|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
John Forester Speaks
On Mon, 7 Oct 2019 12:46:02 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: On 10/7/2019 10:50 AM, Lars Lehtonen wrote: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Chalo wrote: I don't want special bike-specific infrastructure. I want the cars gone, restricted to special motorsports facilities during limited hours and with extremely heavy taxation to help mitigate their pollution and noise. I'm fine with an interim period where the cars stay, but with a 20mph Here in the U.S., a universal 20 mph speed limit would never, ever be accepted - not even by me. It would make it impossible to ever visit my family members and most of my friends. 20 mph in residential and heavily used business and shopping areas could make sense, though. I would have said it could make sense any place there are more than a few pedestrians or bicyclists, except that in most of the U.S. there are very, very few pedestrians or bicyclists. Almost the entire country has been built with the automobile in mind. That's very difficult to change. Lets be rational and say that in the U.S. there will never be any real change. Speed limits are not going to be lowered and no significant bicycle only paths are going to be built. Oh yes, there will be lines painted on roads and old, unused, railway right of ways renamed "Bicycle Path" but will over passes or tunnels at intersections to allow crossing the intersection on city streets without worrying about stop lights and folks turning be built as they are for cars? I remember, years ago in Los Angeles there was an attempt by the city government to get a bond issue approved to built a public transportation system and it was voted down two years in a row. "What for a public transportation system? Just take the car." -- cheers, John B. |
Ads |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
John Forester Speaks
On 10/7/2019 3:59 PM, John B. wrote:
snip Lets be rational and say that in the U.S. there will never be any real change. Speed limits are not going to be lowered and no significant bicycle only paths are going to be built. Oh yes, there will be lines painted on roads and old, unused, railway right of ways renamed "Bicycle Path" but will over passes or tunnels at intersections to allow crossing the intersection on city streets without worrying about stop lights and folks turning be built as they are for cars? I guess we're spoiled in Silicon Valley, but we have built, and are building more, infrastructure with tunnels and overpasses. The key is to eliminate choke points and create connectivity where it has been poor. One key thing is to not have bicycle routes that are on roads with freeway entrances and exits. A few weeks ago we had a City Council meeting where the only agenda item was whether or not to build a short trail along a creek, opening the gates, putting down hard-pack or asphalt, and adding some fencing. I had 130 residents sign up to speak on this agenda item and the meeting went from 6:45 p.m. to 4:35 a.m.. The trail would be what we believe would be a safer pedestrian and bicycle route to some schools and to our library. We voted 5-0 to proceed. Those opposed to the trail have houses that back up to the creek and did not want people walking and cycling behind their houses. Their concerns about the loss of privacy were understandable, but it's public land and the water district, who owns the land, is encouraging more use of their land for trails. We also are starting a community shuttle system trial later this month. This is a response to continued cuts in our county's transit system which has the lowest fare-recovery of any system in the world, and is operated as a social service rather than as a way to support commuters going from housing-rich areas to job-rich areas. The shuttle will go around the city as well as to specific locations in neighboring cities (medical centers and train stations). The shuttle is subsidized, though the subsidy per ride is much less than the subsidy that the county transit agency provides. We are also putting in protected bike lanes, the first one just opened. There was basically a realization that the only way to keep vehicles from driving, parking, stopping, delivering, dropping off/picking up, etc. in bike lanes was to have a physical barrier, lines and paint just were not sufficient. Unfortunately, it took the death of high school student riding to school to spur the city to do something. The latest thing I saw was real estate agents putting their "Open House" signs in bike lanes. This was the final straw for me. I had my City Manager authorize overtime for our Code Enforcement department and on one Saturday they collected 62 illegally placed "Open House" signs that were blocking sidewalks, bike lanes, wheelchair ramps, etc.. I remember, years ago in Los Angeles there was an attempt by the city government to get a bond issue approved to built a public transportation system and it was voted down two years in a row. "What for a public transportation system? Just take the car." Los Angeles is all-in on expanding their transit system. https://www.fastcompany.com/40490942/los-angeless-120-billion-bet-on-transit-innovation. Transit is also the only possible solution to the housing issue in California. You're not going to convince most middle class families to live in rental housing forever, or to live in a high-rise condo once they have kids. You have to give them a way to commute sufficiently fast from areas with enough land for the type of housing they are going to live in. Unfortunately, in Silicon Valley, we have no organization that is lobbying for cyclists. The "Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition" has been co-opted by development and corporate interests and lobbies for more money for highway construction, especially the conversion of HOV lanes to "Express Lanes" where solo drivers can pay to use the HOV lane. A token amount of money was provided for bicycle infrastructure and transit in the last tax that was approved by voters. |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
John Forester Speaks
On Tuesday, October 8, 2019 at 6:48:12 AM UTC-7, sms wrote:
On 10/7/2019 3:59 PM, John B. wrote: snip Lets be rational and say that in the U.S. there will never be any real change. Speed limits are not going to be lowered and no significant bicycle only paths are going to be built. Oh yes, there will be lines painted on roads and old, unused, railway right of ways renamed "Bicycle Path" but will over passes or tunnels at intersections to allow crossing the intersection on city streets without worrying about stop lights and folks turning be built as they are for cars? I guess we're spoiled in Silicon Valley, but we have built, and are building more, infrastructure with tunnels and overpasses. The key is to eliminate choke points and create connectivity where it has been poor. One key thing is to not have bicycle routes that are on roads with freeway entrances and exits. A few weeks ago we had a City Council meeting where the only agenda item was whether or not to build a short trail along a creek, opening the gates, putting down hard-pack or asphalt, and adding some fencing. I had 130 residents sign up to speak on this agenda item and the meeting went from 6:45 p.m. to 4:35 a.m.. The trail would be what we believe would be a safer pedestrian and bicycle route to some schools and to our library. We voted 5-0 to proceed. Those opposed to the trail have houses that back up to the creek and did not want people walking and cycling behind their houses. Their concerns about the loss of privacy were understandable, but it's public land and the water district, who owns the land, is encouraging more use of their land for trails. We also are starting a community shuttle system trial later this month. This is a response to continued cuts in our county's transit system which has the lowest fare-recovery of any system in the world, and is operated as a social service rather than as a way to support commuters going from housing-rich areas to job-rich areas. The shuttle will go around the city as well as to specific locations in neighboring cities (medical centers and train stations). The shuttle is subsidized, though the subsidy per ride is much less than the subsidy that the county transit agency provides. We are also putting in protected bike lanes, the first one just opened. There was basically a realization that the only way to keep vehicles from driving, parking, stopping, delivering, dropping off/picking up, etc. in bike lanes was to have a physical barrier, lines and paint just were not sufficient. Unfortunately, it took the death of high school student riding to school to spur the city to do something. The latest thing I saw was real estate agents putting their "Open House" signs in bike lanes. This was the final straw for me. I had my City Manager authorize overtime for our Code Enforcement department and on one Saturday they collected 62 illegally placed "Open House" signs that were blocking sidewalks, bike lanes, wheelchair ramps, etc.. I remember, years ago in Los Angeles there was an attempt by the city government to get a bond issue approved to built a public transportation system and it was voted down two years in a row. "What for a public transportation system? Just take the car." Los Angeles is all-in on expanding their transit system. https://www.fastcompany.com/40490942/los-angeless-120-billion-bet-on-transit-innovation. Transit is also the only possible solution to the housing issue in California. You're not going to convince most middle class families to live in rental housing forever, or to live in a high-rise condo once they have kids. You have to give them a way to commute sufficiently fast from areas with enough land for the type of housing they are going to live in. Unfortunately, in Silicon Valley, we have no organization that is lobbying for cyclists. The "Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition" has been co-opted by development and corporate interests and lobbies for more money for highway construction, especially the conversion of HOV lanes to "Express Lanes" where solo drivers can pay to use the HOV lane. A token amount of money was provided for bicycle infrastructure and transit in the last tax that was approved by voters. Just a heads-up, don't put the sheltered facility and a bus or shuttle stop together. My favorite unnecessary hazard going to work is the sheltered bike lane where the bus whips around me to the left, I go into the facility to the right, the bus stops, and passengers launch into the bike lane in front of me -- crossing the bike lane without looking to get to the bus. At the stops where the bus pulls to the curb, I at least have a chance of getting around it. I frequently wonder what designers are thinking. -- Jay Beattie. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
John Forester Speaks
On 08/10/2019 10:14 a.m., jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, October 8, 2019 at 6:48:12 AM UTC-7, sms wrote: On 10/7/2019 3:59 PM, John B. wrote: snip Lets be rational and say that in the U.S. there will never be any real change. Speed limits are not going to be lowered and no significant bicycle only paths are going to be built. Oh yes, there will be lines painted on roads and old, unused, railway right of ways renamed "Bicycle Path" but will over passes or tunnels at intersections to allow crossing the intersection on city streets without worrying about stop lights and folks turning be built as they are for cars? I guess we're spoiled in Silicon Valley, but we have built, and are building more, infrastructure with tunnels and overpasses. The key is to eliminate choke points and create connectivity where it has been poor. One key thing is to not have bicycle routes that are on roads with freeway entrances and exits. A few weeks ago we had a City Council meeting where the only agenda item was whether or not to build a short trail along a creek, opening the gates, putting down hard-pack or asphalt, and adding some fencing. I had 130 residents sign up to speak on this agenda item and the meeting went from 6:45 p.m. to 4:35 a.m.. The trail would be what we believe would be a safer pedestrian and bicycle route to some schools and to our library. We voted 5-0 to proceed. Those opposed to the trail have houses that back up to the creek and did not want people walking and cycling behind their houses. Their concerns about the loss of privacy were understandable, but it's public land and the water district, who owns the land, is encouraging more use of their land for trails. We also are starting a community shuttle system trial later this month. This is a response to continued cuts in our county's transit system which has the lowest fare-recovery of any system in the world, and is operated as a social service rather than as a way to support commuters going from housing-rich areas to job-rich areas. The shuttle will go around the city as well as to specific locations in neighboring cities (medical centers and train stations). The shuttle is subsidized, though the subsidy per ride is much less than the subsidy that the county transit agency provides. We are also putting in protected bike lanes, the first one just opened. There was basically a realization that the only way to keep vehicles from driving, parking, stopping, delivering, dropping off/picking up, etc. in bike lanes was to have a physical barrier, lines and paint just were not sufficient. Unfortunately, it took the death of high school student riding to school to spur the city to do something. The latest thing I saw was real estate agents putting their "Open House" signs in bike lanes. This was the final straw for me. I had my City Manager authorize overtime for our Code Enforcement department and on one Saturday they collected 62 illegally placed "Open House" signs that were blocking sidewalks, bike lanes, wheelchair ramps, etc.. I remember, years ago in Los Angeles there was an attempt by the city government to get a bond issue approved to built a public transportation system and it was voted down two years in a row. "What for a public transportation system? Just take the car." Los Angeles is all-in on expanding their transit system. https://www.fastcompany.com/40490942/los-angeless-120-billion-bet-on-transit-innovation. Transit is also the only possible solution to the housing issue in California. You're not going to convince most middle class families to live in rental housing forever, or to live in a high-rise condo once they have kids. You have to give them a way to commute sufficiently fast from areas with enough land for the type of housing they are going to live in. Unfortunately, in Silicon Valley, we have no organization that is lobbying for cyclists. The "Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition" has been co-opted by development and corporate interests and lobbies for more money for highway construction, especially the conversion of HOV lanes to "Express Lanes" where solo drivers can pay to use the HOV lane. A token amount of money was provided for bicycle infrastructure and transit in the last tax that was approved by voters. Just a heads-up, don't put the sheltered facility and a bus or shuttle stop together. My favorite unnecessary hazard going to work is the sheltered bike lane where the bus whips around me to the left, I go into the facility to the right, the bus stops, and passengers launch into the bike lane in front of me -- crossing the bike lane without looking to get to the bus. At the stops where the bus pulls to the curb, I at least have a chance of getting around it. I frequently wonder what designers are thinking. -- Jay Beattie. I found my new least favorite idea for cycling facilities. My son moved to a new place on the Plateau in Montreal and I drove him to carry some stuff to the new place. So I park in a slot in a long line of cars. This is a one way street with parking on both sides. There is a two direction bike lane on the outside of my passenger door with bike traffic coming toward me. When I'm alone, the only way I can see around the SUVs etc. in front of me would be to pull out into the oncoming bikes. And there are a lot of bikes. At least when they're by my door zone I can use my mirror to look back and can see around the car in front. This is ridiculous. |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
John Forester Speaks
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512 Frank Krygowski wrote: Here in the U.S., a universal 20 mph speed limit would never, ever be accepted - not even by me. It would make it impossible to ever visit my family members and most of my friends. Interstates excluded, of course. - --- Lars Lehtonen -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCgAdFiEEvvKqsf7DSishcEgngTfUdOvLBPIFAl2csG YACgkQgTfUdOvL BPLrrgf9HLWbbsewe83KkRKcHD0xjemz1Zmlv+Dzz+YsponpBY E9HdcbD9ETJEUV GB8ba6p9ex/gSgGkhQslU6cqR+KGB57O5tZ9spnXNEBdCBri9DElptP7TPIXo Q8U PRgtqjdBYK1Zg6lgr7pRY3avOIWYSD9c69R80MC5YFW3h9ihUi YKboAYPD/WfRx9 HF5TbVJqnkJM7mSRyuNkHtsrE6mk1vzEmUkiB3uEqTbZrijGQ6 iHOeS6P353Qodl gmRFhXZfaS8VdYWS89oY6qBnzklfv047C9suq7MgAnHRjzcPLr GI7e1YM9F0KYLx 4P99+2YjM4GBMaT98fRYDb/+sxP2yw== =7RIC -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
John Forester Speaks
On 10/8/2019 7:14 AM, jbeattie wrote:
snip Just a heads-up, don't put the sheltered facility and a bus or shuttle stop together. My favorite unnecessary hazard going to work is the sheltered bike lane where the bus whips around me to the left, I go into the facility to the right, the bus stops, and passengers launch into the bike lane in front of me -- crossing the bike lane without looking to get to the bus. At the stops where the bus pulls to the curb, I at least have a chance of getting around it. I frequently wonder what designers are thinking. Well in my area there are lot more cyclists than bus riders, which I'm sure is different than in Portland. I know that this issue has been discussed. Is it better for the bus stop to be by the curb and buses cross the bike lane, or is it better for the protected bike lane to be next to the curb and have bus passengers cross the bike lane? |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
John Forester Speaks
On Saturday, October 5, 2019 at 10:46:13 PM UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Second, I saw no evidence that 10% or even 1% of the motorists were aggressive or inattentive. The biggest irritation I had with a motorist was the one excessively careful one who refused to pass me for about four blocks despite the lack of oncoming traffic. This is my experience as well. It's a few times a week that someone is afraid to pass, most of the time when I'm riding to the right of the white line.. Annoying as hell. The last time I had any motorist anger directed at me was on a group ride a few months ago, but that wasn't a commute. We took the lane before a left hand turn, and a car (which was well behind us when we took the lane) came up behind us, blowing their horn and shouting obscenities. What made it really sad was that we weren't taking up any more space than a car making the same turn. The last time before that was during a commute to work maybe ten years ago. Bear in mind traffic is pretty heinous in the Boston area. My 20 mile commute by car is 35 minutes on a good day, but typically 45 minutes. My commute by bike (same roads) is 60 minutes. http://inrix.com/blog/2019/02/scorecard-2018/ |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
John Forester Speaks
On 10/8/2019 11:51 AM, Lars Lehtonen wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA512 Frank Krygowski wrote: Here in the U.S., a universal 20 mph speed limit would never, ever be accepted - not even by me. It would make it impossible to ever visit my family members and most of my friends. Interstates excluded, of course. That doesn't fix the concept of "20 mph everywhere". Of the friends I can visit only by driving, the two I see most often live 35 miles away. The route to their houses uses only three miles of interstate. The rest of the roads are minor highways or country roads with speed limits from 40 mph to 55 mph. The route to my brother has roughly ten miles of interstate and 35 miles of minor highways and country roads. And I have other examples. Low speeds may be appropriate in dense surroundings, but certainly not everywhere. To make that practical, you'd have to completely rebuild America. -- - Frank Krygowski |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
John Forester Speaks
On 10/8/2019 10:20 AM, Duane wrote:
On 08/10/2019 10:14 a.m., jbeattie wrote: On Tuesday, October 8, 2019 at 6:48:12 AM UTC-7, sms wrote: On 10/7/2019 3:59 PM, John B. wrote: snip Lets be rational and say that in the U.S. there will never be any real change. Speed limits are not going to be lowered and no significant bicycle only paths are going to be built. Oh yes, there will be lines painted on roads and old, unused, railway right of ways renamed "Bicycle Path" but will over passes or tunnels at intersections to allow crossing the intersection on city streets without worrying about stop lights and folks turning be built as they are for cars? I guess we're spoiled in Silicon Valley, but we have built, and are building more, infrastructure with tunnels and overpasses. The key is to eliminate choke points and create connectivity where it has been poor. One key thing is to not have bicycle routes that are on roads with freeway entrances and exits. A few weeks ago we had a City Council meeting where the only agenda item was whether or not to build a short trail along a creek, opening the gates, putting down hard-pack or asphalt, and adding some fencing. I had 130 residents sign up to speak on this agenda item and the meeting went from 6:45 p.m. to 4:35 a.m.. The trail would be what we believe would be a safer pedestrian and bicycle route to some schools and to our library. We voted 5-0 to proceed. Those opposed to the trail have houses that back up to the creek and did not want people walking and cycling behind their houses. Their concerns about the loss of privacy were understandable, but it's public land and the water district, who owns the land, is encouraging more use of their land for trails. We also are starting a community shuttle system trial later this month. This is a response to continued cuts in our county's transit system which has the lowest fare-recovery of any system in the world, and is operated as a social service rather than as a way to support commuters going from housing-rich areas to job-rich areas. The shuttle will go around the city as well as to specific locations in neighboring cities (medical centers and train stations). The shuttle is subsidized, though the subsidy per ride is much less than the subsidy that the county transit agency provides. We are also putting in protected bike lanes, the first one just opened. There was basically a realization that the only way to keep vehicles from driving, parking, stopping, delivering, dropping off/picking up, etc. in bike lanes was to have a physical barrier, lines and paint just were not sufficient. Unfortunately, it took the death of high school student riding to school to spur the city to do something. The latest thing I saw was real estate agents putting their "Open House" signs in bike lanes. This was the final straw for me. I had my City Manager authorize overtime for our Code Enforcement department and on one Saturday they collected 62 illegally placed "Open House" signs that were blocking sidewalks, bike lanes, wheelchair ramps, etc.. I remember, years ago in Los Angeles there was an attempt by the city government to get a bond issue approved to built a public transportation system and it was voted down two years in a row. "What for a public transportation system? Just take the car." Los Angeles is all-in on expanding their transit system. https://www.fastcompany.com/40490942/los-angeless-120-billion-bet-on-transit-innovation. Transit is also the only possible solution to the housing issue in California. You're not going to convince most middle class families to live in rental housing forever, or to live in a high-rise condo once they have kids. You have to give them a way to commute sufficiently fast from areas with enough land for the type of housing they are going to live in. Unfortunately, in Silicon Valley, we have no organization that is lobbying for cyclists. The "Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition" has been co-opted by development and corporate interests and lobbies for more money for highway construction, especially the conversion of HOV lanes to "Express Lanes" where solo drivers can pay to use the HOV lane. A token amount of money was provided for bicycle infrastructure and transit in the last tax that was approved by voters. Just a heads-up, don't put the sheltered facility and a bus or shuttle stop together. My favorite unnecessary hazard going to work is the sheltered bike lane where the bus whips around me to the left, I go into the facility to the right, the bus stops, and passengers launch into the bike lane in front of me -- crossing the bike lane without looking to get to the bus. At the stops where the bus pulls to the curb, I at least have a chance of getting around it. I frequently wonder what designers are thinking. -- Jay Beattie. I found my new least favorite idea for cycling facilities. My son moved to a new place on the Plateau in Montreal and I drove him to carry some stuff to the new place. So I park in a slot in a long line of cars. This is a one way street with parking on both sides. There is a two direction bike lane on the outside of my passenger door with bike traffic coming toward me. When I'm alone, the only way I can see around the SUVs etc. in front of me would be to pull out into the oncoming bikes. And there are a lot of bikes. At least when they're by my door zone I can use my mirror to look back and can see around the car in front. This is ridiculous. I just checked and it seems England has utterly run out of bad ideas for kiddy paths: http://wcc.crankfoot.xyz/facility-of.../March2019.htm Hasn't been updated for 8 months. Maybe they can accept your Canadian entry. -- Andrew Muzi www.yellowjersey.org/ Open every day since 1 April, 1971 |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
John Forester Speaks
On Tuesday, October 8, 2019 at 9:01:39 AM UTC-7, sms wrote:
On 10/8/2019 7:14 AM, jbeattie wrote: snip Just a heads-up, don't put the sheltered facility and a bus or shuttle stop together. My favorite unnecessary hazard going to work is the sheltered bike lane where the bus whips around me to the left, I go into the facility to the right, the bus stops, and passengers launch into the bike lane in front of me -- crossing the bike lane without looking to get to the bus. At the stops where the bus pulls to the curb, I at least have a chance of getting around it. I frequently wonder what designers are thinking. Well in my area there are lot more cyclists than bus riders, which I'm sure is different than in Portland. I know that this issue has been discussed. Is it better for the bus stop to be by the curb and buses cross the bike lane, or is it better for the protected bike lane to be next to the curb and have bus passengers cross the bike lane? Having pedestrians cross the bike lane is a problem. Another example: https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2774/4...9c178bc1f1.jpg The PSU cycle track is a scrum of unconscious students stepping off the curb into the bike lane, staring down at phones or walking to the bus -- and people walking over to get in their cars, which create the barrier. I much preferred the curb parking and door-zone-ish bike lane. You could get out of harm's way. The current facility is a dangerous chute. South waterfront is a two-way mess because of idiots on bikes intermixed with pedestrians. I preferred when it was a pot-holed old road through an abandoned shipyard, but alas, we needed to put more people in hives. https://odis.homeaway.com/odis/listi...607a8c.f10.jpg -- Jay Beattie. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Email to J. Forester | James[_8_] | Techniques | 4 | October 24th 13 01:40 AM |
Forester says... | Tēm ShermĒn °_°[_2_] | General | 184 | February 9th 11 05:01 PM |
Forester says... | Tēm ShermĒn °_°[_2_] | Techniques | 181 | February 9th 11 05:01 PM |
J.Forester How to Brake | nash | General | 0 | March 11th 07 06:17 PM |
John Forester's 1955 Viking "Tour of Britain" | Lars Lehtonen | General | 2 | May 23rd 06 07:44 PM |