Frank,
You are right, I misread that sentence. Thanks for the clarification.
I agree that a curb, would not work and would change the subject from a lane to a path. I was just thinking of a possible way of addressing the parking issue. People will park there regardless. Then, like you said, it is a question of the law and if it needs to be enforced, etc. So, as mentioned before, in those instances cyclists will just need to take the roadway around.
I've always ridden the downhill side of Mon. Blvd. fine as well, you can move fast enough, and with the double lanes there, it is not really an issue. I just could not remember if a lane on that side was part of the scope.
Gunnar,
Not sure on how to answer your question there. Sometimes I will pull over too to let a group of cars go by. Am I doing less for the cause by making drivers think we/I SHOULD pull over, or am I making them see cyclists in a better light because I respected the cars...I don't know. That could lead to plenty discussion. Typing with one hand is slow and irritating. I'll think on it.
- Jake
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Gunnar Shogren gshogren@gmail.com wrote:
The other thing about going down the Blvd. is that the drains are really recessed now that it's been repaved a few times. Double the danger of hitting those. I ride down the Blvd. every so often and usually just ride on the white line. Have never had a problem w/ anybody or anything.
Going up there's no real way to make a wider road since the shoulder banks off so much and of course that's a concern for some cyclists riding there in the winter too, that cars will slide onto/into them.
Don't expect cars not to park on the blvd., just as you wouldn't expect Sunday morning Catholics to not park on University Ave downtown. Even though it is illegal. Such is life.
And just cause something is legal doesn't mean that in the current state of affairs it is wise.
One more consideration- For those that were at the last board meeting we had two guests. Concerned cyclists that wanted to see what was going on in Motown and if they could perhaps help in any way. When we asked them their route to their jobs and such, they told of going up University then up Overhill to Jones. Further more they added that at the light of University and Stewart, they would pull over, let the cars behind them and in that light cycle go around them and *then* would proceed up University to Overhill. The said they've never had problems going up University.
How many folks have heard others grumble about a cyclist or group going up a small hilly road and having a stack of cars behind them? Not pulling over, cause it's their "right".
Yes it is the cyclists right to ride in that road and given the nature of the road it is very difficult for motorists to properly pass them.
So which group is doing more for the good of cycling? Is this the same as not asserting your "rights"?
On Mon, Aug 24, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Frank Gmeindlfgmeindl@verizon.net wrote:
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