#61
|
|||
|
|||
New bike path
On 15/03/2018 8:55 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 1:16:28 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote: On 2018-03-15 12:31, Duane wrote: On 15/03/2018 12:30 PM, AMuzi wrote: On 3/15/2018 11:23 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 3/15/2018 8:47 AM, Duane wrote: On 14/03/2018 9:09 PM, Joy Beeson wrote: On Wed, 14 Mar 2018 08:36:45 -0700, Joerg wrote: If you provide proper infrastructure they will come: That's the second time this week that I've cackled aloud while sitting at the computer. I don't *do* that sort of thing. I rarely use segregated paths but there is a ride I like to do from my house in Montreal West Island area to the old port. It's ~100k and really nice. About 80k of it is on bike paths. These paths follow the river and then the Lachine canal so there are basically no intersections. Along the canal where the path crosses city streets the path has under or overpasses. Here's the thing. I take the day off work on my birthday and do this ride with some friends because there's no one on the paths outside of the commute hours. At commute time it's too crowded. On weekends and holidays it's packed. So I guess my point is that if they make these things people use them. In Montreal, a lot of people use them. Whether or not they make sense for commuters is another story. And group riding on bike paths is a bad idea in any case if the paths aren't empty. Most of us probably enjoy a segregated path that's well-maintained, scenic, and mostly empty. Probably few of us enjoy a MUP when it's seeing heavy use. And with good reason! With widely varying users, narrow spaces and a "no rules" environment, movements are often chaotic. So Joerg should lobby for paths that will be unpopular, because those make for the best riding. Of course, that's a tough sell. Can you imagine asking for tax money for a new freeway, by saying "It will be great! Hardly anyone will use it!" Nationwide, only a tiny percentage of these facilities can be justified as shifting mode share from cars to bikes. Despite the cherry-picked examples, most miles of MUP connect nowhere to nowhere, for obvious reasons. So almost all are linear parks, even though they're "sold" as being transportation facilities. They should be paid for from park taxes, not federal or state transportation tax dollars. Some citizens use and appreciate them, just not for cycling: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=assault+on...th&t=hg&ia=web Well my point was that even though some of us don't use crowded segregated paths, the fact that they are crowded indicates that many people do use them. Last Sunday it was a joy to see a very full paved section of the El Dorado Trail from Placerville to Camino (California). It seems that the New Year's resolutions of many people have stuck this year. Yeah, we can all complain about having to slow down for kids, dogs or slow riders. Yet for some reason cyclists who complain about that do not complain if they spend minutes in slow traffic behind a crawling conga line of trucks. I complain if I have to sit in slow traffic, but the beauty of being on a bike is that I rarely have to do that, except where passing is impossible. Bicycles may permissibly pass on the right when safe in Oregon. I sit in traffic in the mornings, but I'm still making better time than the cars and passing on either side when possible and safe. In Quebec there is not rider to allow cyclists to pass on the right so they're restricted to the regular vehicle laws. On my commute there are not many roads I take without a bike lane though so that helps get me by the traffic. Where there are no lanes I sit in the traffic like the cars. I see it this way: Every slow down is followed by an acceleration event and that builds muscle. Plus I might get to pet a dog or encourage a kid on a tricycle to keep on mashing the pedals. It means a lot to them when an adult says "Good job!". Bike paths in Quebec have a speed limit of 20km/h so doesn't allow for much of an acceleration event. And anyway they're usually crowded enough that slow downs are that sporadic. Out of curiosity, do you have kids? Half of them will think you're a creep or just in their way. The other half might think you're mildly amusing. Kids are accustomed to hearing "good job" -- little Jimmy on the trike probably hears it ten times a day. It's not like he's going to ride over to his parents and say, "geepers, mom and dad, that creepy man over there said I did a good job! That makes me feel so good! It means a lot to me!" In reality, dealing with kids on trikes on a MUP is usually just a matter of giving them a wide berth. It's kind of like dealing with squirrels -- well, strike that. I'll run over squirrels. It's chipmunks here. They're suicidal. Linear parks are fine and some can be useful travel routes for bikes, but mixing bikes and walkers always results in a sub-optimal experience for both -- particularly when you have parents with walkers, dogs and kids on trikes (common around here) and sometimes steep grades. I walk and ride the same local trail, and descending bikes are a menace. I always take the adjacent road when on a bike. The way I look at it is that the linear parks are pretty much not for me. The people that fill them up seem to get along ok as long as some group of MAMILs doesn't terrorize them. My club rides tend to avoid paths. For morning commuters they're not bad as most recreational users aren't out at 6am. On the ride home it's a different thing. Same here regarding steep roads. |
Ads |
#62
|
|||
|
|||
New bike path
On 2018-03-15 17:55, jbeattie wrote:
On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 1:16:28 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote: On 2018-03-15 12:31, Duane wrote: On 15/03/2018 12:30 PM, AMuzi wrote: On 3/15/2018 11:23 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 3/15/2018 8:47 AM, Duane wrote: On 14/03/2018 9:09 PM, Joy Beeson wrote: On Wed, 14 Mar 2018 08:36:45 -0700, Joerg wrote: If you provide proper infrastructure they will come: That's the second time this week that I've cackled aloud while sitting at the computer. I don't *do* that sort of thing. I rarely use segregated paths but there is a ride I like to do from my house in Montreal West Island area to the old port. It's ~100k and really nice. About 80k of it is on bike paths. These paths follow the river and then the Lachine canal so there are basically no intersections. Along the canal where the path crosses city streets the path has under or overpasses. Here's the thing. I take the day off work on my birthday and do this ride with some friends because there's no one on the paths outside of the commute hours. At commute time it's too crowded. On weekends and holidays it's packed. So I guess my point is that if they make these things people use them. In Montreal, a lot of people use them. Whether or not they make sense for commuters is another story. And group riding on bike paths is a bad idea in any case if the paths aren't empty. Most of us probably enjoy a segregated path that's well-maintained, scenic, and mostly empty. Probably few of us enjoy a MUP when it's seeing heavy use. And with good reason! With widely varying users, narrow spaces and a "no rules" environment, movements are often chaotic. So Joerg should lobby for paths that will be unpopular, because those make for the best riding. Of course, that's a tough sell. Can you imagine asking for tax money for a new freeway, by saying "It will be great! Hardly anyone will use it!" Nationwide, only a tiny percentage of these facilities can be justified as shifting mode share from cars to bikes. Despite the cherry-picked examples, most miles of MUP connect nowhere to nowhere, for obvious reasons. So almost all are linear parks, even though they're "sold" as being transportation facilities. They should be paid for from park taxes, not federal or state transportation tax dollars. Some citizens use and appreciate them, just not for cycling: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=assault+on...th&t=hg&ia=web Well my point was that even though some of us don't use crowded segregated paths, the fact that they are crowded indicates that many people do use them. Last Sunday it was a joy to see a very full paved section of the El Dorado Trail from Placerville to Camino (California). It seems that the New Year's resolutions of many people have stuck this year. Yeah, we can all complain about having to slow down for kids, dogs or slow riders. Yet for some reason cyclists who complain about that do not complain if they spend minutes in slow traffic behind a crawling conga line of trucks. I complain if I have to sit in slow traffic, but the beauty of being on a bike is that I rarely have to do that, except where passing is impossible. Bicycles may permissibly pass on the right when safe in Oregon. I sit in traffic in the mornings, but I'm still making better time than the cars and passing on either side when possible and safe. Until some day a passenger in an Uber or Lyft vehicle suddenly decides he'll walk the rest and swings the door open with gusto. I also pass on the right but then at slow speed and not like crazy lane-splitting motorcyclists. I see it this way: Every slow down is followed by an acceleration event and that builds muscle. Plus I might get to pet a dog or encourage a kid on a tricycle to keep on mashing the pedals. It means a lot to them when an adult says "Good job!". Out of curiosity, do you have kids? Unfortunately not. ... Half of them will think you're a creep or just in their way. The other half might think you're mildly amusing. Kids are accustomed to hearing "good job" -- little Jimmy on the trike probably hears it ten times a day. It's not like he's going to ride over to his parents and say, "geepers, mom and dad, that creepy man over there said I did a good job! That makes me feel so good! It means a lot to me!" My experience is different. Mostly it elicited a big smile, maybe because this did not come from a parent or close relative. Also, in the more rural regions of America kids are often brought up the old-fashioned way, with proper expectations of them and without pampering or excessive praise. It's also good to praise a horse or a dog for good trail etiquette. They often notice it favorably and it costs the cyclist nothing. One rider thanked me saying "Sam really likes that". ... In reality, dealing with kids on trikes on a MUP is usually just a matter of giving them a wide berth. I do that regardless. It's kind of like dealing with squirrels -- well, strike that. I'll run over squirrels. I don't like hitting animals, ever. Couldn't avoid running over some though, squirrels and ... rattlesnakes. Once almost a deer but he'd have won. Linear parks are fine and some can be useful travel routes for bikes, but mixing bikes and walkers always results in a sub-optimal experience for both -- particularly when you have parents with walkers, dogs and kids on trikes (common around here) and sometimes steep grades. I walk and ride the same local trail, and descending bikes are a menace. I always take the adjacent road when on a bike. Many of our routes are not park routes but for cyclists with a purpose, folks who commute or have another set destination like I often do. Many bike path started to flourish in this area around 10 years ago and initially pedestrians walked willy-nilly. Now they largely stick to the rule "walk left" which makes things easy. These paths connect residential areas to business parks and I often cycle through on of those. Lunchtime walkers are almost professionals when it comes to trail etiquette. It's funny, after a while one recognizes each other. Oh, the guy with the Fedora and the electric cigarette is already this far? I must be late! -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#63
|
|||
|
|||
New bike path
On 3/13/2018 3:58 PM, Joerg wrote:
The other solution is to starve the beast (big government). Speaking of starving the beast: https://www.yahoo.com/news/gop-confr...-election.html And of course http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed...622-story.html -- - Frank Krygowski |
#64
|
|||
|
|||
New bike path
On 3/16/2018 2:39 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 3/13/2018 3:58 PM, Joerg wrote: The other solution is to starve the beast (big government). Speaking of starving the beast: https://www.yahoo.com/news/gop-confr...-election.html And of course http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed...622-story.html Right. Neither austerity nor profligacy helps: http://amp.sacbee.com/news/business/...204345249.html We're just doomed either way. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
#65
|
|||
|
|||
New bike path
On Friday, March 16, 2018 at 8:27:05 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 2018-03-15 17:55, jbeattie wrote: On Thursday, March 15, 2018 at 1:16:28 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote: On 2018-03-15 12:31, Duane wrote: On 15/03/2018 12:30 PM, AMuzi wrote: On 3/15/2018 11:23 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 3/15/2018 8:47 AM, Duane wrote: On 14/03/2018 9:09 PM, Joy Beeson wrote: On Wed, 14 Mar 2018 08:36:45 -0700, Joerg wrote: If you provide proper infrastructure they will come: That's the second time this week that I've cackled aloud while sitting at the computer. I don't *do* that sort of thing. I rarely use segregated paths but there is a ride I like to do from my house in Montreal West Island area to the old port. It's ~100k and really nice. About 80k of it is on bike paths. These paths follow the river and then the Lachine canal so there are basically no intersections. Along the canal where the path crosses city streets the path has under or overpasses. Here's the thing. I take the day off work on my birthday and do this ride with some friends because there's no one on the paths outside of the commute hours. At commute time it's too crowded. On weekends and holidays it's packed. So I guess my point is that if they make these things people use them. In Montreal, a lot of people use them. Whether or not they make sense for commuters is another story. And group riding on bike paths is a bad idea in any case if the paths aren't empty. Most of us probably enjoy a segregated path that's well-maintained, scenic, and mostly empty. Probably few of us enjoy a MUP when it's seeing heavy use. And with good reason! With widely varying users, narrow spaces and a "no rules" environment, movements are often chaotic. So Joerg should lobby for paths that will be unpopular, because those make for the best riding. Of course, that's a tough sell. Can you imagine asking for tax money for a new freeway, by saying "It will be great! Hardly anyone will use it!" Nationwide, only a tiny percentage of these facilities can be justified as shifting mode share from cars to bikes. Despite the cherry-picked examples, most miles of MUP connect nowhere to nowhere, for obvious reasons. So almost all are linear parks, even though they're "sold" as being transportation facilities. They should be paid for from park taxes, not federal or state transportation tax dollars. Some citizens use and appreciate them, just not for cycling: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=assault+on...th&t=hg&ia=web Well my point was that even though some of us don't use crowded segregated paths, the fact that they are crowded indicates that many people do use them. Last Sunday it was a joy to see a very full paved section of the El Dorado Trail from Placerville to Camino (California). It seems that the New Year's resolutions of many people have stuck this year. Yeah, we can all complain about having to slow down for kids, dogs or slow riders. Yet for some reason cyclists who complain about that do not complain if they spend minutes in slow traffic behind a crawling conga line of trucks. I complain if I have to sit in slow traffic, but the beauty of being on a bike is that I rarely have to do that, except where passing is impossible. Bicycles may permissibly pass on the right when safe in Oregon. I sit in traffic in the mornings, but I'm still making better time than the cars and passing on either side when possible and safe. Until some day a passenger in an Uber or Lyft vehicle suddenly decides he'll walk the rest and swings the door open with gusto. I also pass on the right but then at slow speed and not like crazy lane-splitting motorcyclists. I see it this way: Every slow down is followed by an acceleration event and that builds muscle. Plus I might get to pet a dog or encourage a kid on a tricycle to keep on mashing the pedals. It means a lot to them when an adult says "Good job!". Out of curiosity, do you have kids? Unfortunately not. ... Half of them will think you're a creep or just in their way. The other half might think you're mildly amusing. Kids are accustomed to hearing "good job" -- little Jimmy on the trike probably hears it ten times a day. It's not like he's going to ride over to his parents and say, "geepers, mom and dad, that creepy man over there said I did a good job! That makes me feel so good! It means a lot to me!" My experience is different. Mostly it elicited a big smile, maybe because this did not come from a parent or close relative. Also, in the more rural regions of America kids are often brought up the old-fashioned way, with proper expectations of them and without pampering or excessive praise. Rural? Cameron Park? https://www.trulia.com/p/ca/cameron-...82--2085622330 I'm sure the milk cows are around back. It's also good to praise a horse or a dog for good trail etiquette. They often notice it favorably and it costs the cyclist nothing. One rider thanked me saying "Sam really likes that". Yes, because the owner can read the horse's mind. I'm going to start an institute with the sole purpose of stamping out anthropomorphism. It prevents us from really understanding animals. https://www.marketingfirst.co.nz/wp-...-dogs-hear.jpg ... In reality, dealing with kids on trikes on a MUP is usually just a matter of giving them a wide berth. I do that regardless. It's kind of like dealing with squirrels -- well, strike that. I'll run over squirrels. I don't like hitting animals, ever. Couldn't avoid running over some though, squirrels and ... rattlesnakes. Once almost a deer but he'd have won. Yah, I'm not aiming for the squirrels, but I'm certainly not going over the bars for them -- not unless they get stuck in my spokes. Linear parks are fine and some can be useful travel routes for bikes, but mixing bikes and walkers always results in a sub-optimal experience for both -- particularly when you have parents with walkers, dogs and kids on trikes (common around here) and sometimes steep grades. I walk and ride the same local trail, and descending bikes are a menace. I always take the adjacent road when on a bike. Many of our routes are not park routes but for cyclists with a purpose, folks who commute or have another set destination like I often do. Many bike path started to flourish in this area around 10 years ago and initially pedestrians walked willy-nilly. Now they largely stick to the rule "walk left" which makes things easy. These paths connect residential areas to business parks and I often cycle through on of those. Lunchtime walkers are almost professionals when it comes to trail etiquette. Like I said, some of these routes provide valuable options for riders -- but they are options. Roads are the rule, and people need to learn to ride on roads -- and everybody needs to learn the rules of the road for his or her state. -- Jay Beattie. |
#66
|
|||
|
|||
New bike path
On 2018-03-16 13:19, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, March 16, 2018 at 8:27:05 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote: On 2018-03-15 17:55, jbeattie wrote: [...] ... Half of them will think you're a creep or just in their way. The other half might think you're mildly amusing. Kids are accustomed to hearing "good job" -- little Jimmy on the trike probably hears it ten times a day. It's not like he's going to ride over to his parents and say, "geepers, mom and dad, that creepy man over there said I did a good job! That makes me feel so good! It means a lot to me!" My experience is different. Mostly it elicited a big smile, maybe because this did not come from a parent or close relative. Also, in the more rural regions of America kids are often brought up the old-fashioned way, with proper expectations of them and without pampering or excessive praise. Rural? Cameron Park? https://www.trulia.com/p/ca/cameron-...82--2085622330 If you look hard enough you can find a McMansion just about anywhere. We even have one on our street. Totally out of place for this village. I meant he https://cdn-assets.alltrails.com/upl...f1253dc7d6.jpg I'm sure the milk cows are around back. I meet them along the El Dorado Trail all the time. Sometimes on the trail when one got out. Also goats, et cetera. Occasionally we have to play herder with our mountain bikes. It's also good to praise a horse or a dog for good trail etiquette. They often notice it favorably and it costs the cyclist nothing. One rider thanked me saying "Sam really likes that". Yes, because the owner can read the horse's mind. No, but their reactions. For example, most people do not know that horses can purr if they are feeling really happy. One of my horse friends already did that when I said "Ivan, do you want some carrots?", before opening the pannier. Unfortunately he died at around 21 years old from Cushing's disease :-( The horse that took his place isn't nearly as communicative but also likes carrots. ... I'm going to start an institute with the sole purpose of stamping out anthropomorphism. It prevents us from really understanding animals. https://www.marketingfirst.co.nz/wp-...-dogs-hear.jpg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ss2hULhXf04 ... In reality, dealing with kids on trikes on a MUP is usually just a matter of giving them a wide berth. I do that regardless. It's kind of like dealing with squirrels -- well, strike that. I'll run over squirrels. I don't like hitting animals, ever. Couldn't avoid running over some though, squirrels and ... rattlesnakes. Once almost a deer but he'd have won. Yah, I'm not aiming for the squirrels, but I'm certainly not going over the bars for them -- not unless they get stuck in my spokes. Which has happened here, with nasty consequences. Linear parks are fine and some can be useful travel routes for bikes, but mixing bikes and walkers always results in a sub-optimal experience for both -- particularly when you have parents with walkers, dogs and kids on trikes (common around here) and sometimes steep grades. I walk and ride the same local trail, and descending bikes are a menace. I always take the adjacent road when on a bike. Many of our routes are not park routes but for cyclists with a purpose, folks who commute or have another set destination like I often do. Many bike path started to flourish in this area around 10 years ago and initially pedestrians walked willy-nilly. Now they largely stick to the rule "walk left" which makes things easy. These paths connect residential areas to business parks and I often cycle through on of those. Lunchtime walkers are almost professionals when it comes to trail etiquette. Like I said, some of these routes provide valuable options for riders -- but they are options. Roads are the rule, and people need to learn to ride on roads -- and everybody needs to learn the rules of the road for his or her state. People generally know the rules because they are also car drivers. However, I found that the vast majority of cylists abhors using roads on their bicycles so much that they simply don't. This reluctance is not based on some undefined fear but on accident reports and experiences of friends and relatives who got hit. -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
#67
|
|||
|
|||
New bike path
On 3/16/2018 4:19 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, March 16, 2018 at 8:27:05 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote: It's also good to praise a horse or a dog for good trail etiquette. They often notice it favorably and it costs the cyclist nothing. One rider thanked me saying "Sam really likes that". Yes, because the owner can read the horse's mind. I'm going to start an institute with the sole purpose of stamping out anthropomorphism. It prevents us from really understanding animals. https://www.marketingfirst.co.nz/wp-...-dogs-hear.jpg https://i.pinimg.com/originals/5e/6b...2d480c6e1d.jpg -- - Frank Krygowski |
#68
|
|||
|
|||
New bike path
On Wed, 14 Mar 2018 08:36:45 -0700, Joerg
wrote: On 2018-03-13 18:08, John B. wrote: On Tue, 13 Mar 2018 13:26:50 -0700, Joerg wrote: On 2018-03-13 13:21, AMuzi wrote: On 3/13/2018 2:58 PM, Joerg wrote: On 2018-03-13 12:23, jbeattie wrote: On Tuesday, March 13, 2018 at 7:36:16 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote: [...] Scramento has a huge homeless problem and especially so along the American River bike path. To the point where it isn't always safe riding there anymore. It is largely a homemade problem. The mayor they have now doesn't understand that with all his throwing moeny and resources at this he is enticing ever more homeless to move to Sacramento. Free stuff! When he started this I could notice a substantial drop in the number of homeless I see along the El Dorado Trail yet the guy does not get it. I've been buying bus tickets to Sacramento for the dudes camped along our giant MUP, the Springwater Corridor. I'm glad to see its paying off -- that and the periodic "sweeps." http://pamplinmedia.com/go/42-news/3...ingwater-sweep I was riding back from the Gorge on Sunday and cut over on the 205 bike path and hit a spot under an over-pass where I could barely squeeze by all the tents -- and garbage and needles, etc., etc. F****** incredible pigsty. Let me know if you come up with a solution. I sure don't have one -- at least one that doesn't sound like something out of the Old Testament, or perhaps a modern book on recycling organic matter. The solution would be our country becoming more conservative. Work requirements for welfare, less unconditional free stuff, and so on. The difference in the rate of homelessness in liberal versus conservative states is striking and Oregon looks worse than even California (which I hadn't thought was possible). http://nlihc.org/article/ten-highest...ess-state-2012 Nevada is kind of an exception, probably because a lot of hermits and loners live there. They chose that lifestyle and the low amount of regulations and little enforcement allows them to spend their days baking in a dilapidated trailer out in the desert. The other solution is to starve the beast (big government). High tax states make housing so expensive that too many people are forced to drop out into the streets. California is a prime example of that. Try getting a building permit out here, let alone pay for it. Socialism does not work. Who are you and what have you done with The Real Joerg, who likes high taxes for expensive elaborate kiddy paths paid for by the long suffering working man? I never liked high taxes. All I want is that taxes are invested wisely. Investment in bikes paths and bike lanes is wise, investment in a bullet train to nowhere is not. I see, you feel that building expensive bike paths for an almost infinitesimal portion of the road users is wise investment? It is, because 1. They are not expensive. The bullet train just went to $68B and I am sure when t's all said and done it will be north of $150B or a whole year's state budget. 2. The number is not infinitesimal. If you provide proper infrastructure they will come: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipfuxptI2uU After all, bicycles comprise about 2% of all road accidents and studies I've seen state that nation wide bicycles make up about 1% of the total traffic. Doesn't spend substantial portions of the tax budget on a group that comprises only 1% of the road users seem a bit one sided? So why don't we start by spending 1%? That's plenty. From what you write it appears that you believe that if only someone would build bicycle paths that the percentage of bicycle traffic would rise and I'm not sure that is correct at all. Or perhaps not correct is assumed to be an all encompassing argument. I recently read an article about cycling in the Netherlands. The number of cyclists in the large cities is increasing but in rural areas it is decreasing. Given that Holland has perhaps the largest amount of cycle paths (compared with motorways) and rural bicycle use is decreasing the argument that building bikeways is going to result in some significant increase in cycle use is probably wishful thinking. It is probably also worth saying that the percentage of trips made by Dutch cyclists is 27% of all trips and the number has remained static for the past 30 years. In closing let me say that one of my high school classmates took his girl to the Junior Prom in his Dad's dump truck (there is a long story there) but no one in living memory ever took his girl to the prom on a bicycle :-) -- Cheers, John B. |
#69
|
|||
|
|||
New bike path
On Wed, 14 Mar 2018 21:19:44 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 3/14/2018 5:56 PM, Joerg wrote: On 2018-03-14 14:18, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 3/14/2018 1:07 PM, Joerg wrote: On 2018-03-14 09:08, Frank Krygowski wrote: (You remain the only person I've ever heard of who somehow believes U.C. Davis does not restrict motor vehicle use.) Because they don't. I was there a lot on business and due to the distance and the need to schlepp heavy stuff had to use an SUV. Not the slightest problem. "Restrict motor vehicle use" does not mean "No motor vehicle is ever allowed through." The campus I taught in allowed no motor vehicles in its central core - except, of course, when it was necessary to allow an emergency vehicle, a utility repair truck, a heavy delivery, etc. Allowing one SUV driver schlepping something is far different from letting anyone drive wherever they want. *From https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2...th-the-bicycle "The campus, cheek-by-jowl with the city, is car-free." I have told you before that that is fake news. Simply repeating it does not make it any less fake. ************************************************** **** ... [Yes, as explained above, it's not 100% car free. Everyone else gets the idea.] "Car-use was restricted on campus, with drop-down barriers and a ban on student car ownership (this is still in force)." *From http://taps.ucdavis.edu/bicycle/education/community "The University followed suit by banning almost all motor vehicle use from its central core roadways that were formerly open to motor traffic from off campus." They do not. Yeah, yeah, fake news. Who are you going to believe, professional journalists who have no strong agendas? Or one guy on the internet who wants to spend public money to turn America into Amsterdam? That also refers to their experience with now-so-trendy "protected bike lanes": "Because Davis pioneered the bike lane and other bicycle facilities in this country, it is not surprising that some "experiments" were less successful than others. One such example was the construction of "protected" bike lanes where motor vehicle and bicycle traffic was separated by a raised "buffer" or curbing. In some cases, the bike lane was established between the parking shoulder and the curb line (i.e. cars were parked on the left of the bike traffic lane). Needless to say, any "benefits" of such facilities were soon found to be outweighed by the many hazards created for their users." We all know that there were a lot of messed up bike path and bike lane designs. Davis is no exception. Time has progressed, people have learned, even traffic engineers. Some people have not learned, such as the countless "bike advocates" who are claiming we MUST have "protected cycle tracks" everywhere because nothing else is safe enough. Oh, and then there are people who get paid as consultants, marching into a city and offering to design that garbage. They may have learned, but they don't care. "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it." - Upton Sinclair. The advocates and the traffic engineers showed what they had learned by the design of the Columbus "protected cycle track" completed a couple years ago. After the cycle track went in, the crash rate increased over 600%. Oddly enough, Streetsblog and other pro-segregation propaganda sources don't highlight that fact. So these things were found to be dangerous in the 1970s. They're still dangerous in the 2010s. Forty years, and still the know-nothings demand them. I suggest that a sure method of determining the necessity for bike paths would be to add a motion to the next town/city election - something like "auto traffic shall be here after totally banned in an area bounded by Main Street, North Bridge Road, Sunset Boulevard and the river, i.e. the "business district", during daylight hours", and count the votes for and against the motion. -- Cheers, John B. |
#70
|
|||
|
|||
New bike path
On 2018-03-17 01:28, John B. wrote:
On Wed, 14 Mar 2018 08:36:45 -0700, Joerg wrote: On 2018-03-13 18:08, John B. wrote: [...] After all, bicycles comprise about 2% of all road accidents and studies I've seen state that nation wide bicycles make up about 1% of the total traffic. Doesn't spend substantial portions of the tax budget on a group that comprises only 1% of the road users seem a bit one sided? So why don't we start by spending 1%? That's plenty. From what you write it appears that you believe that if only someone would build bicycle paths that the percentage of bicycle traffic would rise and I'm not sure that is correct at all. I know that it works in most areas. It is clearly evidenced by the reaction of people. Instead of "Nah, I am not going to join you cycling back on Green Valley Road" (this is one of my usual rounds) they say "Oh, there is a bike path? How about Sunday afternoon?". Other times I talked with client engineers when I visited. Many times they have bike racks on their cars and helmets in the trunk. Those are the real outdoor kind of people, the ones where it's not just talk. However, then they say they'd love to cycle to work but the bike path system doesn't connect there. ... Or perhaps not correct is assumed to be an all encompassing argument. There will always be areas where it doesn't work or, like in Milton Keynes, the design gets largely messed up and then people don't use it. Other places might have too much inclement weather. For example, I doubt one would get a lot of people onto bikes in a town in Northern Siberia. I recently read an article about cycling in the Netherlands. The number of cyclists in the large cities is increasing but in rural areas it is decreasing. Given that Holland has perhaps the largest amount of cycle paths (compared with motorways) and rural bicycle use is decreasing the argument that building bikeways is going to result in some significant increase in cycle use is probably wishful thinking. Absolutely not. I lived there for years. Though this has been decades ago they probably have a similar trend as we do in the US where many kids aren't interested in any sort of transportation. They don't even want to achieve a driver's license. Probably because the virtual world and smart phones are sufficient for them. I can't understand it. You also have to keep in mind that they have a substantial public transport system. In essence many people wouldn't need any kind of vehicle. It is probably also worth saying that the percentage of trips made by Dutch cyclists is 27% of all trips and the number has remained static for the past 30 years. I guess the number of available bike path kilometers has also largely remained constant. When I lived in the Netherlands in the 80's the bike path system was rather complete. They did add some bicycle highways but most of those had already been there in large stretches, just with the fluff and signage. For example, I cycles the F35 bike highway route a lot because I couldn't stand the soft Dutch bread. It got me close enough to ther German border to hop over and buy some real bread. Tens of miles just for a loaf of bread was not a big deal over there because I more of less put my bike in 12th gear and kept pedaling until I was there. It was the same down south where my permanent residence was, cycling to Maastricht for a beer and some cheese was a simple spur of the moment decision. 20mi or 30km each way but easy peasy because all bike path. In fact, it was so peaceful versus lane riding that I once fell into "micro-sleep" on the road bike on the way back. A tree woke me up the hard way ... In closing let me say that one of my high school classmates took his girl to the Junior Prom in his Dad's dump truck (there is a long story there) but no one in living memory ever took his girl to the prom on a bicycle :-) Well ... http://tubulocity.com/?p=118 -- Regards, Joerg http://www.analogconsultants.com/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Rockslide onto bike path | Joerg[_2_] | Techniques | 0 | January 24th 17 11:31 PM |
Shared cycle path - auditorially distracted pedestro-kretins stepping into the path of cycles | Light of Aria[_2_] | UK | 59 | March 9th 09 06:17 PM |
Saying Hi on the Bike Path | Jorg Lueke | General | 54 | November 3rd 08 10:13 PM |
Southbank path connecting to Docklands path | Jules[_2_] | Australia | 1 | June 26th 08 01:03 PM |
PER: bike path re-opens | DeF | Australia | 4 | March 18th 06 01:39 AM |