California at long last has adopted its revised Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices ( CA MUTCD). The latest 2012 iteration has some welcomed new tools that will further expand our transportation engineer’s toolbox to implement bikeway facilities in the City of Los Angeles. We’ll detail just a few of those new changes below the fold.
The new 2012 CA MUTCD is available for download here. Everything involving bicycles can be found in Part 9 of the manual. Part 9 is broken up into 4 sections – 9A (general overview), 9B (signage), 9C (markings), and 9D (signals).
Bicycles May Use Full Lane sign
This latest iteration of the CA MUTCD will allow LADOT to utilize new bicycle signage including the Bicycles May Use Full Lane sign. LADOT intends to use this sign (in traffic engineering lingo – sign R4-11) on streets that have Shared Lane Markings (SLM or Sharrows). According to the 2012 CA MUTCD, the Bicycles May Use Full Lane Sign:
… may be used in locations where it is important to inform road users that bicyclists might occupy the travel lane.
The addition of this sign to Los Angeles roadways with SLMs will further increase the visibility of potential bicyclists along those corridors. The benefits are two fold; bicyclists and motorists will be reminded that bikes can use the full travel lane, and SLMs will help guide bicyclists to their proper position on the roadway.
Bicycles May Use Full Lane Sign
Shared Lane Marking with no on-street parking
Also new for 2012, Shared Lane Markings (SLMs) or Sharrows can now be placed without on-street parking. Formerly, the design standard required SLMs to be installed in conjunction with on-street parking and placed at a minimum of 11 feet from the curb. Per the recommendation of our Sharrows Study, we determined that 12 feet from the curb would be the most practical for Sharrow placement in the City of Los Angeles. If you would like to find out more about Sharrows, visit our Sharrows tab.
Sharrows are now allowed without on-street parking. You can find information on Shared Lane Markings in Section 9C.07 in the 2012 CA MUTCD:
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.
Bicycle Wayfinding Signage
Wayfinding signage is classified as a bicycle guide sign. According to the CA MUTCD, they can be placed along designated bike routes (including bicycle friendly streets – BFS) and are useful for providing bicyclists with direction, destination, and distance information. You can find the whole nitty gritty on guide signs in section 9B.20 in the 2012 CA MUTCD.
LADOT plans on prioritizing wayfinding signage implementation along Bicycle Friendly Street (BFS) facilities in the five year implementation plan and along other appropriate facilities like the L.A. River Bike Path and the Orange Line bike path. We will soon be conducting neighborhood outreach to garner input from local communities to determine appropriate destinations for display. Find out more about wayfinding signage by visiting our post here.
Bicycle Guide Signs taken from FHWA MUTCD
[...] Continue Reading: Updated 2012 CA MUTCD now adopted [...]
[...] has updated it’s overly conservative guide to what traffic signals, signage and markings are allowed on our streets; wayfinding and Bikes May Use Full Lane signs are now allowed, NACTO not so much. [...]
Sharrows are now allowed in areas with with no on-street parking. That will increase the liklihood that LADOT will put sharrows on streets instead of much more useful bike lanes. Afterall, it’s easier and cheaper to put in sharrows rather than bike lanes.
Bike lanes on streets with parallel parking at the curb are often striped so as to put cyclists riding within them in danger of being “doored.” Shared lane markings with supporting signage are much more appropriate in such cases. They also address driver misconception that cyclists are obligated to ride within bike lanes where present.
Bike lanes are not the panacea some regard them to be.
But bike lanes have a better track record than sharrows. People won’t ride unless they feel safe. Bicycling is plenty safe as it is, but people don’t feel comfortable mixing with cars as sharrows tell one to do. Bike lanes increase ridership more than sharrows, and I’m sure it’s because it increases one’s subjective safety. Sharrows seem to only really benefit the people who’d ride without them. We don’t need to create infrastructure to encourage the people that currently ride (they currently ride despite unpleasant conditions), we need infrastructure that gets more people riding, and bike lanes do a better job of that.
I don’t understand how sharrows are considered adequate infrastructure on streets where cars are barreling down at 35-40mph (for instance, Vine St.)… they should be for 25mph streets where the traffic isn’t moving at such a faster pace than most bicyclists.
I am a very casual bicyclist in LA because it simply isn’t very safe on streets with extremely fast traffic and no separate area for me to ride except in front of aggravated and speeding motorists. This is not because I lack courage or that I misunderstand the safety / rules of the road for cycling (as I used to ride all over the city in SF with much less trepidation), it’s because the traffic just moves way too fast here (even being a pedestrian can be a challenge on a lot of our streets).
I think traffic calming should be the primary concern for bike routes if you want to see a huge bump in bike traffic (or dutch style lanes if we’re gonna let cars keep plowing through our city at highway speeds). Unfortunately it seems our pols and LADOT lack the political courage for either of these options (or maybe they just don’t care).
Either way, neighboring cities (Long Beach, Santa Monica, PAsadena, Glendale, etc.) will continue to move forward with this common sense idea and continue to poach our tax base by providing more livable neighborhoods for families to settle down in.
To clarify, I think the bike team is doing great work… I just wish the rest of our planning / transportation priorities were synthesized to work with the bike plan via traffic calming (lowering speed limits, adding more crosswalks, sidewalk bump-outs, etc.), instead of against safe streets for fear of inconveniencing entitled motorists in LA.
Hey Corner Soul,
The Mobility Element update is an excellent opportunity to express how you think our planning / transportation priorities should work together!
http://ideas.la2b.org/