On 2018-03-25 10:57, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 3/25/2018 11:09 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-03-25 07:37, jbeattie wrote:
... in Portland. Most of the infrastructure followed a
surge in cycling, driven in large part by an influx of young
creatives. The roads were fine for riding because they were not that
busy and there were and are alternative routes through the
neighborhoods. A lot of my commute routes still involve ordinary
roads with no bike lanes, and most of my weekend riding is on rural
roads with no shoulders.


I trust your judgment since you seem to live there long enough but the
stories in publications sound differently (for those on low BW
connections, this is an 11MB PDF file):

http://www.portlandonline.com/shared....cfm?id=217489

Quote "The accelerating growth in bicycle use validates Portland's
"build it and they will come" approach to bicycle transportation".

First, that document is ten years old. Nationwide, more segregated
facilities are being built, but bike mode share isn't keeping pace.
https://usa.streetsblog.org/2017/09/...re-in-the-u-s/


Second, repeating a propaganda line doesn't make it true. There are
plenty of places where "they built it" but almost nobody came using
bikes. And there are places and times when lots of people began using
bikes despite absolutely no increase in special bike infrastructure.


One can always find a hair in the soup some place. Fact is, properly
design bike facilities can increase ridership, bike time.


[Jay wrote:}

I much
preferred the old roads to some new separated facilities, but with
minor exception, I do like all the bike lanes. I would settle for a
wide shoulder, though. It really makes no difference to me except
that a bike lane gives me right of way and a shoulder doesn't -- but
that doesn't make much difference if motorists don't know the rules

One lawyer I know is worried about the reduction in legal protection
when you ride on a shoulder. According to him, some laws are written
such that your rights diminish if you're not in the normal traffic lane
(or, I suppose, in a bike lane).

My main worries on shoulders are 1) debris, and 2) rumble strips
preventing me from avoiding debris. I've described briefly moving to a
shoulder to make passing easier for a following vehicle, and immediately
getting a flat as a reward. The regular lane gets nicely swept clean by
car tires.


If you are not riding on a wide enough shoulder or bike lane the next
sheriff's deputy is likely going to stop and ticket you. That's the law
in California.


Same here. The long county road back out of the Sacramento Valley only
has bike lanes in spots but much of it now has wide enough shoulders.
I ride there a lot but most other riders would never do that. That is
why we have split commutes or however that is called, where people
truck it to a park & ride lot in the valley near the American River
bike path, then ride the remaining stretch to work.

This part of my ride is roughly the last 8mi of my trip when returning
from the valley and it is not at all enjoyable. I'd much prefer a
segragated bike path.

You're asking for an eight mile segregated bike path along a minor
county road? Should that happen on every minor county road? How many
trillion or quadrillion dollars should be allotted to projects like
that?


Only one cycling artery is needed, more or less along Highway 50. Some
smart people have advocated that (even without my input ...) but the not
so smart ones were in office and decided to sprinkle $50M+ into paving a
singletrack. Which was a rather stupid decision but they started it.

So those $50M could have been used for that and it is way more than
would be needed. The rest could be given back to the taxpayer.


Where would the money come from? How high would you like your real
estate and sales taxes to be?


See above. One only has to be wise with the spending instead of profligate.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/