Comments on: A Look At Possible Bike Route Signs

By: Ashley

Ashley — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 06:23:57 +0000

Michael, ah, alrighty. Thanks for the clarification.

By: MichaelK42

MichaelK42 — Sun, 31 May 2009 16:02:11 +0000

@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.

By: Ashley

Ashley — Sun, 31 May 2009 08:51:47 +0000

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.

By: Ashley

Ashley — Sun, 31 May 2009 08:46:39 +0000

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.

By: Jon Swerens

Jon Swerens — Sat, 30 May 2009 18:45:35 +0000

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

By: MichaelK42

MichaelK42 — Sat, 30 May 2009 14:59:28 +0000

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.

By: Adam W

Adam W — Sat, 30 May 2009 14:16:41 +0000

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.

By: M Badgett

M Badgett — Fri, 29 May 2009 15:36:26 +0000

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.

By: scott spaulding

scott spaulding — Fri, 29 May 2009 14:07:43 +0000

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.

By: Johnny

Johnny — Fri, 29 May 2009 12:45:55 +0000

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.