5 thoughts on “Flexposts and “Interested, But Concerned” Cyclists”

  1. Nope. I would rather see raised pavement markers (aka “Bott’s dots”) embedded into the edge line closest to the car lane to give an audible warning of a car intruding into the buffer zone. I’ve seen these on some state highways in Florida with bike lanes. I’m convinced they would have given my brother time to react to a drifting motorist and saved his life. ________________________________

    Like

  2. Bill – Interestingly, the city tried the Botts dots experiment at this same intersection last year – on the other side of the street, westbound/downhill. First time ‘round they put them on the bike lane side of the buffer, which was dangerous to cyclists, so they fixed it, which was a “yay!”. The new set on the car lane side of the buffer are completely gone, I presume having been battered into submission by cars cutting the corner and encroaching on the bike lane. – Fleck

    Like

  3. Well, I would prefer concrete barriers, this is great because it also has added buffer. I think the posts make the bike lane even more clear to drivers. I would feel comfortable to ride this on roads that are less than 35 miles an hour.

    Like

  4. Thanks for your comment. I failed to note the road, which is MLK eastbound at Elm just west of I-25. The posted speed is 30, I believe. Maybe MLK makes a good test of whether a rider is “Interested, But Concerned” v. “Confident” or “Fearless.” (17,000 daily traffic count, 30 mph). One thing about this stretch is slope, and, ebikes aside, that seems pertinent in the question as well.

    Like

  5. They should really put those flexposts on the outside of the buffer, near the cars. That’s the completely obvious and correct way to do it. So someone had to deliberately decide to NOT do that, which effectively makes the driving lane seem 2 feet wider than it actually is, and thus promotes more car speeding.

    Like

Leave a comment