Q. Dear John,
We have 8-foot-wide off road multi-use pathways on both sides of two 4-lane county roads (pathway, buffer, 2 lanes, central median, 2 lanes, buffer, pathway). Buckwalter Parkway is about 6 miles long and Bluffton Parkway is about 8 miles long.

 

The Bluffton Town Council,  Bluffton Town Manager and Bluffton Chief of Police in South Carolina are seriously considering allowing golf carts on the Bluffton, Buckwalter and McCracken Circle pathways. Greater Bluffton Pathways believes this would be unsafe for those children and families who are biking and walking to school each day.

Karen Heitman
Greater Bluffton Pathways
Bluffton, SC

Karen, I asked Tom Dodds in the South Carolina state bicycle/pedestrian offce if he had an opinion on this situation.  Tom’s answer:

It was kind of awkward for us to weigh in on an issue on that rare road in South Carolina that does not belong to SCDOT, but we did generally. The shared use path fit the definition in the state code of laws to legally be considered a sidewalk (not a stretch–area beside road for pedestrians). The golf carts fit the definition for motor vehicles, and so we reminded the town that state law says no motor vehicles on sidewalks except at the driveways across the sidewalk. Also these particular paths were not federally funded.

Thomas Dodds, P.E.
Pedestrian and Bicycle Engineer, SCDOT

Karen, I hope that helps. 

JW

Denise wrote with a question about railroad track crossings where bicycle accidents were happening:

Q. Hello,
In Harrisonburg, VA, we are having many bicycle accidents at two sites where train tracks ntersect the roadway at very skewed angles and travel along the roadway. We are looking into installing a bulb-out solution, but one of the sites does not have the room for this so we are looking into flangeway filler.

We want to find a company that makes a product that fills all or most of the flange gap so that riders can ride across these places.  Can you recommend something?

Thanks,
Denise Martin
(bicycle advocate)
Broadway, VA

I wrote back and asked what kind of rail traffic was using the crossing. It’s a lot easier to deal with such rail settings than, say, a through route that has trains going faster. I also asked about the roadway’s lanes — how many, what widths? I thought there might be an opportunity to narrow some travel lanes to create some space for a more perpendicular crossing for bikes.

Denise responded: 

…the trains using the crossings in question were freight trains, probably often hauling grain. At one of the crossings, the rail line comes from the south, follows the road and crosses it over a LONG crossing and then follows along the other side of the road.  It is a 5-lane road (one middle turning lane).  The City wants to find a way to make a smooth crossing to benefit all if possible.  Rerouting the road or rail line is completely out of the picture because no one wants to spend that kind of money.  So is placing a bridge over the rails, which I threw in just to make everything else sound less expensive.  Norfolk Southen (the rail company) says the crossings meet “minimum requirements” and if the City wants “upgrades,” they pay.  I say the fix is much cheaper than the medical bills and certainly much less than the cost of a law suit!  Point: Cost IS an issue.  I don’t think anyone would blink about it though if that many motor vehicles were having accidents at a spot. 

The other crossing is on Country Club Road.  This heavily traveled 2 lane road tracks parallel to Route 33.  This is another long, skewed crossing.  Unfortunately the road and trains also go underneath Interstate 81 at the place of the accidents, so there is no room to widen the road or do much else because of the interstate bridge supports on either side of the crossing.I think once they tried to “twist” the road ever so slightly and installed a narrow rubber filler (leaving the 2.5″ inner flange openings.)

We have had quite a few accidents and even broken bones at these places.  Within the past couple weeks a wrist was broken on the Route 11 crossing.  I know of at least 4 very recent accidents there. The local TV weatherman just wrecked his bicycle there and a Harrisonburg police officer wiped out on his police motorcycle!!!  Neither road has a “shoulder” to speak of either.

We wanted to use a compressible flangeway filler to fill the flange gaps.  One company (Polycorp) told me this is not allowed on public crossings (per American Assoc. of RR Engineer’s standards which require the 2.5″ inner flange opening)  I have a few other flangeway filler companies looking into it.  I just discovered HiRail crossings.  They have a pede-STRAIL that is a rubber crossing for pedestrians and cyclists.  The pede-STRAIL rep is on vacation though, so I don’t know if this will fulfill all our needs.  The person I spoke with was not sure it was made to be placed in the roadway.  Their regular crossing is designed for the roadway and could be helpful, but I don’t know if it will eliminate the accidents.

I asked a follow-up question. Denise had mentioned that the crossings are “long,” which suggests a very
shallow crossing angle. I asked if she had any idea at what angle these tracks cross the roadway?

Her response:

Yes, the angle is very unusual on the crossing, but I don’t know that anyone has measured it.  I’ll ask the City engineer about this.  The rails travel mostly parallel to the road and then
gradually cross the road from Left to Right.  The trains then continue on the other side of the road.  A cyclist needs to use up 2-3 lanes on Rte 11 to swing out to make a perpendicular crossing.  Because the road is so busy, cyclists often fail to obtain this much roadway.  On Country Club Road, the cyclist must actually swing out into oncoming traffic to make a perpendicular crossing.  Those that realize this walk or are technically skilled enough to ride it.  However, some of those eventually fall too. Signs warn “Skewed Crossing, Cyclists Use Caution.”  This is a very weak warning in my opinion since most skewed crossings are only slightly skewed.  I have urged the City to put up more strongly worded signs, and they are working on it.  I think they need to acknowledge it for what it is, unfit for a safe
bicycle crossing.

Denise sent some air photos, and gave me some coordinates for Google Earth, which allowed me to zoom in and look around a bit. The angle of the tracks to the roadway did indeed look amazingly shallow. She also told me that she was speaking with the engineer at the rail company, and several meetings had occurred where cyclists, the RR people, and the City had gathered to discuss the situation. THis sounded like it was heading in the right direction.

She added this information:

On the site I had my accident at each rail line has two rails.  The second rail after the flange gap is what bicycle tires seem to push against and suddenly divert left.  This metal rail will be replaced by rubber filler.  “Bulb out” shoulder improvements are supposed to be placed that will allow the cyclist to zigzag across the tracks. (turn right, cross, turn left, remerge).  The turns might be a bit sharp, but the City people wanted to keep the cyclists in the sight line of motor traffic. 

I responded by sending section of the Wisconsin DOT bike facility guide, which does have more details than many of the other guides available. I pointed to images in that guide, one from Seattle where the  rubberized surface is only used toward the right edge of the lane(s). The panels come in sections (4 ft?) and they were able to save some money by only using them where they needed them.  Denise wrote that the WI DOT materials were the single most concise piece she had read yet, and that it tied a lot of info together beautifully. She said she had forwarded the materials I attached on to the city engineers because they were working on finishing the designs. 

And finally came this note from Denise:
Improvements are actually going to be done in the next couple months!!!!  I can’t believe it. I have had quite an education in RR tracks and crossings.  I spent whole days researching solutions and RR products/crossings, so if any info can be passed along, I would love to do this. 

We all learned from this one, Denise! Sometimes the key is that someone takes on the challenge and keeps pushing unitl officials, elected officials, and others recognize the problem and start looking for solutions.

Cheers,
John W.

Here’s a post that shows that, even if the NCBW staff doesn’t know the answer, we’re probably just one or two links removed from someone who does. Sharon asked about cycling in the Dayton area…

Hello!  Do you know where I can go, to find out what route to take to ride from home to work in the Southwest area of Ohio?

Thanks.

Sharon

Hi Sharon –

I don’t have any information on bicycling to work in Southwest Ohio, but am cc’ing this message to an old friend, Don Burrell, who is Senior Planner and Bicycle/Pedestrian Coordinator for the OKI
(Ohio/Kentucky/Indiana) Regional Council of Governments. If he can’t help you, he’s sure to
know who can.

As a separate message, I’ll send you a copy of Don’s “OKI Bicycle E-Info News”
newsletter.Cheers!
J

A. Sharon,
Dayton puts you outside of OKI’s planning area, but Dayton is more bike friendly for commuters and has a wonderful trail network. I will hand you off to Chuck Smith, a member of the Dayton Cycling Club and president of the Ohio Bicycle Federation.

You will find bike commuting resources from the Dayton club
<http://www.daytoncyclingclub.org/commuter.htm>http://www.daytoncyclingclub.org/commuter.htm
   and from the Miami Valley Regional Planning Commission, our counterpart transportation planning agency for Dayton.
<http://www.mvrpc.org/>http://www.mvrpc.org/
Don Burrell, AICP, Senior Planner
Bicycle / Pedestrian Coordinator

A. Sharon,

On Markey Road, you are near the northern end of the Dayton River Corridor Bikeway. Pick up the Bikeway in the Dayton Heart Hospital parking lot, and ride south.  The Dayton River Corridor Bikeway (also known as the Great Miami Trail) will take you as far south as the Montgomery/Butler County border.

Chuck Smith
Chair, Ohio Bicycle Federation
www.ohiobike.org
We bring you:
1.  Share the Road License Plate
2.  Better Ohio Bicycling Law
3.  Ohio Bicycle Events Calendar

Dan Jatres wrote asking for an old copy (Issue #47) of Bicycle Forum, which I edited for many years:

The Chicago Bike Lane Design Guide mentions that this issue had information about city’s experiences with reducing travel lanes to 10 feet; to allow the addition of bike lanes I will be meeting with the Sr. Traffic Engineer for the City of New Orleans in hopes of getting his buy-in on 10-foot lanes and any concrete evidence I can cite would be helpful

Dan Jatres
Regional Planning Commission
Pedestrian and Bicycle Programs
I told Dan I’d try to hunt up a copy of the back-issue, and also included a message I’d seen on the APBP listserve from Michael Ronkin, former bicycle/pedestrian coordinator for the Oregon Dept. of Transportation:

I think you’ll find unanimous support from APBP for the 10′ travel lane  configuration. Peter Furth made a compelling case. He also referred to a study;  I can pass it on to those who write me off-line (though I’ll be gone for all of next week).  It drives a nail in the coffin of ìwider is  saferî for travel lane widths in suburban and urban contexts. The author does  not claim speed reduction is the reason though. I saw him present the paper at  TRB, and his conclusion was wonderful; he essentially said “Why use wider lanes  if narrower lanes are as safe or safer?  With the space youíve saved you can  provide really useful features such as median islands or bike lanes.”

Michael Ronkin

Q. We are looking for a copy of the following report that was published in the mid-80s.

English, J.W. (1986). Liability Aspects of Bikeway Designation.
Washington, DC: Bicycle Federation of America.

Terrance K. Manion | Director of  IT, Instructor of Law, Librarian | Georgia State University
College of Law

 
A. This report is available in Word format at the National Center for Bicycling & Walking web site. Look in the NCBW Publications section of the site library: www.bikewalk.org/ncbw_pubs.php .

Regards,

Gary MacFadden

Brad wrote with this question about getting helmets for distribution in the province of British Columbia.

Good afternoon and greetings from Prince George,
British Columbia, Canada.   Our community
requires that helmets be warn at all times when
biking however many riders do not do so. We are
learning that many don’t wear these simply
because they are without the financial means to
purchase one.  Are you aware of any North
American funding programs that might provide
assistance to obtain helmets for such individuals?

Thank you very much.

 

Brad Beckett
Community Services Supervisor
City of Prince George
Prince George, British Columbia, Canada
250-561-7654

Brad –

I’m cc’ing this message to John Luton of the
Greater Victoria Bicycle Coalition, in case he
has some suggestions for you.

In many communities, the local hospitals help
provide helmets at low — or no — cost. Also,
the ICBC may have some sort of program, although
I couldn’t find it on their website. They do have
a lot of bicycle safety stuff, however. Here are
some of their products.
http://www.icbc.com/youth/youth_new_educators.asp

You should also take a look at the Bicycle Helmet
Safety Institute’s website. This page has
resources, including links to companies that
provide inexpensive helmets.
http://www.helmets.org/toolkit.htm

Hope this helps!
John W.

Q. Hey John,

Bob Shanteau forwarded your web address and the 12 Hazards Color
Drawing to the APBP list-serv. I identified 10 with no hesitation -  the
other 2 escape me . . .

I looked around your web info and the hazards page and I can’t find
anywhere that lists what the 12 are? Where can I find this info?

Thanks,
Debb

A. Hi Debb–

The 12 hazards are (starting at the top):
1. wrong way bicyclist
2. drain grate
3. driver backing out of driveway
4. diagonal railroad tracks
5. train
6. pedestrian
7. dog
8. open car door
9. passing car cutting right
10. crack in road parallel to parked car
11. leaves
12. pothole

I’m surprised I remembered them!

Cheers!
J

Sam Kaufman wrote, asking for pointers on putting in bike lanes around the city of Pittsburgh.

I’m aiming mostly at having the city put in bicycle/walking lanes along all of our trolley lines. Pittsburgh is a very hilly town that dissuades many people from riding a bicycle to work. None of the trolley lines go over a 2.5% grade. I am requesting any guidance on and resources that might be critical to my research. The office of city planning in Pittsburgh does have a master plan written but never has put into effect. What should I do? I was thinking about writing a petition to be put in all local bike shops having people sign it in demand of bicycle lanes and bicycle lanes along the trolley lines as a start. Thanks in advance for any help you can offer.

 I cc’d several other Pittsburgh advocates that Sam might work with.

The main suggestion I had for Sam is to build a constituency. Agency staff and elected officials tend to see one advocate as either a crank or…well, a crank. Rather than posting a petition, you might consider posting an announcement for an organizational meeting for a bike advocacy group (assuming there isn’t one already). It could say something like “Want Bike Lanes in Pittsburgh? Join our new group!” You
really want folks to help make things happen, not just sign a petition.

As for the master plan, keep this process in mind: in places like Pittsburgh, a metropolitan planning organization (MPO) handles the major transportation planning efforts, in partnership with local (e.g., city) agencies. They create the long-range transportation plan, which usually has a time-frame of 20 or 30 years.

In your area, the MPO is the “Southwestern Pennsylvania Commission” (http://www.spcregion.org/). They create the transportation plan and to find the plan (“2035 Transportation and Development Plan for
Southwestern Pennsylvania”), go to: http://www.spcregion.org/trans_lrp.shtml. The actual transportation plan is Section 6 but there are likely references to bicycling in other sections, as well.

The key point is this: the purpose of the plan is to identify the long-range goals and major projects. From this plan comes the actual project list — or Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Projects in the TIP are supposed to be “consistent” with the plan but don’t necessarily have to be specifically be mentioned in the plan. SPC’s current TIP (2007-2010) is here: http://www.spcregion.org/trans_tip_report.shtml.

Scroll down to Pittsburgh and download the map and the list of projects. Identify projects that can either help or hurt efforts. Lobby to get bike-friendly things in and to modify things that aren’t.

One thing I noticed in the list of upcoming projects is that there are several bridge items listed. These are extremely important things because they (1) only come along once in a great while and (2) are critical links in the community. I’d get in touch with the SPC’s planners to find out if there are bike (and
pedestrian) provisions and if not, what needs to happen to get them in. I don’t know who on the staff would be good (probably someone identified as some sort of “transportation planner) but here’s a list:
http://www.spcregion.org/staff.shtml.

One last thing about bike lanes: the best time to paint stripes is right after a street has been paved or repaved. Check out all upcoming projects that involve construction or reconstruction, etc., because these may be good opportunities. They happen more often than new bridges but they don’t happen every year.

Cheers!
John W.

Ron Bishop, an architect in the Berkeley area, wrote looking for information on how to get motorists to change their driving habits when they transfer from the freeways to city streets.

How can engineer calming intersections at these locations? The same is true of the on ramps.  Motorists are speeding up prior to being on the ramp or freeway. There has not been a study done on this that I can find.  Can you point me to how we can curtail freeway speeds and behavior on local streets and at the on-off ramps?

I told Ron I’m not aware of any behavioral solutions for this problem — especially those involving
driver behavior near interchanges. In many cases, it’s more of a design issue. Too often, we see
rural-style freeway ramps, with large radius exits and entrances used in suburban areas. These
just about guarantee that drivers will be going faster on the surface street, whether s/he is
entering the freeway or leaving it.

I also attached a section of the Oregon Bicycle & Pedestrian Plan that deals with interchanges. and cc’d Michael Ronkin, the former Oregon DOT bike/pedestrian coordinator, who may have additional resources on the subject.

Here’s the url for downloading the whole plan and/or other sections.
http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/HWY/BIKEPED/planproc.shtml

John Williams