The Road Commission for Oakland County is widening another road.  This time it’s Tienken between Livernois and Sheldon Roads.

If ever a county road needed bike lanes, this would be it. It would connect Livernois, the Paint Creek Trail, Stony Creek High School, and Sheldon Road (a main access point for the Stony Creek Metropark.)

We need cyclists to give their input to the Road Commission.

A public meeting is planned for January 21st from 4pm until 7pm in the auditorium at Rochester Hills City Hall, 1000 Rochester Hills Drive (south of Avon Road between Livernois and Old Perch roads).

According to the Road Commission, “Public input will help shape the ultimate project design.”

If you are unable to attend the meeting on the 21st, please submit your comments to:

The Road Commission for Oakland County
31001 Lahser Road
Beverly Hills, MI 48025
E-Mail: dcsmail@rcoc.org
Phone: 877-858-4804

If you can attend the meeting, the Road Commission will likely provide their normal technical brush offs.  Here are what you can expect:

Brush off: The Road Commission has a policy of not accomodating bikes on the road.

Answer: The Road Commission mission is “to provide the public with leadership in safe and convenient road.”  Bike lanes are the safest place a cyclist can bike.

Brush off: The Road Commission will build a safety path for bicycles.

Answer: Safety paths are wide sidewalks and are not safe nor satisfactory solutions for for bicyclists according to MDOT and AASHTO.

Brush off: On-road facilities aren’t safe.

Answer: Studies find that bike lanes are the safest place to ride a bike.  Wide sidewalks are the least safe.

Brush off: The Road Commission doesn’t have the money.

Answer: Ask them, “is there no money to make this road safe for cyclists?  Is there money to make this road safe for motorists?”  There is grant funding for non-motorized facilities. No less than one-percent of the Road Commission’s state road funding must be spent on non-motorized facilities such as bike lanes.

E.J. Levy recently sent me an article about Colorado State Highways and how many of them have paved shoulders 4 feet or wider — a great way to make roads safer for bicyclists.  Colorado has had a policy since 1999 to add these shoulders to their state highways.  Nine years later, 72% of their state highway roads have them.

I am not sure if this includes Interstates, where in Colorado they are sometimes open to biking (e.g. I-70, I-76.)

So what’s the story in Michigan? As of last year, 35.8% of MDOT trunklines had paved shoulders 4′ or greater.    That percentage does not include Interstates, which are not currently opening to Michigan bicyclists.

That’s 3,031 miles of state roads with wide paved shoulders.

According to Josh Debruyn, MDOT’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Coordinator, “In the last two years, MDOT has added 365 miles of paved shoulder suitable for bicycling and the number continues to grow every year.”

We expect these to grow as well now that the Governor has directed MDOT to do more.

And don’t think paved shoulders are just for bicyclists.  They help roads last longer, provide a safe pull-off area for vehicles, and allow vehicles to pass bicyclists more safely.

Now if we could only get the Metro Detroit road agencies (e.g. Road Commission for Oakland County) to step up and make this same committment to bicyclist safety.

Bike lanes in Ferndale

here’s been much discussion on this web site concerning bike lanes.

In summary, bike lanes…

1. Have been found to be the safest place for bicyclists to ride.
2. Can be funded from a variety of sources dedicated to non-motorized transportation.
3. Are not a significant liability concern for road agencies according to the state attorney general’s office.

In addition, the Road Commission for Oakland County and Wayne County Road Division have undocumented policies that prohibit bikes lanes.

Now this Macomb Daily article notes that old school opposition to bike lanes is in Macomb County as well.

Robert Hoepfner, chief highway engineer for the road commission, has no complaint with bicyclists. But he is concerned about safety. Many county roads simply aren’t wide enough for the kind of designated lanes Forlini described, Hoepfner said.

If county residents want designated areas for bicyclists, “Then let’s build bike paths and make them safe,” he said.

Apparently Mr. Hoepfner has not done his homework. Bike side paths are significantly less safe than bike lanes. If he was truly concerned about bicycle safety, he’d be building bike lanes. And if a county road is not wide enough for bike lanes, widen it. There is non-motorized funding available for this.

There are no excuses for not providing safe cycling opportunities in Metro Detroit.

In a prior post, we noted that many road agencies and municipalities in Metro Detroit are the major roadblock to getting safe bicycling facilities.

For example, the Road Commission of Oakland County refuses to acknowledge much less use best practices for bicycling facilities. They ignore the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHTO) guidelines for bicycling facilities. They ignore Federal Highway Administration guidance. They ignore bicycling safety studies that show their policies have been consistently found to be unsafe.

We appreciate the fact that Craig Bryson, Public Information Officer for the Road Commission for Oakland County responded:

The Road Commission for Oakland County has no objection to bikers. We simply have no money available to make costly improvements to roads to allow bikers. We cannot afford to simply maintain smooth pavement on the roads or even begin to address the massive congestion that clogs our roads everyday. It would be very difficult to justify spending scarce resources on bike facilities when we can’t maintain the existing roads. If you are proposing additional funding just for bike facilities, we’re more than willing to listen.

However, Craig isn’t correct. It’s not about the road money.

(more…)

If we’re going to make bicycling safer in the U.S., we need to be honest about what needs to be done.

The primary safety solution from many groups is to wear a helmet. But, according to research, wearing helmets is not the best way to improve bicycling safety. Creating safe bicycle facilities, increasing bicycle use, and educating users are the best means for improving safety. The results from the Netherlands support this. It’s one of the safest places to bike in the world yet almost no one wears helmets.

What do you call a cyclist wearing a helmet in the Netherlands? A tourist.

One study summarizes the six priorities that Germany and the Netherlands use to make biking so safe:

• Better Facilities for Walking and Cycling
• Traffic Calming of Residential Neighborhoods
• Urban Design Oriented to People and Not Cars
• Restrictions on Motor Vehicle Use
• Traffic Education
• Traffic Regulations and Enforcement

The big challenge in Metro Detroit is many road agencies and municipalities don’t know what better bicycling facilities are. For example, the Road Commission of Oakland County refuses to acknowledge much less use best practices for bicycling facilities. They ignore the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHTO) guidelines for bicycling facilities. They ignore Federal Highway Administration guidance. They ignore bicycling safety studies that show their policies have been consistently found to be unsafe.

And similarly, many cities have followed the Road Commission’s lead. Rochester Hills and West Bloomfield have pursued wide sidewalks (ironically called “safety” paths) despite the overwhelming evidence that these are not safe options for cyclists.

If we truly want safe cycling, we need to start by forcing our local road agencies and municipalities to use best practices and provide safe non-motorized transportation options for cyclists. This should be our primary campaign. And that message needs to come from cyclists, citizens, AAA, medical professionals, health experts, the Traffic Improvement Association (TIA), and others.

This doesn’t mean helmet use should be discouraged. Helmets can lessen injuries when cyclists are hit. But it’s much better to prevent those “hits” in the first place.