|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition Bicycle Summit and the Failureof Vehicular Cycling.
On 8/10/2017 10:23 AM, jbeattie wrote:
Probably none on the bike paths. That kind of Conga line would drive me crazy, particularly with a commute that is in excess of the average 3.2km (2 mile) trip in Amsterdam. Trip distances in Amsterdam are short and often walkable. They are also dead flat. My commutes have ranged from 14 miles each way down to just a few -- and currently 5-6 miles depending on route and assuming I'm not throwing-in gratuitous miles through the West Hills. I've always tried to live near work or school. Reminds me of riding in China in the 1980's. Very slow, probably about 10 KM/H, and no sudden stops (since those Phoenix and Flying Pigeon bicycles had mostly non-functional rod brakes) or unexpected moves. Go with the flow. I was 31 and it was an effort to not try to go faster. Wide separated bike lanes too. It's not rocket science. We know what gets more people on bicycles: 1. Infrastructure 2. Traffic congestion 3. Lack of mass transit We have #2 & #3 in my area. If we could do more of #1 we'd get some of that 60%. No one expects to get 100% of that 60% instantaneously. It's a long process. |
Ads |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition Bicycle Summit and the Failureof Vehicular Cycling.
On 8/10/2017 7:47 AM, Joerg wrote:
Occasionally I also do that because there are many people who absolutely positively will not cycle on roads. But they ride and some are quite sporty so they don't hold me back. I normally rather ride right from our garage but that requires many miles of county road cycling to get to "the good stuff". I have relatives who are willing to ride on roads with bike lanes, but get very uneasy when there is a break in the bicycle lane. Explaining to them that it's not that dangerous is futile. They are in that 60%. They'd prefer separated lanes but at least they're willing to ride where there's painted lanes. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition Bicycle Summit and the Failureof Vehicular Cycling.
On 8/10/2017 2:16 PM, sms wrote:
On 8/10/2017 5:34 AM, AMuzi wrote: On 8/9/2017 10:06 PM, John B. wrote: On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 17:13:44 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 8/9/2017 3:58 PM, Joerg wrote: I could have told them already in the 70's when I was a teenager that "vehicluar cycling" is a bad idea and will not work. Being in traffic and using the proper turn-off lanes, yes, that's what I always do. Riding lane center at a whopping 15mph pretending to be in a car is stupid. It's the same as wanting to ride on a moped on the same runway where a Boeing 747 is about to land. Oh, bull****. When I ride lane center, I'm not pretending to be a car. I'm using the legal right to the road that is specifically given to the operator of a bicycle. It's clearly written in the state laws. No pretending is necessary. And only the ignorant would claim it's stupid to ride according to those laws. We did 25 miles today, mostly on narrow country roads and highways, meaning there was really not a single place where the lane was wide enough to be safely shared with a passing motor vehicle. My wife and I and the other dozen or so people on the ride were almost always near lane center. We were passed by many dozens of cars. As usual, there was no drama, no hostility, no close calls, no terror. The same happens when I ride in the city and suburbs, including the 35,000 vehicle per day road I use to get to the hardware store. I know there are people too timid for such riding. They tend to hide their timidity by bragging about their "gnarly" heroics, and spice it with tales of their beer drinking prowess. But those on today's ride would probably laugh behind their backs. As for those 60% I side with Jay. Some of those will start cycling once we have a decent infrastructure and I have seen proof of that. However, the majority of the "interested but concerned" will find excuses. Oh, it's too cold. Oh, it's too hot. It could start raining, see that cloud there on the horizon? And so on. We have indeed missed a lot of opportunity because bike paths were largely not built. We can lament all day long that we'll never get above 3% or whatever of mode share in most areas like Frank keeps saying. At the same time he touts the health benefits of cycling and what that means for the economy. I agree with him there but it's a contradiction. We have to ask ourselves whether a 1-2% mode share increase is worth it or not, considering all "side effects". Is a 1% - 2% bike mode share worth it? Joerg, it depends greatly on "worth WHAT?" Is it worth increasing the crash count from 2 per year to 15 per year, as happened recently on one stretch of road in Columbus? Is it worth spending public money on trial-and-error bike facility designs, as Portland has done for years, then re-doing them to try to make them work? Is it worth delaying the travel of competent cyclists, or ticketing them for refusing to use faulty designs? Is it worth telling people that bicycling is so hazardous that one should not do it until there are segregated facilities everywhere? Why is it not worth it to begin educating both bicyclists and motorists about how to properly and safely share existing roads? After all, that's _really_ what Vehicular Cycling is about. My guess is that bicycle use, as a percentage of the population is not and never will increase. According to the National Bike Dealers Association in 1973 there were some 15.2 million 20" and larger wheel bicycles sold in the U.S. which is asterisked as "Record High". In 1981 there were 8.9 million sold and in 2015 there were 12.5 million sold. The U.S. population figures for the same years are 1973 - 311.9 million 1981 - 229.47 2015 - 320.0 Bicycle use per capita is then: 1973 - 1 bike/20.5 people 1981 - 1/25.7 2015 - 1/24.9 In short, other then the one year, 1973, there is a smaller percentage of USians on bicycles every year. Over the past 20 years from 1995 - 2015 the numbers a 1995 - 12 million bikes, 20 inch or larger wheels size, sold versus a population of 266.28 million. Or 1 bike per 22.19 people 2015 - 12.5 bikes versus 320.9 million or 1/25.6 Obviously bicycle sales vary from year to year and in the 20 year period (above) the high point was in 2005 when 14.0 million bikes were sold in a population of 295.8 million or 1 bike/21.12 people. As regards 1981, roughly 1/3 of all US bicycle stores open in 1980 were closed by the end of 1982. That short severe recession hurt more than bike shops too. Was it just the recession? Or was it also a change in the retail market for bicycles? The expansion of stores like REI which didn't sell the low-end stuff like K-Mart, Sears, etc., and mail order outfits like Bike Nashbar, first for high-margin clothing, parts, and accessories, and later for private-label complete bicycles with higher margins than name brand bicycles. Shrinking margins on complete bicycles, and I do not know. When things go well, it's always attributed to management genius. By management, anyway. When things go awry, the list of reasons/excuses is a mile long, just as in every other business. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition Bicycle Summit and the Failureof Vehicular Cycling.
On 8/10/2017 10:08 AM, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-08-09 19:21, sms wrote: On 8/9/2017 2:31 PM, Joerg wrote: Sorry but that is not correct. I grew up and lived in Europe for decades and rode more than 100k miles there on bicycles. Riding lane center is not at all customary there and would quickly result in a citation and fine. But if you're a tourist they just ignore you, and assume that you don't know the law. Sometimes. In the UK you can take the lane when necessary, other times you can't. That's how it is in most countries. Meaning if you are out there on a rural road riding lane center you can be ticketed. Or get killed. Yes, yes, Joerg, we know. Your universe is a terribly, terribly dangerous place. (BTW, the Perseid meteor shower is coming soon. Be careful! You could get killed!) Are you saying it's different in other European countries? No one said that it's customary to ride lane center, you only do it when there is no other option. Frank said in another post yesterday in this thread "My wife and I and the other dozen or so people on the ride were almost always near lane center". True. Same on today's ride. Not the words "almost always". Today he wrote, quote " My wife and I rode lane center there whenever it was necessary or desirable". I don't know what to believe of his writing. Do you? Your basic problem is understanding, not believing. To explain: As usual, it was almost always necessary or desirable. 30 miles today, probably 20 people on the ride. I'd say about one mile of the ride had a lane wide enough to safely share. The rest was on roads with lanes no more than 9 feet wide. Most of the roads had low traffic. If you're on a low traffic road riding with friends, how do you ride? On fairly level ground, we normally ride two abreast and converse. If a car approaches behind us, someone will say "Car back." Depending on the situation, we may or may not "single up" to make it easier for the motorist to pass. Sometimes it's simply not necessary because they can easily go around in the other lane. Sometimes it's unwise because they should not pass, because of oncoming traffic. Riding two abreast is definitely legal in any case. Now there is one common way I violate state law: If I'm on an empty street or road, I will almost always violate the "AFRAP" portion of the law even if the lane is wide enough to theoretically share. Instead of riding at far right, I'll aim for the smoothest part of the lane; because after all, why should I move right to help an imaginary motorist? Perhaps you cower near the gutter even in that situation. It wouldn't surprise me, because you certainly seem to be a timid and fearful person. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition Bicycle Summit and the Failureof Vehicular Cycling.
On 8/10/2017 1:04 PM, AMuzi wrote:
When things go well, it's always attributed to management genius. By management, anyway. When things go awry, the list of reasons/excuses is a mile long, just as in every other business. In my area, the cost to lease space is so high that low-margin businesses have a very hard time. We have some bike shops that do well, like two Trek tied shops, because they sell a lot of high-cost CF bikes to persons with very high disposable income. But selling mainly $300-$500 bicycles with only 35-40% margins is not going to work unless you own your building. When I see boomers like me, they're typically on road bikes that they've been riding for a very long time. I went on a training ride a couple of weeks ago with someone, and I thought she'd show up on a recent vintage CF bike, but she showed up on an old Bridgestone road bike even older than my Specialized road bike. She wanted a new bicycle but not CF, and was looking into a custom Dean titanium. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition Bicycle Summit and the Failureof Vehicular Cycling.
|
#48
|
|||
|
|||
Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition Bicycle Summit and the Failureof Vehicular Cycling.
On 8/10/2017 11:12 AM, Duane wrote:
Having a shower and locker at the office definitely makes things easier for commuting by bike. I suppose a shower and locker make bike commuting easier, but I think the need for a shower is greatly overestimated. My first bike commuting job was 2.6 miles away. Even in Georgia summers I never needed a shower when I arrived. I usually took it easy on the way in, and mornings are the coolest part of the day. When I moved to Ohio, a firm criterion for our house purchase was that it had to be within 10 miles of the new job. I found this one, seven miles from work. Again, I took things easy on the way in (and was lucky that most of the way in was level or downhill). I rode in business casual clothes, except when arriving at noon for summer evening classes. Then I'd wear shorts and have a change of clothes on board. But showering before cycling meant my sweat wasn't stinky, so I'd just wait and cool down a few minutes before entering the office complex. And I guarantee nobody could tell which days I rode in and which days I drove or took the motorcycle, because they would frequently ask. That included students who came to my office for help and were sitting two feet from me at my desk. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition Bicycle Summit and the Failureof Vehicular Cycling.
On 8/10/2017 11:20 AM, Andre Jute wrote:
Some Americans can speed to work on road bikes precisely because there are so few cyclists. If there were a mass of cyclists, you'd soon hear political ructions to have the corralled in a bike lane. There will of course be a breakpoint somewhere, where the mass of cyclists is so large that they get the first consideration in law and infrastructure, as in The Netherlands, but does anyone (except Crazy Frank Krygowski) actually believe that America's bike share will ever approach that breakpoint, whatever it is. The laughable Mr. Jute is obviously unaware that I've been saying that bike mode share in the U.S. will NEVER exceed 10%. At least, barring some sort of unpredictable global catastrophe. It's people like Joerg and SMS who are claiming that bike lanes can transform America into Amsterdam. I've been arguing against that foolishness. Do try to stop posting out of ignorance, Jute! -- - Frank Krygowski |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition Bicycle Summit and the Failureof Vehicular Cycling.
On 8/10/2017 3:22 PM, sms wrote:
On 8/10/2017 10:23 AM, jbeattie wrote: Probably none on the bike paths. That kind of Conga line would drive me crazy, particularly with a commute that is in excess of the average 3.2km (2 mile) trip in Amsterdam. Trip distances in Amsterdam are short and often walkable. They are also dead flat. My commutes have ranged from 14 miles each way down to just a few -- and currently 5-6 miles depending on route and assuming I'm not throwing-in gratuitous miles through the West Hills. I've always tried to live near work or school. Reminds me of riding in China in the 1980's. Very slow, probably about 10 KM/H, and no sudden stops (since those Phoenix and Flying Pigeon bicycles had mostly non-functional rod brakes) or unexpected moves. Go with the flow. I was 31 and it was an effort to not try to go faster. Wide separated bike lanes too. It's not rocket science. We know what gets more people on bicycles: 1. Infrastructure 2. Traffic congestion 3. Lack of mass transit Nope. You left out the most important item: Dissuading car use. As long as motoring is more convenient, very few people will choose to bike. Traffic congestion by itself is not sufficient disincentive to driving. You also left out short travel distances. And flat terrain. And a historic culture of utility bicycling. And fashion. And much else. -- - Frank Krygowski |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Founder of Marin County Bicycle Coalition Arrested again | Mike Vandeman[_4_] | Mountain Biking | 1 | December 13th 13 02:42 PM |
Marin County Bicycle Coalition Expands into Mountain Biking | sms88 | Social Issues | 1 | November 8th 11 06:02 AM |
Best Bike Buys searches online bike stores to help you find bicycles,bikes, bicycle parts, bicycle clothing, and bicycle accessories | [email protected] | Rides | 0 | May 14th 08 09:56 PM |
Best Bike Buys searches online bike stores to help you find bicycles,bikes, bicycle parts, bicycle clothing, and bicycle accessories | [email protected] | Australia | 0 | May 14th 08 09:55 PM |
Best Bike Buys searches online bike stores to help you find bicycles,bikes, bicycle parts, bicycle clothing, and bicycle accessories | [email protected] | Techniques | 0 | May 14th 08 09:54 PM |