cthenn

So now that there's all this double yellow stripes on diablo, does that mean cars aren't supposed to pass going uphill at all? I'm all for safety and am in favor of this signing and striping project, but I don't know if it's a good idea to have lines of cars queuing up behind slow cyclists. It's only going to lead to more frustration, and put more pressure on the riders. I personally don't like when cars hang back forever. Obviously I don't want them passing me when it's unsafe, but I also don't like having some guy on my butt when it's fine to go around.

I'm just wondering if anyone has talked to a ranger or experienced first hand what it's been like with the double yellow.

DiabloScott

Yeah, they're going overkill with the double yellows.

Also they're putting stop signs at Juniper, and a stop sign on the descent at Junction... they're covered up with black plastic right now but they're already there.

CliffordK

I think many states allow passing bicycles, pedestrians, and tractors on a double yellow (with caution).

Just no passing ordinary cars & trucks.

prathmann

Yes, but California is not among them. It was one of the provisions of the previous version of our 3' law, but that version was vetoed by the governor with the relaxation of the 'don't cross a double yellow' cited as the reason.

CliffordK

Does anybody pay attention to that?

So, does that mean cyclists can ride 3 wide up Mt Diablo, and nobody will care?

dachshund

Unfortunately some drivers won't cross the double yellow line, period. In my experience this means cars will come closer to riders. Probably the best strategy is to force the issue and take the lane and force people to go around.

It's disconcerting that they've done this.

Lanceoldstrong

On the other hand. . .

When we're climbing, it will be safer for us, if the descending cars heed the double yellow,
and don't cross over it into the lane we're in for ascending.

BarryVee

Rode Diablo Sunday. Lots of cars. Nearly all who passed went over the new double yellow though several were hesitant to do so. Three uphill autos encroached my lane on the downhill trip, (not due to passing bikes but ogling scenery). Overall everybody played well together and I felt safe.

cthenn

Interesting discussion on Strava from a guy I follow. I'm sure many of you know or know of Carl Nielson, a former Diablo ranger.

This is a copy/paste from a comment he made on one of his rides regarding the striping.

Carl Nielson Note: I posted this comment on my Facebook page. Some of you are not connected with FB. I thought that I would re-post it here. It relates to bike safety on Mount Diablo State Park. Presenting my opinion here as a private citizen who loves to cycle... I've seen a handful of videos showing the unsafe passing by motorists on South Gate Road (SG) in Mount Diablo State Park over the weekend following the placement of a double-yellow centerline. I was a proponent of the additional bike safety signage but I've always had issues with the double-yellow approach for multiple reasons. There is already a provision (CVC code) precluding passing unsafely/on blind curves with a broken-yellow centerline. The advisory signs that have been placed in recent months are a good reminder and do no harm. As evidenced in the videos over the weekend, a number of SG motorists crossed over the double-yellow centerline in passing cyclists. In a way, the videos look all-too-familiar to the prior videos posted when there was a broken centerline. I believe many cyclists had the expectation that the placement of a double-yellow centerline would significantly improve bike safety. In addition to appearing to be as effective (or ineffective, based on your perspective!) as the broken centerline, the double-yellow centerline has created additional issues that affect driving behavior, traffic flow, and frustration levels of road users. For the law-abiding motorist ascending, he/she will not cross the double-yellow centerline to pass a cyclist until there is a passing zone (infrequent) or the cyclist opts to pull to the shoulder. This has the potential of creating back-ups and increasing frustration for all parties involved (i.e. Cyclist: "Why isn't that guy passing me?" / Motorist: "That cyclist needs to pull over and let us pass!"). And the double-yellow centerline has essentially made the road more narrow (inches are critical on a narrow roadway). Road width is applicable in passing safely and respecting the 3-Foot Law. Some will counter, why not go with double-yellows on select curves? Calculating the placement of such lines would be very difficult and subject to much interpretation. Do you go with placement based on the legal speed limit? How many cyclists descend at the legal speed limit? On a broader sense, I strongly believe that DMV needs to emphasize and expand bike safety in their driver training programs/process. Perhaps some PSA's addressing bike safety would be beneficial. Thanks for reading!

Diablo has gotten more and more scary for me as a cyclist on the weekends, I hardly ever ride up on a Saturday or Sunday now. There seem to be so many more cars then there used to be. The double yellow may prevent some incidents, but it may also cause as many...time will tell I guess.

bikingshearer 

I'm in favor of the double-yellow line. I'm convinced it will help. Here's why.


For both the savvy, considerate divers and the testosterone-laden jerks (and while there are women drivers like this, the men outnumber them by a ton), it simply doesn't matter what kind of center line there is - they are going to do, for good or ill, what they are going to do.


But then there is the great middle group of drivers. Those who have never dealt with a twisty mountain road that is popular with cyclists. Those who are lulled into thinking that a broken center line means it's okay to pass (I know that isn't what the law says - I'm talking about rubber-meets-the-road reality here). Those who really don't quite know what they are supposed to do for whatever reason, but will do the right thing once it is made clear to them what the right thing to do is. A double yellow center line will get these drivers' attention and make it clear to them that passing on a blind corner is not okay. The net result is a larger percentage of the drivers doing the right thing. That sounds like increased safety to me.

Yes, I suspect that more drivers will get frustrated with having to wait behind cyclists. But my gut says that the increased "stay in your own lane" factor will add significantly more to overall traffic safety that the frustration level will decrease it.


That's my opinion. It's worth exactly what you paid for it.

cthenn

Good counterpoint, and I understand your point of view. Thinking about it more, some of us may be overreacting just a bit. I ride in other areas with twisty roads similar to Diablo, with a double yellow line, and it rarely actually causes a problem. Pinehurst, Redwood, Grizzly Peak, Skyline...etc, all have double yellow, and I don't really ever have a problem with drivers queuing up behind me not daring to cross the double yellow. Frankly, I think a driver's behavior is not going to change based on dashed or solid double yellow lines. There will always be those who are super aggro, and are jerks no matter what, and others who are too timid to pass even when there is an adequate window to do so. A painted line isn't really going to change many drivers' behavior.

The additional signage is the main benefit, and I'm all for that. I rode up last night (almost dying from the smoke-choked air) and saw the new stop signs. I'm actually surprised there hasn't been a stop sign at junction on the way down before. The juniper one I can do without, but the junction one is welcomed.

DiabloScott

Agreed, although here's the other side. The CalTrans rules for where double yellows go is based on sight lines and passing distances for cars passing other cars driving near the speed limit. For cars going 25 mph passing bikes going 5 or 10 mph the passing distances are WAY shorter. So even the responsible great middle group of drivers sees that they can pass safely even though the signage says not to and that creates an antipathy for the signage in general.

There are some sections of double yellow that are ridiculously long. Perhaps shorter sections would be more effective, but I'll bet CalTrans doesn't allow for such a consideration.

bikingshearer 

Agreed that there is a difference between the distance needs for passing cars vs. passing an uphill cyclist. I suspect that, for most drivers, the double-yellow line will not keep them from passing. I do think, however, that the double-yellow lines plus the signs promoting awareness that cyclists are on the road will have the very desirable effect of getting people to at least think about what they are doing before trying to pass. (Except, of course, for the mega-jerk outliers I referred to. Fortunately, they are a small minority.)

And I'd join your bet that CalTrans regs don't allow for the distinctions you mention. Based on what my wife, a now-retired CalTrans environmental planner, had to say, it's pretty clear that CalTrans as a body detests bicycles and thinks they are bothersome toys that get in the way of their mission to make it possible for cars (and trucks and buses) to get around faster and easier. Yes, there are bicycle advocates at CalTrans, but only because someone higher up the political food chain said they had to. CalTrans is an organization run by and for engineers - anything that gets in the way of the immediate implementation of what is deemed to be the "correct" engineering solution to making cars move around better and faster is, by definition, wrong/bad/stupid and not to be done - unless someone with a bigger political stick dictates otherwise (see, e.g., Brown, Jerry (Oakland Mayor version) and the east span of the Bay Bridge).

However, I'm pretty sure that CalTrans has nothing to do with striping the road on Mt. Diablo. I think it's done by the State Parks agency, whatever it's called. They may follow CalTrans guidelines, but CalTrans almost certainly has nothing to do with the actual project.

DiabloScott

They put one of those speed detector signs at the top of The Bump now.



It's not just mega-jerks that are the problem, it's the mega-stupid... how scary is this?

Cyclist0108

On the SF Comical website: New bid for peaceful coexistence of bikes, cars on Mt. Diablo - San Francisco Chronicle

I haven't ridden Diablo since the late 1980s. I wanted to try it again. Now I have my doubts...


Someone should contact the insurance agency (as well as the CHP) for CA 7SIP202 and send a link of that video.

FrenchFit 

Read that Chron article this morning. Hardly bike friendly. We seem to be nuisances at best.

DiabloScott

This doesn't look like anywhere on Diablo... thoughts?



This is not a new law - and it says "when it's not safe for them to pass, and at the next safe place to turn out". There aren't that many places to turn out.

cthenn

The above photo looks like it may be somewhere between Juniper and Devil's Elbow, but I'm not sure. As far as the "pull over" law, I'm not pulling over onto the gravel pull outs, it's just totally unsafe for skinny slick road bike tires, so I don't see how we can be faulted. There are very few paved turn outs, or wide spots at all on that road.

Also, I got honked at yesterday by a law-abider. It was Thursday morning, hardly anyone on the mountain, and I'm riding up SG when a car rides me for about a quarter mile then honks at me. Of course it was in the double yellow area, but it was on SG right before it flattens out before the kiosk. There is decent visibility there, enough for a car to get around and for a bike coming the other way to see. So of course this startles the hell out of me and rage mode kicks in and I violently gesture for them to go around. That must have shocked them back and around they went without any issue. But the whole thing was ridiculous because I wasn't going very fast and there was more than one opportunity for the car to pass me. I am not a fan of all the double yellow!

One more note/question. I went up to the summit on Wednesday, and just rolled through the new stop sign at Juniper on the way UP. Does anyone know if the rangers are giving us the same slack they do at all the other uphill stop signs? I always run the stop sign at SG kiosk, and all the stop signs at the junction on the way up. I just wonder if because the stop sign is new at Juniper, they are being a little more strict. Again, I'm talking about on the way up, not down. I mos def am stopping on the way down, but on the way up, I'm wondering if they would pull over a cyclist (I've never been ticketed or yelled at for rolling any stop sign on Diablo going up).

gsa103

I was discussing this in detail with co-workers, we all ride Diablo on a semi-regular basis. One of them has ridden several times after the re-striping.

The problem with double-yellow everywhere is that it's essentially double-yellow no where, drivers just wind up getting frustrated and going whenever, exactly how they used to.

More interesting, he was riding up and a ranger got behind them, and just waited and waited...so it seems like they are now expecting cyclists to pull off

Given the current striping and legal expectations, they really need to look at adding some bike pull-outs or passing areas. Bikes lanes that would only go ~100 yds, just so cars could have a spot to get by.

In the end, I suspect the current double-yellow is going to be exactly like the old situation, and everyone will just ignore it.

As for the stop sign at Juniper on the uphill, I applaud anyway going up fast enough to where stopping is a serious consideration. I'm usually going at a pace best described as "brisk walk".

DiabloScott

The safety folks are having a ceremony on Oct 7 (Friday) morning. If you're available you should consider going.

slimyfrog

I wonder if they have considered reserving a time for bicycles only. Maybe the gate could open at 8 for bicycles and 10 for cars? As a cyclist, I wouldn't mind paying for access at the ranger station (something we don't seem to be required to do now...) in order to make up for the loss of income from cars.
Admittedly I have not done a lot of thinking on this topic, but off the top of my head, it seems like it would go a long way towards at least reducing the number of incidents.

DiabloScott

The problem with that is, then the drivers would think cyclists should be riding then and only then, more victim blaming when someone gets hit.

I wouldn't mind paying though - even a voluntary fee for a season pass or something... to give more legitimacy to riders. They tried an annual pass thing once (~1991?) but they didn't go through the proper procedure to implement it and it was overturned within a few months.

Lanceoldstrong

Yesterday Mrs. Oldstrong roled with me on a little spin to see the striping, signs and sharrows.
It was 107.5° on my Garmin, but she didn't mind, she was so happy to see all the cycling friendly infrastructure.

slimyfrog

Doing Diablo this Sat with a friend. Yay! Looking forward to seeing the new infrastructure and the rangers betting on whether "the fat guy makes it to the top" or not

FollowUp: I like it. All the cyclist-friendly signage will hopefully help remind drivers that roads are for everyone. During my first Diablo climb I saw a young kid in a pickup complaining to the ranger at the toll station about cyclists:"Those guys are total BLEEPholes! Sometimes there's 5 in a row!" and the ranger, tongue-in-cheek "Okaaay.... I'll be sure to pass that along..."