Same Rules:
Cyclist Education
The majority of bike vs motor vehicle accidents are a result of bad choices by cyclists (running stop signs/lights, riding against traffic, on sidewalk, in the dark without lights, etc.). The crash data indicate that regardless of other safety issues in the traffic environment, uneducated cyclists are often the cause of their own problems.
The first step to creating a cyclist-friendly community is to teach cyclists to act as drivers of vehicles, to follow the rules, to understand traffic dynamics and the difference between safe and unsafe movements. Doing this can vastly reduce crashes caused by both cyclists and motorists.
Even in a less than perfect traffic culture, educated cyclists can control their own safety and feel confident on the road. Solving the problems caused by cultural ignorance of safe cycling is paramount. Bike facilities cannot supplant education, and in many cases require more education to counteract the inherent flaws of segregating vehicle drivers.
Many who argue for infrastructure over education do so on the basis that people won't be attracted to cycling if they are told they need to learn something. But not understanding the limitations of popular infrastructure, like bike lanes and side paths, can result in serious injury or death.
Cycling advocacy is the promotion and safeguarding of cyclists' rights and safety. It is not the promotion of cycling to reduce motoring, save the environment, end obesity or sell bicycles. However, creating educated and confident cyclists is the best, most ethical way to promote cycling.
The Motorcycle industry has figured this out. We can learn from them. |
Same Rights:
Traffic Culture Change
Cycling advocates must realize that creating “safe places to ride” is a social structure problem that cannot be solved with physical structures.
We must educate motorists and law enforcement* about cyclists’ right to the road. We must insist on equity, respect and access.
The traffic culture which motivates cyclists to seek "car-free-space" is detrimental to more than just cyclists:
- Motorists suffer from other aggressive drivers and increased insurance costs;
- Residents suffer from reduced livability and decreased property value. Many of us can’t allow our children to play or ride bikes on our neighborhood streets, the way we did as children;
- Speed bumps, rough bricks and gratuitous stop signs increase fuel consumption and decrease road quality. If individuals maintained a sense of
respect for others, we wouldn't need these traffic-calming devices;
- Pedestrians suffer the most where no one acknowledges crosswalks. We are all pedestrians!
Cyclists and cycling organizations can be community leaders in advocating for civility, cooperation and an end to the degradation of traffic safety.
Creating a safe and civil environment for cyclists though traffic culture change benefits cyclists, pedestrians, motorists, home-owners. All citizens are stakeholders.
*The Orlando Police Department is ahead of much of the nation in recognizing and protecting cyclists' rights. Thanks OPD! |
Same Roads:
Infrastructure
“If you treat drivers like idiots, they act as idiots. Never treat anyone in the public realm as an idiot, always assume they have intelligence.”
—Hans Monderman
There's a connection between road design and traffic behavior. Painting edge lines and center lines on curvy, slow speed roads allows motorists to drive too fast, so we install raised reflectors andstop-sticks to keep them from running off the road, and speed bumps to slow them down. When our road designs attempt to compensate for incompetence, we shouldn't wonder why people drive so badly.
Sadly, this is also the trend in bikeway design. It is most blatantly seen in blue bike lanes — bike lanes which create dangerous conflicts between cars and bikes. They are painted blue to alert everyone of the danger. They should be eliminated.
Cyclist-friendly advocacy seeks to increase awareness of what actually enhances cyclists' use of the roadway vs illusory facilities that give cyclists a false sense of security. We owe it to ourselves to become familiar with the benefits and hazards of various cycling facilities and not just celebrate any strip of asphalt or white pain thrown our way. Unsuspecting cyclists are duped into endangering themselves in poorly-designed or incorrectly-painted facilities. That is an unacceptable consequence of infrastructure-first advocacy. Novices make enough mistakes on their own without being led into suicide slots and coffin corners.
Cyclist operational enhancements - smooth pavement, traffic light sensors, sharrows or signage that empower cyclists to claim the lane.
Cyclist psychological enhancements - wide lanes, bike lanes and shoulders. Extra space on the road makes it easier, or less intimidating for cyclists to use higher speed roads. Where there are few driveways or cross streets these facilities do not create many operational problems for cyclists. In complex urban and commercial areas, cyclists are much safer controlling a narrow lane than riding on the margin (be that a bike lane, shoulder or sidewalk).
The best-designed and implemented bikeways cannot supplant education, so when psychological enhancements conflict with safety, the solution must be education, not infrastructure!
Traffic flow enhancements - bike lanes, side paths or any facility that removes cyclists from the traffic lane for the convenience of motorists. Motorists like to grumble about public spending on bike infrastructure, but most of it benefits them more than us. |
