Blog
A FABBulous guide for Bicycling Advocates
Using the funds from an Advocacy Advance grant, the Fairfax Advocates for Better Bicycling (FABB) have produced the “Guide for reviewing Public Road Design and Bicycling Accommodations for Virginia Bicycling Advocates.” The guide helps advocates review transportation plans and projects to ensure that bicycling facilities are included. It provides suggestions on ways to influence the process. And it’s just an all around good looking document.
One cool feature: the guide outlines different types of treatments and includes a simple checklist to determine if bicycling friendly guidelines have been followed.
The guide was designed for Virginia advocates but many of the ideas can be used by advocates across the country. Check it out here.
Darren Flusche
League Policy Director
Flusche joined the League in April 2009 and has a B.A. in history from Syracuse University and a Masters of Public Administration with a concentration in public policy analysis from New York University.
Subscribe
July 19th, 2010 at 6:46 pm
Based on a quick look, pretty good document. Its rare to see advocates and traffic professionals entirely fluent with each other’s vocabulary and this leads at times to suggestions that don’t work too well.
By the way, shouldn’t the sharrow on the bottom of pg. 12 be a little farther left, i.e., get the right edge of the sharrow away from the gutter pan?
July 20th, 2010 at 10:12 pm
The shared lane marking could be a bit further to the left. The center of the arrow is about 2 feet from the gutter pan and about 3 feet from the edge of curb. I would probably ride another foot to the left. MUTCD guidance states: “If used on a street without on-street parking that has an outside travel lane that is less than 14 feet wide, the centers of the Shared Lane Markings should be at least 4 feet from the face of the curb, or from the edge of the pavement where there is no curb.”
It’s difficult to get a good photo of a sharrow given they are used in so few places in this area (DC Metro), so we used a stock photo from the Pedestrian and Bicycling Information Center (PBIC).
Bruce
July 29th, 2010 at 1:02 pm
The guide says:
What is the best type of bicycling facility?
No one has a one-size-fits-all answer.
Yes, I do. And most of us do.
Why the wishy-washy language? When stated in this, “Well, there is lots of disagreement” style, removes the power from the document. We need a document that is not afraid to state clearly what is required.
I, for one, don’t care what vehicular cyclists prefer — they had 30 years to make a difference — they failed.
I also don’t care what the automakers prefer.
We know _exactly_ what types of facilities are necessary — we can specify them down to the inch. We need to do this sooner rather than later.
August 2nd, 2010 at 7:07 pm
“I, for one, don’t care what vehicular cyclists prefer — they had 30 years to make a difference — they failed. ”
Excuse me, but we have had vehicular cyclists since the 19th century. It is not a movement. It’s is a way of riding…
Most jurisdictions treat bicycles as vehicles, and are expected to follow the rules of the road. Vehicular cycling never fails. The only fail is trying to convince sidewalk sallys and gutter bunnies that there is a safer and more efficient way, that doesn’t cost taxpayers anything.
-”Vehicular cycling techniques have not been tried and found difficult. They have been presumed difficult and not tried.”
– P.M. Summer…
…paraphrasing G.K. Chesterton