Sight distance

Recently an apartment complex Did a refurbishment. They are adjacent to the V1 Bikeway close to O'Keefe Street, Buranda. As part of their refurbishment they installed a new fence on their property.Due to its height and proximity to the bikeway the fence restricts sight distances for out-bound cyclists and persons entering the bikeway. 

 These photos don't really show how severe the impact is. On the first day after the fence was installed I almost ran over a pedestrian who was trying to cross the bikeway. Neither of us could see each other till the last moment. Luckily he managed to quickly step back in time. If it was a mother with a pram I think I would most likely have crashed into the pram.

Council cannot do anything about this as the fence is perfectly legal. It is within the property and there are no restrictions on the property that would prevent them from installing this fence.

Austroads Guidelines (Part 6A: Pedestrian and Cyclist Paths) recommends against locating paths adjacent to property boundaries for exactly this reason, and Section 7.8 has recommended clearances for curves to get safe sight distances. This bit of bikeway is squeezed between the property boundary and a retaining wall, so not much opportunity to get adequate separation. It would have been good though to get some sort of restriction placed on the height of boundary fences for the property to avoid this type of hazard.

When planning new shared paths that are adjacent to property boundaries it would be good for planners and designers to keep this example in mind, and put in place appropriate measures to prevent this from happening.

Facebook support

The Sydney Morning Herald reports there is a facebook group that has been established to lend support to the separated bikeways being rolled out in Sydney. The over 4,800 people 'liking' the group clearly enjoy the freedom of these new bike lanes.

Protected cycleways

Rachel Smith has posted an excellent article on the Crikey blog on 'Why Women Wont Cycle'. It is said that an excellent barometer of the safety of a cycling network or route is the percentage of women cycling on it. I have posted previously on this and agree with Rachel 100%.

Separated cycleways can greatly improve safety along routes. But, if the intersections are not done well they can significantly increase risks to cyclists. I posted previously that international research has shown that the most dangerous place for a cyclist is on the footpath because of conflicts with driveways and side streets. If a separated bikeway does not adequately address these risks it can actually decrease safety. This Wikipedia article provides an excellent scan of some of the research on the safety and risks of separated cycle facilities. What is clear is that unless the intersections and driveways are well done, a separated bikeway can increase risks to cyclists significantly.

But making the intersections safe can sometimes reduce their utility for cyclists. Take this Sydney example. The separated bi-directional bike path below has a potential conflict with right turning traffic. To prevent this, cyclists using the pathway are stopped at the light, even when right turns for cars are given the red light. Cyclists can only proceed once they activate the sensor in the tarmac and then they are given a green phase of their own. So they have to stop at the lights every time. For cyclists travelling with traffic this can be very frustrating and I did notice several cyclists in traffic instead of in the separated cycleway.

Bike Path Bollards

A hot topic for Brisbane-area cyclists is Council's use of these barriers to prevent vehicles from driving on off-street bikeways:

Cyclists contend that these barriers pose a crash danger to riders and, at a minimum, create an unnecessary pinch point. But Council maintains that these are needed to keep people from taking their cars right on the path. As of now, they are still installed as standard practice.

However, guidance from other cities and countries tends to recommend bollards only as a last resort and when actually needed. The US Federal Highway Administration offers the following guidance:

Trail managers should question whether bollards, gates, fences, or other barriers are needed at all. For the purpose of the bullets below, “bollard” includes bollards, gates, fences, or any other barrier constructed or installed next to, within, or across a trail presumably to restrict unauthorized access.

• Even "properly" installed bollards constitute a serious and potentially fatal safety hazard to unwary trail users. In addition, no bollard layout that admits bicycles, tricycles, and bicycle trailers can exclude single-track motor vehicles such as motorcycles and mopeds. For these reasons, bollards should never be a default treatment, and should not be used unless there is a documented history of intrusion by unauthorized cars, trucks, or other unauthorized vehicles.
• A landscaped median may be an appropriate method to reduce the likelihood that somebody might think the shared use path is a public street or driveway. See "What kind of barrier will keep cars off a bike path?" by John Williams and Kathleen McLaughlin, originally published in Bicycle Forum (Issue 30, August 1992), now NCBW Forum. See Article.
• Bollards are often ineffective: a determined person is likely to go around or go through. This may result in additional maintenance costs for the trail, either to repair or replace the bollards, or to repair trail or landscaping damage where vehicles go around the bollards.
• Bollards are often a hazard to trail users, who can crash into them, possibly resulting in serious injury or death. Poorly installed bollards can lead to head-on collisions. Bollards are involved in "second user" crashes, where the first user hides the bollard until it is too late to avoid it, even if the first user has adequate sight distance. These crashes can produce serious or incapacitating injuries. This can happen to pedestrians as well as bicyclists or other higher speed users.
• Unjustified bollards can create liability exposure. Trail managers should consider whether or not they increase their liability if they install bollards, gates, fences, or other barriers.
• Bollards, gates, fences, or other barriers can slow access for emergency response.

But the literature acknowledges that barriers are sometimes needed. What types are better than others? One of the most popular treatments is to split the path entrance into two one-way paths:

They can be designed just wide enough for emergency vehicles to fit through, while appearing too small for cars. If less space is available, the one-way path width can be reduced with low height plantings in the median so that emergency vehicles can drive over the top.

What other treatments have worked well?