Bicycle Facilities

There are more and more calls for bicycle facilities. While this would be nice for those who are out for a Sunday ride of a couple of miles I do not see this as an answer.

Bicyclists pay for the road as well as anyone else. Bicycles do not wear the roads out. And roads are not built by gas taxes - they aren't even used to repair the roads.

The real answer is to strongly enforce the traffic laws. People are afraid to ride on roads because of not just careless drivers but those who openly attempt to scare cyclists off of "their" roads. I have watched this occur in front of cops who took no actions whatsoever. And I watched a direct assault on a cyclist who recorded the whole thing on his GoPro and took it into the Highway Patrol office seconds after he managed to shake the man off of his rear wheel who actually chased him up a walking dirt path with trees on either side.

The Highway Patrol watched the video which showed this automobile driver breaking the law in several different ways and then said, "We can't do anything unless and officer observes this at the time of it happening."

And then shortly after that I watch the Highway Patrol do nothing about an incident of like danger to a cyclist.

No one can afford separate bicycle facilities so the only thing is to make the roads safe for ALL users and that includes the auto drivers that are threatened by careless or aggressive acts of other drivers.

On 2017-05-08 10:30, wrote:
There are more and more calls for bicycle facilities. While this
would be nice for those who are out for a Sunday ride of a couple of
miles I do not see this as an answer.

Bicyclists pay for the road as well as anyone else. Bicycles do not
wear the roads out. And roads are not built by gas taxes - they
aren't even used to repair the roads.

The real answer is to strongly enforce the traffic laws. People are
afraid to ride on roads because of not just careless drivers but
those who openly attempt to scare cyclists off of "their" roads. I
have watched this occur in front of cops who took no actions
whatsoever. And I watched a direct assault on a cyclist who recorded
the whole thing on his GoPro and took it into the Highway Patrol
office seconds after he managed to shake the man off of his rear
wheel who actually chased him up a walking dirt path with trees on
either side.

The Highway Patrol watched the video which showed this automobile
driver breaking the law in several different ways and then said, "We
can't do anything unless and officer observes this at the time of it
happening."

And then shortly after that I watch the Highway Patrol do nothing
about an incident of like danger to a cyclist.


There you have your reason. Folks like Phil and some others do not
believe it but that's how it is. I personally took the witness stand in
court during a case about a trucker who had brutally pushed a cyclist
into the ditch with the side of his truck. I saw it all because I was
directly behind, he passed me first and then chanced it on the next
rider while another truck coming from the other side was way too close.
Luckily his truck had under-ride protection on its side, else there
might have been a funeral first. Result: Acquittal! Unbelievable. All he
got was a verbal warning from the judge but without entry into his
driving record. That guy remained trucking on the roads. Lesson learned:
In the enforcement and judicial realm hitting a cyclist often doesn't
seem to be taken seriously.


No one can afford separate bicycle facilities so the only thing is to
make the roads safe for ALL users and that includes the auto drivers
that are threatened by careless or aggressive acts of other drivers.


It's the only way to get most people to cycle. Folsom managed to afford
them. Same for some other cities. The easiest in terms of cost and
maintenance are often singletrack connections. The main (long)
singletrack going through our town is maintained by volunteers. Gets me
all the way to Placervile and then some. Folsom in the other direction
where I can connect to a nice bike path system leading all the way to
Sacramento. There's other issues down there so I tend not to go there
but that's another story.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On Wednesday, May 10, 2017 at 11:07:36 AM UTC-4, Joerg wrote:
Snipped

No one can afford separate bicycle facilities so the only thing is to
make the roads safe for ALL users and that includes the auto drivers
that are threatened by careless or aggressive acts of other drivers.


It's the only way to get most people to cycle. Folsom managed to afford
them. Same for some other cities. The easiest in terms of cost and
maintenance are often singletrack connections. The main (long)
singletrack going through our town is maintained by volunteers. Gets me
all the way to Placervile and then some. Folsom in the other direction
where I can connect to a nice bike path system leading all the way to
Sacramento. There's other issues down there so I tend not to go there
but that's another story.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

There's justt his one teeny weeny problem and that is that many cities do NOT have areas where a single-track bicycle facility can run through town. Besides, with a single-track and someone going lickety split one way what happens to the poor bicyclist coming the opposite way? SPLAT! that's what. And don't sayy hat people will ride those single-tracks at moderate speeds.

Cheers

On 5/8/2017 10:30 AM, wrote:

No one can afford separate bicycle facilities

Huh?

so the only thing is to make the roads safe for ALL users and that includes the auto drivers that are threatened by careless or aggressive acts of other drivers.

You'll never achieve that through enforcement. No one can afford that
level of enforcement.

The only solution is a combination of traffic calming and separate
facilities. Some cities in my area have done a great job with traffic
calming. You have to find a way to make it impossible for the vehicle
drivers to engage in dangerous and illegal behavior. For example, at the
intersections with the the most red light running you put in barrier
arms that come down, or pop-up road barriers.

On 2017-05-10 12:11, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Wednesday, May 10, 2017 at 11:07:36 AM UTC-4, Joerg wrote:
Snipped

No one can afford separate bicycle facilities so the only thing
is to make the roads safe for ALL users and that includes the
auto drivers that are threatened by careless or aggressive acts
of other drivers.


It's the only way to get most people to cycle. Folsom managed to
afford them. Same for some other cities. The easiest in terms of
cost and maintenance are often singletrack connections. The main
(long) singletrack going through our town is maintained by
volunteers. Gets me all the way to Placervile and then some. Folsom
in the other direction where I can connect to a nice bike path
system leading all the way to Sacramento. There's other issues down
there so I tend not to go there but that's another story.

-- Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

There's justt his one teeny weeny problem and that is that many
cities do NOT have areas where a single-track bicycle facility can
run through town.


If there is an abandoned rail line there is usually opportunity for a
bike path, at least singletrack. Such rail lines were typically built
smack dab through town, for obvious reasons.

Instead of belaboring this usually moot point over and over go visit an
older city such as Folsom and see how they did it.


... Besides, with a single-track and someone going
lickety split one way what happens to the poor bicyclist coming the
opposite way? SPLAT! that's what.


Strange that this never happened to me and I've had lots of riders,
illegal dirt bikers, horses, hikers, deer, dogs and others come from the
other direction. Maybe you should visit California to learn how it's done?

Hint: One key item when the trail is in thick foliage is a daytime
running light. A BRIGHT one. Especially to avoid a collison with a dirt
biker who are often doing 30-40mph.


... And don't sayy hat people will ride
those single-tracks at moderate speeds.


As I've said before there are stretches of our local one that I ride at
20mph. Fast enough?

Ok, on straight asphalt I can do 25mph but not for more than 1/2h and
then I am bushed. So I seldomly do that for more than 5-10mins.

Of course there are slower stretches but my avg speed difference between
singletrack on one side and road & bike path on the other is rarely
above 3mph (pure riding times). Except on trails I stop more often to
take in the scenery, visit with my horse friend Ivan, chat with a
rancher, et cetera.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On 5/10/2017 11:07 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-05-08 10:30, wrote:

No one can afford separate bicycle facilities so the only thing is to
make the roads safe for ALL users and that includes the auto drivers
that are threatened by careless or aggressive acts of other drivers.


It's the only way to get most people to cycle. Folsom managed to afford
them.

Folsom did NOT get "most people to cycle." _Nothing_ will get most
people to cycle.

If you want to promote segregation of cyclists, do it honestly. Say
"Building this may cause 1% of people to ride bikes occasionally."

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 2017-05-10 13:23, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/10/2017 11:07 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-05-08 10:30, wrote:

No one can afford separate bicycle facilities so the only thing is to
make the roads safe for ALL users and that includes the auto drivers
that are threatened by careless or aggressive acts of other drivers.


It's the only way to get most people to cycle. Folsom managed to
afford them.

Folsom did NOT get "most people to cycle." _Nothing_ will get most
people to cycle.

If you want to promote segregation of cyclists, do it honestly. Say
"Building this may cause 1% of people to ride bikes occasionally."


You know very well how I meant that. Try to read in context. "Most
people" means most people who would be considering or be willing to
cycle. Yes, in the US it's usually going to be just a few percent.

Why not all of the willing folks? Because for some the hills around here
are too much. Beats me why because shifters have been invented and there
are cassettes other than corncob. Other excuses are "Oh, it's too hot",
"Oh, it's too chilly", "Oh, it could rain any hour now", "But the Giants
play this afternoon" and so on.

I am the a "glass-half-full" kind of guy. Too often you seem to see a
"glass-half-empty". Luckily the movers and shakers in Folsom, Davis,
Placerville and so on don't and ... build bike paths.

--
Regards, Joerg (who was on the MTB last superbowl)

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On 5/10/2017 4:34 PM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-05-10 13:23, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 5/10/2017 11:07 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-05-08 10:30, wrote:

No one can afford separate bicycle facilities so the only thing is to
make the roads safe for ALL users and that includes the auto drivers
that are threatened by careless or aggressive acts of other drivers.


It's the only way to get most people to cycle. Folsom managed to
afford them.

Folsom did NOT get "most people to cycle." _Nothing_ will get most
people to cycle.

If you want to promote segregation of cyclists, do it honestly. Say
"Building this may cause 1% of people to ride bikes occasionally."


You know very well how I meant that. Try to read in context. "Most
people" means most people who would be considering or be willing to
cycle. Yes, in the US it's usually going to be just a few percent.

Why not all of the willing folks? Because for some the hills around here
are too much. Beats me why because shifters have been invented and there
are cassettes other than corncob. Other excuses are "Oh, it's too hot",
"Oh, it's too chilly", "Oh, it could rain any hour now", "But the Giants
play this afternoon" and so on.

I am the a "glass-half-full" kind of guy. Too often you seem to see a
"glass-half-empty". Luckily the movers and shakers in Folsom, Davis,
Placerville and so on don't and ... build bike paths.

Regarding bike facilities, you are a "sell the bull****" kind of guy.
I'm bull****-intolerant.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On Wednesday, May 10, 2017 at 4:09:26 PM UTC-4, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-05-10 12:11, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Wednesday, May 10, 2017 at 11:07:36 AM UTC-4, Joerg wrote:
Snipped

No one can afford separate bicycle facilities so the only thing
is to make the roads safe for ALL users and that includes the
auto drivers that are threatened by careless or aggressive acts
of other drivers.


It's the only way to get most people to cycle. Folsom managed to
afford them. Same for some other cities. The easiest in terms of
cost and maintenance are often singletrack connections. The main
(long) singletrack going through our town is maintained by
volunteers. Gets me all the way to Placervile and then some. Folsom
in the other direction where I can connect to a nice bike path
system leading all the way to Sacramento. There's other issues down
there so I tend not to go there but that's another story.

-- Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

There's justt his one teeny weeny problem and that is that many
cities do NOT have areas where a single-track bicycle facility can
run through town.


If there is an abandoned rail line there is usually opportunity for a
bike path, at least singletrack. Such rail lines were typically built
smack dab through town, for obvious reasons.

Instead of belaboring this usually moot point over and over go visit an
older city such as Folsom and see how they did it.


... Besides, with a single-track and someone going
lickety split one way what happens to the poor bicyclist coming the
opposite way? SPLAT! that's what.


Strange that this never happened to me and I've had lots of riders,
illegal dirt bikers, horses, hikers, deer, dogs and others come from the
other direction. Maybe you should visit California to learn how it's done?

Hint: One key item when the trail is in thick foliage is a daytime
running light. A BRIGHT one. Especially to avoid a collison with a dirt
biker who are often doing 30-40mph.


... And don't sayy hat people will ride
those single-tracks at moderate speeds.


As I've said before there are stretches of our local one that I ride at
20mph. Fast enough?

Ok, on straight asphalt I can do 25mph but not for more than 1/2h and
then I am bushed. So I seldomly do that for more than 5-10mins.

Of course there are slower stretches but my avg speed difference between
singletrack on one side and road & bike path on the other is rarely
above 3mph (pure riding times). Except on trails I stop more often to
take in the scenery, visit with my horse friend Ivan, chat with a
rancher, et cetera.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

It's be one heck of a detour for me to ride from Ontario Canada to Folsom California. It'd be as you say "moot" anyway. the point i tried to make Joerg is that a LOT of cities do NOT repeat do NOT have abandoned railway right-of-ways running through them. Besides that as many cities grew the railways became quite far removed from where peole were trying to get to. It's one of the reasons why the automobile is so popular. The fact is that many areas simply do not have the abandoned railways that are need for your type of bicycling facility. I for one don't wantto have to ride miles out of my way to get to a rail-trail and then have to ride more miles out of my way to leavethe rail-trail in order to get to the place I want to be that's one a road i can take a far more direct route to.

You ride as fast on single-track as you do on a paved road? then get sdponsored to a Tour de France team.

Cheers

On 2017-05-10 14:32, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Wednesday, May 10, 2017 at 4:09:26 PM UTC-4, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-05-10 12:11, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

[...]


You ride as fast on single-track as you do on a paved road? then get
sdponsored to a Tour de France team.


Please try to read more carefully what I wrote. Else discussions don't
make sense.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/