Put Your Road On A Diet
Posted by Byron Watkins Tuesday, November 08, 2011
It is always interesting to me the ire that bike lanes spark in people.
Fundamentally, it is just a space where a person riding a bike can safely travel from point A-to-point B, much like anyone else in a vehicle (under California vehicle code a bike is classified as such) but figuratively, they always seem to represent so much more.
Last week, George Hostetter posted a blog at Fresnobee.com questioning if bike lanes are a “quality of life issue” or the city trying to socially engineer it’s citizens. The blog was in response to a District 3 community meeting being held tonight* by Fresno Council member, Oliver Baines.
The rub is that Fresno Street, between California Avenue on the southwest and C Street on the northeast, is due for road diet, which will add bike lanes, in accordance with the City’s Bicycle Master Plan. Based on Baines’ actions, it seems he is convinced his District would not want the road diet.
It is a frustrating blog post to say the least. I take umbrage with Hostetter’s snarky, aggressive tone but I am going to try and contain this to only addressing some of the post’s ignorance.
(Okay, that was a little aggressive.)
Let’s say I walked up to you and said, “Would you like me to take your main four lane road and make it a two lane road?”
When I present it like that of course your response is going to be, “NO!”
That even sounds terrible to me and I like bike lanes.
It’s less lanes, that can only be bad right? Even the word diet sounds negative. But a road diet is more than that, it is about making the road safe for all forms of transportation.
A road diet forms what is called a “complete street.” It takes 4 lanes of two-way traffic and creates, in order, from curb-to-curb:
1) Parking Lane
2) Bike Lane
3) Vehicle Lane
4) Two-way left turn lane
5) Vehicle Lane
6) Bike Lane
7) Parking Lane
It creates a safe place to park. It creates a safe place to bike. It creates a safe place for cars to exit traffic. It has been proven that road diets make it safer for cars, bikes and pedestrians.
One simple way it makes it safer for cars; when a car has to make a left turn from a 4-lane road it must stop in the left traveling lane and block the traffic behind it. This can cause rear end collisions because drivers don’t usually anticipate cars stopping in the left lane. With the addition of a “two-way left turn lane” a vehicle can safely move out of traffic to make a left turn.
I could go on about other ways that road diets are effective but if you would like to learn more about how they make streets safer, there is lots of great information available on the City’s website.
But the ire of bike lanes and road diets doesn't only come from a lack of education. If you ever read a comment thread under a bike lane post it seems to tap into a deeper place. It’s like something sacred is being taken away from drivers. Something is invading a space they feel is for only for them and their automobile.
When I read these I always wonder, “Do drivers ever stop to think that a bike lane is also available to them?”
On any given day, you could choose to either be a driver or a bicyclist. You don’t have to only choose one or the other. (You also could choose to be a pedestrian. But for our purposes here, we will stick with the two.)
Did you know that 40% of your trips are within two miles of your house? 50% are within three miles. Two miles is a perfect biking distance for most people. When most of your trips are so close, your car doesn’t have to be the necessity for every excursion.
And what about those that cannot afford to operate a motor vehicle? Do they not have the option of getting around their city safely? Are we saying that you only have the right to move about the city if you can afford a vehicle?
One argument Hostetter makes is why do we need bike lanes when only 1% of Fresno’s population bikes? But one of the main reasons people choose to use their bike for transportation and utility is because there is infrastructure available that lets them feel safe doing it. Improved infrastructure means more people on bikes.
Hostetter also seems to imply one should just ride their bike on the sidewalk. While technically legal in Fresno, riding a bike on the sidewalk is illegal in many areas of the state and not as safe as riding in a bike lane. The sidewalk presents a whole gamut of bicycle obstacles. People, bus stops, fire hydrants, telephone poles, newspaper dispensers and the worst one...cars.
When exciting a parking lot, drivers rarely stop before the sidewalk. They typically stop at the edge of the road. When this happens, they are never looking out for pedestrians or cyclists they are only looking to the lane they want to merge into. If you are riding on the sidewalk, you could very easily find yourself on the hood of one of these cars.
But a bike lane puts you into the drivers field of vision, you are part of traffic and well out of range of their fast approaching hood ornament. (Do they even offer those anymore?)
Although it may not seem like it, the bike lane is far safer than the sidewalk and once you have experienced the uninterrupted flow of the bike lane it is impossible to go back to the obstacle laden course that is the sidewalk.
Regardless of what side of the political spectrum you stand on.
Regardless of what side of the environmental debate you stand on.
Regardless of where you currently stand on bicycles.
We are all going to have to make tough choices about how we get around in the coming future.
Gas isn’t getting any cheaper. Oil isn’t getting any more abundant. The economy isn’t throwing good paying jobs at people. We all need options so that we can make decisions about how we each choose to get from point A-to-point B.
This isn’t “social engineering.” It’s long overdue.
*If you would like to attend the community meeting tonight (Tuesday, Nov 8th), it is being held at Edison High School and starts at 5:30. The roads in District 3 are used by everyone, not just District 3. We would love to see you there in support.
