26 Responses to “A Look At Possible Bike Route Signs”

1. Jon Swerens, said:

   TooMuchClutter!GetRidOfSkyline!

2. Michelle Love, said:

   I agree! I think you should re-think the design more. And the color looks bad too, but that might just be the picture. Great idea!

3. scott spaulding, said:

   Hmm… so maybe a color scheme based on the Room for Dreams palette? It would be consistent, at least.

4. Andrew Mitchell, said:

   I like the sign. I don’t think it looks cluttered. I do think that the skyline should be substituted for some of the existing branding the City already has in place.

5. Jon Swerens, said:

   Honestly, what are these signs trying to tell me? Are they telling motorists there is a bike lane? Or bikes on the road? Or are the signs for cyclists only? And if cycling is going to be an actual serious transportation mode in Fort Wayne, why not use actual serious traffic signs? Pretty things like skylines indicate parks and recreation, not traffic warnings.

6. Ashley, said:

   The more I look at those signs, the more passionate I get about my response. The US Department of Transportation has already set forth standards for both regulatory (http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/HTM/2003r1/part9/fig9b-02_longdesc.htm) and guide (http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/HTM/2003r1/part9/fig9b-04_longdesc.htm) bike signs. Regulatory mark official bike lanes and guide signs mark bike routes.

   I am completely with Jon on the fact creating our own original signs indicate Parks & Rec as opposed to treating biking as a serious form of transportation. You can find all the standards here: http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/HTM/2003r1/part9/part9b.htm

7. Andy W., said:

   Ah, but Ashley! This is Fort Wayne! We have Room for Dreams©®™! And when you have Room for Dreams©®™, you have to have pretty signs. :-P

   Seriously, though, I totally agree with you and Jon. I am not clear about what the signs are trying to tell whom.

8. Johnny, said:

   Wow. Why should anyone even care what you guys think? I mean, the City is trying to help those of us who cycle-why come piss all over it?

9. Jon Swerens, said:

   Well, if the city only wants positive responses, it shouldn’t ask for input, right?

   But Ashley’s right in that there are already traffic standards out there, and there’s no reason to go against what’s worked elsewhere.

   I’m concerned about long-term cycling safety issues. Is the signage the biggest problem in the world? Well, no, and if the city goes forward with these signs, oh well. But proper, *understandable* signage does create improved safety for the cyclist and a seriousness about the matter in the mind of the motorist.

10. Andy W., said:

    Johnny,

    You got me. You’re right — I hate my city and my country. I guess I should just go to Russia, since I’m a big fat commie.

    Why don’t you read Jon and Ashley’s comments a little closer and see that they are asking very valid questions about the reasons for these signs’ existence. That might be more productive than being reactionarily antithetical because we have a dissenting opinion.

11. MichaelK42, said:

    Great. We’re spending time worrying about the drapery colors instead of how to build the bloody windows.

    I feel a blog rant in the making but pain and weariness conspire against me.

12. scott spaulding, said:

    The windows are on a different production line from the draperies but they’re both still in the same factory.

13. MichaelK42, said:

    That’s an awfully strange factory then.

14. scott spaulding, said:

    The point is that it’s an iterative process right now and discussion of one aspect or idea informs and shapes other pieces.

    The more discussion the better, as long as we operate under the assumption that things are in flux and nothing has been decided yet.

15. MichaelK42, said:

    Yet there’s still such a thing as spending time on important issues first, and the PR window dressing later, when the important things are better defined.

    Besides, as Ashley noted, there’s already signage defined – based on human interface factors and standards, not aesthetic design considerations.

16. scott spaulding, said:

    Dude, deep breath. They took maybe a minute or two from the regular meeting to show the signs and say “hey we came up with some signs that we’ll talk about more later”. I took a pic and shared it here to generate some discussion. We’ve had some great feedback that will help the next time it is brought up.

17. Johnny, said:

    I did read it, and besides, you aren’t telling the city this stuff-you’re all hiding in the blog world.
    Make some phone calls.Then bitch at me…
    Look at other cities, and the signs they have used. What is wrong with creating an identity for new routes?
    And the commie comment? Where is that coming from.

18. scott spaulding, said:

    The person running this site and approving the comments (me) is on the task force. When asked to serve on the task force I made my intention known to use this site to garner feedback and ideas. Hence this post, the first of (hopefully) many.

    Visits from the City-County building are in the top tier of visits to this site on a daily basis.

    We’re hardly operating in the shadows.

19. M Badgett, said:

    Just want to throw my two cents in as someone who rides or walks more than he drives. I like the signs a lot and if not these signs; I really like the idea of unique branding for cycle routes.

20. Adam W, said:

    Has anyone who is commenting ever been to another city that actually has a large amount of bike route signage? Other cities have created their own signage for their bike routes as well. Did you ever think that something different from the regulatory signage that blends in with all the other signs along the road might be more noticeable? I like the idea that it is something different. It might pop out a little more to motorists and really get the point across that this is a route that you should expect to see larger amounts of bicycle traffic. I just ask that instead of ripping apart an idea maybe you should ask why they have chosen different signage and colors…maybe there are good reasons for them! Once you are educated on reasons then you can make all the comments you want. I’m not sure about the color myself, but I’m curious if this is even the finished product.

21. MichaelK42, said:

    We haven’t asked enough questions for you Adam? We’re not educated enough for you? Tough.

    The issue isn’t the signs, if you’d bothered to read the comments. The issue is the timing and why less important things are being dealt with so soon – questioning, not bashing.

22. Jon Swerens, said:

    If you’re interested, you can find a more official response on my Web site: http://www.thegoodcity.com/

23. Ashley, said:

    As Scott has mentioned, these signs are no finished product. They were only briefly shown as a head’s up they’ll be discussed at a later date.

    Michael, warning. I originally commented because I did have an issue with these beta signs. I understand you feel this is a drapery discussion, but I consider it to be a part of the windows discussion.

    Earlier this spring I visited Seattle where biking as a form of transportation is a serious thing. (Those folks are dedicated. The hills out there are killer.) I felt safe getting around town via their bike routes, because their regulation signs made the rules of how to interact with bicyclists and bike routes clear to drivers. As bike routes are put onto roads where right turn lanes for cars and straight lanes for bikes exist, the fact bike lanes are official lanes of traffic must be clear. (See the animation under “Bike lane laws”: http://www.sfbike.org/?bikelane_right_turns for clarification of lane situation.)

    I disagree that different signs will stick out to drivers. We are trained to look at the regulation signs. You can only take so much information as you’re traveling down the road at a high speed. Customized signs run the risk of being read second to signs providing information for the task at hand.

    Having said this, I would have no problem customizing the already regulated bike route sign. (Bike routes are different than dedicated bike lanes.) This has been standardized in California. The federal sign is M1-8 at http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/HTM/2003r1/part9/fig9b-04_longdesc.htm. The customization for Oakland can be seen at http://www.oaklandpw.com/Page122.aspx#define and the customization for San Francisco can be seen on page 3 of http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/tpp/offices/bike/sites_files/Bike_Bklt_3-03_view.pdf.

    I feel there is a need for official signs due to Fort Wayne drivers being used to an infrastructure that favors driving. Last summer I biked to work in Indy/Carmel mostly via their Monon Greenway, but near my work I was required to ride with traffic. Last Friday I rode to work in Fort Wayne and was shocked by the general disregard for both pedestrians and bicyclists. Multiple times I witnessed motorists make right and left turns as people were attempting to cross intersections when their sign said “WALK.” This is something I only rarely encountered as drivers generally yielded. Yes, Carmel and Indy have more pedestrians/cyclists, but they also have the infrastructure and signs to support and encourage considerate driver behavior.

24. Ashley, said:

    PS – Please don’t kill me for the length. I am terrible at saying things short and to the point. I am more than a little embarrassed for the length of that comment.

25. MichaelK42, said:

    @Ashley – I mean it’s drapery in the senses that it’s premature AND I think it’s dumb to reinvent the signage.

    In other words, making “pretty” drapery signs instead of using standardized road signage. It’s a user interface issue, not an eye candy opportunity.

    So basically I agree with you and Jon.

26. Ashley, said:

    Michael, ah, alrighty. Thanks for the clarification.

Leave a Reply