These new BIKE LANES didn't last two weeks!
Vložit
- čas přidán 18. 06. 2024
- San Diego installed "Edge Lanes" (also called "Advisory Bike Lanes") along a short neighborhood block in Mira Mesa, California. And the people living nearby lost their collective minds. Here's why these lanes aren't quite as bad as local TV coverage claims.
Buy me tacos 😀🌮► / roadguyrob
Ask a road question ► www.roadguyrob.com/interchange
-------------------------
Sources cited:
-------------------------
"Safety Considerations for All Road Users on Edge Lane Roads," transweb.sjsu.edu/research/19...
"Edge Lane Roads," www.advisorybikelanes.com
"April 4, 2022 MMTC Meeting," Town of Mira Mesa. www.miramesatowncouncil.org/a...
"Good Evening San Diego," KUSI-TV. April 9, 2022
"'You're Playing Chicken': Mira Mesa Neighbors Caught Off Guard by New Street," KFMB-TV. April 1, 2022
"City of San Diego changes confusing stretch of Gold Coast Drive back to 'normal,'" KFMB-TV. April 12, 2022
"Unannounced Mira Mesa bike lane sparks frustration and confusion," KFMB-TV. April 1, 2022
"Climate action gone wild: City of San Diego's redesigned 'two lane' road angers residents," KUSI-TV. April 1, 2022
"Controversy Brews Over Redesigned Street in Mira Mesa," FOX 5 San Diego. April 1, 2022
-------------------------
Time sections:
-------------------------
Neighbors Hated It (0:00)
How Do They Work? (2:23)
Yield Streets (4:30)
Vulnerable Road Users (5:40)
Classification Mismatch (7:12)
Saying Goodbye (10:15) - Auta a dopravní prostředky
I laughed for a solid minute when the news report started talking about the "city worker". Absolutely amazing!
I mean he’s wearing a vest, when have ya ever seen a kid or anyone else be safe and wear a vest lol
@@josephharrison5639my neighbor never fails to leave for her walks without her safety vest! But in general its not common lol
@@josephharrison5639my parents wore similar vests going for nightly walks in their neighborhood. Granted, there were no sidewalks so they had to walk on the side of the road, but there wasn't very much traffic. I wouldn't call vests common, but I wouldn't automatically assume it's a city employee either - especially riding around on a scooter. But what do I know.
@@josephharrison5639 And now you know the vest of the story...
Here in New York City, the vests do indicate a city employee. How you ask? Well, they put them on their vehicle's dashboard and the parking enforcement agents don't ticket them for any of the infractions because, well, they're city employees. As a result, they get the name of 'theft vests.'
"Look at this surveyer working for the city"
Yeah that's about all you need to know about your local news station.
"Should we ask them what's going on or how they feel?"
"No Sharon, make something sensational up and put words and feelings in their mouth, even blow up an event that was barely noteworthy into a life or death scenario if you think it will get people to watch"
Propaganda station. If we actually called things what they were.
"But make sure the city talks to residents first." The whole time I was watching this I was thinking just plopping something like this down without plenty of outreach first is guaranteed to make people mad. At least the one city rep admitted that. It's an unfamiliar concept, but would probably have gone down smoother if people understood it first. BTW, congrats on getting hired by the City of San Diego to survey streets on your scooter!
Who cares if the residents know? What about when someone not from the area shows up? Roads aren't just for local people. Roads needs to be understood by EVERYONE.
It's basically the same as if they hadn't put any lines down. It's not hard.
A lot of people will get mad no matter what you do, but it's far better to tell them first than to plop down a completely different driving system on them with no warning.
"Oh, this is so confusing - how does this work?"
"There's too many signs with explanations"
That was funny.
Meanwhile in Europe this kind of street treatmeant pops up all over the place.
Even on country roads middle lines get removed to encourage people to drive more carefully.
@@oerthling Europe is smart enough to know you don't combine these kind of bike lanes with curbside parking though. That was the problem here.
Haha! That's freaking hilarious that the news caught you on the scooter. I was just thinking about how this street's lines make cars behave exactly like they do in the suburban neighborhood streets I grew up on.
Love your videos.
Except most people keep right on an unmarked, neighborhood street. These lines encourage people to just got down the middle of the road all the time, until it's time to swerve to meet a car.
That was edited.
He showed the real footage afterwards
@@jovetj Driving in the middle is safer.
If you're driving so fast that you cannot react to another driver, you're driving way too fast for the environment.
Driving in the middle gives you more reaction time and awareness of anything coming out from the sides, like pedestrians. And makes it unlikely you'll drive into someone opening their car door.
When you meet another car you both move to your side of the road and can pass eachother fine.
I've driven a lot on roads that are as thin as a single lane, with no space on either side due to parked cars(They really should be converted to 1 ways but they haven't been), and it's inconvenient but perfectly managible as long as you're driving at a safe speed and not like a maniac. And if you're driving far too fast like a lunatic, well, you're unsafe no matter what road you're on.
@@CallyMayz And how responsible and attentive are most drivers? Not very. You just demonstrated my point.
@@jovetj I didn't demonstrate your point at all.
This is a standard requirement to drive on a road and people do it all the time.
“Cars get first dibs because, well, they’re paying the bill” - I know that’s how it’s “supposed” to work with the gas tax but few places actually cover the costs of road construction and maintenance with gas tax revenue. They usually end up taking from general funds that all tax payers pay into, even non-drivers. Would love a video on gas tax in general or how our heavier vehicles with more or less the same fuel consumption mean we cause more damage but still pay the same.
I was gonna post the same thing. Car infrastructure is incredibly expensive and to think that the taxes paid by car users actually cover those cost is incredibly unfounded.
@@matiasgrioni292 Even still, car owners still pay for a higher portion of road maintenance than the general populace (of which car owners are also a part of). I'm all for multi-modalism (which itself includes cars) but it seems that recent efforts are more about making driving difficult/more expensive than making other modes more appealing. It's also of course worth pointing out that car uses benefit even those who don't themselves drive, delivery vans, trucks, city services etc. all require roads and benefit society at large.
Vehicle license tax also is used to pay for road construction and maintenance
@@xtreme242 Right but they still don't cover it which leaves non-drivers subsidizing it. It's only going to get worse with heavier EVs causing more damage but not having the gas tax. There are plenty of ways to balance it, but I just wanted to point out the slight discrepancy.
@@arsvi123 All of your points are correct, but when cars are only paying for a portion (even a majority share) of the cost but, usually, getting 100% of the benefit (in this case safe, maintained roads) then the others are still shorted. And the rest of us only benefit so much from trucks because we've built it that way. We also benefit from rail transport of goods but we've invested heavily into less efficient trucks.
*Feeling* dangerous is probably an advantage. People are way less likely to exceed the speed limit when they are worried about a head-on crash with other cars.
i feel like some chicanes would be better to slow people down, then add the bike lanes.
It’s not feeling dangerous though. It is dangerous
Yup thats what they do in many EU countries. They narrow down the lanes so that the car traffic slows down wherever they need to. US has big speeding and accidents problem is because of very very wide streets.
We're used to lane lines adding order and "safe space expectations." These lines run counter to that. They're TRYING to convey flexibility and options, but IMO they add confusion. Better situation is NO markings at all. That makes it more clear that it's a flexible free-for-all situation. 🤷
@@Dragon228833 Source? If nothing else, it's definitely less dangerous for people outside cars, since head in crashes with cars is the only situation it might be more dangerous.
The biggest problem here is education. We had a number of these appear near to me in Oxford. There was no education offered around their use. Your report clearly shows how they work and for that I'm grateful.
Exactly. I see bike lane and I think I'm not allowed to be there
Oxford... OH?
@@adventureoflinkmk2 UK
Taking a step back from the initial "wtf?" reaction these do make sense.
The narrow car lane should act as traffic calming slowing down car traffic to the point where the speed difference between cars and bikes is less of an issue. It should also reduce people using residential streets as throughfares due to reduced speed.
The big issue I see is you still have cars crossing the bike lane to park and you still have a "door zone".
It's better than sharrows but not as good as a separate, protected, bike lane.
The big problem is that most americans are too stupid and road ragey to ever appreciate traffic calming because CAR GO FAST and anything that slows them down is an attack on freedom and liberty... or something.
You could solve that by having the parking be diagonal. That way the door swing wouldn’t intercept the path of traffic/bikers.
It's not "protected" at all, and it has anyone and everyone swerving into any "lane" they wish. As pointed out in the video, this is exactly how residential streets work, but without the lines. So, these lines are stupid. The lines also discourage cars from keeping right, which just encourages a head-on collision. This is because of human nature: most drivers are bad drivers.
Good roads should NOT rely on suppressing human nature for safety.
@@jovetj No!You just have to get more attention to where you are!Just a small road between houses and bikers.Dont let your car do the job off driving!Do it yourself!Or do i have to say that European drivers are better than Americans???😀
@@jooproos6559 I've never been to Europe so I cannot make any such comparison.
Part of the comedy for me was how insanely wide that road was. Like there was definitely enough room for buffered bike lanes in both directions
There was, if you got rid of on street parking. If you kept the parking and the sidewalk, you wouldn't be able to reasonably get two lanes and enough room for bikes. There only seems to be around 48' of ROW, while the average two lane street in Chicago has a ROW of 66'
Look at 3:51 in the video
Yeah, when he said "this narrow road isn't wide enough" I initially thought he was joking...
@@blakehakimian8730 So get rid of it then. Literally every house on this road has a parking space anyways
that's what I was thinking. And there were driveways why do you need parking? At least not on both sides.
I can't believe that they removed it after just two weeks? This is not nearly enough time to show if this works or not. Every new traffic pattern causes some confusion at first, so it may take time to see the benefits. I would have given it more time and then ask all residents what they preferred. (And not just the ones who complain the loudest)
Everybody's an armchair expert these days. And outrage culture is booming. The city should have communicated far better then they did to avoid the outrage. I think a lot of public adjacent organizations lack the PR skills necessary for driving proper public messaging about what they are doing.
They should have given it at least 3 months.
they should've kept it and let the shitty drivers keep having a meltdown
They should have given it at least 300 years.
Shouldn't cause any confusion. Driver uses their eyes and reads signs etc... Accordingly. If this confused you, shouldn't be driving a 3 ton hunk of metal down the road.
"Cars get first dibs, 'cause... well they're paying the bills."
Best joke ever! And the delivery was just spot on! Almost sounded like it was sincere!
Do you know what a gas tax is?
@@jovetj do you know how high a gas tax, or property taxes for that matter, would need to be to actually pay for all the space wasted to move one person in a metal box?
@@wolfetone2012 100000000000000
@@wolfetone2012 true, in every case people that bike or take public transportation end up subsidizing car infrastructure
lmao this is totally normal in the Netherlands or Germany and people are loosing their minds, I love this Channel and I love seeing that things that are brand new in the US and are preventing crashs (like yellow lines in a construction) which we've had for ever
Yeah but driving standards in the Netherlands and Germany are way more strict than in North America. A good chunk of drivers here would fail their driving tests in Europe.
The population of San Diego, not a huge city, is almost double the population of the largest city in the Netherlands. There are no comparisons to be made between such disparate places. Even Germany only has 3 cities larger than San Diego.
@@chrisfoxwell4128What does the total population of a city have to do with it?
@chrisfoxwell4128 so if Germany has cities larger than San Diego but those cities have shared lanes (and many other even more "complicated" road situations), which Germans living in those larger cities navigate with no problems... does that not destroy your argument?
It's simple: Americans are bad drivers on average. And instead of improving drivers by making driving schools more difficult and final driving test more strict, you're dumbing down the roads, making them as wide and comfortable as possible.
And even with your dumbed down roads adjusted for dumb American drivers, you still have two to three times the accidents per capita, and two to three times the death toll. So, dumbing down roads doesn't work.
People admitting that the design makes them uncomfortable just proves that it works as intended, but people don't actually want safer streets. They just want to go fast.
I wanna go fast.
Yup. Typical car culture bullshit. But admittedly this is an infrastructure channel and an infrastructure solution would be to eliminate the convenience of cheater roads by blocking their freeway links before adding in edge lanes.
@@rickybobby9255 hit the highway
I agree with you but they need a better way to share the update on the new roads or rules.
IMO they need to require a online education course before each license renewal. This way the very least gives the state a way to educate the people.
Personally I think more people don't understand why traffic is inherently dangerous. The assumption that wider roads are a cause. It would be interesting if they just singled out this idea and explained that wider and faster roads put everyone in a dangerous situation.
... and opinion vs facts would be a large step on their understanding. Changes to the norm are almost always difficult
@@rickybobby9255 100 people die in car crashes DAILY, maybe you will be one? Maybe you kill a kid on bike or someone's grandma, keep being selfish......
In The Netherlands, we have these on all residential streets where a separate bike-path is not possible. Especially the natural speed reduction is great.
Ironically it's the USA, where the bikes don't get enough protection from cars, where this sort of thing just proves politically impossible.
I really think it's the mindset that's the problem: in the USA, car drivers are normal road users and cyclists are fringe weirdos, so people resent anything that slows cars down to give cyclists greater protection.
The point of these side lanes is the cars have to use them to avoid oncoming cars, but because they're marked as bike lanes, it is clear that cars are guests and have to yield to bikes (and by implication, if you run down a cyclist in a marked cycle lane, you wouldn't necessarily be able to blame the victim and get away with it like you usually can). Most Americans think that's unreasonable: if cyclists want space on the street, they should buy a pickup truck.
Correct, the Amarican traffic system is ages behind us in The Netherlands.
@@JaapGinder we prefer it this way. America has a much bigger car culture than Netherlands. Also cities in Netherlands are much older, some of them are built before the invention of cars, so their roads are narrow and twisty. In the US most road are wide and straight, cars will just have frontal impact with edge designs like this.
@@philwoodward5069 Exactly! at least with this people might think twice before getting angry because a pedestrian "doesn't belong in the street" and so they're angry about getting stuck behind a biker or someone skating. If I had a penny for anytime a person in a car was clearly mad that I was in the street on my longboard (electric so I have the same speed as bikers) I would be able to easily put together or buy a high end board with the money. Hell, I could even just buy a small motorcycle with it.
People are super entitled and seem to all have skipped the day in driver's ed telling them bikes have the same rights to the road as cars. (except for interstates but no one wants to die that way anyway) These days many areas have even added in laws allowing other vehicles road access or the old laws already allowed for it. NC for example already allowed me to use the roads on my eskate based on my average speed and top speed. It wasn't explicitly written in as allowed, but the requirements for bikes and mobility devices made it legal.
@@awdrifter3394 Amazing. As a Londoner, I'm well accustomed to people saying we can't have protected cycling routes because of our narrow, crooked streets (to which the solution is, as in Amsterdam, to provide through routes for bikes via the backstreets while using modal filters and the like to keep vehicular traffic off those streets).
I've never heard the straightness and wideness of a road advanced as an argument *against* putting in bike infrastructure. 🤔
In France these shared lanes are really popular and we call them "chaucidou", I often ride my bike on streets with them and you really see the difference on how much distance cars leave when passing you.
From my personal experience, I think that cars leave me with around 1 meter when there is a white central discontinuous line (1 meter is the legal minimum in towns limited to 50km/h / 30mph). With this "chaucidou" drivers tend to leave me with around 1.5 to 2 meters or even more when there is no car coming the other way which is way more comfortable in my opinion (1.5 meters is the legal minimum on rural roads limited to 80km/h / 50mph.) Keep in mind that the speed limit of the roads with this kind of painting never exceeds 50km/h or 30mph. I think that a real separated bike lane is ideal but the "chaucidou" is definitely better than nothing.
Oh one more thing, in France we don't have this kind of parking where you can park on the whole length of the road, we have individually separated parallel parking spots and you have either a curb or a sidewalk where you are not allowed to park, which i guess is better because the places where you can get hit by a car opening its door are fewer and more visible but I don't think that is possible in the US because of the parking minimums and the fact that everybody uses a car so you need more parking spots.
It's so annoying for the cars. I hate them in france. And i think i hate them also when i use my bike. I really don't see the point apart for annoying car's drivers. And you don't need two meters to use your bike, one meter is plenty enough. If a bike user is smart, he can zigzag on the walkway like a grown man. It's what we do in the countryside and it never hurt anyone. But i believe than town bicycle users have two brain cells.
@@Sombre____ If you mean riding a bike on the sidewalk, that is technically illegal, plus i live in the countryside so when i go through a town the section where there is a sidewalk is not very long so taking the time to get off my bike, go onto the sidewalk and then do the same to get off the sidewalk once it ends takes a lot of time on my commute and doesn't provide much added safety since car drivers don't expect cyclists to cross on pedestrian crossings. Also i dislike doing that because it just creates conflict situations with pedestrians.
If you are riding your bike for leisure and you are not in a rush, i think in that case it's ok to ride on the sidewalk if that makes you feel safer. But if you are commuting on a longer distance and want to go fast, you shouldn't ride fast on the sidewalk, you could hurt someone. If cars are allowed to go fast on the street, why shouldn't bicycles do the same?
Also that is irrelevant on out of town roads (which represent most of my commute) where there is no sidewalk. Cars and cyclists just have to share the road until we build appropriate bike infrastructure.
This ain't 🇫🇷 France, nor do we want to be like France.
@adampolok as a kid I rode on the sidewalk...cars don't have bumpers...almost got killed as a teenager thinking cars are looking 4 you. NOT !!!
I think a major problem with these is that they encourage car drivers to merge without looking and to always drive over the bike lane. This might just be an issue with the high-traffic street, though, as I can see this being very useful in streets and roads with low ridership.
It seems like the main issue was the education about the road. You can't just change the design of the road without telling anyone how they work.
Anyone with a driver's licence should already know how a dotted white line works
@@danieldaniels7571 It means you are allowed to change lanes and stay in that lane. You can't ride on a dashed line on a normal road you can get a ticket for unsafe lane change or improper passing on non edge lane streets.
The city can and DOES make the changes it sees fit. Not only do you have no say, but you have no clue that changes are a comin’.
@@danieldaniels7571 What state do in whose driver’s test asked when you should “put one wheel in the travel lane, one wheel in a lane with bicycle symbols in it, and drive for blocks straddling the dotted white line in between?”
City should have doubled down and did this with another road drivers are speeding on. If they had asked for public outreach on this then we wouldn't have seen it in the first place probably
I’m surprised that the residents of this street are happy with their street being used as a shortcut to the freeway. Where I live people are crying out for traffic calming infrastructure if they live on a street like this.
In England they are installing pottery and other objects to cut the streets off. If you live in the neighborhood you can get in and out, but you can't pass through it because waze found it as a faster route anymore.
In my town, they've taken 3 lane feeder roads and reduced them to 2 lanes... Now the queue backs up for 3 light changes, when it used to be 1... This is an engineered problem. Think about it... Worse roads means that DOT gets more money. In my town, they spent millions of dollars "painting lines" on the street. So, then a lot of this is the washing of money through contracts for lucrative projects that cost very little to implement, but the taxpayer burden is extreme... Sadly this corruption affects daily lives by stealing your time away from each citizen. They do it to "make streets safer", but ironically in my town, after these changes were implemented, the fatalities are at an all time high. Our cities are "experimenting on us" with experimental, untested, and poorly engineered roads, which by definition are dangerous because they are "unfamiliar in design and function", where the whole point of road safety is to make road features as homogenous and standard as possible so there is no "learning curve" and the end of each turn... Another example is they have taken one intersection, and built an island that "juts out" into the feeder road, with no markings or "road narrows" signs. They actually built this on purpose, and I saw a car hit this median and have the tie rod destroyed. Then you see strike scars on the curb, showing that this happens to lots of folks. ... and they did it on purpose. I reported it to them, and they said "it was by design"... lol Then don't get me started on the light timing. It's as if an oil investor has taken over the system and use the lights to "slow down traffic as much as possible", which makes pollution worse and the cars just site there idling in frustration. It all needs to change, and it's a management, engineering, and corruption issue.
Arg, know it alls.. ha
@@mostlyguesses8385 I've actually attended Civil Engineering classes in college, so I think I have an idea of what I'm talkin' about... and yes, the death rate in my town is at an all time high AFTER they implemented these changes that they call improvements... If anything, revert my roads back to the way they used to be, and they will not only double the car throughput, but it will also be safer. I should make a video so you could see it for yourself in disbelief. In my town, rather than build concrete roads, they build asphalt roads so that they road crews can spend eternity repaving them every 5 years indefinitely... It's a machine that learns how to feed itself and grow in all kinds of creative ways.
@@mostlyguesses8385 The lights in my town used to be timed for throughput, now they are timed to "slow down traffic"... Pitiful.
Nailed it - that's what was missing in the coverage. Was always used for a cut through. I don't know whether it's still sedate enough for edge lanes but does seem like it's at very least on outer limits of acceptability, especially when you compare to the existing case studies (that are overwhelmingly rural). Feels like this + traffic calming might make some sense?
The concept is inspired by thousands of unmarked residential streets in the US; and thousands of safe streets featuring this design concept in the Netherlands (the safest place to walk, bike and drive in the world). Your video did an excellent job explaining the science and psychology behind the design concept. Yes, this particular street has too many cars traveling at too high speed for the design concept to work, especially as an introductory, pilot project in this community. Pilot projects featuring this design concept have a much higher probability of acceptance and positive performance if applied to residential streets with motorist volumes of less than 5,000 per day; and coupled with a street design featuring a host of features (vertical and horizontal deflection and color marking) that effectively achieve prevailing motorist speeds of less than 20mph. Traffic engineering is a discipline that specializes in designing streets that achieve the desired prevailing speed. If they say they can't achieve the target speed (20mph or less) with design, they are not good engineers. Hire engineers who are confident in their abilities and actually know something about traffic engineering and street design.
The difference here is that you don't usually have any markings on those streets and they are clearly too narrow for more than one vehicle at a time. (obvious exceptions for two motorcycles or two bicycles)
@@SmallSpoonBrigade here in the netherlands they're also too narrow for more than 1 vehicle at a time and yet we drive fine with that in place. I think this more or less shows the level of driving americans posess compared to us
I think the side lanes should not be cycle lanes, just supplementary lanes, as I am extremely skeptical of cars in them.
Someone tell them about the dotted centre line: you do have clear boundary AND you can still pass through it.
Can't believe they didn't think of that. Besides, as a cyclist I always stick as close to the side of the road as possible to make it easier for cars to overtake me...
+1. Couple that with sharrows and that would have been a much more familiar solution.
At the beginning of this video, he discusses the space requirements that dictate what is available on our streets. Most suburban roads are much wider than they need to be to accommodate a car going 25 mph. This wasn't addressed directly in this video, but a lot of media around the subject will point out how streets in America need to be narrower to encourage slower driving. This is because people drive the speed they feel they can comfortably go without damaging their vehicle. When the streets that are meant to only have 25 mph speed limits have lanes the size of a freeway people drive like it's a freeway. To make it safer, they encourage people to have more vigilance by making the lanes narrower and demanding the driver's attention. The issue is this is counter to the desires of the average motorist who has become accustomed to unconscious driving.
@@davidlyday7373 This is the same problem America has with roundabouts. Roundabouts have several advantages in cost and throughput, but they're safer than traffic lights because they make people uncomfortable. Suddenly drivers have to look around and pay attention, when they'd rather be spending 10% of their focus driving between the lines and the rest texting. That and people don't like change, and our media companies are happy to play up that and act outraged whenever anyone tries something new.
the thing is also about intention in the road design it might be, on paper the same as dotted line, but in this case, drivers are invited in the bike lane when there is another car, on the contrary, with dotted lane, bicyclist are forced to drive on the car lane
These type of roads are so extremely common here in the Netherlands. It can even be one-upped, a full width bike road where cars are "guests". More ideal would be segregation of bikes and cars, although within city limits 30 kmph zones where cars are considered a guest on cyclist first roads are fine too. From my personal experiences cycling in the US though, I think it's a country decades away from, if ever, achieving this level of cohesion between cars and cyclists. Where cycling in many parts of north western Europe in particular feels completely natural, in the US the feeling was best described as a death wish.
No offense mate but I'm pretty sure your country is tiny and has a low population density compared to theirs. Nothing that works in your country is going to work there.
I've seen them plenty of times in Denmark. Works better than biking on the shoulder.
As a dutchy myself, I hear you. But this problem is two faced. Users that don't know how to navigate such street and no proper marketing for such street will cause people to not trust such street. The drone footage shows the street should work, but the majority thinks its bad because most drivers have not been educated on how this works, which creates weird situations.
Honestly though, I wonder how many accidents have happened in those two weeks. I bet there were none.
I was thinking that it would have been better not to designate those bike lanes, as it would give the impression that that space is safer for cyclists. Removing all markings and making it visually narrower would slow cars down and make it safer for this to become more of a cycling artery, separate from the primary car-oriented road further north. Making it cycling only (aside from residents) would be an ideal solution, but this is the US we are talking about.
Cars should NEVER be a "Guest" on a road. sorry, cyclists MUST move over and allow cars to pass, in all circumstances. YOU are the most at risk, and YOU must be the most vigilant and the most accommodating. you can't do something that would make a larger vehicle crash or hit you. you must give way to any vehicle that is larger then you.
This is a really a great design! A one and a half lane for cars on local and residential roads is a great idea to slow people down yet still provide access on minor travel roads.
It's not a good design for several reasons:
- The painted lines like this are not necessary because this is how unpainted streets are treated.
- The painted lines encourage cars to travel in the middle of the road versus keeping right for oncoming traffic.
- The traffic volume is too high for this type of application. The road already had a painted center line for a good reason.
@@jovetj N°3 is the real reason it wouldn't be good. N°2 is actually the point, and why it's good design. If you don't feel safe, you slow down and are less dangerous. N°1 can be said for any road, so it's a bad argument.
First off, this is a terrible idea. We've got the same basic issue around here, a total of 4 lanes of road, 2 for parking and the remaining being divided between bikes and cars. The usual way we've done it is with "sharrows" as in basically the right most bit being for bikes, and the cars flowing around them as they would in any other passing situation. It doesn't really require any education for the car drivers as it's not really any different than normal, it just shows the cyclists that this is a road that they're intended to use.
As far as residential roads go, this is absolutely massive. Around here that would qualify as an arterial that would have a center-line as well as traffic control devices at the intersections. On the streets we have where it is just one lane in both directions, it's really one lane in both directions and it's clear that you've got to pull over, you don't have the additional mental space of trying to figure out if there's a cyclist involved and figuring out who is going to yield to whom.
In the netherlands we have roads like these almost everywhere, and they work fine. Cars mnow when they can pass a bicycle by looking ahead and if you don’t know if it is safe to pass a bike you just stay behind them for a little bit.
2:58 you said “cars get first dibs cuz well, they’re paying the bill”. But I’m pretty sure that they are in fact subsidized once you account for the hidden cost of free parking, the space required for cars, the strain they put on the road, and the increased cost of spaced out development built around cars, while bicycles don’t really contribute to deterioration of roads and are significantly cheaper to build for that also pay for car centric roads since a lot of that funding isn’t covered by gas taxes and road fines.
-guy who watches Not Just Bikes
THEY ARE PAYING THE BILL
I’m going mostly off of Not Just bike’s videos about suburban finances. If you watch it and don’t believe it, then that’s up to you. I also know there’s a book called the high cost of free parking, which I admittedly haven’t read.
If you have a source to back up your claim that drivers do infact pay for 100% of the roads, I’ll gladly look into it
People who don’t own cars pay for the drivers who do.
@@zokpls8712 From 1776(Since data collection) - 2022, approximately $0 has been raised from the 'People who don't own cars' tax as there isn't one.
@@mrhmm3198 No they are not, do some research.
Communication and education with the public that is being served goes a long way to successfully implementing changes that affect them.
alternatively, you just make the changes on a massive scale, educate via PSAs, and not give in to demands to take it out. People will get used to it in time just like with every other controversial change that everyone ends up liking eventually. The same thing occurs with roundabouts.
@@jceess you're correct but residents shouldnt be blindsided with drastic changes. The city shouldnt cave to pressure unless the experiment actually fails, because the ones complaining dont actually know what they're talking about, the lack of familiarity just freaks them out.
Although consultation with the public always looks like the fairest, most democratic way of bringing in change, in reality it just means change never happens.
@@rogink It is the way of Democracy... Everyone having a voice. As long as everyone is given an opportunity to understand, then the proposed changes, whether they like them or not are understood by all.
In this instance because of this very important step was skipped; it was DOA...
I think both are true. I lived on Alemany Boulevarde in San Francisco when they striped the bike lanes, but they had a public meeting about them first. A lot of people whinged, but the city insisted on trying it-it's just paint, they said. Cyclists flocked to it, motorists got used to it, the bike lanes stayed, and now, in the extra half-metre of space it left in the median, there are pretty plants and things.
Depending on the amount of the traffic these roads can be good. We (Denmark) have had some of those for quite a few years now
A good way to fix the problem would be to make the street one way with single lane for cars, that would create space for fully separated bike lane, and also stop the road from being a shortcut lowering traffic
You’re totally missing the point. It’s a residential street. Number one problem is drivers are not obeying the speed limit. This type of innovative solution is too much, too fast for most Americans drivers to comprehend. My understanding is they still haven’t accepted round abouts yet.
THAT MAKE TO MUCH CENTS WE CAN NOT HAVE THAT
My favorite was the signs (not shown here).
1. "No Center Line" for people who can't actually see that for themselves.
2. Illustrative sign that appears to say, "In case of incoming traffic, run over bikes."
1:44 In case of incoming traffic, yield to bikes.
@@TheNotoriousKRP Or in reality...shared road, drive like you're not the only person on it...somehow this works in Korea, Japan, all of Europe...
Look at the UK alone in cities and the country, most roads are barely wider than this shared lane, yet cars somehow manage to pass each other safely, along with bikes, tractors, pedestrians. Perhaps the problem is the drivers, not the roads.
@@jeffclark5268 The problem is the dumb-ass stripes. If the city had just left the road the way it was, everything would've been (continued to be) fine.
The city violated the fundamental rule: "If it ain't broke, don't fix it." Of course, local governments do that _all the time._ It's a distinguishing hallmark of local government. Gotta justify those bloated city staffs somehow, right?
@@jeffclark5268 i thought london was horrible for bikes
@@MsZsc it is not great, but better than this.
Watching this fresh off a 2 week road trip in Spain makes those residents freaking out over that road even more hilarious. The roads get much much tighter and pedestrian/cyclist centric than that and not once did it ever feel "dangerous" it just makes you drive a little more cautiously. In those 2 weeks I did not see a single accident anywhere on a Spanish road. On my 2 hour traffic ridden drive back home from JFK I saw 4 accidents. We really have no clue about road design here, really wish the engineers who actually know what they're doing would stick to their guns a bit more rather than immediately caving to angry Karens.
its San Diego, the Karen-est city in the state.😂
Maybe. But keep in mind they also did not educate the neighborhood about their plans. Education goes a long way to let people know what the road is designed for and let them adapt to the new way of using the road before implementing it
I completely agree, although I have one outstanding question. I know from NotJustBikes that the Woonerfs generally use permeable pavers and a whole lot of elevation/textural/color changes to signify bicycle priority. In the US, cities put down white paint and leave the bike lanes black asphalt for the most part. While in Spain did you notice different textural changes in conjunction with the perceived cultural awareness? How important is it to go above and beyond with these three design elements (elevation, texture, and paint) when implementing bike lanes in a community that hadn't ever accommodated them before?
One they didn't tell any one , two these look like traditional bike lanes and you are not supposed to drive in bike lanes. Three they are only suppose to be used on narrow low traffic roads. It's not about people being karrens
@@BadDriversofMaryland they did have bake lanes before, but it had a center yellow line and stripped for two lanes of a traffic
In europe there a buch of streets where you just dont have space for anything. They are usually 2 or 3 car width wide, but parking is permitted, so in relity its just enough for one car. It is still a two way street, if two cars use it at the same time, the one who is closer to an intersection backs up, not a big deal.
Here in San Diego, by the mile of cars, they did this thing were they deleted one of two lanes going to Chula Vista to accommodate a bike lane. Now there's a 15min quarter mile back up. There's a free way entrance on the other side of the bridge so it gets super congested.
I feel like the edge lane road would not only force people to slow down on that road. But it would probably make it a less favorable rout turning a computer road back into a quiet neighborhood road
The speed limit in neighborhoods should be 25mph, or lower: 20 is plenty!
It's a reverse psychology road. Let's make drivers and bikers incredibly unsafe and confused, so that they drive with extreme caution. Horrible process, idc if the statistics say it's good, it has to work on a human level, and intentionally making people unsafe is not good for their psychology.
@@user-jc2ez6ig5z Only unsafe if you have no clue how to drive it. Take a look at vids of new roundabouts in North American intersections, roundabouts are extremely common in other countries and not at all an issue for people who actually know how to drive. There is a difference between having an unsafe road and having idiotic drivers. You can put a roundabout in a neighborhood or a shopping center and people in this country still drive the wrong way on it. You can revert a one-lane road back to the two lanes but those idiotic drivers are still there, you are still in danger because of them (or yourself if you’re the case). The road’s only an issue if the driver’s are careless. Focus on getting those drivers off the road, with or without a confusing road they will still be there ever-presently presenting themselves as dangers to public safety
@@zonaryorange8734 I disagree, roundabouts are safe and intuitive. On the other hand, the road design in the video is like a roundabout where everyone can turn clockwise or counterclockwise.
This video's road conflicts have nothing to do with lack of education, and everything to do with be a legitimately unsafe, unintuitive, and conflict provoking design.
@@1981menso speed limits dont matter. People routinely speed on these roads because of poor design and busy schedules.
6:42 "He's clearly working for the city" lolllll
I think the problem is that they used white dashed lines. For most people, that separates lanes, and you are supposed to stay in your lane. If they gave it a different treatment, such as painting it red or green with bicycle symbols, and omit the white dashed lines, it would probably convey the same message and not be instantly rejected by some people.
The Netherlands (ETW60), Germany (EKL4) and other countries even have similar designs outside the buildup area: The actual road is only wide enough for one car or barely for passenger cars to pass each other, while there is a separate area (especially in Germany often just gravel) if busses or trucks have to pass each other.
Smart however the difference is that does are clearly not cycle lanes, and cyclists understandably dislike cars in them so maybe they should be unmarked or be marked with a special non bike shared lane or just a no parking sign.
Especially after this video, Road Guy Rob really needs to collab with Not Just Bikes. I think that would be super interesting.
He might learn a thing or two, yes.
and/or Bicycle Dutch
This is gonna be interesting. Didn't he say he doesn't even own a bike?
He’d be quickly disabused of the notion that streets are “for cars”. Especially residential streets.
@@numhold I wonder how the hell you don't own a bike ???
As a San Diegan, it's no surprise that it was KUSI that called you a city worker. They used to be a respectable independent channel, but have really gone downhill the last few years. It's also not surprising they were trying to equate it to the end of the world. It's just all doom and gloom scare mongering over there.
KUSI more like kuso
That was so darn funny haha, really goes to show how little interest, nuance or care news companies can get away with putting into, well, the news nowadays
They didn't even ask. Just assumed it was city worker. 😅
Uh pretty sure that's every news channel lol.
Did the station get bought out by Sinclair?
There's a street set up like this near where I live that I ride down part of the way to work. Generally, people don't seem as confused as in this video. One time I was riding along, a guy turned onto the street in his truck, stopped halfway into his turn, rolled down his window, and asked me if cars were allowed there. Figured he was from out of town and told him he was allowed. Besides that nothing.
I feel like if they got rid of the dashed lines for the suggested bike lane and just left the two outside solid lines for parking, it would’ve been fine. You don’t necessarily need a painted centerline on a neighborhood road.
It almost seems like someone wanted to be able to later say "see, people don't like this type of roads so we won't build them anymore"
The worst part is that the idea was great. The signs were "there was room to improvement" but the idea is great, and neighbourhood streets already work this way. This was sad to watch.
Pretty much how politics works. People want something you don't like so you make a very shitty version that you can point at and say "See it isn't good". Just look at all the welfare programs that are designed to incentivize people to not work so they can claim people on the program are lazy when working a minimum job would pay less than not working.
We've got a lot of those in Belgium. They're called "bicycle suggestion lanes". But people also refer to them as "murder lanes". They're slowly dissapearing from the roads though, often being replaced by elevated bicycle lanes and narrower slower car lanes.
tja, Belgen 😅
@@wilwulpje5684 mja zunne echte wupkes eh?
@@alexanderkupke920 "I wonder if American drivers are just to stupid to get along with bikes and pedestrians" Yes, yes we are. Most folks don't cycle so anyone who is doing so is an annoyance to them, not just someone just doing what they do too. But the real issue here is that we are used to anything with lines at the outer edges but not in the middle, and is only one car wide, is a one-way road so folks are going to be confused as hell by this unusual situation they have never been trained on or driven before. The other thing we are used to is that if there is a bike lane marked like this, no cars are allowed to be there so some drivers would be hesitant to use the space when needed and cyclists wouldn't understand that a car could be swerving into the space anytime there is oncoming traffic.
How often do you hear about someone getting hit in one of those lanes?
Euhm... no we dont call them that.
These are also only placed in roads where the max speed is 50 kmph.
Maybe in your neighbourhood they dont care about the max speed.
Mr. Williams makes a good point. Make motorists actually think about how to negotiate a stretch of road, and they will have to pay attention to signs, marking, and other road users. In most car/bike collisions, the driver states that he or she didn't see the cyclist; yeah, because they're programmed to see only other cars as traffic. Give them a puzzle to solve, and they will be forced to engage with the situation rather than just cruise complacently along. Limit motorists' speed on such streets, and you have a potentially very safe and workable situation.
Hey Rob, if you see this, I live in Fort Collins Colorado and we just installed one of these on E. Pitkin St. here in town. I am mediately thought of your video and stood there on the side of the road watching the traffic go by. All I was missing was the orange vest.
These people can park on their own property, remove the car storage lanes and use the road for transport.
Seriously.
"But that's expensive for JUST ME!!!!1!1@!" - carbrain
Restricting parking to one side would make plenty of room for two full bike lanes and two full driving lanes
another that can be done is reduce the road to one-lane-one-way allowing for parking on both sides, trees, wider sidewalk and a bikelane
It all depends on the purpose of the street. If this truly is a through street, then definitely remove some of the parking for better traffic / bicycle flow.
But if this truly is a local residential then they need to block off through traffic at one or more points to prevent people from driving along it as a cut-through, which introduces more traffic than a shared bike/car roadway can comfortably handle.
This is like an average Dutch road. We have thousands of kilometers or miles as you call them, of this type of roads. It is just a matter of getting used to it. I was a police officer for 38 years and saw that these types of roads also were introduced in the Netherlands. I was initially skeptic. During my career I treated around 3500 traffic accidents, but I don't remember much on this kind of streets. The dotted lines mark more or less the maximum position of the right for cars when they pass a cyclist. For cyclists these lines mark the maximum left position while riding. When there is no cyclist, the full road width is used by cars. Two cars can pass easy then. Only the moment that at the same time, two opposing cyclists and two opposing cars drive it is too narrow ... simply delay and show some courtesy and give each other space.
In rural environments in The Netherlands, cyclists were often hit by cars in the dark. All rural roads have this type lines now and because it is quiet there during the dark, drivers will ride between the lines in the middle and do not drive over cyclists anymore. There should have been a news item about how to behave on this type of roads.
Americans do NOT refer to kilometers as miles, they are fully aware that they are two completely different measures of distance.
@@mobiusklein9140 ;-) it was noting serious. I' m from an era when we learned both systems at technical school.
@@dikkiedik53 I'm old enough to remember when we (the U.S.) decided to switch to metric in the 70s. They put up a bunch of shooed limit signs in km/hr under the ones in mph. Then a couple of years later they took them all down.
At least in NL where I live the bicycle area of the road (edge) is painted red so people know what to do automatically, but we Dutch are used to bicycles everywhere. We are a cycling nation.
Yes, it works great here in NL, but only on certain roads. Not too busy, and not with continuous parking on both sides. Great solution, maybe not for this particular road.
They had streets designed like this in a lot of the smaller towns in Switzerland that I went to a few years ago, and they always worked really well!
Wilerstrasse and Loretostrasse in Lichtensteig are two examples of streets like that.
Hey Rob, I’ve been meaning to ask this for a while. Do you think if the DOT/City had reached out to local media before, with an information blitz as to how this style of traffic striping worked, it could have been received better? Rather than having the news spew the negative reaction to it?
Do you think DOT’s could do that when they do introduce new traffic control elements to have better success? Thanks for the vids, love your channel.
As a dutch person I'm used to this in the middle of nowhere XD It's typical old bicycle infrastructure. A bike line besides the street is better though :-)
Cyclers keep in the cycling area (unless they pass others). Without these lines you will simple cycle in the center of your lane :-)
The road also needs more obstacles to make people meet the speed limits.
And if you hit a cycler here with a car.... Well, prepare to be sued. As the more vulnerable road user is protected by law ;)
Adding onto your last part
Even if the cycler crashes into the car, its still the cars fault
@@melsbov unless it can be proven with a dash cam for example. But in general the car driver is at fault unless proven innocent
I recognize bikers have right of their safety, but they have no right to hold the road hostage and slow down other people. Where to strike the balance is a rough question.
Lawsuit is cold comfort after somebody is dead or permanently disabled from being hit by a car. In a country with a strong bike culture, no problem. Out of the blue in a car culture? Bad idea. I'm all for public transportation; having buses and light rail available would be a godsend in many many ways, but the underlying situation is not similar in the U.S where normal distances are very long compared to in the Netherlands, and there is zero public infrastructure to support a public transport/bike culture.
@@parkershaw8529 the problem is the mentality. If it was a lot more pleasant to ride a bicycle and use public transportation, there’d be a lot less cars on the road. A lot less traffic jams. Commuting on a bicycle doesn’t make you a cyclist, it should just be normal to be able to arrive safely on a bicycle. In the us, everyone would think you use a bicycle because you’re too poor to buy a car. But it should be the norm. I’m a huge patrol head and even I live happily in a cyclist focused country like the Netherlands.
We have tons of "edge-lane" roads here in the Netherlands, espeically on slow, quiet, rural or suburban roads. They work wonderfully from the cycling and driving perspective.
Not really, at least not from footage I've seen on CZcams (I have never been there myself).
It LOOKS like a great place for bikes, but if you're in a car you are constantly and artificially hampered from just going on by way of having to wait around for the bikes to clear the way, which almost never happens because so many people use the damn things. So what you really mean is: They work wonderfully from the cycling perspective but don't you dare drive a car",
@@Kr0noZ well you just pass by with speed of 30km/h instead of 70km/h that's all .
@@Kr0noZ Nice of you to admit you have no actual experience with the subject. Again, these are slow, rural roads that we're talking about, so not many bikes to begin with. Besides, there's no "waiting around for the bikes to clear the way," cyclists are already on the edge of the road, bordered by the dashed lines.
@@Kr0noZ Maybe that's the entire point to promote bike usage instead of car usage. Sure you have to wait/slow down in your car for bike, but if those bikes weren't there all these people would be in cars, now the time it takes you to go from A to B is slower for all parties involved. On top of that you need way more money for bigger roads to "solve traffic congestion", you increase global warming, a lot more people die from car crashes, your population gets obese and less healthy so that costs you even more money. I prefer driving in the Netherlands compared to any other country I've been to.
This assumes that Americans would also be courteous and respectful to people on bikes. They aren't. There's literally people who'll install pipes on their trucks specifically to fill a cyclist's lungs with poisonous exhaust.
You always have to consider the culture when trying to implement things like this elsewhere, and American culture is being stupid and not caring about anyone but yourself.
another great video rob! do you guys not have dashed centre lines in the us?
3:35 this is exactly what dashed yellow lines are for!!
I really liked this statement: “Ambiguity is a benefit”. Being in a uncomfortable position does make you more alerted
But that's where it bumps with public perception. All the research seems to say it's safer, but drivers hate ambiguity, it doesn't feel good. We want to have a clear lane to drive in, we hate to share it with vehicles of different speed, and the less we have to be cautious about the better it feels.
It's hard to argue against increased safety, and yet a lot of these measure are impopular because it reduces our "freedom" to drive fast and selfishly.
@@Kaiso54 I follow a person who moved to the Netherlands where these kind of roads are quite common even on more rural roads where you can drive 55mph. She was confused about these roads and the overwhelming reply people gave her, if it's confusing your driving to fast.
@@Kaiso54 That is whole point. When drivers feel uncertain, they slow down and pay more attention to what is around them.
@@Kaiso54 Driving fast isn't selfish. Making everybody cycle is selfish
@@DrJams Driving fast is absolutely selfish. "I need to get there as fast as possible at the expense of public safety in case I mess up". Drivers can still drive, but now they're forced to be aware that they need to SHARE the road in a safe manner. Sounds like the opposite of selfish to me.
If you want a clear division of directions AND you want people to be able to overtake, use dashed lines as a median instead of double solid lines.
Exactly. That way, people know where they are suppose to drive by default, and only move left with discretion to pass.
These roads would do much better just being unpainted roads. The intended behavior is exactly what people do on unpainted roads already. This kind of markings are just asking for trouble, to confuse everyone.
As a "vulnerable road user" on my electric skateboard, I know I tend to only ride on unpainted roads or ones with a dashed line. Anything else is welcoming death even more.
Dashed centre lines already exist as you point out. It's akin to the we need a new standard to unify all the other standards.. adds another standard to the list. But I guess it meant someone got paid a lot of money to write research papers and get grants from the council.
In Maryland, it is lawful for a motorist to cross double yellow line to to pass a cyclist. Not sure where else in the US this is legal.
@@JoeKubinec Then either double lines are overused to the point of losing their meaning, or Maryland takes head-on collisions too light-heartedly.
Everywhere else in the world double lines means it is unsafe to cross into the opposite direction for any reason and it is illegal to do so. Solid lines, especially double ones, are to be given the same respect as solid walls. The presence of a cyclist does not magically make that stretch of road safe. Safer stretches of road where overtaking is ok don't use solid lines. It's a much more sensible and consistent system.
I think proving who is at fault in an accident would be an issue.
7:03 😂 lol cant Believe that the news station just Recorded you
> "Cars get first dibs because they pay the bills"
A widely cited misconception. Motor vehicle tax is just one revenue stream the DMV/equivalent levies for the states/equivalent to spend on anything it wants. Even if it is written into law, that law should be changed to be a tax for polluting the environment, to support those who cannot use those roads in a car, etc.
And IIRC property tax pays for a lot more of the overall upkeep on roads than motor vehicle tax. Not just the pavement, but the water, electric, and sewer mains under it, the landscaping, the garbage collection happening on those roads etc.
THIS!
I'm so tired of this lie...drivers don't pay for roads and they aren't entitled to roads.
@@DanielBrotherston Especially when >25% of a transportation surface is used as free storage of pollution machines.
@TNerd spandex*
One reason I think really caused the confusion is the "line" itself. Nearly all of the drivers were taught to drive between two lines or one side of the line, creating both at the same time and the two way traffic. They are not the ones to blame.
This road is better off with no paint at all. The intended use is what drivers and cyclists would naturally do on an unpainted road, and the line just adds to the confusion, because exactly as you said, drivers are taught to stay between lines. And not straddle lines.
As a driver, you should always be out of the way of oncoming car traffic by default. It's stupid to expect both traffic directions to share the center lane, and have to run over bicycles, or block bicycles, if they can't slow down in time for each other.
I agree. Even the DMV Driver handbook does not mention this pattern. Plus, you are right many of us in the USA are taught to drive between the lane lines and stay out of the bike lanes or parking lanes. I understand it may be different in the countries like the UK, Denmark, the Netherlands, or Stockholm for example. But take into account this was San Diego, where this traffic pattern was foreign and not that familiar to those who grew up in Southern California. Not that we cannot adapt, but new unfamiliar traffic patterns that have not been used in the region previously need to be deployed with proper driver training and public awareness of how it is supposed to work to reduce accidents.
In my city some planner had the brilliant idea to take out 2 lanes of a 4 lane major street and replace them with bike lanes. This road handled thousands of cars each day and is a major access road. I worked on this road (in an office building with over 1000 employees, with several similar buildings in the area), and when I saw what they were doing I couldn't believe my eyes. Not only that, but I don't know if I saw more than 10 bikes on this road in the 15 years I worked at the building. It lasted less than a month. As it is, why do these 1 lane each way residential streets in this video have double yellow lines?
Please never force me to play chicken when driving, that seems like one of the worst road designs I can imagine.
You were spot on with pointing out how unmarked roads already operate the way they intend these road to be used, but the bike lane markings provide an illusion of order and protection that doesn't exist on these roads as they would with dedicated bike only lanes
Why not just leave it as an unpainted road, and let the drivers and road users work out what they need to do? The edge lane paint only adds confusion, and wastes paint that gives no useful information.
This video was well done, but saying that “cars get first dibs because they’re paying the bill” perpetuates the idea that motorists pay for their use of the road while nobody else does, which is false. Motorists are subsidized far more than other road users, and we have to stop acting like they should always have first dibs on road space, while road space is a privilege for other users. Regardless, edge lanes are a great topic that’s not discussed enough and the video was super interesting!
At 2:58, I just want to point out that unless it's a toll road, and even then to some extent, the bills are not "paid by the cars". The bills are paid with taxes which come from everyone regardless of if they drive or ride a bike. Car centric roads are subsidized, to varying extents, by non-drivers.
"They're the ones paying."
Nah, not really. Nearly all roadwork is from general revenue. The gasoline tax is a tiny fraction, and the registration/excise tax isn't that much either.
Having shared use of quiet residential streets makes sense. But for busier and faster streets, a separate bike path, away from the road, makes more sense. Colorado Springs has had these for decades, spanning the city, from downtown to the further suburbs. But in recent years, someone in the city decided that painted bicycle gutters were needed on busy streets, creating the inevitable conflict, making things worse for cyclists and drivers alike. As a driver, wait properly for the dashed line to pull right to turn right, and you'll have several cars passing you on the right by pulling across the solid white line as if it weren't there; I haven't yet noticed any driver shoulder checking before doing so. All this fashion for painted bicycle infrastructure is endangering everyone. If the road is small enough, slow enough, quiet enough, then just leave off all lines. Works fine, as you showed. If it's bigger than that, make a separate bike and pedestrian way elsewhere, 100-300m away. We're not a poor country unable to do such things. The seven mile long paved off road bike/pedestrian path near my small mountain town gets substantial use, as does the nearby highway, no conflicts. Same with the myriad off road bike/pedestrian paths in nearby Colorado Springs. Instead of more paint infrastructure with the excuse of "well that other type of paint infrastructure would be even worse", use the existing off road right of ways to build more off road bike pedestrian paths.
I support only spending the gas tax on car infrastructure. Lol
If they really want painted bike infrastructure on a busy road they should eat the road space for a "sidewalk" and use paint to separate pedestrians and cyclists on the elevated sidewalk instead. (You may need to use asphalt for the bike half of the sidewalk because frost + normal sidewalks = not level)
I actually prefer this style of road. Psychologically, it makes the drivers think they have less room, so they would be less likely to drive fast in low speed limit areas.
it's great until you're heading home tired after a long day at work and aren't ready to have a car in front of you. I could easily see someone focused on the car in front of them so swerve into a bike they didn't see because they're focused on the car.
i think the same, i actually like the idea. If its the best in regards what people are used to atm is a big question. How ever, ones people got used to it, it can lead to a more well defined system, it just needs some time to break the old habits. - tbh as european i did not know, that it is common that you have yellow lines everywhere. In most regions in europe you have a center divider which is more or less only there to show you where the center is, you are legally allowed to cross is to overtake (if there is enough room of course). We also have something similar to the yellow lines, how ever those are only in areas, where it is really dangerous to overtake, where nobody with a brain would overtake anyways, like on corners.
@@SilverStarHeggisist Precisely, tired or not.
@@virginiamoss7045 or imaging this on a foggy early morning, when like half the people think because there's some light that means they don't need to turn their headlights on.
@@SilverStarHeggisist In EU we have lots of verry old roads that allowed 2 way traffic these roads are mostly not wider then 1.5 cars.
I think there is a disparity between us and US, that we are used to riding on these streets VS US being used to verry wide roads.
Meanwhile in the Netherlands, I bike on an edge lane road like every day. I didn't even know it had a name, it was so normal.
The problem in the US, is the cyclists think that they can ride anywhere, and anyway they want. They don't stop at red lights, or stop signs, and they ride in both directions, on both sides of the road. They also ride in the middle of the road, and refuse to move for faster traffic. They also ride 2 and 3 across, even though they're required to ride single file.
@@Normal1855 That is the same in the Netherlands... we just (have to) deal with it.
Normally on a road like this when there would be a 20mph speed limit (30 km/h) here so it would not be too much of a problem with modern electric bikes going almost that fast as well.
And to avoid dangerous action by car drivers, the rule is that in case of an accident the car is always at fault, not the biker.
@@Normal1855 You sure that's a cyclist thing? Most dashcam vids from the US are 97% cars that pull such stunts like not stopping for red lights or stop signs, driving anywhere on and off the road or blocking traffic.
But good for you they changed it back to a situation where the people on bikes need to ride on the road and it's forbidden to pass them with the double yellow lines. That way instead of looking at ugly bike -infrastructure- lines and passing them when safe, you can stay behind them and drive 4mph for the entire street. Don't tell me you want them to move over to the sidewalk or the parking lane, you just said you didn't want them driving anywhere where they don't belong.
@@Normal1855 And still you dont want separate infrastructure? With better infrastructure they Will behalve better. And if they are separate they wont botter you, and there will be less cars, so maybe even faster travel time for you
@@Anco Few places in America hardly has viable alternatives to driving, so every bad driver is forced to get into a car. And people wonder why traffic is so bad
The Edge Lanes looked great
Sad they didn't communicate with the community proactively
Great video. These streets make a lot of sense in these residential areas. I'd feel a lot better cycling in these edge lanes because people tend to pass close and thread the needle between you and the oncoming traffic. In my state 3ft is required by law when passing a cyclist. It seems like right of way would just be the same as if you were passing another slow car here which is how it 'should' be.
ok it's clear you have never cycled on one then, we have one here and it's fuckinghorrible
If anything is going to cause more needle threading, it's going to be a road with no markings for where cars belong.
It's crazy how low of standards we have for drivers.
Have you seen the people who barely pass the open book, easy driver's test here? We need driver's test at least on the level of the UK
@@scottanno8861 Nah, Denmark should be our goal. To get a "B" license (car) students are mandated to sit through several hours of classroom education, pass a series of closed-course tests (normal condition and simulated iced surface). Students must also record several hours on public roads with a supervisor (30+ years old or licensed 10+ consecutive years without revocation or suspension). Prospective "B" license holders must also take 8+ hours of first-aid safety courses, receive a note from a doctor stating overall health---especially eyesight---is within acceptable parameters. Only after all of these requirements are satisfied can you schedule your final tests; a 25-question multiple choice exam (minimum 80% to pass), and a public road test with a government supervisor. Any mistakes on the final public road test means you fail the license test (even just straying in your lane onto paint markings is considered a mistake). All of this is to operate a car. Once you have your "B" license it's valid until you turn 70, after which you must receive an OK from your doctor, and pass the road tests every 2 years.
@@InternetKilledTV21 Yeah that would work too
As opposed to the caliber of bike riders? Where I live, they're entitled riders, who think the traffic laws don't apply to them. I can't ever can't even count how many times I've almost hit a cyclist, who blew through a stop sign, or red light, in front of my. And that's WAY more than when other drivers.
@@Normal1855 Bike riders are annoying and elitists, but honestly the problem is too many cars on the road with no qualification.
As someone who's been following this issue and works in the active transportation engineering world, San Diegos fumble here was outreach. They didnt talk with the residents or members of the community, councilpeople, or anyone really with what they were doing. People are always resistant to change, you have to inform them before something like this happens or people will reject any proposal, no matter how sensible
My city had the same issues when we added some roundabouts in some major areas. We've had some out of the way ones for decades, but put a big one in a major artery, no one remembers how to go through them...multiple people trying to go left, even though the road really guides you to the right around the circle. (I think half of them were in protest or smart asses)
They did try to reach out...but even with multiple methods....the city couldn't hit every demographic and so many ppl were focused on the "scary roundabout" that they wouldn't pay attention to the media to learn
But we stuck with them and every year there's a new one or two going up...I really like them and definitely finding my morning commute faster with them.
Ok buy why do bikes need 2 lanes? You have a bike and person who at most weighs 300lb …. A car at minimum is at 2k lb… this doesn’t make sense to me
@@mikeboychuk8809 one lane to go one way, the other lane to go the other way... On top of that, it visually narrows the road, so cars drive more carefully.
@@mikeboychuk8809 Bikes get two lanes because the street is giving them priority over cars. Cars only get one lane and have to yield
@@MegaJoler the thing is it really isn't a bike lane. Cars are allowed there. This road layout just forces people to look out for each other and reduces speed as the width of the street feels narrower (than it actually is).
"Gold St has people backing out of their driveways onto it."
If you think that's bad, in Pennsylvania, we have people backing out of their driveways onto state highways where the speed limit is 55mph! In my three years as a school bus driver, I've witnessed several accidents on the _exact same_ stretch of road, all of which were caused by some entering or leaving their driveway.
As a city bus driver, I almost rear-ended someone who stopped in the middle of the highway for seemingly no reason, did not signal their intentions, did not put their 4-ways on, and even tried to back up, as I was approaching them and trying frantically to stop _in the rain_ ! Luckily I did, but there was a long line of people tailgating me that could've rear-ended me as a result.
"cars get first dibs because they're paying the bills"
Wow, and here I was thinking that taxes paid for roads.
you knew it was a problem when the surveyor on his scooter showed up trying to figure it out 😂
LOL 😆
That's typical press thick as stuff pigs do , didn't they see his microphone sticking out his pocket .
In Louisiana, you are expressly allowed to pass a bicycle in a no-passing zone:
"An operator of a motor vehicle may pass a bicycle traveling in the same direction in a no-passing zone only when it is safe to do so."
from La. RS 32:76.1(B)
Have done it many times here in TN. The no passing is for regular traffic. You'd be in a real bind if you couldn't pass a horse, a tractor, a cyclist or even the Menonites.
It's the same in many other countries. In the UK, if the vehicle is stationary or travelling 10mph or less (which would include most cyclists going uphill) you may pass on double whites.
Yea that's what I was taught to do in New York, if it's safe you can cross the double yellow to pass a bicyclist or pedestrian.
That's the way everywhere. I don't know where they got that you can't pass a slow rider?
@@AdamSmith-gs2dv or tractors. If you couldn't, a 10 minute trip, would take an hour.
We just had a one way street add 2 way bicyle traffic with both lanes on the north side of the street. They had to add signs to all side streets and exits to look for bicycles coming the other direction and had to add traffic lights going in the reverse direction for the bikes which run them any way. I haven't seen but 1 bike on the same street riding on the non-bicycle side against traffic.
That was very interesting! Thanks :-)
Hey Biffa do u think there should be edge lanes in cities skylines?
edge Lanes on quiet residential streets don't make any sense precisely for the reason you stated: people including cyclists and kids playing basketball are using those streets WITHOUT any lines just fine...
the real solution to Gold Coast drive is to make it so it doesn't go through. this will stop anyone other than residents from using it. we have that exact scenario here in my city. A street that used to go through that now has an elementary school in the center of it. the cycling route continues between steel bollards through to the school bus parking lot which is where the street used to go. there's a U-shaped neighborhood on either side of the school grounds
Exactly my thoughts as well. Although, I don't think making it not go through is even necessary (though probably a good idea). Just remove all the lane markings. It means the same thing, everyone understands what it means already, and it's a clear signal to through traffic that they shouldn't be there. If anything, the only effect of the edge lane markings is that it gives through traffic permission to be there.
Now here's a thought: instead of making the road not go through, what if they just... lied? Put up "not a through street" signs, and maybe put in a report with Google maps to get them to stop routing traffic through there?
@@roceb5009 Or just put steel bollards on a block in the middle of the route. Easy, fast, cheap, takes literally less than one day to do
@@frafraplanner9277 yeah but that also blocks local traffic, forcing people leaving for their commute onto roads *inside* the neighborhood, plus making them even later, which makes them go faster...
They could also make it illegal for through traffic during rush hour. I have seen roads like that.
Put in some jig jogs where you have to turn right then left or vice versa to stay on the street.
Recently visited the Netherlands (aka the bike kingdom) there were lots of these lanes in slower streets. I can’t fathom why Americans can’t build good bike lanes.
75 years of propaganda from oil and car companies.
@@1981menso also an abundance of boomers/Karens who reflexively hate everything to do with roads that isn't adding 16 lanes for cars.
Because the vast majority don't want them.
@@johnathin0061892 Enjoy, your traffic, your road rage and the 100 people killed DAILY in cars and by cars.
@@johnathin0061892 majority SEEMINGLY dont want them because the infrastructure isn't there in the first place. People do want to bike and use good public transit. There's a high demand, but we're all forced to drive.
I can see this working but this definitely doesn’t seem like an ideal solution as it very likely to cause crashes I feel, I think this would only be good for very low speed residential streets in cities with less car usage. I personally would shrink the car lanes and widen the sidewalks and encourage cycling down the sidewalks.
I really don't even see the need for Bike Lanes in areas where there are sidewalks.
Yes, I hear you. Sidewalks are for pedestrians... Except, when was the last time (other than downtown), where you saw enough pedestrians to even be a concern? Bikers would still have to obey traffic laws, and be considerate to pedestrians.... But here in our area, I'm lucky to see 4-5 pedestrians a *week*... The sidewalks are going mostly unused, let the bikers use the sidewalks and they'll be safer (vs cars), and the sidewalks will actually be used.
Very interesting video and another example I can include into my presentation of how to NOT design bike infrastructure that I plan on presenting to my local city council next month. I've been watching your content since December and have thoroughly enjoyed the content you put out.
The design itself while not top notch is not bad given the situation. Implementing on the other hand is a case to learn from to not repeat.
@@zagrizena Yeah it's not bad for a small quiet residential street but I've overall felt this road to be a good example of how the city needs to communicate with residents and listen to them as much as possible, so the project doesn't feel imposed and alienate residents ultimately killing the project.
My takeaway on this was.... find ways to restrict / deter freeway users from cutting through a neighborhood street and just don't paint lines. People will figure it out as they do on unmarked neighborhood roads. Spending the money to paint lines and erect signs added more to the confusion than if they'd just paved the road and left it unmarked.
make bigger freeways, get more cars, so make bigger freeways and get even more cars....This is a problem of ever expanding road networks.
i think the best way was to force everyone to work from home if they could.
We did that (restricting traffic) which resulted in the neighboring government filing a frivolous lawsuit, some people are really hard to please.
This. If someone is unhappy with the traffic on the freeway, maybe they should consider where the traffic came from.
That's my take also. This feels like an attempt to remind people that it is a neighborhood street and should not be used as a commuter shortcut. Make people less comfortable on the road, so you reduce traffic on it, and make it safer for the people that live there. However it will take a while for the change to filter through the shortcut apps that people use and discover that it really isn't a good shortcut anymore.
Where I live we have these things called speed bumps! They have to be implemented correctly, obviously, but they seem to help.
The problem with that street is that it goes through.
The city should block it to car traffic in a couple of places so it loses it's appeal to drivers who use it as a thoroughfare. Just leave gaps in the blockades so cyclists can get through.
As for the markings, get rid of all markings on that street.
trouble is if driveways go onto that road you cannot completely make it bikes only, otherwise people will yard hop in their SUVs so they can park in their garage.
@@filanfyretracker
I didn't say to make the road for bikes only.
I said they should block the road in a couple places so cars can't use it for a thoroughfare.
@@deezynar how about parking on one side only, 2 car lanes and 2 bike lanes?
@@Boby9333 that defeats part of the purpose which was to force drivers to subconsciously slow down and be more cautious.
you are correct, this is the best solution and is exactly what they would do in the Netherlands. It's called 'filtered permeability.' Source: I'm a transportation engineer.
After living in Germany for a year, Europeans are miles head of the US in sharing the roads with „vulnerable road user“. Most village roads don’t have a centerline and people aren’t making a big hoopla hin sharing with bikes.
Excactly.
Isn't the simpler fix to change the center line to a dotted yellow?
We have some of those shared lane streets in my city over by my dad's house, and they're absolutely horrible. In the last two years that it existed, I've almost had three head-on, and two T-bone collisions and seen zero bicycles; but only one near-collision in the 18 years prior (with no bicycle incidents and many using it), 10 of which I was living there, including my first 8 years as a driver!
Welcome to America, where you need a road sign to tell you not to crash in a car
Don't worry, people don't read them anyway
@@jgood005 of course people dont read them. i can literally see that theres no car comming either way and im not going to go to a complete stop every fucking block
It seems like people just hate it because it's different and new. When they built a DDI in my town, everybody was complaining about how odd it was, even though it really did help in relieving traffic. But the DOT should've notified residents before implementing those edge lanes.
DDIs are good for cars, really sucky for people who walk and bike.
@@zzz6valvoline If you have enough car traffic to justify using a DDI, chances are it's already incredibly unpleasant to walk or cycle there.
@@zzz6valvoline That's just the thing- there aren't any pedestrians at this intersection, and very rarely any cyclists. I think people just need to be better educated and accepting of new traffic patterns.
People always hate change, but the bigger issue is that the city added something completely unfamiliar to the locals and didn't inform them about it at first. A street with edge works counter to how you normally drive and how you have been taught to drive, so people need to be taught on how to drive "wrong" so they understand how to drive"right".
That's the biggest gripe. They never got input from the people who it affects the most.
I thi9nk that there is a key tool that is being ignored in this situation. something called a "dashed yellow line". that would serve the comperable purpose and not increase worry over hitting on-coming traffic.
“Cars get first dibs, because well, they’re paying the bill”.... Gas taxes have never come even close to paying what road infrastructure costs. Everyone in the country pays the bill not ‘cars’.
North American streets are dangerously easy to navigate in most cases.
I'd really like to see Americans who struggle with these streets navigate sma town streets in Europe which may very well be only as wide in total as the "car" section here
yea that street is 2x as wide as the street i live on and i have no problem meeting other cars in my pretty big volvo v90
That's because we've land to spare. My favorite was visiting Texas, were half the roads were two lanes in each direction and a parallel road on each side of the main road.
@@SilverStarHeggisist you spelled shit road engineering wrong
@@einar8019 no it was great, you literally never had to worry about being stuck behind someone going slower then you. I wish all roads were like that.
@@SilverStarHeggisist if your in a car its great but for literally everyone else its terrible. its bad for the enviroment, for pedestrians, for the people living next to the road, for bisiclyists and its also less safe for car drivers too because of the increased speeds
4:17 The pickup and the white car turning left both run on the stop marking on the opposite side of the road. People who drive so recklessly don't deserve to have any saying about road safety. They only need to get a ticket for putting lives in danger, and have their licence revoked.
You would have ban like 1/4 of driver's. Though I do agree super annoying and dangerous. Like the people that never used their turn signals.
This reminds me of how you need to pass oncoming traffic in Britain. I'm an American who drove in rural Britain this past year and it was a learning curve, but I ended up liking it after the second week! You have to pay more attention, but it kept me focused instead of getting distracted on "easy" roads.
If they want to reduce thru traffic, add some small roundabouts. That is what we do around here. Locals hate roundabouts, so we'll add them to streets we don't want people to use for thru traffic, and people actually do avoid them. LOL.
Something else to consider: in California and a lot of other states like MA, VA, CT, etc. traffic enforcement is very strict and expensive. People are used to getting pulled over for driving in a bike lane. So, when they see what looks like a bike lane with one car lane in the middle, they may be hesitant to move into the bike lane for fear of getting a ticket, causing a lot of confusion. Here in FL, it is a different story. Traffic enforcement basically doesn’t exist. It sucks, but people would probably be less confused by this road design because they already feel as if they can move into the bike lane to avoid an oncoming car with no consequences.
yes , yes and yes. When a city in California introduced floating parking it confused even the cops there and they issued tickets to people who correctly used the floating parkin spots
Cops in CA NEVER patrol in neighborhoods. This is a moot argument.
@@1981menso they did when I lived in Milpitas and I see them do it in Sacramento. When I was in the bay area they did t Selective Traffic Enforcement Program (STEP ). That's when you get police from 4-8 different agencies and do crack down on speeders. ANd yes they would pick a street like this
Florida should be a pretty good case study in how NOT to do things.
Orlando was just ranked number one in the nation as most dangerous for pedestrians and cyclists, and Florida beats 49 other states in pedestrian and cyclist fatalities.
Eh, this doesn't mesh with my experience at all. Cars drive in bike lanes all the time, delivery trucks unexpectedly pull up and stop in bike lanes, and enforcement just is not there. Maybe different street design would help ?
Another problem are needlessly large vehicles. How is it legal to have lifted pickup-trucks so high that they can blast their exhaust right into your face as a cyclist ? A few such toys make for a terrible experience for everyone. Why don't we seem to have a universal standard for bumper heights for all street-legal vehicles ? There are already all sorts of regulations around cars&trucks.
There are 3 main requirements for an edge lane road. (in my opinion)
- low traffic volume
- rural setting
- NO PARKING!!
They failed all 3. Feels like they wanted to fail.
A 4th might be that the road is narrow. This road looks like it could have 2 lanes both ways and a bikeline.
Bullshit, this works in other countries.
@@brozius I know, I live in one.
Considering the width of the road and the fact that all the properties had off-street parking rendering most of the on-streer parking unnecessary, I don't understand how they couldn't find room for two curb-separated bike lanes and two car lanes.
- Looking at the car count this IS a low traffic volume. If it was any lower you wouldn't even need any markings on the road.
- A rural setting would be a horrible choice for this type of road design. Since driving speeds are usually higher in rural areas and there's more room, that's where the separate bike lane comes in.
- No parking would be ideal, but it's not necessary. I would say the current situation with only the yellow middle line is considerably worse with parking. With the bike suggestion lanes, at least you had a clear boundary line for parking, that'll help cyclists identify parked cars easier, and helps drivers park better. And the dotted line means that cars passing cyclists will keep a better distance so the cyclists won't be forced to ride closer to the parked cars than comfortable.
The only thing that went wrong with this road is that they didn't inform anyone about the change. You can't expect the people driving here to immediately understand it, since this type of road design is apparently still quite rare in that city.
And about the narrow road. This honestly was the best way they could have divided the space. 2 lanes and one bike lane would have been quite unsafe for cyclists. 2 lanes, means cars will drive faster. And 1 two-way bike lane would mean that as soon as they get to the next street the cyclists would have to cross the entire road again, to ride safely on the right side, since not all streets are designed the same.
This is a design error you see with many new American cycling projects. Yes, a protected two-way bike lane is the safest option for cyclists. But that only counts as safe if they have a good connection to the other streets. If not, then just use an unprotected lane on either side of the road. Just take it one step at the time. It's about the network, not the single road.
Street parking is good. it serves as a protection barrier.
idk, it still seems to me like great in theory, not great in practice. My initial thought was "if it's supposed to simulate an unpainted neighborhood road, why not just take the paint out?" But then you mentioned that it shouldn't be unpainted because the road gets used as a tertiary detour for commuters. And in that case... well, drivers take speed cues from the road, and you said that the center section (which to those who don't understand the purpose would seem to be the car-designated section) is as wide as an interstate lane, which is designed for high speeds.
To be perfectly honest, it sounds to me like the road itself is an issue, a neighborhood road that also accommodates commuters. You'd need to find a way to discourage the detour-seeking commuters before anything else could be done.
Keep up the good work, fine city surveyor. It's a thankless job.
What my city did is turn streets into one way streets.
Put a park in the middle of one street to make in into 2 dead end streets.
Then the NIBY's in the neighborhood would complain about how long it takes them to get to the freeway.
@@1981menso So you go around the block NBDR and your front yard and street is nice and quiet.
If I can see there's a road where I need to go, I would rather just drive there slowly than have to plan an elaborate circling pattern to home in on the destination.
@@joec.2768 It's not for those who live there it's to deter those who do not.
Hi Rob. I live in the SD area and work in active transportation planning. I appreciate you doing this video! It’s all about safety!
But the Edge Lane treatment is safer. Problem is road is being used as a cut through and it was designed to be a slow residential street. To restore it to a slow residential street you need to add 'filtered permeability' basically barriers in the street that allow bikes and peds to go through but force drivers to turn and make the route more circuitous and therefore less effective than just staying on the highway or the arterial aka 'stroad.' Make it so cars can't cut through and you fix the problem, pavement markings become an irrelevant moot point.
yeah? wanna help me stop the stupid airport people mover idea?
@@PeterPapineau3 what's the problem with it? (I genuinely haven't looked at it)
@@jayjackson5705 just ban thru traffic and make the sidewalk wider and people will slow down
@@einar8019 that's what you're essentially doing with the filtered permeability. Signage won't work because it requires enforcement and that's next to impossible to be effective.
THE NEWS REPORT LMFAOOOKKOOOOOO I WAS LAUGHING SO HARD
The way drivers feel about this is the way most bikers feel about litterally every single road on the planet with very few exceptions.