New "speed control" bariers at Roosevelt Island

[mstone]

I’m saying that the vehicle speeds are constrained and the threat is manageable.

[baiskeli]

@mstone 44670 wrote:

I’m saying that the vehicle speeds are constrained and the threat is manageable.

Sure, it’s manageable. All safety is manageable. But on the trail, I have zero vehicle threats to manage at all. And it’s not speed that’s the issue, it’s blind spots.

I looked around for other opinions on the web, and found this in a list of hazards and how to deal with them, from Bicycling Magazine:

“Hazard- A motorist exits a driveway or parking lot into the path of a bicyclist.

How to handle- AVOID IT: No bike-handling tricks can overcome the danger of riding on a road with numerous parking-lot exits. Just take a less-direct route. “

http://www.bicycling.com/training-nutrition/injury-prevention/parking-lotted

I still don’t see how a busy parking lot is better than a bike trail to ride a bike on. But you don’t have to convince me, nor I you. Just watch out for me if you’re entering the trail and I’m already on it.

[mstone]

Apples and oranges. I will refrain from wasting more bits on this.

[NickBull]

@baiskeli 44672 wrote:

Sure, it’s manageable. All safety is manageable. But on the trail, I have zero vehicle threats to manage at all. And it’s not speed that’s the issue, it’s blind spots.

I looked around for other opinions on the web, and found this in a list of hazards and how to deal with them, from Bicycling Magazine:

“Hazard- A motorist exits a driveway or parking lot into the path of a bicyclist.

How to handle- AVOID IT: No bike-handling tricks can overcome the danger of riding on a road with numerous parking-lot exits. Just take a less-direct route. “

http://www.bicycling.com/training-nutrition/injury-prevention/parking-lotted

I still don’t see how a busy parking lot is better than a bike trail to ride a bike on. But you don’t have to convince me, nor I you. Just watch out for me if you’re entering the trail and I’m already on it.

I’ll bet that 99 percent of the people on this forum who go through that parking lot are going through while commuting on weekdays when it is unusual to see _any_ cars in the parking lot. I try to avoid the MV trail on weekends because of the joggers and other pedestrians. But even then, the parking lot is safer than the trail. You just watch for backup lights and cars that have people in them.

[Mark Blacknell]

The horse, it is dead. That said – one of the reasons that I prefer the parking lot is that people in cars backing/pulling out are *looking* for others in the parking lot. Kids running onto or adults stepping to the trail don’t really expect anyone there.

[baiskeli]

@NickBull 44872 wrote:

I’ll bet that 99 percent of the people on this forum who go through that parking lot are going through while commuting on weekdays when it is unusual to see _any_ cars in the parking lot. I try to avoid the MV trail on weekends because of the joggers and other pedestrians.

There was one parked car in the lot this morning. There were also no pedestrians on the trail.

But even then, the parking lot is safer than the trail. You just watch for backup lights and cars that have people in them.

You make that sound simple.

[baiskeli]

@Mark Blacknell 44874 wrote:

The horse, it is dead. That said – one of the reasons that I prefer the parking lot is that people in cars backing/pulling out are *looking* for others in the parking lot.

Most of the time. But even if they are looking, it doesn’t mean they will actually see you. You’re moving fast and probably not visible behind adjacent cars or in their blind spot.

[5555624]

@Mark Blacknell 44874 wrote:

That said – one of the reasons that I prefer the parking lot is that people in cars backing/pulling out are *looking* for others in the parking lot.

I still have a faint scar from where my chain ring sliced my right ankle because a woman simply backed out of a parking space without looking and we collided.

Also, whenever I go through that parking lot on a commute home there are cars.

[rcannon100]

Parking lot today PM…. all but devoid of cars

[ATTACH=CONFIG]2471[/ATTACH]

[rcannon100]

Parking Lot. Today AM. Devoid of cars.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]2472[/ATTACH]

[Steve]

@rcannon100 45079 wrote:

Parking Lot. Today AM. Devoid of cars.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]2472[/ATTACH]

Trail looks devoid of bikes too, so it’s probably not that dangerous either.

[dasgeh]

@Steve 45086 wrote:

Trail looks devoid of bikes too, so it’s probably not that dangerous either.

Ugh. The point is that we should have the option of parking lot or trail, depending on our own evaluation of safety. Personally, given that a car can pull into the parking lot at any time, making the crossing dangerous, I find the parking lot safer. Just give me the option of taking it.

OR AT LEAST GET THE FREAKING BARRIERS OFF THE TRAIL. Tim, can you tell the contact that it would help if they were at least 1-2 feet closer to the river. When I went through last night, there were other cyclists and runners, and the 1-2 feet of asphalt would have been helpful.

[rcannon100]

@Steve 45086 wrote:

Trail looks devoid of bikes too, so it’s probably not that dangerous either.

And the conversation goes in circles.

The danger is two hair pin, 90 degree turns, that require you to all but come to a full stop. I have seen repeated bikes fail to successfully navigate that double-90. Particularly, any bike of non standard shape or length (recumbents, tandems). The double-90 also does not accommodate two way traffic. Either one bike is curb hopping or it is stopping to permit the other bike to navigate.

Shall we just keep repeating the same arguments so that you can continue to defend the car-oriented NPS shoving biking into an unsafe navigation?

[baiskeli]

@rcannon100 45099 wrote:

And the conversation goes in circles.

The danger is two hair pin, 90 degree turns, that require you to all but come to a full stop. I have seen repeated bikes fail to successfully navigate that double-90. Particularly, any bike of non standard shape or length (recumbents, tandems). The double-90 also does not accommodate two way traffic. Either one bike is curb hopping or it is stopping to permit the other bike to navigate.

Shall we just keep repeating the same arguments so that you can continue to defend the car-oriented NPS shoving biking into an unsafe navigation?

Nobody’s defending that trail. It sucks. I find that slowing down to navigate it is easier, and probably safer, than using the lot (except when it’s empty, when it’s a wash). Doesn’t mean I like the trail the way it is. I just don’t find it a big deal to simply slow enough to turn on it. You slow, and stop, all the time to cross roads.

I don’t know how they could make that trail better though. If they go made it straight, they’d have to put the crossing at the entrance/exit to the GW Parkway, which would be much riskier. The best way would have been to put the bridge over the entrance. Hey, maybe they could run the entrance around and under the existing bridge? That might work.

[dasgeh]

@baiskeli 45104 wrote:

Nobody’s defending that trail. It sucks. I find that slowing down to navigate it is easier, and probably safer, than using the lot (except when it’s empty, when it’s a wash).

The point is those who don’t agree with you should have the choice. No one wants to force you to take the parking lot. The barriers force us to take the trail. Given that there’s a plausible argument that it’s less safe, why not let users decide?

As far as making it better, I’ve been dreaming of a new bridge that starts between the parking lot and the GWMP and goes up and over, first the entrance to the parking lot then turns to go over the GWMP. It might be longer than the current bridge, which would mean less steap (yay). It certainly would eliminate the stupid hairpin (YAY YAY).

[Author]

Posts