toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I think the point here is that cyclists are vulnerable to some degree no matter how fast, experienced, assertive, or responsible they are.
On Thu, Aug 12, 2021, 20:34 Mark Davis <mark@...
On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 7:52 PM Daniel Karpelevitch <daniel@...
The number of club and race team members with decades of experience, exceptional bike handling skills, and responsibility who have been hit by cars should be enough to show that responsibility alone is not enough to keep cyclists safe.
True, but if you control for speed and
aggressivenessassertiveness, you might find that they are no less vulnerable than the people riding beach bikes at 10 mi/h.
I still have not seen empirical research or statistics on the Walnut project specifically as to how safe or unsafe it is. But anecdotally, I see more cyclists there than on the parallel roads (Stevenson and Mowry). We can also look at successful bike-centric cities such as Amsterdam and see that they are using many of the strategies being tried in Fremont.
Two words. “ horrible project”. This is our tax money wasted for little to no gain or even making things worse. Did it really help riders feeling safe? Apparently not.
This road design is absolutely bad for car drivers. I am just glad we don’t have much crowd in this part of town otherwise we would have seen traffic jam as a result of slowing down traffic flow.
I am wondering Why Nobody speaks about cyclist responsibility? It is as if cyclists are entitled to enter a cross section blindly and expect everyone else to pay attention. I am a cyclist and I say big “ no “ to this sense of entitlement. Slow, beginner riders must slow down also and pay attention to upcoming traffic and get drivers attention.
Children or recreational riders with low skill should not ride on roads with cars. We have biking trails they can use.
My solution, as I have suggested before. 5 feet shoulder with metal poles separating road from bicycle shoulder is lower cost and effective. ( no need for extra 5 feet beside the 5 feet shoulder).
For cars turning right one wide but smooth speed bump 100-200 ft to the turn, may help in slowing down drivers. And again, cyclists riding in city are responsible to pay attention to their surrounding.
For driveways cutting bicycle path, speed bump and sound alarm will do the job.
Lastly, Nooooo Sharrows. If you ever accidentally crossed or rode on sharrows ( which will happen) you know that sharrows can cause cyclists to lose control of bicycle.
Whenever people complain that bike infrastructure isn’t safe, we are told that this infrastructure isn’t for *us* the savvy cyclists. It’s for beginners who want to feel safe. I submit that beginners might be lured onto this infrastructure at first, but the first time they are almost right hooked will be the last time they use it.
Good infrastructure works for everyone and how to use it safely is clear. They don’t design roads that are only are safe if you ride 10 miles below the speed limit and say they are for beginning drivers only. They don’t consult people who don’t have driver’s licenses to ask how to design the roads that they will then start driving on. They shouldn’t design bike infrastructure that only works for people who aren’t even regularly riding their bikes with the *hope* they will start riding and they shouldn’t design them solely based on what those people — who have little experience or knowledge — *think* is safe.
Infrastructure should be designed based on data as to what is actually safe and you should be able to figure out how to use it without getting a PhD in traffic engineering. The bike infrastructure on Walnut fails on all those measures.
On Aug 12, 2021, at 2:22 PM, Daniel Karpelevitch <daniel@...
Ken, presumably you take Stevenson or Mowry instead. My point is that there are people that wouldn't take those alternate routes. Not only would they prefer the Walnut bike path, they would not, or be much less likely to, ride elsewhere.
Personally, I'm in the same boat as you. I'll ride on Niles Canyon Rd, Valecitos Rd, and other objectively unsafe roads without a second thought (not something even all of the club riders can say). But I recognize that I and riders like me are not the majority. Civil/traffic engineers should not be prioritizing our needs. They should focus on making cycling safe, accessible, and equitable for everyone. I believe the new changes are positive steps in that direction.
My solution is the best yet! I now completely avoid riding on Walnut. Mission accomplished…
Your sister sounds like the ideal customer for the new bikeways.
Rather than treating bike-ped mixing as a problem on the side paths, we should expect it and design for it. Adding more rules, and attempting to separate bikes and peds, is futile. Especially at the intersections.
Instead of two narrow adjacent crosswalks, make one big one. Instead of a narrow sidewalk + narrow side path, make one wide one. Instead of hoping for one-way bike traffic, assume two-way traffic.
In other words, make Walnut work more like the Alameda Creek Trail. One wide space (on each side of the road) that everybody negotiates with each other.
Oh, and can some of the trees be trimmed? I keep having to duck under the low hanging branches.
On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 12:08 PM Daniel Karpelevitch <daniel@...
Michael, you make great points.
My 13-year-old sister just started riding bikes and will be riding to high school in a few weeks. Our route is from Mission/Walnut all the way down Walnut to Fremont Blvd, then north on Fremont to Washington High School.
My sister averages around 8-10 mph. She absolutely does not feel safe riding on unprotected bike lanes. The only reason she will be riding to school this year is because of the new bike path on Walnut and the bollard-protected bike lanes everywhere else she is riding.
I know the club riders are much faster on average, but I think it is important to realize that that bike path and the new intersections weren't built for the "avid cyclist." If we want cycling to grow and make Fremont less car-centric, this is a sacrifice we must be willing to make. There are still plenty of alternate routes that do not have any of these new designs.
I agree that pedestrians on the bike path and in the intersections are a problem. I think more signage making clear where each should go would help, as well as some sort of separators (the small white flexible bollards come to mind).
What does confuse me is the new intersections design popping up without the accompanying bike paths around them, such as at Fremont/Stevenson and Fremont/Mowry. Hopefully the surrounding infrastructure will be built shortly after, otherwise I do not see the purpose.
The new side paths and intersections are designed for slower cycling, 10-12 mph max. If I rIde them at that speed, I can generally avoid right-hook and drive-out collisions with motorists, and conflicts with pedestrians.
Faster than that, we should use the roadway.
Another thing I've noticed on Walnut, and at the fancy new intersections, is that bikes and peds don't strictly follow the lines painted for them. Bikes and peds use each other's crosswalks, and travel in both directions on both the sidewalk and side path. If we're going to build more of these, we might as well accept that and make them Class I multi-use paths. The attempts at bike-ped separation don't work.
On Thu, Aug 12, 2021 at 11:25 AM Greg Vicksell <vicksell@...
I was really surprised when Fremont
made these changes. As already stated, you are not required to
take the path up onto the islands. You still have the right to
remain on the road like the motor vehicles. The other aspect of
this is if you come down the path on Walnut from Mission towards
Fremont you are going to be crossing a lot of driveways and cars
coming out of the parking lots probably aren't going to be looking
for you. I find it safer to stay on the road.
On 8/12/2021 11:06 AM, Andrew Sass via groups.io
Three more near misses that I
have seen (one being me, even with a bright rear light and
front light with side flashers). ï¿½I have also seen one with a
car leaving that apartment complex and pulling up to where
they can see oncoming traffic and almost hitting a bike, and a
car/bus near miss as the bus just stops in the street as there
is no pullout for the bus stop.
The problem is worst when the
light is green to begin with. ï¿½The cyclist pulls up onto the
sidewalk and the car does not expect them to pop out again
when the car turns. ï¿½It is safer for cyclists just to go
straight and take the lane when on Paseo. ï¿½At least they are
seen. ï¿½It would be much better if the curb was back 4 feet to
safely go straight
While I am venting, those
islands that are in the bike lane on Washington Blvd are also
an accident waiting to happen. ï¿½Cyclists, even novice ones
travel fast on the downhill and hitting those are certain
broken bones, or worse.
There should be a moratorium
on any more street changes until some statistics and feedback
On Thursday, August 12, 2021, 09:54:49 AM PDT, Vinnie
should send this to Hans Larsen at Fremontï¿½s DPW.
Hans is very good with bike issues but heï¿½s not
perfect. I was just commenting last night that I
donï¿½t like how bikes go up on the sidewalk on
big issue is the nice wide right turn lanes for
bikes look like they could be for cars. The initial
design at Civic Center / BART Way was like that, and
the City had to redo it. I saw the new configuration
at Mowry / Fremont and my first thought was those
right turn lanes would be too small for a lot of
vehicles, not even realizing they are not for
vehicles. Motorists will be confused too unless they
paint them bright green.
Please be careful
when crossing Walnut after going up the green
bike path on the sidewalk.ï¿½ On three occasions
now I have almost seen bike riders get hit
when they have the green light and they
advance just as a car sweeps aroundï¿½the wide
corner.ï¿½ I don't really blame the cars,
because it is just sooo weird, that theï¿½corner
jutsï¿½out so far.ï¿½ I just don't want anybody
getting hurt.ï¿½ So be careful and watchï¿½for the
cars coming around the corner.ï¿½