“A disappointing step in the wrong direction”
Only if you misunderstand elementary traffic principles.
A new panic has ensued among a few Finest City Cluster B(ike) Activists.
These two images are showing 30th Street just prior to its intersection with Upas Street in San Diego. The top shows the current configuration while the bottom shows the older configuration.
This is where 30th Street, a relatively major North-South street that traverses both the commercial areas of the North Park and South Park neighborhoods seemingly, ends at Upas. This entire area of San Diego, for the most part, is on a grid. 30th Street does continue further South, but that section is a few hundred feet to the East, meaning that 30th Street thru travelers have to hop on Upas for a brief bit.
30th Street in the section of North Park - the direction both these images show, is also home to one of San Diego’s newest, and arguably most controversial so-called “protected bike lane,” which places bicyclists who choose to use it out of relevance of other traffic. Fortunately this portion has few driveways resulting in little to no mid-block turning and crossing risks but it does have a handful of signalized intersections. Unfortunately, these intersections present left-cross and right-hook hazards for cyclists, and the signals lack a separate phase to separate bicyclist movements from turning and crossing movements from motor vehicle operators.
A novice to the world of bicycling advocacy might wonder if actual bicyclists wanted this.
Oh yes, many did because such manufactured conflicts makes them feel safer, and many are tied to the ideology that more of these bikeways will result in a “Field of Dreams” type fairy tale for mass cycling adoption.
This bikeway also drew sufficient criticism from non-bicyclists alike - especially North Park locals who were concerned about the removal of parking spots (even resulting in a lawsuit), the last minute changes to the City Council meeting where a vote for the project was slipped in (“Democracy”) and later, the conflict several restaurants and bars had with the bikeway when they opened COVID19 curbside dining.
The intersection of 30th and Upas happens to fall at either the beginning or the end of the new bikeway, depending on travel direction, but in the case of these hysterics, their issue entails the end.
For much of the bikeway’s life near this terminus, the curbside dining for several restaurants prevented the bikeway from being “protected,” and thus bicyclists rode what amounted to a standard (actual) bicycle lane.
This lane was painted all the way to the intersection’s limit line creating an MUTCD violation (bike lane lines are not allowed to be solid prior to intersections), and then “extended” with stripes and green paint into the intersection itself to aid cyclists in making a left turn onto Upas. This “lane” aligned with the single general-use traffic lane (there’s no such thing as a “car lane” - not the bike lane. Meaning - bicyclists would need to make a move left, perhaps (gasp!) needing to yield to traffic in the general-use lane, in order to properly align themselves with the faux green “lane.”
Right turning bicyclists would make those turns from the “bike lane” as it would be the right-most lane that serves their destination - a basic traffic concept. Legally, right turning motorists would need to do the same as required by CVC 21717.
So what are these two whining about?
The business finally removed the curbside dining spots. This provided the space for the city push the bikeway to the curb, and prior to the intersection, the space to install a right-turn only lane.
Now there is a dedicated left-turn lane, and a dedicated right-turn lane.
This means bicyclists using the bikeway have more space and time to make that lateral move if they chose to turn left and now they have a dedicated right-turn lane too. Shared-lane markings are painted (correctly) in the center of that lane to assist with safe lane positioning.
Mr Cluster B(ike) ain’t having it, though.
The “protection” ended dozens of yards back in the photo - as intended, making the statement “these have no place in a protected bikeway,” false.
Intersections are about destination positioning meaning road users are to move to the appropriate lane that serves their destination prior to arriving and entering the intersection. This of course requires yielding to others already using that space.
This is Rules of the Road 101.
The entire intent is to provide save and predictable movements.
It’s taught to motorists when learning to drive cars.
It’s taught to cyclists in major bicycling safety educational programs and books.
As is yielding prior to making lateral moves.
Nobody’s “forcing” a bicyclist into this position.
In the end, this petulance and general incompetence on how basic traffic rules work is sadly a common feature in the Cluster B(ike) Activist world.
These individuals seem to be more married to victimhood and dependence on the Nanny State than on growing up and taking any sort of personal responsibility.
Good thing these people tend to not reproduce.
This, sadly, isn’t the first time Cluster B(ike) Activists have gone into full blown hysteria over a new right-turn only lane.
