- cross-posted to:
- micromobility@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- micromobility@lemmy.world
You must log in or register to comment.
This is as American as apple pie. In my city, they made the protected bike lanes so small that they can’t get street sweepers in so they’re filled with years is shit.
That bike lane doesn’t really look that safe anyway. With the amount of space it took, they could easily have installed more physical seperation like larger curbs, bollards, a line of trees. I don’t even see the texturing they use on the asphalt to warn drivers they are exiting their lane. The current design offers no protection against drunk or distracted driving. Even something as simple as a car pulling over for a firetruck could result in a collision with a cyclist.
That white car further down in the picture demonstrates exactly why you need protected bike lanes. For crying out loud you could fit two cars in that lane and they still can’t stay inside it.
Also a good argument for that texturing i was talking about. The driver may not be aware of how far over the line they are. With the texturing it is difficult to ignore the lines.
They aren’t aware, but I guarantee it’s not because of the markings. Probably looking at their phone.
Yes, and if there was texture it would be felt in the car. The markings I’m refering are small bumps on or beside the line. They make the vehicle vibrate and produce a loud noise when a tire drives on them. It might make them look up from their phone
I see now. “Might”. I would much like the tree separation you mentioned, not only a physical barrier but a noise and wind breaker. But it would cost more… :(
My understanding is they are very cheap to install relatively speaking. All lanes should really have them, they are really useful even for regular driving. For example if you have to cross a shoulder line or center line it can give the driver a better idea of exactly where the line and their vehicle is. They also help find the shoulder or center line if some snow is covering the paint. If pulling over all the way onto the shoulder, you know when you are completely out the lane after the second set of vibrations.
Which is why I always ride on the sidewalk. In my city the bike lane (assuming there is one) is separated by nothing but a line of paint. You’d have to be suicidal to use that shit.
Why does it say “Lane Bike” on the road? Do people suddenly start reading from bottom to top when they’re driving?
Lots of markings on roads follow this pattern. I think the logic is that the closer (bottom) text comes into focus first.
But yeah, when you look at it, it just looks backwards
The problem is that humans are not Xerox machines and we don’t read by a direct line moving ahead of us, but instead we focus on objects. If the “LANE | BIKE” sign were separated by fifty feet it would be logical, as each line would be its own distinct object, but by having them so close it actually inhibits attribution.
I would argue that as soon as that’s the case and letters have to be spread far and wide, a sign might be more appropriate.
I think it’s how they do it in America (I was watching a video of James May reviewing a cybertruck, and he commented on markings that say things like “Xing Pedestrian”). It makes a certain kind of sense, I suppose.
There’s an empty lane RIGHT THERE
So close
fuckcars moment
Why am I not surprised that this is Dana Point…
I thought I recognized that road! You see this shit all over OC, but at least there are places to bike.
That bike lane is a place to bike in the same way a tightrope over some rapids is a bridge…
AVOIDING THIS SIGN
Same kinda genius who programs it with “KEEP YOUR EYES ON THE ROAD”, but more dangerous.
Classic.
