America's Most Dangerous Cities For Cyclists

[Kontact]

Originally Posted by Seramount

focusing on fatalities may not paint the most accurate picture of 'dangerous'...how many people get hit by cars and don't die?

would also like to see the stats of reported instances where motorists were cited for colliding with cyclists.

That's all true, but the problem you run into is that the reporting gets sketchy when there isn't a fatality. Some areas are going to cite drivers more often than other areas, so that skews statistics.


Bicycling is not "safe". It is a high speed sport on a vehicle that offers few safety features more than roller skates. Despite it being common and mixed heavily with very dangerous cars, the danger is surprisingly low. But that doesn't mean it is as safe as going to the gym.

[glepore]

Originally Posted by Aaron O

Having ridden a fair bit in quite a few cities...I'm shocked to see Philly listed. The riding is damned good here...far better than newer cities like Tampa. It blows Manhattan out of the water.

I'm not, really. Yes, the riding in Philly is damned good. But its also a really workable cycling/pedestrian city. More riders than many places as a result. Because the study isn't normalized to account for how many cyclists per million are on the road daily, its worthless.

It also doesn't account for injuries. Fatalities are an unfair measure of how dangerous a cycling city is, serious injuries are just as important.

Hopefully though the recent Spruce Street incident/protest will bring about renewed interest in Vision Zero here.

[Aaron O]

Originally Posted by glepore

I'm not, really. Yes, the riding in Philly is damned good. But its also a really workable cycling/pedestrian city. More riders than many places as a result. Because the study isn't normalized to account for how many cyclists per million are on the road daily, its worthless.

It also doesn't account for injuries. Fatalities are an unfair measure of how dangerous a cycling city is, serious injuries are just as important.

Hopefully though the recent Spruce Street incident/protest will bring about renewed interest in Vision Zero here.

I don't know the methodology of their study...I do know that Philadelphia is a lot safer for cycling than most cities.

My interpretation of that accident might differ from most...many of the lanes are dangerous because they promote an illusion of safety; I preferred Spruce before the lane. Advocates are committed to lanes not because they are safer, but because they help get beginners on the road who think they are. Now I'm forced into a lane with joggers, skaters, and stopped cars that push me into traffic unexpectedly. The safety is in numbers. I'd prefer an approach where we encourage people to ride in traffic as safe.

I also don't understand why in this day and age...where cameras and monitors are so cheap...insurance companies aren't insisting on monitors/screens for the blind spots. There's really no reason for a truck having a blind spot anymore.

[glepore]

I don't disagree about the lanes. I don't think cyclists should be "forced" to ride anywhere. The idea of a known east/west corridor is not a bad idea in theory, and it does serve to make motorists more aware of the presence of cyclists, but yeah, it creates an illusion. I'm a big believer in the old "effective cycling" approach of making yourself visible by controlling your space, and riding like you're a target. The getting right turned thing is the most common way for a cyclist in traffic to get crushed, so an experienced rider is hyperaware of it, but its hard to blame a victim who wasn't.

Yeah, no excuse for a "blind spot". But in the real world, no reason to be in a blind spot either.

[Aaron O]

Originally Posted by glepore

I don't disagree about the lanes. I don't think cyclists should be "forced" to ride anywhere. The idea of a known east/west corridor is not a bad idea in theory, and it does serve to make motorists more aware of the presence of cyclists, but yeah, it creates an illusion. I'm a big believer in the old "effective cycling" approach of making yourself visible by controlling your space, and riding like you're a target. The getting right turned thing is the most common way for a cyclist in traffic to get crushed, so an experienced rider is hyperaware of it, but its hard to blame a victim who wasn't.

Yeah, no excuse for a "blind spot". But in the real world, no reason to be in a blind spot either.

Agreed all around. The thing is that when you're in your "safe" lane, to the right of traffic, it can lull you into a sense of security. You're in your lane! So what if there's a truck to your left in its lane. There are lanes I do like...Delaware Ave, which has very few turns/lots...the bridge lanes on South and Grays Ferry are AWESOME and really increase access west. Spring Garden.

Some are deadly. You couldn't pay me to ride on Washington Ave...and the entire area around Logans Circle is a trap. The way the protected lane on Chestnut ends is INSANE.