Charlotte trying to be more bike friendly

[archiham04]

You're saying those wide sidewalks exist in Pineville? Please do tell where

^ here you go

Edited October 27, 2015 by archiham04

[Bikeguy]

Nice article about the Recyclery.  

https://www.charlotteagenda.com/25365/trips-kids-charlotte-teaches-kids-love-bikes/

[jednc]

The NCDOT is proposing some restrictions on bike riders on North Carolina roads. Those include: " cyclists should not be allowed to ride more than two abreast, should be required to get local permits for large informal group rides, and should be directed to stay in the right half of the travel lane."

It sounds like the DOT is getting a little more serious about trying to keep cyclists safe. More on this can be found here.

Read more here: http://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/local/article51984775.html#storylink=cpy

[nonillogical]

As a cyclist I don't have a problem with most of the proposed restrictions, but the requirement to stay in the right half of the travel lane goes against one of the most basic tenants of cycling safety. Like the study group says (in an ignored recommendation), "taking the lane" when there is no bike lane is far safer as cars must treat you like they would a car or motorcycle, whereas when you are riding close to the shoulder most cars feel that they can squeeze by you. I have had many close calls myself this way and as a result almost always ride in the middle of the lane. I know another provision is to increase the minimum safe passing buffer from 2 to 4 feet, but that is not a tangible difference to a motorist.

[Bikeguy]

^ absolutely agree with this.  When I'm riding on a stretch of Charlotte streets where there are two lanes in both directions, I ALWAYS take the lane.  It is much, much safer.

 

[InSouthPark]

Honestly, it has NOTHING to do with the laws on the books. The ones that cause the issues are the ones who don't obey common sense traffic rules on the road in the first place...cyclist and drivers alike. 

As a former triathlete (I broke my neck in a bike crash last year, asphalt 1 - Me 0) but I have seen a bit of everything. 99% of the time there was an issue it was with someone being a "jerk", either the cyclist or the driver.  No laws are going to change either one.  I rarely had issues because I rode alone the majority of the time. But when I did, it was usually distracted drivers, teenagers acting like a-holes, or country rednecks thinking they own the road. 

[southslider]

All vehicles in NC are already required to operate as close to the roadway edge, where practical. The new bike regulation doesn't even apply if able to ride within 15 mph of the roadway's speed limit.

Edited December 30, 2015 by southslider

[ah59396]

On October 16, 2015 at 8:29 PM, MilZ said:

Not sure why this is a quote.  Please ignore that.

ill gladly take my ticket.  I'm riding in the entire lane.  Riding off to the side pretty much guarantees you'll get clipped by a car and far more dangerous.  So I'll take getting a ticket over getting hit by a car all day.

[videtur quam contuor]

Has anyone seen the size of some of those storm drain openings? Extending two feet from the curb and guaranteed to crash a bike. Also crumbled curbing in the street, or mud runoff where there is no curbing. Utility poles RIGHT ON the curb edge and then parking or other metal signs located perfect height to take off a helmet or handlebar.

[ah59396]

7 minutes ago, tarhoosier said:

Has anyone seen the size of some of those storm drain openings? Extending two feet from the curb and guaranteed to crash a bike. Also crumbled curbing in the street, or mud runoff where there is no curbing. Utility poles RIGHT ON the curb edge and then parking or other metal signs located perfect height to take off a helmet or handlebar.

Riding a bike in Charlotte is a treacherous affair.  More reason to take the lane.  The utility poles right on the edge are especially scary.  There's always rebar or random crap poking out of them too.  It's the worst.

[Bikeguy]

and there is the liability issue IF there was a collision.  Given this state's contributory negligence laws, any degree of "contribution" to a collision ( even if it's 1% cyclist as opposed to 99% to the driver) renders the driver harmless, unless there is gross negligence on the part of the driver. 

[SgtCampsalot]

I'm going to print out a few studies on taking the lane and keep it in my bike bag in case I ever get pulled over.

On 12/29/2015 at 5:19 PM, jednc said:

should be required to get local permits for large informal group rides,

 

So, are the Plaza Midwood Tuesday Night Rides, and the groups of spandex-wearing Meyers Park cyclists that go around Queens Rd, considered the same category in this? Or is there some distinction being made here?

Edited December 31, 2015 by SgtCampsalot

[jednc]

4 hours ago, SgtCampsalot said:

I'm going to print out a few studies on taking the lane and keep it in my bike bag in case I ever get pulled over.

So, are the Plaza Midwood Tuesday Night Rides, and the groups of spandex-wearing Meyers Park cyclists that go around Queens Rd, considered the same category in this? Or is there some distinction being made here?

Honestly, the article didn't clarify what they would consider the type group that should get a permit. And, the article did say that many advocates for biking were less than pleased with these recommendations. I do feel like DOT is trying to do something to increase biker safety...but whether this is IT I don't know.

[ah59396]

I ride PMTNR quite a bit.  It has gotten too big for its own britches.  What I mean is, there are far too many riders, too many layman riders and too many drinking riders.  This past year in particular, I've seen some nasty crashes where racing was involved, a new need for pre-ride "safety meetings" with all the riders and, what I can only assume, was a crack down by CMPD on the ride due to us corking intersections and basically blowing through redlights and holding up traffic (which, was more due to necessity of keeping the group together and not just to say "f it" and play frogger on N Tryon).

So I can definitely see where this "permit" idea for large group rides is coming from.  I don't necessarily disagree with it, because I am of the belief that rides like PMTNR more so highlight the dangers and pitfalls of the NC riding scene as opposed to breaking the rules for the sake of doing so.  I'd much rather the state and local municipalities continue to create safer conditions for single and group riders as opposed to regulating them because we don't follow the crappy, dangerous rules they've created for us (except the red light thing, that's just bad business).  But that's still a losing battle in NC.  Guy on bike getting hit by a car is still the bad guy.  

[SgtCampsalot]

I used my epic MS Paint skills to piece together a proposal (to me, myself, and I) for an Uptown two-way cycle track network that would capitalize on the one-way streets we have (which are normally terrible for bikes, but are perfect for cycle tracks like this) to make an ideal circuit for riders.

Something like this is necessary to bring all the random bike lanes and road diets into a cohesive network. The term "network" has not been applied fully by the city IMO.

Any thoughts on these routes? (Noting: The Pine St, Mint St connection would need to be shared traffic, unless you put a track on Graham St, which probably isn't smart yet). All the Phase 1 tracks would be on the "inside of the loop" sides of the streets.

And when I say two-way cycle track, I mean this kind of thing. Parts of it buffered by concrete, some by parked cars, and some by plastic bollards, etc:

Edited January 9, 2016 by SgtCampsalot

[Prodev]

I think it's a good idea and would promote cyclists since it would take any safety concerns out of the equation. Feels a little like a chicken or the egg situation though. We don't have enough critical mass of bikes on the roads to necessitate this today, so we'd need to take a leap of faith to spend the money and give up a lane of the existing road in hopes that it actually does promote people biking more. I'd be in favor of the city allocating a reasonable amount of money for this, probably in phases as you've mentioned. It's a much lower cost and less controversial way to keep pushing the pro-transportation theme the city has gotten a reputation for. 

Edited January 9, 2016 by Prodev

[cltcane]

1 hour ago, Prodev said:

I think it's a good idea and would promote cyclists since it would take any safety concerns out of the equation. Feels a little like a chicken or the egg situation though. We don't have enough critical mass of bikes on the roads to necessitate this today, so we'd need to take a leap of faith to spend the money and give up a lane of the existing road in hopes that it actually does promote people biking more. I'd be in favor of the city allocating a reasonable amount of money for this, probably in phases as you've mentioned. It's a much lower cost and less controversial way to keep pushing the pro-transportation theme the city has gotten a reputation for. 

My concern is that you would have to eliminate all on-street parking to make this feasible because you can't make College, Church, 3rd, and 6th (all major arteries to funnel traffic in and out of Uptown) one lane.  In addition, Pine St. (the Fourth Ward extension of Mint St.) is already only two lanes, and it is very narrow at the 6th St. intersection by HT.  Also, back to the parking issue, I live in Fourth Ward in a building without parking, and we have to rely on available street parking which is already a royal pain in the a** at nights and on weekends without eliminating an additional 15-20 spaces on 6th.

[CLT2014]

Does City Center partners have any data on what % of the Uptown workforce lives within a mile of Uptown?

[SgtCampsalot]

Good points

1 hour ago, cltcane said:

My concern is that you would have to eliminate all on-street parking to make this feasible because you can't make College, Church, 3rd, and 6th (all major arteries to funnel traffic in and out of Uptown) one lane.  In addition, Pine St. (the Fourth Ward extension of Mint St.) is already only two lanes, and it is very narrow at the 6th St. intersection by HT.  Also, back to the parking issue, I live in Fourth Ward in a building without parking, and we have to rely on available street parking which is already a royal pain in the a** at nights and on weekends without eliminating an additional 15-20 spaces on 6th.

Good points. I think, now reassessing it, the critical routes would be a singular North/South or East/West route. The important goal would be to provide a demonstrably useful connection so that people would understand it and use it from day one (otherwise the city could change their minds after the fact, like many other cities have done with separated bike lanes).

For North/South: Caldwell can stand to lose one lane in the 1st Ward portion while keeping on-street parking on most of it, and the 2nd Ward portion mostly has plenty of room to get to the 277 bridge (not even taking into account future development on some surface lots). Besides, it's a joke that this northern portion of the 277 loop is so treacherous to walk/bike on. The BLE trail that will spur up to Brevard is very nice, but not enough. 

This route would seamlessly connect the North and South ends. An argument against it could be that this will already be done with the rail trail, but I strongly feel there is an entirely different, and no less important, value to having visible, on-street facilities like this on the RIGHT roads.

For East/West: it would be a contest between 3rd St and 6th St. I think 3rd St makes the most sense, because it can spare a GP lane more easily while keeping any parking by the park. 6th St would be a nice route to have, but much of it is very narrow with important on-street parking.

Edited January 9, 2016 by SgtCampsalot

[SgtCampsalot]

11 hours ago, cltcane said:

 Also, back to the parking issue, I live in Fourth Ward in a building without parking, and we have to rely on available street parking which is already a royal pain in the a** at nights and on weekends without eliminating an additional 15-20 spaces on 6th.

I just drove 6th St from end-to-end tonight with new eyes, and you're completely right. Most of it is narrow, and most of it has much-needed parking for residences (that totally deserve on-street parking, because they are predominantly very well-designed blocks of development in Fourth Ward). I even noticed that 7th St has the same problem, even though you could reasonably make a bike connector through that little park it dead-ends at.

I deduced that the only reasonable East/West connector on that north end of uptown (as well as the MOST needed) is 11th and 12th Streets. I've heard city staff, and even advocates, make the case that since those two streets feed into a highway, we shouldn't do anything to promote bicycles to be on them, but that is fallacious, because people will be crossing them anyway, more and more in the coming years. This, plus the fact that they are doing a mini-cycle track on 12th between the BLE and Brevard St, so it would perfectly fit their plans. They could also easily connect it with the greenway trail off 12th at the Seigle Point park.

Unless that was made into a boulevard, those streets need full bike facilities; they're both one-way, so the loss of a GP lane has less impact, and the entire stretch from Church St to McDowell is a death trap if you aren't a seasoned rider.

Edited January 10, 2016 by SgtCampsalot

[kermit]

Been asking for something like this for years! North Davidson street between 36th and "Memorial stadium" (yes, I am confused about this geography as well) will be closed to cars on May 1 between 11am and 4pm. Awesome!

http://plancharlotte.org/story/protected-bike-lanes-sustain-charlotte

[kermit]

Is there any discussion of widening the old section of LSC Greenway between East blvd and CMC? It certainly gets tight along there on nice days.

Edited April 3, 2016 by kermit

[kermit]

CLT 5 reports on Crescent buying a bcycle station for Crescent Dilworth. They also plan to give Bcycle membership asbpart of their amenity package. 

http://www.charlottefive.com/developers-funding-b-cycle-stations

They also plan to purchase a dock for Stonewall.

This sort of buy in could break Bcycle open (in a good way)

Edited May 9, 2016 by kermit

[Matthew.Brendan]

That is excellent news. I swear I want to like Bcycle but the cost is a turn off every single time I contemplate it. I don't live in an area where a yearly membership would make sense. 

[Squid7085]

Long time lurker, but I recently decided to post. I just moved to Charlotte from the Kansas City area, and have been amazed with how patchy the bicycle infrastructure is. It seems like Charlotte is trying, but they don't have the money/will/support to make it something special.

I agree with taking the lane though, I often would stay off to the right back in Kansas and drivers would either move to the other lane to pass, or pass at a pretty safe distance. Here, I have almost been clipped multiple times, while simultaneously being flipped off or honked at. The other day on Morehead a guy was within feet of my bike behind me laying on the horn, despite having a clear lane to pass. I have gone to using sidewalks or just driving in some instances because of this. I really want to bike, and living in South End I see many, many people biking and using the B-Cycle every day, but they almost always are using the rail trail, or sidewalks. I shouldn't have to scream at drivers that I have a right to be on the road. 

As a side to the recent posts, my apartment complex offers free bike rentals for tenants, as well as many of the other places I looked at before moving.