spare_wheel

both and in between: bike lane/cycletrack/separated path/bikestreet/car-light mixed areas/pedestrian-only areas etc.

spare_wheel

Ironically, most of the criticism of bike lanes in Portland comes from advocates of separated infrastructure, not VCers. In fact, every self-described VCer I know is in favor of DZ-free bike lanes.

spare_wheel

I completely disagree. I am more than capable of riding at or near the speed limit on most of my commute so I simply ride in the lane regardless of the presence or absence of a bike facility. Despite riding in the lane ~90% of the time, I almost never experience conflict with motorists. If I am riding slower than prevailing speeds I generally use a bike facility or move over to the right (as is courteous). If it's unsafe to ride on the right I control the lane by riding on the left side (or right side of a one way). When I ride with my better half or with friends I gladly use bike facilities and when there is a facility that accommodates faster cycling I gladly use it.

dru_

I would opinion that you are in fact being respectful, as you are not impeding traffic, and when you need to you do get out of the way.

spare_wheel

Please examine the quote and note that it was not attributed to kickstart.

Also read this:

FTFY
Acronym for "fixed that for you."
Often used sarcastically - not to fix an honest mistake, but to sarcastically disagree with someone.

VTBike

So which is it?

spare_wheel

i don't know how it is where you live but riding a bike in the main traffic lane is definitely considered to be "inconvenient" by many motorists. for example, many motorists feel the need to pass me even when i am riding at or above the speed limit. because i live in a city where motorists are accustomed to cyclists riding in lane they almost always pass safely...but it's still quite obvious that i am "inconvenient".

VTBike

Right...

kickstart

Well since safety and efficiency go hand in hand in the real world, and you believe that the majority of people don't deserve safe efficient roads, I don't see how you can expect any positive changes at all.....or if you actually want them.

spare_wheel

slower speeds and road diets are both safer and less efficient.
just sayin'

genec

Not necessarily. Road diets with added traffic circles, even with lower speed limits, tend to move more traffic volume than the same road at a higher speed limit with stop lights and stop signs that cause a start and stop flow, vice a smooth flow. The average speed of traffic goes up, instead of the race and squeal from stop to stop.

spare_wheel

yeah...should have said "can be". lane reduction+turn lane also sometimes increases vehicle flow. still many, if not most, road diets modestly increase travel time during peak hours.

kickstart

There's nothing wrong with those things where appropriate, but much of their effectiveness relies on displacing traffic elsewhere. In short, they don't make "roads" safer, they make a particular road safer.

rydabent

This subject needs some common sense and logic injected into both drivers and cyclist. Drivers need to realize that they need to share the road with cyclist. And that is especially true of cyclist that are commuting to work. Drivers should be thankful that some cyclist commute, since that frees up parking spaces. Cyclist OTOH need to be reasonable and logical about where the ride. If there is a MUP next to an heavy use arterial, they should be on the MUP. During early morning commutes, I doubt they will encounter that many walkers that slow them down much. Logic in this case says it is better to be a little slower on a MUP than being hit by a hot head driver. But again drivers need to understant that cyclist that commute may have no other alternate route to ride to work.

Cant we all just get along?

dynodonn 

I avoid my local MUPs like the plague, I can deal with hot head motorists far better than the chaotic nature of peds and other cyclists on a MUP.

kickstart

That's it right there,

Give a little when you can, take a little when you must.

kickstart

You're perfectly capable of dealing with those peds and cyclists on MUTs, but you get frustrated with having to deal with their less than thoughtful behavior?
Motorists sometimes may feel the same about cyclists on public roads.....depending on their biases.....and actual cyclist behavior.

spare_wheel

1. My cruising speed is far too fast for a MUP.
2. MUPs in PDX are major commute routes for people who walk or run to work. (More people commute to work by foot than by bike in PDX.)
3. The most direct and efficient routes are often arterials.
4. I think it's important for cyclists (who are willing) to ride on arterials because motorists need to understand that no urban road is off limits for cyclists.
5. The law in OR (and many other states) indicates that cyclists who ride at the "normal speed of traffic" are permitted to use the full vehicle lane.

Note: I am not arguing that cyclists who ride more slowly and/or cautiously shouldn’t use MUPs.

FUD. I have close to two hundred thousands miles riding in dense urban traffic and have never been injured by a "hot head driver".

Can't we all treat cycling as a legitimate form of transportation?

genec

Sure, we can, can everyone else?

-=(8)=-

What are you willing to give to get?

kickstart

Everything you stated in your post is perfectly reasonable and rational except for #4 which is ridicules.

Most of my commute is on arterials, but I make a conscious effort to minimize my negative impact on other road users whenever possible. A public road isn't the appropriate place to play games or make political statements, its simply irresponsible to do any less than our best.

Legitimacy can be won or lost through our actions, and the people we encounter when commuting are likely to be encountered by us on a regular basis.

-=(8)=-

I have experienced this in a few places. With al positive results except in Vermont, where the same white caddy would buzz me every morning on Rt 4.
Here in Louisville, I have established a rapport with my morning commuters and they are all very decent to me. I use a very unique tail-light too, which I think helps let them know who is up ahead and are familiar with how Im going to behave in our stretch of road together. Theres lots to be said for consistency and familiarity.

spare_wheel

When I ride on arterials I typically ride at or near the speed limit (25 mph for most arterials) so how is my presence negative or irresponsible?

There is broad support for safer cycling infrastructure in Portland:

Portlanders disagree on bike infrastructure much less than you think - BikePortland.org

spare_wheel

And in Portland pretty much everyone else does. I'm shouted at at most every 2-3 years. I get close passed a few times a year. This is not an exaggeration -- almost every driver moves fully into the neighboring lane to pass. I've never had something thrown at me in Portland in 14 years of daily riding (mostly on arterials).

dynodonn 

I've rode on MUPs and on the roadway, as bad as some motorists are, there is more of a resemblance of order in their nature than with peds and cyclists on a MUP. On a MUP, peds and cyclists have even less situational awareness and randomness about them than motorists, even with all the distractions motorists have.