Narrow traffic lanes on Harrisburg Ave and add bike lanes
From "A Stronger Lancaster: Submit Your Ideas"
Go to the project
Lanes are too wide and encourage speeding, and this would be a useful bike connection. Alternatively, the extra space could be used for tree planting and additional street parking.
Comments(11)
Commenting is not possible because this project is currently not active.
Most recent comments have loaded.
Profile of John Gardosik
Posted by:John Gardosik
4 years ago
Sharrows would be unsafe on this road. Standard lanes in an urban environment are 10'. These are clearly *at least* 12'.
Profile of Bill Hoffman
Posted by:Bill Hoffman
4 years ago
@John Gardosik Why are sharrows unsafe? They show the proper position for cyclists within the lane (although a few in Lancaster are within the door zone). The Hbg. Ave. traffic lanes are probably 12'. Standard design urban lanes are 12', although Lancaster changed their specs to 10'. Hbg. Ave. is a state highway, so PennDOT might have to approve any changes the city wants to make.
I am greatly concerned when cities put cyclists in danger under the guise of trying to help them. That's why I wrote "don't mess it up" in my previous post. Examples of danger: the Walnut St. hidden bike lane, the door zone bikes on Buchanan Ave. (which will be removed when the street is repaved).
Profile of John Gardosik
Posted by:John Gardosik
4 years ago
@Bill Hoffman 10' is an urban lane. 12' is a highway lane. Harrisburg Ave is complicated because it's sort of both, but that's kinda the problem. The wide lanes encourage speeding. They might be good for someone who's already comfortable biking on wide lanes, but they're not encouraging to people who might want to try biking but don't feel safe.
I'm also open to the argument that there's not enough room for 3 lanes of traffic *and* safe, comfortable bike lanes. In that case, if you want to maintain it as a bike route, I'd at least argue for changes at intersections that narrow the crossing distance and force turning cars to slow down more.
Profile of Bill Hoffman
Posted by:Bill Hoffman
4 years ago
@John Gardosik Agreed, wide lanes encourage speeding, but that can be addressed with enforcement rather than physical changes to the road that are harmful to cyclists--a zero-cost solution. The third lane here is a 2-way left-turn lane that is empty most of the time. Motorists can easily encroach into that lane to pass cyclists. Bulbouts at intersections help pedestrians by, as you say, shortening the crossing distance, but they can and often do force cyclists to move farther left, which means looking behind and yielding to overtaking traffic.
Profile of Brent McComsey
Posted by:Brent McComsey
4 years ago
@Bill Hoffman Is it an option to use curb extensions that cyclists can pass through then? Those exist, right?
Profile of Bill Hoffman
Posted by:Bill Hoffman
4 years ago
@Brent McComsey If they exist, they shouldn't. There are design and operational problems with this idea. If the cut is at street level, then two ADA ramps have to be added to the extension so wheelchairs can use them. How will snow be removed or street sweeping done if the cuts are narrower than the width of the plow or sweeper? This would also take cyclists out of the traffic stream and then put them back in. That is unsafe. With an extension cut-through, pedestrians would be at risk from cyclists driving through the cut. Curb extensions are intended to shorten the crossing distance for pedestrians. Your idea increases the distance, which defeats the purpose of the extension in the first place.
Profile of Bill Hoffman
Posted by:Bill Hoffman
4 years ago
The lanes are NOT too wide. They're about standard for a city street. Instead of bike lanes, use sharrows and "Bikes May Use Full Lane" signs. Hbg. Ave. is already a state bike route. Don't mess it up. Adding the median alongside of F&M made it harder to bike in that area because the travel lanes were narrowed. Remember that every travel lane is a bike lane when a bike is using it.
Share
Posted by
Profile of John GardosikJohn Gardosik on February 16, 2022
Current status
viewed
Location
Unable to display map. WebGL2 support is required.
Ensure that your browser and hardware meet the minimum requirements.
https://esriurl.com/webgl-faq