Comments on: New markings to help cyclists cross tracks

By: avlowe

avlowe — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 01:44:39 +0000

Cherry Island in Chicago has a shared rail bridge (1 train/week?) with infilled flangeways. From Germany comes Velostrail a crossing panel with a depressable insert approved for up to 80Kph - tested to 120Kph - and at least 1 million axle-passes. Used on bridge in Hamburg and elsewhere also on street running lines.

Crucial in rail crossings is not the slipperyness of the rails but the vertical profile. Try riding obliquely across a ridge of 1/2" or more or along a crack or edge of a manhole cover and wet or not the wheel will kick sideways. Railhead profile should be flush or slightly lower than road surface, so that the tyre bridges between areas with higher friction.

UK DoT did research on the tactile paving for blind pedestrians and the 'profiled' kerb lines in thermoplastic (ribs to wake up drifting drivers) and conclude that max height allowable was 5mm (1/4") with a carefully specified edge profile. Far too little research in this respect though wrt 2-wheel road users.

Still not finished that Burke Gilman Trail after 20 years then - I've the property values report that Peter Lagerwey had in 1989!

Check out www.fillthathole.co.uk and the Network Rail section

By: Name

Name — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 09:00:01 +0000

Thanks. Really.

Actually, when I drove my car today, I put on my seat belt, I paid attention to the road conditions (sorry I didn't have time to text you), and I didn't have an accident all day.

Note: For those of you joining us late, something along the lines of "Alex, I'll take 'Not looking where I'm going but insisting on blaming someone else for my subsequent mishaps for $200'" should get you up to speed. ;-)

Got home, checked in on the kids, and they had a couple of problems during the day, but nothing we couldn't handle without blaming someone else.

All the best.

By: SPG

SPG — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 08:48:57 +0000

You're awesome!
Since you didn't crash your car today you should take out your airbags, cut off your seatbelts and pull off your bumpers too!

By: SPG

SPG — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 06:14:48 +0000

Road improvements and relocations happen all the time. Even without bikes this road is a good candidate for a realignment. It's narrow and straight so it both encourages undue speed and doesn't provide a good means of mitigating the dangers of it. The intersection at the west end isn't that great to begin with, not to mention there are a lot of alternate routes paralell to this one.
And you don't want people to zip to Ballard on bikes? If the trail kept going we'd see a lot more people taking advantage of Ballard's retail core.

By: SPG

SPG — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 06:10:40 +0000

I disagree with your disagreement.

Further we can see that by the other story about SBSG dumping in the canal and flaunting the environmental laws that the basis of their lawsuit isn't something they particularly care about…the environment. So then what is the point of the lawsuit? To stop the trail. By what means? Any. Thus I think it's very fair to say that it is obstructionism.

By: SPG

SPG — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 06:07:25 +0000

I also think the local stats are getting skewed by those f—ing tracks because it looks like just about everyone has or is going to eventually crash on them!

By: SPG

SPG — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 06:06:20 +0000

When I got pushed off the road by a truck it counted as a solo crash because there was no contact.

By: SPG

SPG — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 05:57:56 +0000

"What's to stop a few cyclists from filling the tracks with concrete late at night?"

You should call Salmon Bay and place an order for concrete.
But we're not using Salmon Bay because of this, but we need concrete. Salmon Bay wants to make money selling concrete, but would they cement over their own tracks? Too many conflicts!

Just kidding, but we really do need to do something about those tracks. A removable lid could do the trick, especially since the train's engineers already have to walk in front of the train on those occasions when they use it so it's not like we have a bullet train or commuter service going through there every hour.

By: Mondoman

Mondoman — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 03:13:29 +0000

I disagree.

By: Mondoman

Mondoman — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 03:11:07 +0000

Speaking as a cyclist myself, I'm only for removing those cyclists that flout the rules of the road.

By: Name

Name — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 03:02:48 +0000

Actually, I have, and so have my kids (2 girls, 10 and 12). I rode with them, showed them how to slow down and cross at an angle closer to 90 degrees, and, miracle of miracles, they crossed it and lived to tell about it. If you like, I'll talk to them about setting up a time when they can show you how to do it too.

By: seattlemedic7

seattlemedic7 — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 23:42:50 +0000

oh ya sure… we should change our route because of the bikes. Be gald we have people ZIPPING over to Ballard for a snack.

By: Manders83

Manders83 — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 23:10:33 +0000

Below is the BCoC Board and their respective Businesses that I will be boycotting until the suit is dropped. I'm especially sad about the Bay...

President
Brent Siewert (Majestic Bay Theater)

Vice President, Business Development Chair
John Backes (Shoreline Community College)

Vice President, Issues
Barry Hawley (Hawley Realty)

Vice President, Membership
Timo Nørring (Sterling Savings Bank)

Vice President, Programs & Special Events
Michelle Rosenthal (Garvey Schubert Barer)

Treasurer
Michael Hollingsworth (Sterling Saving Bank)

Board of Directors
Mark Ball (Snoose Junction Pizza)
Michael Fancher (Seattle Divorce Services)
Kristen Juan-Snyder (Peoples Bank)
Kerri Lonergran (Lombardi's Neighborhood Italian)
Greg Swanson (Viking Bank)

Executive Director
Beth Williamson Miller

Administrative Manager
Sue Allegra

By: Manders83

Manders83 — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 22:51:43 +0000

Greg, its not just the tracks but the variety of hazards when biking through this area. Watching out for cars uses enough concentration but having to navigate an obstacle course as well is more than we should be asking of the typical cyclist.

In my opinion we should be getting as many people out of their cars and choosing other modes of transportation as possible for multiple reasons- biking is a serious alternative in a dense areas and should be developed.

In particular to increase participation it needs to be accessible for average users, many of whom are going to be beginners. When you add all of that together: new bikers, railroad tracks, pot holes, cars, unclear paths, etc. then the barriers to getting people to bike as a serious alternative remain high.

By: Manders83

Manders83 — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 22:39:24 +0000

Sunday night I saw the train running on my way to Fredmeyer so it is still in use- there seems like enough space in Ballard to bridge the gap and leave the train alone- it seems just a little creativity is needed.

By: SPG

SPG — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 22:10:53 +0000

…and paint on a crossing might prevent a few more cyclists from falling and causing you to have to respond and have another unit cover for you and increasing response times.

I thought we were obviously riffing on the use of any funds. Sorry you didn't get the joke. We like you guys and I wouldn't want to cut your budget at all.

By: GregD

GregD — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 19:03:01 +0000

Are there bad drivers, Yes

Are there bad bike riders, Yes

As much as I respect the work that is happening on bikewise.com, it is not an unbiased tool, as it is the bike riders who report. It is a great tool to learn the major causes of bike crashes, and what we as riders can do to avoid them.

If you look at the statics it is about even for who is at fault in Car vs. Vehicle accidents.

And the number of car vs. bike injury accidents are almost the same as bike vs. bike injury accidents.

But the largest segment of bike injury crashes are individual crashes with no other vehicle involved.

Education may not have helped in your case but I think there is little that could be argued about it wouldn't help prevent individual crashes.

MichaelSnyder posted the following numbers in a previous thread.

Crash involvement:
Solo bicycle crash - 50%
Bicycle vs Bicycle - 17%
Bicycle vs Car - 17%
Bicycle vs Dog - 8%
Other - 8%

By: cyclistandSUVdriver

cyclistandSUVdriver — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 13:34:41 +0000

guess what - a bicycling license wouldn't have done any good in my situation since I know damned well how to ride safely and the idiot driver ran a red. Look at how many advanced and expert cyclists have posted accidents on bikewise.com. It's the dratted drivers who need more education!!

By: cyclistandSUVdriver

cyclistandSUVdriver — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 13:28:14 +0000

dude – the whole point of this discussion is to save lives. Isn't that your duty?

By: seattlemedic7

seattlemedic7 — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 09:58:30 +0000

Sure we can boycott the Ballard business that are chamber members, and QUESS WHAT… Those business will leave town. SAD SAD SAD.

By: seattlemedic7

seattlemedic7 — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 09:51:26 +0000

sure.. cut the FD and EMS. (Goggle FIRE DEPARTMENT BROWN OUTS). By cutting FD and EMS you are raising response times for emergencies. So insted of a 4-6 min response time to your burning house it could get upped to 10-12 minutes. that 6 minutes could save a life… maybe yours.

By: B B O

B B O — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 09:00:09 +0000

Remember, share the road! Cyclists like that in regard to automobiles, but please include trains too!!!!

By: SPG

SPG — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 08:53:04 +0000

True, but we can all recognize this for what it is…obstructionism.

By: SPG

SPG — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 08:52:03 +0000

Considering the amount of damage a car can do, a license is a good idea. Considering the amount of damage a bike or pedestrian can do it's silly.
I do agree with the need for better cycling education and am all for that, just not as part of a licensing scheme. We should be teaching it in grade school and offering it with the purchase of a bike, even if it's just a pamphlet that explains how to be a safe cyclist, it would at least be a start.
The people who call for licensing are really calling for removing cyclists from the streets as they assume that a license also means enforcement and the ability to take that license away.

By: Mondoman

Mondoman — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 08:40:28 +0000

And please also report it to the Seattle city council members and candidates, and the mayor and the mayoral candidates.

By: Mondoman

Mondoman — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 08:35:50 +0000

I hear it at night all the time — maybe the key is just staying up late? It has a very distinctive bell.

By: Mondoman

Mondoman — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 08:34:17 +0000

I would change Greg's wording from “lazy” (which I don't think is accurate) to “inexperienced”. I've ridden that area a number of times without any actual or perceived problems. If I were forced toward the tracks by traffic, I'd make a sharp right and cross over to the far side of the tracks even if it meant going onto the dirt/plants.
I guess it's analogous to the concept of “defensive driving”, in that you should always be looking for alternate/escape routes as well as auto/bike/ped traffic anywhere near you. It's very rare that there is only one possible physical route to ride — others may not be as fast or convenient but may be safer. I'm not trying to preach or minimize your accident SPG, but just pointing out that the changes we make to our own behaviors are often easier to accomplish and have a broader impact than trying to get an institution to make a physical change.
I *would* urge SPG and everyone else who feels strongly about this to contact the members of the city council, the current mayor and both candidates for his office, our local district reps/sens etc to express your concerns, and to keep contacting them week after week until something gets done. Posting on MyBallard, while psychically satisfying, won't get much done in the real world.

By: Mondoman

Mondoman — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 08:19:22 +0000

I don't think the Cascade Bike Club is a stranger to litigation — we can't decry litigation per se only when we don't like the people using it, and support it when we do.

By: Mondoman

Mondoman — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 08:16:51 +0000

I'm starting to come over to Greg's POV. There's no way we can remove all the hazards to biking in an area like Ballard. Thus, we need to decide as a society whether to force people to get some instruction before riding (by a licensing scheme) (to prevent at least some such accidents) or to let people be responsible for their own safety. In general in America we've opted for the latter, but maybe we need to have a discussion about this.

By: Mondoman

Mondoman — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 08:09:27 +0000

I think the idea is that you make a sharp right turn, crossing the tracks at as close to a 90 degree angle as possible, even if that takes you into the dirt on the far side of the tracks. Riding in the dirt is preferable to crashing.