Jake and all – I have found in the AASHTO and state bicycle plan literature that a placing a curb between bikes and traffic is a complete no-no for both the safety of cyclists and the safety for motorists.

I do believe that a bicycle lane can be/should be closed off due to specific events just as parking can be prohibited for special events such as parades, one way traffic can be created due to football games, lanes on bridges can be closed for marathons, turning lanes converted to through lanes – daily - due to traffic congestion, etc., etc. Whenever the greater good needs to be served in specific situations, “rights” can be adjusted and people’s prerogatives may have to be met by the people taking detours.

If there is a saw horse and sign on the Boulevard shoulder bikeway at Eighth Street due to Pitt basketball parking, we may have to adjust by climbing Eighth Street instead…unless when we encounter cars parked for the event we prefer to take a position in a 12’ traffic lane on the Boulevard itself!

Having the climbing bike lane available 95+% of the time is critical. That, I believe, is the goal that we are working for. We can adjust as necessary to make it work and help improve cycling in Motown!

Don

---

From: bikeboard-bounces@cheat.org [mailto:bikeboard-bounces@cheat.org] On Behalf Of Frank Gmeindl
Sent: Monday, August 24, 2009 9:43 AM
To: FDJakeB@gmail.com
Cc: Bicycle Board
Subject: Re: [Bikeboard] [Fwd: Re: WV DOH Response to Letter Concerning Closing of Rail Trail]

Jake,

Thanks for the reply.  No, I did not mean to write "incorrect" in the sentence, "It is also least likely to discourage cyclists from selecting correct lane positioning when going straight through or making left turns."  Perhaps I should have written, "It is also most likely to encourage cyclists to select the correct lane positioning when going straight or making left turns." but that would be incorrect because cyclists are most likely to choose the correct lane positioning when they're not in a bike lane in the first place.

Thanks for your agreement with my recommendations.

Please see my response to gunnar about cars parking on the bike lane.  You know, by law in every of the 50 states, bicyclists have the same rights as drivers of vehicles.  To me, that means that we have the right to drive our bikes on the roadway unless the roadway, such as the interstate highways, are explicitly signed to exclude bicycles.  Therefore, bicyclists have the same right to be on the Mon Blvd roadway as cars.  Putting a curb between the bike lane and the roadway makes it no longer a bike lane but a side path and effectively removes our right to be on that roadway.  In addition, WV has an atavistic clause in the code that says that bicycles MUST use the side path and shall not use the roadway.  Thus comes the occasionally heard epithet, "Get the #@&! of the road on the trail where you belong!"

I believe "they", if you mean the WV DOH and the City of Morgantown, are planning on keeping bicycles off the roadways in this state and in this City.  We, the Bicycle Board recommended that the bike lane only be put on the climbing side of Mon Blvd going towards Evansdale.  Putting a bike lane on the other side of the Blvd is both unnecessary and dangerous.  It is unnecessary because bicycles can descend the Blvd without falling below the minimum speed limit.  It is dangerous because the shoulder ends abruptly at the bottom of the hill where the cyclist's speed could be maximum, the roadway lanes go from 2 to 1 making it more difficult for the cyclist to merge from the shoulder into the traffic lane and beyond that, the single lane further narrows and is bounded by a 6-inch high curb.  Also, bike lanes are notorious for collecting debris, particularly glass because cars are not there to sweep it up but also mufflers, exhaust clamps, big chunks of wood, etc.  Flatting or hitting one of those at 40 mph is unpleasant.

Just FYI, speed limit on the Blvd is 40 mph and the traffic lanes on Mon Blvd are 12 feet wide.  Most cars are 6-7 feet wide and the maximum allowable vehicle width in WV it 8.5 feet.  That leaves a minimum of 3.5 feet for the bicyclist within the lane: not enough for the MV and the bicyclist to travel side-by-side safely in the lane but there is the passing lane which the MV can use to pass the bicyclist.

Thanks for your reply and the opportunity to rant:)

Frank
Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles - John Forester, Effective Cycling


On 8/24/2009 8:41 AM, FDJakeB@gmail.com wrote:

** "It is also least likely to discourage cyclists from selecting correct lane positioning when going straight through or making left turns. "

Frank, did you mean to write "incorrect" here?

I agree with your recommendations, and your letter looks great.

Gunnar is right about the parking, but I don't know if there is much to be done to prevent that, other than a curbing divider, but that is too excessive I am sure. Bigger cars would probably drive over that anyways.

Are they planning on putting a lane on both sides of Mon. Blvd. or just the uphill side going towards Evansdale?

See you next week,

Jake

On Aug 23, 2009 11:22pm, Gunnar Shogren <gshogren@gmail.com> wrote:
> What happens when there are big events at the Coliseum?
>
> No parking on the bike lane?  Yeah right.
>
> Up and down the Blvd.
>
>
>
> Your recommendations look nice and all.
>
>
>
> Parking, parking, parking.  It's all about parking for the cars.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 23, 2009 at 11:08 PM, Frank Gmeindlfgmeindl@verizon.net> wrote:
>
> > Bicycle Board Members,
>
> >
>
> > Please review the Mon Blvd Bike Lane recommendations that I provided to Bill
>
> > Austin below and let me know if anything is wrong.
>
> >
>
> > Frank
>
> > Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles
>
> >
>
> > -------- Original Message --------
>
> > Subject: Re: WV DOH Response to Letter Concerning Closing of Rail Trail
>
> > Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 23:06:03 -0400
>
> > From: Frank Gmeindl fgmeindl@verizon.net>
>
> > To: 'Bill Austin' baustin@moncpc.org>
>
> > CC: Don Spencer dspencer36@comcast.net>
>
> > References:
>
> > moncpc.org>
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Bill,
>
> >
>
> > It might help me to understand what we're trying to do if you shared with me
>
> > the WVDOH letter to which you and Don are referring.  I was not aware of it
>
> > until I received Don's message below.
>
> >
>
> > Does the MPO have a plan drawing of the existing Monongahela Blvd. between
>
> > Eighth Street and Patteson Drive?  If so, could I get a copy and mark it up
>
> > to show the bike lane?
>
> >
>
> > I would use the 1999 AASHTO Guide to the Development of Bicycle Facilities (
>
> > http://www.sccrtc.org/bikes/AASHTO_1999_BikeBook.pdf ) and the 2003 Manual
>
> > of Uniform Guidelines for Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) Part 9 Traffic
>
> > Controls for Bicycle Facilities (
>
> > http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2003/part9/part9-toc.htm ) for guidance for
>
> > the markup.
>
> >
>
> > Pages 22-32 of the AASHTO Guide deal with bike lanes.
>
> >
>
> > Stripe width
>
> > Page 23 explains that a 6-inch solid stripe is common but some jurisdictions
>
> > have used an 8-inch stripe "for added distinction".  I would recommend a
>
> > 6-inch stripe to minimize resistance from the WVDOH.  All markings on the
>
> > bike lane should be white.
>
> >
>
> > Lane width
>
> > Page 23 and Figure 6 on page 24 indicate that we should designate a 5-foot
>
> > wide bike lane since parking is prohibited and there is a gutter and curb.
>
> >
>
> > Marking Symbols
>
> > Clearly marking the bike lane as one-way is imperative.  Figure 13 on page
>
> > 31 provides templates for typical one-way arrows and bike lane symbols.  The
>
> > arrow symbol and the bicycle symbol should be sufficient to communicate to
>
> > both motorists and cyclists that this is a bike lane and that bicycles are
>
> > to travel up it.
>
> >
>
> > Symbol locations
>
> > Figure 14 on page 32 shows recommended locations for the symbols with
>
> > respect to intersections.  The text on page 31 also says, "additional
>
> > stencils may be placed on long uninterrupted sections of roadway".
>
> >
>
> > I would recommend placing the bicycle symbol and arrow symbol as shown in
>
> > Figure 14 beginning 6-feet from the north end of the driveway north of
>
> > Advance Auto. Because of the traffic volume entering and exiting Advance
>
> > Auto and the Exxon station, starting the bike lane further south would
>
> > jeopardize cyclists' safety and may present liability to the state and those
>
> > businesses.
>
> >
>
> > I would recommend repeating the bicycle symbol and arrow symbol every 250
>
> > feet after their initial location.  250 feet spacing is consistent with
>
> > MUTCD guidelines for other markings and signs and will provide a frequent
>
> > reminder to motorists that there's a bike lane to their right.
>
> >
>
> > Where to end the bike lane
>
> > Figure 10 on page 28 depicts typical bicycle and auto movements at major
>
> > intersections.  This figure clearly makes the points I was trying to make to
>
> > you and Don when we were discussing where the bike lane should end near
>
> > Evansdale Drive.  Page 29 shows preferred treatments for the bike lane when
>
> > it comes to a right turn lane as at the intersection of Mon Blvd. and
>
> > Evansdale Drive.  I believe the treatment that is most likely to get WVDOH
>
> > buy-in is represented in Figure 10-d.  This treatment requires no changes to
>
> > the existing markings.  It is also least likely to discourage cyclists from
>
> > selecting correct lane positioning when going straight through or making
>
> > left turns.
>
> >
>
> > The AASHTO Guide provides limited guidance on where the bike lane should
>
> > end.  Fortunately, the MUTCD provides some guidance.
>
> >
>
> > The MUTCD Section 9C.04 Markings For Bicycle Lanes states, "When the right
>
> > through lane is dropped to become a right turn only lane, the bicycle lane
>
> > markings should stop at least 100 feet before the beginning of the right
>
> > turn lane."  While in our case, the right through lane is not "dropped" to
>
> > become a right turn only lane, the intent of this guideline is to provide
>
> > sufficient distance, 100 feet, for the bicyclist to merge into the right
>
> > through lane before autos begin to turn right.  Therefore, I would recommend
>
> > that bike lane end 100 feet before the beginning of the right turn lane from
>
> > Mon Blvd. onto Evansdale Drive.
>
> >
>
> > Signage
>
> > The MUTCD Section 9B.04 Bicycle Lane Signs also provides valuable guidance
>
> > on signage.  I would recommend placing the following signs at the following
>
> > locations (the letters and numbers in parentheses after the sign text
>
> > designate the specific sign number that can be found in the MUTCD):
>
> > 1.  BIKE LANE (R3-17) AHEAD (R3-17aP) 6 feet after the intersection of
>
> > Eighth Street and Mon Blvd.;
>
> > 2.  BIKE LANE (R3-17)  at the beginning of the bike lane and every 1000 feet
>
> > thereafter (the MUTCD requires BIKE LANE signs to accompany bike lane
>
> > markings but "the signs need not be adjacent to every symbol to avoid
>
> > overuse of the signs";
>
> > 3.  BIKE LANE (R3-17)  ENDS (R3-17bP) at the end of the bike lane;
>
> > 4.  BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE, YIELD TO BIKES (R4-4) at the beginning of the
>
> > right turn lane;
>
> > 5.  SHARE THE ROAD signs (SHARE THE ROAD (W16-1) plaque in conjunction with
>
> > the W11-1 (bicycle in diamond shaped sign) sign every 250 feet on both sides
>
> > along Don Knotts Blvd., Beechurst Av., the west side of Mon Blvd. between
>
> > Eighth St. and Evansdale Drive, both sides of Mon Blvd. between Evansdale
>
> > Dr. and the Edith Barrill (Star City) Bridge.  (Please note that the Bicycle
>
> > Board recommended and the Traffic Commission approved these share the road
>
> > signs at the same time that the Bicycle Board recommended and the Traffic
>
> > Commission approved the Mon Blvd. bike lane.)
>
> >
>
> > I'm sure I overlooked some things.  I hope you've discovered and noted them
>
> > as you read the above.
>
> >
>
> > I look forward to the next step.
>
> >
>
> > Frank
>
> > Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > On 8/23/2009 1:48 AM, Don Spencer wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Bill – Sorry to be absent from my computer so much this week. I appreciate
>
> > your meeting with us last Monday to work on the bike lane. I promise to stay
>
> > out of your way on this issue - as far as the MPO structure is concerned.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > If a local drawing is needed, I would rather have the Bicycle Board create
>
> > the drawing first and then have it taken to the City Manager and Engineer
>
> > for their review and action. The Bicycle Board has more experience in
>
> > understanding cycling issues than do the Engineering personnel – even though
>
> > they have resources which they can use to check out and confirm standards.
>
> > The DOH will have their own opinion too, but it is important for us to say
>
> > what we proposed…first.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Frank Gmeindl needs to be the point person – in my opinion.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Don
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > ________________________________
>
> >
>
> > From: Bill Austin [mailto:baustin@moncpc.org]
>
> > Sent: Friday, August 21, 2009 2:24 PM
>
> > To: 'Bill Austin'; dspencer36@comcast.net
>
> > Subject: RE: WV DOH Response to Letter Concerning Closing of Rail Trail
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Don,
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > I wasn’t sure you got this the last time I sent it. One key question I have
>
> > is will the City be able to provide a drawing of the typical section we are
>
> > proposing? Do you need to have the City Manager request it from the City
>
> > Engineer? I will be happy to work with the appropriate person on the
>
> > specifications. Please let me know who that is.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Thanks,
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Bill
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > From: Bill Austin [mailto:baustin@moncpc.org]
>
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 18, 2009 9:52 AM
>
> > To: 'dspencer36@comcast.net'
>
> > Subject: FW: WV DOH Response to Letter Concerning Closing of Rail Trail
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Don,
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Thanks for meeting with me yesterday. I was rereading the attached response
>
> > from DOH this morning and had several thoughts. Please take a look at the
>
> > next to last paragraph and the last paragraph on the first page. We need to
>
> > do several things, first we need to note the City Managers commitment to
>
> > placing the striping. Secondly, we need a drawing of THE typical
>
> > cross-section of the striping that needs to be installed. It should probably
>
> > be based on an ASHTO standard facility that has been constructed in West
>
> > Virginia. I am looking into that now. We will need a draft engineering level
>
> > product to share with the new technical committee by mid-September.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Please let me know your thoughts.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Thanks,
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Bill
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > From: Bill Austin [mailto:baustin@moncpc.org]
>
> > Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 4:18 PM
>
> > To: 'Bellcom21@aol.com'; 'David Bruffy'; 'dspencer36@comcast.net';
>
> > 'gvmayor@comcast.net'; 'jlgoodwi@access.k12.wv.us'; 'Joe Fisher';
>
> > 'dulaneyoil@comcast.net'; 'Keller, Perry J'; 'bill@byrnehedges.com';
>
> > 'scmayor@comcast.net'; 'Moncom@aol.com'; 'djhstarcity@hotmail.com';
>
> > 'dulaneyoil@comcast.net'; 'statler4board@hotmail.com'
>
> > Cc: Mike Paugh
>
> > Subject: WV DOH Response to Letter Concerning Closing of Rail Trail
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Board Members,
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Please find attached a letter from Robert Pennington of the West Virginia
>
> > Department of Highways responding to the MPO’s recent correspondence
>
> > concerning the closing of the Rail Trail. We will continue to work to
>
> > coordinate with DOH on this issue.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Regards,
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > Bill Austin, AICP
>
> >
>
> > Executive Director
>
> >
>
> > Morgantown Monongalia MPO
>
> >
>
> > 180 Hart Field Road
>
> >
>
> > Morgantown, WVA  26508
>
> >
>
> > 304-291-9571
>
> >
>
> > 304-692-7225 Mobile
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > _______________________________________________
>
> > Bikeboard mailing list
>
> > Bikeboard@cheat.org
>
> > http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/bikeboard
>
> >
>
> >
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Bikeboard mailing list
>
> Bikeboard@cheat.org
>
> http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/bikeboard
>