Cycling surges in the land of the automobile

On 10/24/2010 3:22 PM, damyth wrote:
[...]
So you think someone riding in a faired recumbent (which I'll
abbreviate as HPV) can safely ride at 70kph, on the same paths, at the
same time, as those kids riding to school with their parents depicted
in the video you cited?[...]

See my post below with the links to videos of the 'bent streamliner
knocking garbage cans out of the way.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On 10/24/2010 4:37 PM, André Jute wrote:
[...]
But I must say that, whether the solution is bike paths or integration
with automobile traffic, pandering the fast-commuter minority will
absolutely insure that cycling remains a Cinderella activity in the
US. There will simply never be enough hardcore commuters to justify
spending tax-payer funds on them instead of on motorists.[...]

Nonsense. Citing scofflaw motorists for behaving badly around cyclists
is revenue positive. Similarly, citing scofflaw cyclists is also
revenue positive.

--
Tom Sherman - 42.435731,-83.985007
I am a vehicular cyclist.

On Oct 24, 7:34*pm, Peter Cole wrote:

Assen appears to have many high speed bike paths (in other videos), no
doubt helped by its relatively low density and natural routes along
canals. Similar situations exist in many cities for "bike highways"
along other such natural features like rivers, lake and ocean shores,
and RR ROW's.

Care to take a large American city and show what percentage of it can
be accessed by your natural features bike paths?

Here's a good one to work on.
http://www.noaca.org/cuybike.pdf

It may be better to use Google Earth to show exactly how you'd get
past all the built structures, existing property lines, etc.

I know that, in my more naive days when I was on a committee trying to
do what you describe, the committee soon realized it was all fantasy.
And even the transportationally useless bike trail that finally got
built out in the distant suburbs and farmlands took decades, due to
property conflicts, right-of-way challenges, and other hard facts of
law and geography.

- Frank Krygowski

On Oct 24, 3:12*pm, damyth wrote:
On Oct 24, 2:37*pm, Andre Jute wrote:



It seems to me -- not pointing a finger at you particularly, Damyth
because many other hardcore commuters here share your opinion -- that
a small minority of cyclists want to behave on the cyclepaths like
motorists behave on the road, that is force everyone to maintain their
speed or get the hell out of their way. Lou Holtman has already
pointed out, perhaps two or three months ago, that the Dutch model
only works by slowing everyone down to pretty near a lowest common
denominator (did he say 15kph? -- gee, when I'm enjoying the
countryside, that's quite often faster than I ride).

I'm not offering a solution, but you might consider this: most
successful street planning proceeds from the principle of speed
control, and then the fast throughways are a bolt-on or set-aside
extra.

But I must say that, whether the solution is bike paths or integration
with automobile traffic, pandering the fast-commuter minority will
absolutely insure that cycling remains a Cinderella activity in the
US. There will simply never be enough hardcore commuters to justify
spending tax-payer funds on them instead of on motorists.

It is simply a fact of life that the 12-15kph lowest common
denominator has the most votes and the best chance of forming a bike
culture.

Andre Jute
Reformed petrol head
Car-free since 1992
Greener than thou!

The speed limit argument may have some merit, but why would any
cyclist need it if we consider the alternatives? *The only "pandering"
that's going on is to recreational cyclists. *Vehicular cyclists are
not asking for any extraordinary considerations that motorists
wouldn't want, namely, sufficiently wide lanes.

Bike path advocates don't realize as bike ridership goes up, any bike
lanes that exist will become untenably congested. *It's really no
different than the (vehicular) cul-de-sac neighborhood hells that I
talked about earlier. *There won't be any alternative routes to
relieve congestion, because what's going to end up happening is all
cyclist traffic gets dumped on that single bike path, especially if
any segregation goes on.

This is all assuming that the the bike paths won't get "appropriated"
into multi-use, like for walking dogs, baby strolling, roller-bladers,
joggers, etc.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Using Assen as an example of the feasibility of separate bicycle
facilities is like using Disney World as an example of the feasibility
of monorails. Assen is apparently the centerpiece of Dutch cycling,
and its downtown looks like a theme park. BTW, the guy with the
YouTube video of cycling in Assen runs a tour company.
http://hembrow.eu/cycling/#selflead

I would love to see kids riding to school -- including my son. PDX,
however is not flat. Those poor kids going to school at Ainsworth
Elementary would have to do one to two miles of 8-12% to get up SW
Vista Ave. It could work on the eastside, though -- if we knock down
a few houses and rebuild the entire neighborhood ala Assen. Note that
the bike boulevards in Assen have pedestrian facilities on the side --
so the whole paved area is like a one lane road. No way you're going
to build a new, one lane road through the dense eastside. The only
real option in this town is to use the existing right of ways -- the
roads.

I don't know of any separate, bicycle-only facilities in this town --
they are all multi-use, either by designation or by consensus, meaning
they have been overrun with walkers, skaters -- those guys with the
obnoxious roller cross-country skis -- people with six dogs, etc. On
a sunny day, it is like running the gauntlet on a bike. -- Jay
Beattie.

On Oct 24, 4:49*pm, Jay Beattie wrote:
On Oct 24, 3:12*pm, damyth wrote:









On Oct 24, 2:37*pm, Andre Jute wrote:

It seems to me -- not pointing a finger at you particularly, Damyth
because many other hardcore commuters here share your opinion -- that
a small minority of cyclists want to behave on the cyclepaths like
motorists behave on the road, that is force everyone to maintain their
speed or get the hell out of their way. Lou Holtman has already
pointed out, perhaps two or three months ago, that the Dutch model
only works by slowing everyone down to pretty near a lowest common
denominator (did he say 15kph? -- gee, when I'm enjoying the
countryside, that's quite often faster than I ride).

I'm not offering a solution, but you might consider this: most
successful street planning proceeds from the principle of speed
control, and then the fast throughways are a bolt-on or set-aside
extra.

But I must say that, whether the solution is bike paths or integration
with automobile traffic, pandering the fast-commuter minority will
absolutely insure that cycling remains a Cinderella activity in the
US. There will simply never be enough hardcore commuters to justify
spending tax-payer funds on them instead of on motorists.

It is simply a fact of life that the 12-15kph lowest common
denominator has the most votes and the best chance of forming a bike
culture.

Andre Jute
Reformed petrol head
Car-free since 1992
Greener than thou!

The speed limit argument may have some merit, but why would any
cyclist need it if we consider the alternatives? *The only "pandering"
that's going on is to recreational cyclists. *Vehicular cyclists are
not asking for any extraordinary considerations that motorists
wouldn't want, namely, sufficiently wide lanes.

Bike path advocates don't realize as bike ridership goes up, any bike
lanes that exist will become untenably congested. *It's really no
different than the (vehicular) cul-de-sac neighborhood hells that I
talked about earlier. *There won't be any alternative routes to
relieve congestion, because what's going to end up happening is all
cyclist traffic gets dumped on that single bike path, especially if
any segregation goes on.

This is all assuming that the the bike paths won't get "appropriated"
into multi-use, like for walking dogs, baby strolling, roller-bladers,
joggers, etc.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Using Assen as an example of the feasibility of separate bicycle
facilities is like using Disney World as an example of the feasibility
of monorails. Assen is apparently the centerpiece of Dutch cycling,
and its downtown looks like a theme park. *BTW, the guy with the
YouTube video of cycling in Assen runs a tour company.http://hembrow.eu/cycling/#selflead

I would love to see kids riding to school -- including my son. PDX,
however is not flat. *Those poor kids going to school at Ainsworth
Elementary would have to do one to two miles of 8-12% to get up SW
Vista Ave. *It could work on the eastside, though -- if we knock down
a few houses and rebuild the entire neighborhood ala Assen. *Note that
the bike boulevards in Assen have pedestrian facilities on the side --
so the whole paved area is like a one lane road. No way you're going
to build a new, one lane road through the dense eastside. The only
real option in this town is to use the existing right of ways -- the
roads.

I don't know of any separate, bicycle-only facilities in this town --
they are all multi-use, either by designation or by consensus, meaning
they have been overrun with walkers, skaters -- those guys with the
obnoxious roller cross-country skis -- people with six dogs, etc. *On
a sunny day, it is like running the gauntlet on a bike. -- Jay
Beattie.

Your comparison of Assen to Disney World is right on the money. But I
think you meant to reply to Mr. Peter Cole, not me, considering you
and I are in violent agreement.

Let's just say no one can rightly accuse Mr. Peter Cole of the crime
of intellectual honesty.

On Oct 24, 4:34*pm, Peter Cole wrote:
On 10/24/2010 4:22 PM, damyth wrote:

So you think someone riding in a faired recumbent (which I'll
abbreviate as HPV) can safely ride at 70kph, on the same paths, at the
same time, as those kids riding to school with their parents depicted
in the video you cited?

No.



If that's not evidence of a severe reality distortion field, I don't
know what is. *The whole idea of a separate facility for HPVs is
absurd. *They don't need one given they go just as fast as cars.

I don't think the Dutch built bike facilities for 70 kph, but apparently
at least some are ridden at that speed in the vicinity of Assen.



Jay Beattie (as an example) commutes on a bike. *I do the same. *In
urban sprawl that spans more than 5 miles. * This doesn't have much to
do with "urban density" or how close the nearest Starbucks is. *NYC
has a higher urban density than Boston, it also spans a larger area
than Boston (and they both dwarf Assen). *The point is if you intend
to go from one end to another in NYC or Portland vs. Assen, it means
in order for bike paths to be useful, it can not be congested (i.e.
narrow), and must have a traffic flow that's way faster (in real life,
not "professional driver on empty course") than the one in depicted in
Assen where parents rode to school with their kids.

Given these facts, now tell me how you plan on making the Assen model
work (in any "urban" city of your choice) in the US.

I didn't select the Assen video of school children for speed, or as an
example of urban commuting, only to show the numbers of children on
bikes, in response to the US "bike bus" video.

Assen appears to have many high speed bike paths (in other videos), no
doubt helped by its relatively low density and natural routes along
canals. Similar situations exist in many cities for "bike highways"
along other such natural features like rivers, lake and ocean shores,
and RR ROW's. Those have been exploited for decades to put in motor
expressways.

For travel over normal city streets in congested urban areas, it's not
the peak speeds that are important, but the average speeds, which are
mostly determined by intersections, particularly by queues during peak
times. Bike paths allow cyclists to bypass queues, so although their
peak speeds may be lower, their average speeds are usually higher. The
typical all-day urban average speed in a dense city is typically given
at 25 mph or so, peak time speeds may be half of that. It's not hard to
match or beat.

Who mentioned anything about peak speeds?

I suggest you read Jay Beattie's reply in this thread that he posted a
few minutes ago:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.b...163d0dc07ad827

On 10/23/2010 12:23 PM, Jay Beattie wrote:
On Oct 23, 5:41 am, "Duane wrote:
"Peter wrote in message

...





On 10/23/2010 3:18 AM, Chalo wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:

Frank Krygowski wrote:

Even better news:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0lfqShrRlE

No Magic Foam Bicycle Hats™ and Magic White Bicycle Lines™??????

OMG, they're all going to dieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!

They will all die, without exception.

Pretty hopeful video, though.

Chalo

A much more hopeful one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2n_znwWroGM

I don't get why people are against facilities. They
always seems to increase cycling and are often
done well.- Hide quoted text -

I think I would go crazy if I were limited to those facilities. The
last thing I want to do is be in perpetual passing mode -- around
wobbly little kids who are being held by parents. It reminds me of
skiiing through the bunny slope. It's nice for kids and families, but
not so much fun if you are trying to get somewhere.

I ride on some bike paths at around 6:30 am and sometimes
at 5:30pm. They're never crowded in the morning and not often
at 5:30 on a week day. When they're crowded, I either take the
road or an alternate route. Why would you be limited to taking
that route?

On Oct 25, 5:17*am, Duane wrote:
On 10/23/2010 12:23 PM, Jay Beattie wrote:









On Oct 23, 5:41 am, "Duane *wrote:
"Peter *wrote in message

...

On 10/23/2010 3:18 AM, Chalo wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:

Frank Krygowski wrote:

Even better news:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0lfqShrRlE

No Magic Foam Bicycle Hats™ and Magic White Bicycle Lines™??????

OMG, they're all going to dieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!

They will all die, without exception.

Pretty hopeful video, though.

Chalo

A much more hopeful one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2n_znwWroGM

I don't get why people are against facilities. *They
always seems to increase cycling and are often
done well.- Hide quoted text -

I think I would go crazy if I were limited to those facilities. The
last thing I want to do is be in perpetual passing mode -- around
wobbly little kids who are being held by parents. *It reminds me of
skiiing through the bunny slope. *It's nice for kids and families, but
not so much fun if you are trying to get somewhere.

I ride on some bike paths at around 6:30 am and sometimes
at 5:30pm. *They're never crowded in the morning and not often
at 5:30 on a week day. *When they're crowded, I either take the
road or an alternate route. *Why would you be limited to taking
that route?

Because the powers that be would start building roads like the one the
red sedan is on:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/292u833

Pretty soon you'd run out of alternatives. It couldn't possibly be
more asinine. At least that town in the Netherlands is appropriately
named.

On Oct 25, 6:12 am, damyth wrote:
On Oct 25, 5:17 am, Duane wrote:



On 10/23/2010 12:23 PM, Jay Beattie wrote:

On Oct 23, 5:41 am, "Duane wrote:
"Peter wrote in message

...

On 10/23/2010 3:18 AM, Chalo wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:

Frank Krygowski wrote:

Even better news:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0lfqShrRlE

No Magic Foam Bicycle Hats™ and Magic White Bicycle Lines™??????

OMG, they're all going to dieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!

They will all die, without exception.

Pretty hopeful video, though.

Chalo

A much more hopeful one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2n_znwWroGM

I don't get why people are against facilities. They
always seems to increase cycling and are often
done well.- Hide quoted text -

I think I would go crazy if I were limited to those facilities. The
last thing I want to do is be in perpetual passing mode -- around
wobbly little kids who are being held by parents. It reminds me of
skiiing through the bunny slope. It's nice for kids and families, but
not so much fun if you are trying to get somewhere.

I ride on some bike paths at around 6:30 am and sometimes
at 5:30pm. They're never crowded in the morning and not often
at 5:30 on a week day. When they're crowded, I either take the
road or an alternate route. Why would you be limited to taking
that route?

Because the powers that be would start building roads like the one the
red sedan is on:http://preview.tinyurl.com/292u833

Pretty soon you'd run out of alternatives. It couldn't possibly be
more asinine. At least that town in the Netherlands is appropriately
named.

The placement of those poles there is really bad along that road.

On Oct 25, 6:24*am, Dan O wrote:
On Oct 25, 6:12 am, damyth wrote:









On Oct 25, 5:17 am, Duane wrote:

On 10/23/2010 12:23 PM, Jay Beattie wrote:

On Oct 23, 5:41 am, "Duane *wrote:
"Peter *wrote in message

...

On 10/23/2010 3:18 AM, Chalo wrote:
Tom Sherman wrote:

Frank Krygowski wrote:

Even better news:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F0lfqShrRlE

No Magic Foam Bicycle Hats™ and Magic White Bicycle Lines™??????

OMG, they're all going to dieeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!

They will all die, without exception.

Pretty hopeful video, though.

Chalo

A much more hopeful one:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2n_znwWroGM

I don't get why people are against facilities. *They
always seems to increase cycling and are often
done well.- Hide quoted text -

I think I would go crazy if I were limited to those facilities. The
last thing I want to do is be in perpetual passing mode -- around
wobbly little kids who are being held by parents. *It reminds me of
skiiing through the bunny slope. *It's nice for kids and families, but
not so much fun if you are trying to get somewhere.

I ride on some bike paths at around 6:30 am and sometimes
at 5:30pm. *They're never crowded in the morning and not often
at 5:30 on a week day. *When they're crowded, I either take the
road or an alternate route. *Why would you be limited to taking
that route?

Because the powers that be would start building roads like the one the
red sedan is on:http://preview.tinyurl.com/292u833

Pretty soon you'd run out of alternatives. *It couldn't possibly be
more asinine. *At least that town in the Netherlands is appropriately
named.

The placement of those poles there is really bad along that road.

Speaking of which, I guess the Dutch don't ride when the sun is down.
Are bike lanes lit?