Bicyclists in rush-hour traffic

[live love laugh]

I am all for exercise, emission and gas demand reductions and any other benefits that come from bicycling. However, I cannot believe the life-risking behavior that I see from bicyclists here in Chicago where, just yesterday, yet another cyclist was killed. The city has narrow, painted bike lanes that are 3-feet wide (if that) all around. Cyclists seem to think that these lanes offer them immunity from harm when all it takes is one less-than-alert parked driver to open their door unexpectedly pushing a cycler into moving traffic (also less than 3 feet away). There have been extensive radio campaigns communicating local laws that require drivers to yield to cyclists. Still, there are too many grey areas that put drivers and cyclists at peril. When a cycling lane ends, and a driver needs to make a right turn, say, is the cyclist supposed to stop and wait for the driver, or is the driver to wait for the cyclist? What if the driver doesn't put on a turn signal and the cyclist runs into him? Of course the driver is at fault but waiting for the cyclists congests already congested traffic even further.

Last week I was on a two lane, two way street with parked cars and cycling lanes in Chicago's very congested Lincoln Park with cyclists everywhere. I was careful but the impact was that on a two lane street, you now had four lanes of moving traffic and two more lanes of parked cars--with no room for error.

I think that the intentions are good on the part of the city and cyclists but it's a lose-lose proposition in many instances. The city, and not motorists, should be held liable for the deaths of cyclists in many of these situations because it is just not as safe as they make it out to be.

[frazzled]

1. The new "protected" bike lanes are making those right-turns more dangerous

At least in my opinion. These new lanes--where the cars are parked on the street side, in the middle between traffic, and cyclists ride on the curbside lane--were first put into place a year or so ago, near my house. Problem is, every time we stop to make a right turn to go home, we can't see whether there are any bicyclists coming ... because there are cars and often large SUVs parked that obscure your view to the right. The only thing to do is to inch into your turn so you can get a view back into the bike lane to see if any cyclists are coming. Because the cyclists do NOT stop at that stop sign, ever. And they're coming downhill at a fairly rapid pace. We're always terrified that we'll hit one.

[Prism]

2. I damn near killed a cyclist this morning.

Driving to work this morning. He was coming down a steep grade with a partially obstructed corner. He had a stop sign. I did not. He flew into the intersection with nary a thought. I am awesome at swerving. Missed him at 40 mph with about six inches to spare.

I'm a cyclist. I certainly know of the world of the asshole driver.

But Jeesus. I wanted to hunt him down and start screaming.

[Earth_First]

5. Nope. That never happens. Ever.

Cyclists are the angels of the road. To learn from a cyclist is to learn drivers education.

[bike man]

3. I ride a motorcycle and bicycles. It has always amazed me how many riders

have not grasped the idea that in the event of a collision with a 4 wheeled vehicle of any size - they will be the loser.

It does not matter if the two wheeled operator is 'in the right', he/she will lose.

If a car is parked on the side of the road, assume a door will open. If the possibility exists that a vehicle will turn right into lane, assume it will happen.

[ConcernedCanuk]

4. I biked daily out of necessity for 2 summers

.
.
.

I quickly learned to watch out for "the other guy"

Biked on the "wrong" side of the road facing traffic so I could see vehicles approaching. I could not always hear a vehicle approaching from behind.

Also, learned to check every parked vehicle I was about to pass - paying close attention to see if there was someone in the driver's seat, possibly opening a door in front of me.

You notice much more on a bike than in a car, and I was amazed at how many people are either texting or talking on their cell phones in their cars, even though it has been illegal for some time.

I pay VERY careful attention to people on their phones - SOMEONE has to be paying attention to avoid accidents - and it's gonna be me for sure.

Never even consider answering my cell when I'm driving. Find a safe spot, pull over, check the caller - and call back if I feel like it.

AND TEXTING WHILE DRIVING!! - well, that's pretty much insane . .

had one person nearby who was texting drift over the centre-line - killing himself instantly by hitting a transport head on.



CC

[muriel_volestrangler]

6. I'm not sure what you're suggesting the bikes do, apart from stop riding

"Cyclists seem to think that these lanes offer them immunity from harm when all it takes is one less-than-alert parked driver to open their door unexpectedly pushing a cycler into moving traffic (also less than 3 feet away)."

Yeah, it sucks, but what is a cyclist meant to do about it? Avoid riding past parked cars altogether? Ignore the cycle lane that a reckless driver (or back seat passenger) could open their door into, and ride in the part of the road meant for the cars?

"When a cycling lane ends, and a driver needs to make a right turn, say, is the cyclist supposed to stop and wait for the driver, or is the driver to wait for the cyclist?"

The driver has to wait for the cyclist, of course. The overtaking vehicle should only do so when it's safe to, and that includes not having to pull in so swiftly that you impede the vehilce (ie the bicycle) that you're overtaking. The situation frazzled describes in reply #1 sounds like bad design, though - that does become a situation where the driver cannot see a cyclist until it's too late.

[live love laugh]

7. There are some streets and some times of day when it is simply unsafe and the rules need to

be adjusted to limit riding accordingly.