By now you’ve probably seen photos of bike boxes, or even ridden on them. Last week I cruised around downtown with Scott Moore of the Mercury and Tom Miller of Commissioner Sam Adam’s office to look at some of the potential intersections for bike boxes.
A Bike Box Would Solve:
Shown here is a cyclist who (illegally) uses the crosswalk as a defacto bike box, getting herself out ahead of the line of cars. Bike boxes would be effective in situations where a cyclist approaches a red light and gets to the head of the cue before the light turns green.
A Bike Box Could Have Saved Tracy’s Life:
Shown here is 14th and Burnside, where Tracy was killed. A bike box would have put her out in front of the truck, into the line of sight of the truck.
Bike Box Would Not Solve:
On its own, a bike box would not solve the traditional right-hook crash where a motorist passes a cyclist and then turns right into them. However, the City of Portland is recommending other solutions including blue paint and striping the bike lane through the intersection to highlight potential conflict.
One Concern:
I have concerns about the placement of signs, especially for pedestrian safety. At 16th and NW Everett, a new safety installations helps cyclists but the sign actually hides walkers. In my daily experience at this intersection, often times cars are waiting for walkers to cross which helps me get through safely.
Although the signs seem like the convey the correct meaning, I fear that they will be ignored simply due to sign overload. Look at this picture, for example. A driver has to deal with four separate signs.
Visitors to Portland will not be used to the signage, lane usage,
and local city laws. To be uniform Bicycle laws should be uniform
throughout Oregon. The information should be in the Motor
Vehicle Pamphlet and everyone needs to pass a test every fourth
year. [LAWS CHANGE!]
During weather conditions like the heavy rains we get in Oregon
it is not always easy to see bicyclists. Too many signs will just be
overlooked when your not familiar with a city. Bicylists forget
about the blind spots in most vehicles due to poor mirrors.
I believe bicycles should be registered and they should have to
pass written tests on the laws just like the motor vehicles is
they are going to share the roads.
The bicyclist should have to pay for the marking, signage, etc
related to bicycles in a registration fee because they are not
paying gasoline taxes.
“The bicyclist should have to pay for the marking, signage, etc
related to bicycles in a registration fee because they are not
paying gasoline taxes.â€
The notion of all road users paying proportionally for their needs in our transportation system is a noble one. If you think this through, however, I believe cyclists are already pulling their weight (it’s a light load!).
First, cyclists pay taxes too. Bicyclists and motor vehicle drivers are not mutually exclusive. Many bikers also drive cars, paying the requisite gasoline tax and registration/license fees. A cyclists who owns a registered motor vehicle and maintains a valid driver’s license but drives less is paying a larger sum relative to their use of the road system.
Second, transportation projects are not exclusively funded by the gas tax. Only 23% of ODOT’s 2005-2007 budgeted revenue comes from the motor fuels tax. 21% comes from state general funds, lottery proceeds and bond revenue – sources which are indiscriminate of what type of vehicle a citizen is using. (http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/COMM/docs/key_facts/KeyFacts_complete_web.pdf, p46)
Thrid, bikes are cheap. When you consider the cost of building and maintaining transportation infrastructure, the needs of bicycles are a huge bargain. Bike lanes, bike racks, and a few signs take up far less space and cost far less than infrastructure for motor vehicles or public transportation. The Portland Office of Transportation spends only 1.5% of its funding on bikes, yet an estimated 5% of all trips are made by bicycle.
Finally, bikes produce a net positive impact. If we carry your logic out, road users should really be paying for their impact on society. In this case, cyclists should probably be compensated for having to breathe the exhaust of motor vehicles while creating no immediate pollution of their own. We should be paying cyclists for fostering more livable communities, reducing congestion, reducing our dependence on foreign oil, conserving energy, promoting public health and populating our streets with humans who wave, speak and smile rather than anonymous sealed boxes of metal and glass.
The cost of building and maintaining safe, convenient and efficient transportation systems is borne by all. When you consider the amount paid-in by various user groups versus their needs and impacts, cyclists are contributing more than enough to deserve safe exercise of their legal right to use the roadways.
DESIGN FOR DISASTER
Not all problems can be easily fixed. Especially difficult intersections will always have some risks. However, an early design approach may be an appropriate way to ease the conflict between bikes and cars.
The recent accident on Marine drive is a good example. A west bound cyclist on the bike path has to make two crossings on Marine Drive: at 42nd street and 33rd street. The sight line to cross Marine Drive (north to south) is very limited and encumbered by shrubs. Even though there is a flashing yellow on Marine Drive I have never seen it work.
The location of the crosswalk near 42nd may be the best but could be easily improved by trimming the adjacent shrubs. Note that the sight line from south to north is very good and allows both cars and bikes to see each other for as much as a half mile. A little change to the north side would allow better visibility and a much safer crossing.
The intersection at 33rd has no crosswalk and is especially hard to cross because of heavy car and truck traffic to and from Marine Drive. There is a bike lane on the west bound Marine Drive that is frequently used by cars waiting to make a left to 33rd. A far better design would be a crosswalk further west on Marine Drive so that the bikes could cross away from the intersection.
Once we have a design including a nice safe off road path, but bad connections at each end, any significant fix can be very expensive. Painted crosswalks are frequently helpful, but nothing beats a good sight line where both cars and bikes can see each other from a good distance.