and where there are likely pedestrians in the street from time to time) And of course many will ride a sidewalk when they need to make a connection. Or they can simply ride uncomfortably.

I take the general travel lanes on Maine Avenue when I commute. I am not comfortable riding on them. I do it anyway, because there is no good alternative. I take them to get to the Eye Street lanes where I am much more comfortable. Allowing drivers to block the Eye Street lanes will make me MORE uncomfortable, despite my physical abiliity to get around obstructions (or to wait, in cases where heavy auto traffic makes it impossible to get around) It will make bike commuting less enticing. The fact that I already have an uncomfortable segment on Maine does not change that.

I simply find the “bike lanes don’t go everywhere, therefore anyone not completely comfortable taking the lane is not worth worry about” argument to be a complete red herring. really. Every individual segment that we make more comfortable for the cautious will not only help those already riding, but will get us more riders. Which BTW, is the surest route to better education and enforcement.

[elbows]

Not a bike lane issue, but on Monday (9/14), there was a moving van from at least 9:30 am to 7pm where the moving was blocking the path next to the Glebe post office. Where the van parks is between them and the post office but the blockage of the path was a little annoying. There is not a torrent of riders on this spot, but there is always someone going through.

This used to be a nice little path and since the construction of the townhouses next door, there is always a blockage here of some sort.

[Guus]

@hozn 124568 wrote:

I stand by the assertion that this here is simply “not a big deal”. I’ve ridden that road a number of times; the lanes have plenty of room and taking a moment to slow down and check behind before going around the truck is no more dangerous than any other maneuver on the street. If someone isn’t confident enough to do that safely, they probably shouldn’t be on the road by themselves .

I don’t mean to make the discussion too personal, but your comment about your son is exactly why a protected bicycle lane network is so valuable. If we allow cars to temporarily park in bicycle lanes it means we can never trust those bicycles lanes to be 100% available for children and other less confident bicyclists, therefore bringing down the appeal of the whole network.

[TwoWheelsDC]

@Guus 124585 wrote:

If we allow cars to temporarily park in bicycle lanes it means we can never trust those bicycles lanes to be 100% available for children and other less confident bicyclists, therefore bringing down the appeal of the whole network.

I’d argue that no road user should ever trust or assume anything about the availability of a given route.

[hozn]

@Guus 124585 wrote:

I don’t mean to make the discussion too personal, but your comment about your son is exactly why a protected bicycle lane network is so valuable. If we allow cars to temporarily park in bicycle lanes it means we can never trust those bicycles lanes to be 100% available for children and other less confident bicyclists, therefore bringing down the appeal of the whole network.

I completely agree that if we want children to feel safe cycling on roads, then we need separated cycling infrastructure. I would not entrust my son to ride alone on a street with an unprotected bike lane. Frankly, I wouldn’t let him ride alone on the W&OD either, which is probably more likely to get him injured (though maybe less likely to get him killed in the case of an injury).

An unprotected lane like the one pictured seems only marginally safer than riding in the street, IMO. There are plenty of perfectly legal reasons why cars would be in the lane (parking, leaving a parking spot, turning into driveways, backing out of driveways, etc.) as well as other obstructions (opening of doors, etc.). I do not believe these are inherently safe places for inexperienced cyclists to ride — especially on busy roads.

So, I agree; I just think that’s a different question. Would I like more protected bike infrastructure? Certainly. Do I think you should be riding in an unprotected bike lane if you are not comfortable riding in traffic? No.

[lordofthemark]

@hozn 124587 wrote:

There are plenty of perfectly legal reasons why cars would be in the lane (parking, leaving a parking spot, turning into driveways, backing out of driveways, etc.) as well as other obstructions (opening of doors, etc.). I do not believe these are inherently safe places for inexperienced cyclists to ride — especially on busy roads.

A car backing into or leaving a driveway can also occur on a sidewalk or in a cul de sac. And as you point out, the MUTs can be dangerous as well. Basically you are saying inexperienced cyclists should not ride at all, or only on particularly quiet MUTs and residential streets with virtually no driveway activity?

No place is completely safe – the point is relative safety and comfort. Yes, if you are going to ride in a striped bike lane, you need to A Be able to swerve out of the lane or stop when there is an obstruction in the lane. Being able to stop quickly for an obstacle is essential to any safe riding, including on a MUT. B. If one is able to safely swerve around, one must also be willing to. If one is either unable to do so safely, or unwilling to, one must stop till the obstacle moves on, or if that is too long, then move the bike to the sidewalk, dismounting if necessary.

Nonetheless, the fewer obstacles there are in the lanes, the easier, more convenient and safer the lanes will be for their users. The relative safety versus taking the lane will depend on many factors.

So, I agree; I just think that’s a different question. Would I like more protected bike infrastructure? Certainly. Do I think you should be riding in an unprotected bike lane if you are not comfortable riding in traffic? No.

I think we are using the word comfortable differently. You seem to be using it as a synonym for safe. That is not how I mean it. I can safely ride on the right lane on Maine Avenue. At any rate, as safely as any more confident cyclist. At most my going (relatively) slowly means maybe there is more likely to be a crazy who will rear end me, but I doubt that is statistically huge (changing lanes for my vehicular left to 7th is another thing, but if worst came to worst I could always forego the left and proceed further on Maine to where the trail picks up)

But I am not COMFORTABLE there. I do not like riding with big, noisy death machines right behind me, even if my head knows they do not want to kill me and that rear end hits are rare. It makes my day worse. It makes my enjoyment less. It makes me think fondly of the metro. It makes me breath a sigh of relief when I pull onto the Eye Street bike lanes. Where the dangers are in FRONT of me. Where slowing down or stopping lessens or eliminates the danger, instead of increasing it.

So. I am not comfortable riding in traffic. I find it uncomfortable. Are you telling me I should not be riding on the Eye Street lanes? Or on the lanes around Shirlington? Or on Eads Street? I do not think that makes sense. It simply does not follow.

[DrP]

I am curious. With all the questions and comments on comfort, kids, and others, when did you start riding bicycles and where was that? Perhaps others, not on this forum, are comfortable on these roads based on their prior riding experience. Perhaps some are uncomfortable because, while similar to the roads they grew up riding, they are different roads and thus “scary.” Does that change the approach of education and lane marking? Does it change how we get messages out to drivers? While not all kids learned to ride, many kids did learn to ride bikes as kids and then stopped for some reason. They are now driving. Can we take advantage of that.

So, I started as a kid in a suburb of NYC. Road-wise, definitely not dissimilar from Arlington or Falls Church City or even parts of Alexandria. There were no bike lanes anywhere. Helmets were not the thing (and no, I am not starting a helmet vs not discussion – I like helmets and point out to my mom regularly that when she was a kid, the cars were not going >=35mph next to her). Once I knew how to ride easily (6 yr old, maybe?), I was all over the place riding. Sometimes to school, but usually all over my town and the next town over. There were lots of “neighborhood” streets, but several with cars going 30-40 mph and lanes much narrower than many of the major streets here. The worst of those I typically crossed rather than rode along, but there was definitely a stretch of US1 that I rode – I would liken it to Lee Hwy in Arlington or Route 7 in Falls Church. I still go back to that town regularly. I see more people biking on these roads and kids on many of them. There still aren’t bike lanes, although there are bike route signs. Some I would be more comfortable on than others, just as here.
While I am definitely for more cycling structure, are there places that we should focus more on and others, well, it isn’t worth the potential backlash?

[baiskeli]

@hozn 124543 wrote:

at UVA they taught us

Wahoowa.

[kwarkentien]

Wow! This turned into a giant brouhaha. I simply pointed this out and asked if there was another reporting mechanism besides 558-2222 (aka “the nonemergency number” for PD/FD/EMS which is actually answered by 911 dispatchers at ECC just like an emergency call, hence my refusal to report it that way since it doesn’t at all rise to that level). These guys weren’t breakfasting, had the truck roll up door up with the lift gate down, and were preparing to ostensibly load/unload stuff even though the alley and loading dock were merely feet away from them. It just pissed me off. I rode around them, no BFD, but that doesn’t excuse it. They were setting up for what looked like several hours there (there were like 6-8 guys with that truck) and I found that to be poor planning and placement on their part to do whatever silly-assed job they were there for. (It was an office moving truck as I recall.) But again, all I asked is if there is something akin to the web 311 system DC uses to report such crap. That’s it kids. Oy!

[MFC]

@DrP 124594 wrote:

I am curious. With all the questions and comments on comfort, kids, and others, when did you start riding bicycles and where was that? Perhaps others, not on this forum, are comfortable on these roads based on their prior riding experience. Perhaps some are uncomfortable because, while similar to the roads they grew up riding, they are different roads and thus “scary.” Does that change the approach of education and lane marking? Does it change how we get messages out to drivers? While not all kids learned to ride, many kids did learn to ride bikes as kids and then stopped for some reason. They are now driving. Can we take advantage of that.

So, I started as a kid in a suburb of NYC. Road-wise, definitely not dissimilar from Arlington or Falls Church City or even parts of Alexandria. There were no bike lanes anywhere. Helmets were not the thing (and no, I am not starting a helmet vs not discussion – I like helmets and point out to my mom regularly that when she was a kid, the cars were not going >=35mph next to her). Once I knew how to ride easily (6 yr old, maybe?), I was all over the place riding. Sometimes to school, but usually all over my town and the next town over. There were lots of “neighborhood” streets, but several with cars going 30-40 mph and lanes much narrower than many of the major streets here. The worst of those I typically crossed rather than rode along, but there was definitely a stretch of US1 that I rode – I would liken it to Lee Hwy in Arlington or Route 7 in Falls Church. I still go back to that town regularly. I see more people biking on these roads and kids on many of them. There still aren’t bike lanes, although there are bike route signs. Some I would be more comfortable on than others, just as here.
While I am definitely for more cycling structure, are there places that we should focus more on and others, well, it isn’t worth the potential backlash?

Starting riding in the D.C. burbs about age 6 (quiet streets), was riding in Bethesda up Wisc. Ave by high school. All pre-helmet and pre-bike lane.

[Author]

Posts