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):
- BIKE LANE (R3-17) AHEAD (R3-17aP) 6 feet after the intersection of
Eighth Street and Mon Blvd.;
- 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";
- BIKE LANE (R3-17) ENDS (R3-17bP) at the end of the bike lane;
- BEGIN RIGHT TURN LANE, YIELD TO BIKES (R4-4) at the beginning
of the
right turn lane;
- 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
Bikeboard mailing list
Bikeboard@cheat.org