Talk:Effective Cycling

integrate: "shared space" and empirical evidence

I saw some data in german which showed on average significantly more cyclist deaths and accidents after bicyles lanes where installed. My experience is the same. That is that most bicycle lanes are not designed intelligently and actually decuple the risk of death or severe accident for the cyclist. Bumpy side walks just painted red with bicycle lanes is one example for a dangerous and inconvenient design. Cyclists get run over by vehicles from side streets expecting a fast moving vehicle on the main street but not on the side walk, even though the ground crossing the side street is painted red. I saw this happen myself once to an unobservant cyclist who was run over by an equally unobservant motorist. Probably the cyclist thought himself safe because he paralled a big street and made no turn. And the motorist thought she had the right of way because the red paint crossed her side street from a pedestrian side walk not on grade. So the side streed for her ended not before the red paint but some meters afterward, joining the main street. --demus wiesbaden (talk) 21:38, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

'not on grade' may be a confusing term, especially for non-native english speakers, or even non-highway-engineers ! A 'grade crossing' is also known as a 'level crossing' - not an underpass or overbridge. In this case the side walk probably had a kerb (UK) or curb (US). It is probably open to question whether this would count as 'on grade'. To further confuse things, the word comes for the Latin for 'step' - gradus'. --195.137.93.171 (talk) 13:28, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Mis-Quoting Conor Reynolds, University of British Columbia

The article states

the authors of a meta-study on cycle infrastructure safety research at the University of British Columbia[2], who have publicly stated that "In comparison to cycling on bicycle-specific infrastructure (paths, lanes, routes), on-road cycling appears to be less safe."[3]

[2] http://www.ehjournal.net/content/8/1/47

Results to date suggest that sidewalks and multi-use trails pose the highest risk, major roads are more hazardous than minor roads, and the presence of bicycle facilities (e.g. on-road bike routes, on-road marked bike lanes, and off-road bike paths) was associated with the lowest risk.

[3] http://www.ehjournal.net/content/8/1/47/comments

In comparison to cycling on sidewalks and on multiuse paths, on-road cycling appears to be safer. In comparison to cycling on bicycle-specific infrastructure (paths, lanes, routes), on-road cycling appears to be less safe.

So the UBC study defines 3 categories of facilities:

• Safest

bicycle-specific infrastructure (paths, lanes, routes)

• Intermediate

on-road cycling

• Least Safe

sidewalks and on multiuse paths or trails

Selective quotation is misleading. I've tried to add

However, that study also concludes that "sidewalks and multi-use trails pose the highest risk" and Forester has published a reply.

But for some reason I can't submit to articles, only talk pages ! Please do it for me ! --195.137.93.171 (talk) 14:00, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Upgraded my router and managed it myself! --195.137.93.171 (talk) 14:30, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Effective Cycling. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140623222906/http://ddot.dc.gov:80/page/bicycle-facility-evaluation to http://ddot.dc.gov/page/bicycle-facility-evaluation

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:14, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Effective Cycling. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131213210351/http://www.trl.co.uk/online_store/reports_publications/trl_reports/cat_road_user_safety/report_infrastructure_and_cyclist_safety.htm to http://www.trl.co.uk/online_store/reports_publications/trl_reports/cat_road_user_safety/report_infrastructure_and_cyclist_safety.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:15, 14 January 2018 (UTC)