Can you make it to the market on a bike?

"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" writes:


ALL "bicycle lanes" are "separate but equal" facilities; therefore
their deficiencies are inherent and do not depend on the quality of
the particular implementation.

Are you on drugs or something? Cars are allowed in bike lanes (to
merge in before turning across them and they are part of a road).
I've yet to see anyone disparage an HOV lane as a '"separate but equal"
facility' (a code phrase for what is really an inferior faciility).

Cut the rhetoric. If you have any point, you should be able to
show some deficiency in the Caltrans design standards, not in some
figment of your imagination.

--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" writes:

Bill Zaumen wrote:
Tom "Johnny Sunset" Sherman writes:

Bill Zaumen wrote:
...
When you have a really nasty bug to track down as part of your 6-figure
job, any act of kindness is really appreciated. :-)...

I hear there are a lot of highly intelligent, computer software and
hardware design capable people in India willing to work for a high
four figure or low five figure (U.S. dollar) annual income.
There are some things you can't outsource to India. Working on an OS
is one of them, particularly when new hardware is involved (and India
is mostly doing software, not hardware).

For now.

No, for a very long time to come, as long as the U.S. has a
substantial technical edge, and if India and China catch up, their
incomes will become comparable to ours.

Also, infrastructure is important - when you are running chip
simulations that need the largest machines you can get your hands on
and that have to run for a day or more (maybe a lot more), you can't
get by in a place where there are regular power failures on a weekly
or daily basis.

Some of the hardware design
done in Silicon Valley requires a huge capital investment in server
farms for chip verification. That is not available in India or China
right now,
^^^^^^^^^

Exactly.

except it is for as long as those countries are not at the top of the
heap in the high-tech world.

which may be why we have so many people from India or
China living here and getting U.S.-level salaries.

Expanded guest worker program, perhaps?

We need every smart person we can get, but you'd have to work in
the area to know why.


--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" writes:

Bill Zaumen wrote:
Does Bill Zaumem actually ride a bike in the real world and pay
attention to what happens, or does he just argue on Usenet?
I live in a town that sweeps its bike lanes and has both before and
after 2001. If you aren't going to maintain a facility, you probably
shouldn't put it in, but where I live, these things are maintained.

Is this town some upscale Silly Cone Valley community or similar?
Where I live, the potholes are big enough to rip a 185/60R14 tire
off a rim - think they have money for sweeping the "bicycle lane"?

I posted a URL for one of our movie theaters in town. Take a look at
it and figure it out for yourself.

Also, where I live the bicycle lane is mostly used to pass other motor
vehicles on the right, while driving 20 to 40 mph over the speed limit.

I've been passed while driving by a speeding vehicle that decided to
use a bike lane to get by, even though there was no on-coming traffic
and the road was completely straight. You can always find some idiot
on the road who is competely irresponsible. What else is new? It
simply has nothing to do with bike lanes - they'll do something
incredibly stupid regardless.


--
My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB

On Aug 1, 5:49 pm, William wrote:
On Aug 1, 2:28 pm, William wrote:



On Aug 1, 11:12 am, Pat wrote:

On Aug 1, 11:54 am, William wrote:

On Aug 1, 10:25 am, Pat wrote:

On Aug 1, 10:43 am, donquijote1954
wrote:

On Aug 1, 4:00 am, Peter Clinch wrote:

Yes, there are some idiots who'll sit behind you and honk at you, but
they won't run you down, because it might scratch the paintwork. If you
push people off into bike lanes as a rule they will be far more maligned
and looked down upon on the instances where they have no choice to use
the roads, if they're typically in a bike lane instead.

They don't help. We know they don't help as we can see them not
helping. *HAVE YOU GOT THAT YET?*

You still avoiding my question: BIKE LANES OR NO BIKE LANES, HOW DO WE
BRING BIKE RIDERSHIP FROM THE AMERICAN OR BRITISH LEVES TO THE DUTCH
OR DANISH LEVELS?

You see, you are thinking about the problem from the wrong direction.
You are saying "biking is great, what is wrong with everyone else".
Instead, you need to examine why other people don't bike and address
that.

Predominantly, I would think it is the combination of "no time to bike
& no place to bike to". Most people won't bike to work if they get
sweaty or if they work the night shift, etc. Bike lanes might
partially address the "no place to bike to" issue, but not really.

For example, I need to run out and get my kid some things for football
practice. While we're at it we need to do some back-to-school
shopping. Okay, that's simple and the kid is in great shape. I just
need to run to the nearest sporting goods store. Fortunately, there's
a small mall across the street. This trip is a bit unusually because
I do 90% of my shopping at the nest Walmart. So ideally, this is
bikeable. But the problem is, the nearest sporting goods store is
about 45 miles away. That's about 15 miles past the Walmart. So at
10 mph (because of the hills and the purchases), you're talking at 9
hour bike ride.

I don't blame you, biking works best
when everything is
more central and dense like a metro area.

So I think your idea has merit, it just needs to be tweeked. The
community didn't allow a Walmart because of a DOT right-of-way issue.
But maybe if we had more Walmarts, so that they were closer to people,
the people could bike to them easier. Plus if they put in
SuperCenters with groceries, then more shopping could be done in 1
trip.

So I guess bike lanes are part of the problem, but having a place to
go is the other part. Therefore, maybe you should lobby for more
Walmarts -- and have them tied into bikeways -- to encourage shopping
by bike.

Have you no sense of quality Pat? I guess that is implied when your
from nowhere land.

I don't follow your logic. Of course I am from the middle of
nowhere. That's great. Clean air. Clean water. Mountains in the
background (okay, the Allegany's aren't exactly the Rockies). It is a
nice, simple life. What else to I need. This is a great lifestyle.
What "quality" am I missing? The Kleenex from Walmart is somehow
worst than the Kleenex from the Kleenex Boutique? The $18 Harry
Potter book I bought last week has different words in it than $32
version in your corner bookstore? My backyard swimming pool is
somehow less wet than your municipal one? My fruit-of-the-loom
underwear are somehow less fruity than yours from the mall. Does a
Timex keep different time than a Rolex -- it doesn't really matter to
me, because I don't wear a watch.

You might crave some imported, organic, fresh pasta only made by
virgins on the hillsides of Italy. But regular pasta is fine by me.
You don't need that stuff to live well. You only need it to fill the
hollow spots in your sole. There's nothing wrong with simplicity.
I'm not exactly a monk, but this definitely isn't Madison Ave. But
that's what makes it nice.

On Friday, a friend and I are thinking of throwing a canoe on the
Allegany River and going a few miles, just for the heck of it. That's
excitement around here.

Besides, the Walmarts around here are pretty generous when it comes to
youth sports. We'll hit up each of them during fundraising for each
of the sports. It's not a lot, but they'll throw in $25 to $50 (each)
any time they are asked -- and we ask them quite often. That buys
stuff for the concession stand or for a raffle.

So what about this "quality" thing?

Pat, Walmart is McDonalds department stores. In every way. If you wanna
call that quality go right ahead. Just keep that bull **** out of the
city.

To be more specific, ever notice how a lot of things, not
ALL things but a lot, are a heck of a lot crappier at walmart as
apposed to the other extreme like William-sanoma or crate and barrel?
I'm not saying that every place should be as expensive and *high tech*
for a lack of a better word as those places are. But ever notice how
theres a lot of poor people at Walmart? I guess you would'nt since
thats all you have in nowhere land but here in the cities when people
have more options then the lowest and crappiest, we tend to shoot for
the happy medium between excessive and contemptible.

I prove via internet: http://www.walmart.com/catalog/produ...uct_id=2403033

Wal*Mart:Lowest Common Denominator
Look at this cool set of pots and pans and the mounted rack. Only
34.32!!!
But in reality,look at cheap and thin the metal on the cooking
utensils and the pots is. Don't expect those to get through a
thanksgiving dinner....

Kohls: A Happy Mediumhttp://www.kohls.com/products/product_page_vanilla0.jsp?PRODUCT%3C%3E...
A good medium, not to bad it gets the job done. 170$ is pretty
reasonable, closer on the low end of things but again it will get the
job done.

William-Sonoma: When brains collide with class and stlye Bet you don't
have one of these at "The Rez" do you Pat?http://www.williams-sonoma.com/produ...x.cfm?pkey=cck...
600 dollars and just for the pots. Yea I would say this would out live
the competition in ever way by a large margin. Still, nothing to there
1,400$$$ one. ttp://www.williams-sonoma.com/products/sku8991465/index.cfm?pkey=cckwseti
Hey, you get what ya pay for!

Now, cheap prices may seem all good, but why not just pay a little
extra for the one that will last?
(Ahem* because your either poor or have no options or you just have no
sense of quality)

Now Pat, you may be saying to yourself that those other sets of pots
are expensive only for more profit, but if that was true, do you
REALLY think William-Sonoma would still be around?

Umm, eh eh, shhh, but go look again. For Walmart, you compared the
price of the pot RACK to the cost of the pots in the other stores.

Second, I've hear of Kohls but have no idea what they sell. Sorry.
I've never hear of William-whatever and there probably isn't one with
a few hundred miles of here. Sounds like one of those too-much-money
and too-little-brains stores for people who have a cook do their
cooking for them.

$1200 for pots is ridiculous. Anyway, you wouldn't believe the stuff
I use. On the rare occasion that I need to buy cookware, I swing by a
restaurant supply store in Buffalo and get what I need. Strictly
utilization, but great quality. You can beat on the stuff with no
damage. My teflon frying pan, which I use all the time, is probably
over 5 years old and the teflon is still perfect. Oh, and the stuff
is pretty cheap.

My tea pot is from K-Mart and is probably going on 10 years old. It's
Revereware. Great stuff.

What you have to understand about rural areas is the simplicity of the
place. If you wanted $1200 pots, you wouldn't live here. You can get
almost anything you want at Walmart. You just want different things.

Here's a better comparision for you:
http://www.kohls.com/products/produc...18608 0661287
http://www.walmart.com/catalog/produ...uct_id=5673563
But I suppose the ones from Walmart are somehow inherently inferior..

On Aug 2, 3:24 am, Ace wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 08:14:13 +0100, Peter Clinch

wrote:
donquijote1954 wrote:

Letting bikes loose out on the roads can be dangerous. Better channel
them through bike lanes.

Bike lanes don't have a better safety track record than the roads.

Go tohttp://www.cyclecraft.co.uk/infrastructure.htmland actually do
some reading around the subject.

Alternatively, you could just stop feeding the troll. It's fairly
clear that he's not listening, and I doubt that anyone will seriously
take any notice of him, as he's such an obvious monomaniac.

Bike lanes and thus people riding bikes and saving gas is such
monomaniacal idea. Reasonable people just drive a country to war and
get more oil. They all want to be like Napoleon. Isn't that a clinical
case?

On Aug 2, 5:08 am, Tony Raven wrote:
Ace wrote:

Alternatively, you could just stop feeding the troll. It's fairly
clear that he's not listening, and I doubt that anyone will seriously
take any notice of him, as he's such an obvious monomaniac.

Its also fairly obvious he won't be around for long before he gets
killed by one of the many thousands of cyclicidal SUV drivers in his
neighbourhood ;-)

A real possibility for me, like that of you getting killed by
terrorists. Well, they are both terrorists, right?

On Aug 2, 5:27 am, Mike Clark wrote:
In message .com
donquijote1954 wrote:



On Aug 1, 1:13 pm, Mike Clark wrote:
[snip]
In contrast to the 'idea' of ever more separate lanes being good for
improved safety there is the contradictory data that shows that in
places where you remove all the lane markings, signs and junction
priorities you often get a measurable increase in safety.

Should we erase the car lanes too? I think we could have bike lanes
and still enforce those breaking the law, so they can pay for more
bike lanes. Are you parked in the bike lane? You got a fine for 100
bucks...

Yes the data is based on situations where all the lane markings and
junction priorities, traffic lights etc are removed. Basically people
stop driving as if they have a known priority and instead start looking
out for and avoiding other road users.

OK, either lanes for all or lanes for none. When do we start that
campaign?

On Aug 2, 5:28 am, Tony Raven wrote:
Ace wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 10:08:26 +0100, Tony Raven
wrote:

Ace wrote:
Alternatively, you could just stop feeding the troll. It's fairly
clear that he's not listening, and I doubt that anyone will seriously
take any notice of him, as he's such an obvious monomaniac.

Its also fairly obvious he won't be around for long before he gets
killed by one of the many thousands of cyclicidal SUV drivers in his
neighbourhood ;-)

That'd be a shame.

Or an exaggeration.

Well, *I* exaggerated. My risk of getting killed by road terrorism is
greater, much greater, than you getting killed by the other type of
terrorism.

I saw a bumper sticker today that here is quite revolutionary: SLOWER
TRAFFIC KEEP TO THE RIGHT... AVOID ROAD RAGE! That must be a communist
attempt at bringing regulation to our roads. We want to zigzag if we
please, and drive our SUVs while on the phone if we want, so we can
remain a free nation!

Rage is part of life in the jungle, and the strong shall survive.
Hallelujah!

On Aug 2, 2:21 pm, (Bill Z.) wrote:
"Tom \"Johnny Sunset\" Sherman" writes:



ALL "bicycle lanes" are "separate but equal" facilities; therefore
their deficiencies are inherent and do not depend on the quality of
the particular implementation.

Are you on drugs or something? Cars are allowed in bike lanes (to
merge in before turning across them and they are part of a road).
I've yet to see anyone disparage an HOV lane as a '"separate but equal"
facility' (a code phrase for what is really an inferior faciility).

Cut the rhetoric. If you have any point, you should be able to
show some deficiency in the Caltrans design standards, not in some
figment of your imagination.

Besides, if "separate but equal" is the law of the land in many areas,
particularly applied to those who live beyond walled communities, I
don't see why it should apply to bikes and SUVs. They do NOT mix, just
as lions and monkeys.

Bill Z. wrote:

Wayne Pein writes:


The comparison is therefore a 16' lane vs. a 12' lane with 4' bike lane.

16' lane:
- bicyclist chooses lateral position based on speed and other
operational and physical context. It can be 4', 5', 6' from the edge
under typical conditions or further under atypical conditions such as
a stopped delivery vehicle or very high bicyclist speed.


.... which is just what you do in the bike lane case - when riding
at less than the normal speed of traffic you will be nominally
14 feet from the adjacent traffic-lane's stripe, which puts you
a couple of feet inside the bike lane.

YOU may ride 2' from edge of pavement, and others may ride 2' from edge
of pavement, but it is not good practice. I don't ride 2' from edge of
pavement.


If you are less than 12 feet
from that lane divider (which puts you just outside the bike lane)
you should be going as fast as traffic unless avoiding some specific
hazard (which the bike lane rules allow).

Not me. I typically ride 4' from edge of pavement no matter what my
speed is.




Bicyclist can pass to left of stopped vehicle without changing
lanes. - bicyclists are ordinary slow moving vehicle
operators. Bicyclist has superior right to occupy that lane space
since he was there prior to overtaking motorists. - bicyclist
within the lane engenders caution in passing motorists. - bicyclist
traveled way is kept debris free by tire and wind blast from motor
vehicles.


The California Vehicle Code forbids lateral movement on a roadway
unless such a movement can be made with reasonable safety. If you
were going slower than traffic and then decide to move left, you
do not have squatters rights, lane stripe or not.

I don't care about the CVC.




- bicyclists are "special." Bicyclist has less right to use the "motor
vehicle lane" either by law or by motorist coercion.


Nonesense.


Sorry. It's true.



- bicyclist behind bike lane stripe and out of "motor vehicle lane"
means that motorists need not be cautious.


That is also wrong. A driver has a responsibility to operate a
vehicle safely. Even drivers who don't care generally don't want
their fenders dinged needlessly.

So? Motorists pass bicyclists faster and closer when a bike lane is
present. They need not exhibit any caution when passing.




- presence of bike lane can encourage higher motor speeds whether
bicyclists are present or not.


Bike lanes actually have the opposite effect - motorist speed tends
to increase the wider a lane is.

Sorry. You are wrong again.




The bike lane acts as a paved shoulder and buffer from roadside
elements, well channelizes vehicles, and places them in a favorable
position for optimal lines of sight. - bike lane collects debris.


Not true either, unless the adjacent traffic lane is very wide. Drivers nominally guide on the lane stripe, staying a couple of
feet inside. Whether you have a bike lane stripe or not, the
area 12 to 16 feet from the "traffic" lane stripe will be kept
clean. However, as a bike lane, a local jurisdiction that installed
the bike lane then has an obligation to keep it clean, but there
is no such obligation for a shoulder (which is not intended for
vehicular travel).


Yea, jurisdictions on Bike Lane Fantasy Island keep bike lanes as clean
as the normal lane.

Wayne