| |
Main
Date: 25 Sep 2006 20:46:06
From: Matt O'Toole
Subject: The latest bike lane research
|
From the Bikeleague newsletter today:
"By studying the interactions of drivers and bicyclists on Texas roads,
transportation engineers at The University of Texas at Austin have
discovered that having painted bike lanes on streets and roads helps both
commuters stay in safer, more central positions in their respective lanes.
The results are posted here:"
http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/pdf_reports/0_5157_1.pdf
Anyone care to engage in a little peer review?
Matt O.
|
|
| |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 07:56:26
From:
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
Bill Sornson wrote:
> frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> > Bill Sornson wrote:
>
>
> > Really, Bush is the _only_ person I recall who ran into a bobby -
> > whether losing one's balance, playing with new pedals, or just running
> > the bloke down. You must have confused me with him.
>
> Actually, you seem to be the one who's confused. I've twice asked about you
> and your "one and only fall" on a road bike in, like, 63 years and 594,000
> miles...
Yep. You certainly seem curious about that incident - although you do
have the details wrong.
The most important detail: I did not run into any policemen at all,
ever. Even during my biking in the British Isles, I've always managed
to avoid running into bobbies (or anyone else).
My fall was descending a super-steep city street during a wintertime
commute - a street so steep that they've now closed it. I was going
VERY slowly, about 3 mph. I swerved to avoid a patch of glass, and
slipped out when my tire hit a patch of road salt. I got a little
scrape on my knee.
> ... and you keep talking about Bush. (Of course, you're not alone in
> this ubiquitous /obsessive syndrome/.)
Wow - people talking about the president of the US! How odd! ;-)
- Frank Krygowski
|
| | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 17:18:28
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
>>> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Really, Bush is the _only_ person I recall who ran into a bobby -
>>> whether losing one's balance, playing with new pedals, or just
>>> running the bloke down. You must have confused me with him.
>>
>> Actually, you seem to be the one who's confused. I've twice asked
>> about you and your "one and only fall" on a road bike in, like, 63
>> years and 594,000 miles...
>
> Yep. You certainly seem curious about that incident - although you do
> have the details wrong.
>
> The most important detail: I did not run into any policemen at all,
> ever.
I believe I mentioned falling over (due to losing balance, being unable to
unclip, or as was apparently your case a tire slipping out). I never said
you ran into a booby...of course.
HTH
|
| | | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 18:43:46
From: Mark Hickey
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
"Bill Sornson" <askme@ask.me > wrote:
>frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
>> The most important detail: I did not run into any policemen at all,
>> ever.
<snip >
> I never said
>you ran into a booby...of course.
Great typo.
k Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame
|
| |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 06:02:51
From: qui si parla Campagnolo
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
di wrote:
> "qui si parla Campagnolo" <peter@vecchios.com> wrote in message
> news:1159275204.428679.179640@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> >
> > Earl Bollinger wrote:
> >> "Matt O'Toole" <mattotoole@letterboxes.org> wrote in message
> >> news:pan.2006.09.26.00.46.05.379570@letterboxes.org...
> >> > From the Bikeleague newsletter today:
> >
> > $3 + per gallon didn't do it, perhaps scarce fuel will...take people
> > out of their 10 mpg SUVs and into smaller, fewer autos...plus a POTUS
> > that is concerned would be nice.
> >
>
> Again, the evil SUV is the problem!
A large vehicle that gets poor milage, it this era of expensive and
getting scarcer energy, is not responsible buying or building, on the
part of the 'big 3'. In this era of unstable energy resources and
escalating oil $, GM reintroduces the Cao, Ford the Mustang and
MOPAR keeps up with the same 3 it has that has the poorest milage of US
autos. Meanwhile Toyota, Nissan and Honda introduce the Yaris, Versa
and Fit...and people wonder why the 'big 3' are in trouble.
Ya know, the 'big 3' could design a big vehicle that was enery
efficient, w/o being small..but that costs money, something they don't
have due to their shortsighteness...Wasn't the fiasco in Iraq a hint?
A little nudge by the Feds..in the form of better/realistic CAFE
standards would be a good start..but the pres is in the big oil pocket..
|
| | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 17:22:21
From: bill
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
> di wrote:
>> "qui si parla Campagnolo" <peter@vecchios.com> wrote in message
>> news:1159275204.428679.179640@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>>> Earl Bollinger wrote:
>>>> "Matt O'Toole" <mattotoole@letterboxes.org> wrote in message
>>>> news:pan.2006.09.26.00.46.05.379570@letterboxes.org...
>>>>> From the Bikeleague newsletter today:
>>> $3 + per gallon didn't do it, perhaps scarce fuel will...take people
>>> out of their 10 mpg SUVs and into smaller, fewer autos...plus a POTUS
>>> that is concerned would be nice.
>>>
>> Again, the evil SUV is the problem!
>
> A large vehicle that gets poor milage, it this era of expensive and
> getting scarcer energy, is not responsible buying or building, on the
> part of the 'big 3'. In this era of unstable energy resources and
> escalating oil $, GM reintroduces the Cao, Ford the Mustang and
> MOPAR keeps up with the same 3 it has that has the poorest milage of US
> autos. Meanwhile Toyota, Nissan and Honda introduce the Yaris, Versa
> and Fit...and people wonder why the 'big 3' are in trouble.
>
> Ya know, the 'big 3' could design a big vehicle that was enery
> efficient, w/o being small..but that costs money, something they don't
> have due to their shortsighteness...Wasn't the fiasco in Iraq a hint?
>
> A little nudge by the Feds..in the form of better/realistic CAFE
> standards would be a good start..but the pres is in the big oil pocket..
>
In defense of the big 3, have you seen the monster pick ups that Toyota
has been making? As to Mustangs, I had a 5.0 with a 5 speed and the
highway geared rear end and I could get 33 MPG when cruising in 5th
gear. I could also do 160+MPH in 4th gear, albeit 200 RPM over the red
line. As for the small hot rod cars getting bad mileage, a lot of that
is the drivers lead foot driving. Give them a smaller engine and they
will still drive full throttle, full brake, repeat until destination.
I have a 1966 Chrysler with a 400 HP 440 police engine that I can milk
for 16 MPG on the highway or hot rod down to about 8 MPG. My 1988 Mazda
can be driven to 35+MPG or down to about 18 if I hot rod it. Put some of
the blame where it belongs, on the lead foot drivers. I had a 1968
Renault R-10 that I could get 54 MPG out of so it isn't rocket science.
Back then a nickel's worth of gas could get me 10 miles.
Bill Baka
|
| |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 23:30:14
From: Tom Keats
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
In article <i2rjh2tse4tfhov9ieb6r16rvg524dat1t@4ax.com >,
Chris Neary <diabloridr@tcsn.net > writes:
>>When I was acclimating to clipless pedals, I fell over a good number of
>>times just trying to stop. It happens.
>
> Not to me.
>
> Anyone else?
Me neither. When I acquired my first set of clipless pedals
I took the time to lean against the apartment building's
dumpster and practice getting in and out of the pedals.
It only took a few minutes to get the feel.
But that was in one of my more patient moments. I can
nevertheless relate to a person's desire to just ride
the bike, and figure out the damned newfangled pedals later.
cheers,
Tom
--
-- Nothing is safe from me.
Above address is just a spam midden.
I'm really at: tkeats [curlicue] vcn [point] bc [point] ca
|
| |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 18:10:24
From:
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
Bill Sornson wrote:
> frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> > Bill Sornson wrote:
> >> frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> >>> Bill Sornson wrote, about the current POTUS:
> >>>>
> >>>> Yeah, no one ever crashes on a mountain bike ride.
> >>>
> >>> On pavement. Into a Scottish policeman.
> >>> http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/07/06/bush.bike/
> >>>
> >>> I mean, haven't we all done that? ;-)
> >>
> >> Weren't you the person who fell over in a parking lot (your "only
> >> bike accident") or something?
> >
> > Well, let's see: I recall falling while riding my mountain bike -
> > it's part of the game. Never once on pavement, though. And
> > certainly, never into a Scottish bobby or other policeman.
>
> Hmm. I thought your "only road bike crash" (or accident) was a
> losing-your-balance kind of thing. Maybe I confused you with another
> pomp---- err, jolly fellow.
Really, Bush is the _only_ person I recall who ran into a bobby -
whether losing one's balance, playing with new pedals, or just running
the bloke down. You must have confused me with him.
And it's hard not to take _that_ as an insult! But I've noticed your
tendency to confusion, so all is forgiven. ;-)
- Frank Krygowski
|
| | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 05:47:59
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>>>> Weren't you the person who fell over in a parking lot (your "only
>>>> bike accident") or something?
>>> Well, let's see: I recall falling while riding my mountain bike -
>>> it's part of the game. Never once on pavement, though. And
>>> certainly, never into a Scottish bobby or other policeman.
>> Hmm. I thought your "only road bike crash" (or accident) was a
>> losing-your-balance kind of thing. Maybe I confused you with another
>> pomp---- err, jolly fellow.
> Really, Bush is the _only_ person I recall who ran into a bobby -
> whether losing one's balance, playing with new pedals, or just running
> the bloke down. You must have confused me with him.
Actually, you seem to be the one who's confused. I've twice asked about you
and your "one and only fall" on a road bike in, like, 63 years and 594,000
miles, and you keep talking about Bush. (Of course, you're not alone in
this ubiquitous /obsessive syndrome/.)
Whatever.
|
| |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 16:25:08
From:
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
Bill Sornson wrote:
> frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> > Bill Sornson wrote, about the current POTUS:
> >>
> >> Yeah, no one ever crashes on a mountain bike ride.
> >
> > On pavement. Into a Scottish policeman.
> > http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/07/06/bush.bike/
> >
> > I mean, haven't we all done that? ;-)
>
> Weren't you the person who fell over in a parking lot (your "only bike
> accident") or something?
Well, let's see: I recall falling while riding my mountain bike - it's
part of the game. Never once on pavement, though. And certainly,
never into a Scottish bobby or other policeman.
Do you actually mean you have too? Amazing!
>
> When I was acclimating to clipless pedals, I fell over a good number of
> times just trying to stop. It happens.
Hmm. Is _that_ what Bush was doing at the time? See, I'd have
practiced out of sight of reporters - and where there weren't any
bobbies to run into. ;-)
- Frank Krygowski
|
| | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 00:24:02
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
>>> Bill Sornson wrote, about the current POTUS:
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, no one ever crashes on a mountain bike ride.
>>>
>>> On pavement. Into a Scottish policeman.
>>> http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/07/06/bush.bike/
>>>
>>> I mean, haven't we all done that? ;-)
>>
>> Weren't you the person who fell over in a parking lot (your "only
>> bike accident") or something?
>
> Well, let's see: I recall falling while riding my mountain bike -
> it's part of the game. Never once on pavement, though. And
> certainly, never into a Scottish bobby or other policeman.
Hmm. I thought your "only road bike crash" (or accident) was a
losing-your-balance kind of thing. Maybe I confused you with another
pomp---- err, jolly fellow.
|
| |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 10:42:25
From:
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
Bill Sornson wrote:
> AustinMN wrote:
> > qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
> >
> >> $3 + per gallon didn't do it, perhaps scarce fuel will...take people
> >> out of their 10 mpg SUVs and into smaller, fewer autos...plus a POTUS
> >> that is concerned would be nice.
> >
> > I'd settle for a POTUS that could stay upright on a bike.
>
> Yeah, no one ever crashes on a mountain bike ride.
On pavement. Into a Scottish policeman.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/07/06/bush.bike/
I mean, haven't we all done that? ;-)
- Frank Krygowski
|
| | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 12:46:41
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
On 26 Sep 2006 10:42:25 -0700, frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
>
>Bill Sornson wrote:
>> AustinMN wrote:
>> > qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
>> >
>> >> $3 + per gallon didn't do it, perhaps scarce fuel will...take people
>> >> out of their 10 mpg SUVs and into smaller, fewer autos...plus a POTUS
>> >> that is concerned would be nice.
>> >
>> > I'd settle for a POTUS that could stay upright on a bike.
>>
>> Yeah, no one ever crashes on a mountain bike ride.
>
>On pavement. Into a Scottish policeman.
>http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/07/06/bush.bike/
>
>I mean, haven't we all done that? ;-)
>
He also managed to fall off a Segway.
--
zk
|
| | | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 01:08:48
From: Victor Kan
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
Zoot Katz wrote:
> He also managed to fall off a Segway.
If I recall the photo correctly, he didn't just fall off it, he did an
endo off a Segway!
--
I do not accept unsolicited commercial e-mail. Remove NO_UCE for
legitimate replies.
|
| | | | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 23:57:55
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 01:08:48 GMT, Victor Kan
<victor@usenet.NO_UCEloopdrive.net > wrote:
>Zoot Katz wrote:
>
>> He also managed to fall off a Segway.
>
>If I recall the photo correctly, he didn't just fall off it, he did an
>endo off a Segway!
He kept his balance and landed on his feet after going over the
handle bar.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2989000.stm
--
zk
|
| | | | | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 11:10:22
From: Joshua Putnam
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
In article <km7kh2pb14qi79oj15e8663bs4nov1nf12@4ax.com >,
zootkatz@operamail.com says...
> On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 01:08:48 GMT, Victor Kan
> <victor@usenet.NO_UCEloopdrive.net> wrote:
>
> >Zoot Katz wrote:
> >
> >> He also managed to fall off a Segway.
> >
> >If I recall the photo correctly, he didn't just fall off it, he did an
> >endo off a Segway!
>
> He kept his balance and landed on his feet after going over the
> handle bar.
I managed that once while learning to ride a pennyfarthing, too. Flying
over the bars on a hill and suddenly discovered I'd landed on my feet,
unharmed. Don't think I could have done it intentionally.
--
josh@phred.org is Joshua Putnam
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/ >
Braze your own bicycle frames. See
<http://www.phred.org/~josh/build/build.html >
|
| | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 17:53:30
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
frkrygow@gmail.com wrote:
> Bill Sornson wrote:
>> AustinMN wrote:
>>> qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
>>>
>>>> $3 + per gallon didn't do it, perhaps scarce fuel will...take
>>>> people out of their 10 mpg SUVs and into smaller, fewer
>>>> autos...plus a POTUS that is concerned would be nice.
>>>
>>> I'd settle for a POTUS that could stay upright on a bike.
>>
>> Yeah, no one ever crashes on a mountain bike ride.
>
> On pavement. Into a Scottish policeman.
> http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/07/06/bush.bike/
>
> I mean, haven't we all done that? ;-)
Weren't you the person who fell over in a parking lot (your "only bike
accident") or something?
When I was acclimating to clipless pedals, I fell over a good number of
times just trying to stop. It happens.
|
| | | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 20:13:54
From: Chris Neary
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
>When I was acclimating to clipless pedals, I fell over a good number of
>times just trying to stop. It happens.
Not to me.
Anyone else?
Chris Neary
diabloridr@tcsn.net
"Prize the doubt, low kinds exist without"
- Inscription at Ramsmeyer Hall, Ohio State University
|
| | | | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 00:10:02
From: Zoot Katz
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 20:13:54 -0700, Chris Neary <diabloridr@tcsn.net >
wrote:
>>When I was acclimating to clipless pedals, I fell over a good number of
>>times just trying to stop. It happens.
>
>Not to me.
>
>Anyone else?
>
>
It was a couple months of riding Eggbeaters before experiencing my
first "clipless moment".
--
zk
|
| | | | | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 07:22:05
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
Zoot Katz wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Sep 2006 20:13:54 -0700, Chris Neary <diabloridr@tcsn.net>
> wrote:
>
>>> When I was acclimating to clipless pedals, I fell over a good
>>> number of times just trying to stop. It happens.
>>
>> Not to me.
>>
>> Anyone else?
>>
>>
> It was a couple months of riding Eggbeaters before experiencing my
> first "clipless moment".
And EBs are rather gentle compared to mid-90s era SPDs. (323s IIRC.) I
remember that "moment of panic" feeling -- or rather, /moments/ of panic --
quite well.
Bill "football-sized hematoma on right thigh after one particularly eventful
ride" S.
|
| | | | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 05:50:28
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
Chris Neary wrote:
{SOMEONE said:}
>> When I was acclimating to clipless pedals, I fell over a good number
>> of times just trying to stop. It happens.
> Not to me.
>
> Anyone else?
You've never seen or heard of people - especially newbies -- being unable to
unclip and doing an "Arte Johnson" fall?
I find that hard to believe.
BS (called)
|
| | | | | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 19:39:38
From: Chris Neary
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
>>> When I was acclimating to clipless pedals, I fell over a good number
>>> of times just trying to stop. It happens.
>
>> Not to me.
>>
>> Anyone else?
>
>You've never seen or heard of people - especially newbies -- being unable to
>unclip and doing an "Arte Johnson" fall?
Rarely, and NEVER a "good number of times".
>I find that hard to believe.
Believe what you want, you often do.
Chris Neary
diabloridr@tcsn.net
"Prize the doubt, low kinds exist without"
- Inscription at Ramsmeyer Hall, Ohio State University
|
| |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 07:04:24
From: AustinMN
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
> $3 + per gallon didn't do it, perhaps scarce fuel will...take people
> out of their 10 mpg SUVs and into smaller, fewer autos...plus a POTUS
> that is concerned would be nice.
I'd settle for a POTUS that could stay upright on a bike.
Austin
|
| | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 16:17:02
From: Bill Sornson
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
AustinMN wrote:
> qui si parla Campagnolo wrote:
>
>> $3 + per gallon didn't do it, perhaps scarce fuel will...take people
>> out of their 10 mpg SUVs and into smaller, fewer autos...plus a POTUS
>> that is concerned would be nice.
>
> I'd settle for a POTUS that could stay upright on a bike.
Yeah, no one ever crashes on a mountain bike ride.
|
| |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 06:17:14
From: qui si parla Campagnolo
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
Earl Bollinger wrote:
> "Matt O'Toole" <mattotoole@letterboxes.org> wrote in message
> news:pan.2006.09.26.00.46.05.379570@letterboxes.org...
> > From the Bikeleague newsletter today:
> >
> > "By studying the interactions of drivers and bicyclists on Texas roads,
> > transportation engineers at The University of Texas at Austin have
> > discovered that having painted bike lanes on streets and roads helps both
> > commuters stay in safer, more central positions in their respective lanes.
> > The results are posted here:"
> >
> > http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/pdf_reports/0_5157_1.pdf
> >
> > Anyone care to engage in a little peer review?
> >
> > Matt O.
>
> My impression is it is a way for the goverment to save money and make it
> appear they are doing something positive.
> Thus they get a study supported their side, and they get off cheap with it
> only costing them paint and painting crews to go implement it.
> It doesn't really do anything, as painted bike lanes quickly become useless
> in a urban environment where all the motorists park on them
Depends, cannot park in the bike lane here in the 'republic'...anything
is better than going toe to toe with a car in a shared lane.
, forcing a
> cyclist out into the roadway anyway. Plus they are totally useless with the
> typical inattentive motorist (think using a cell phone, and or eating at the
> same time they are driving).
|
| |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 06:04:40
From: dave_bonnell@hotmail.com
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
> > http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/pdf_reports/0_5157_1.pdf
> >
> > Anyone care to engage in a little peer review?
> >
I never bothered reading the report (yet), but I have lived in cities
with and without bike lanes. As a beginning cyclist, a dedicated lane
made me more comfortable being on the road. Now that I have more
experience, I would definitely do without the lanes. Not only do I see
some serious safety issues, but bike lanes can send the wrong message
to the public....that cyclists should only be on the road if a bike
lane exists.
Generally, I prefer slightly wider lanes to a dedicated bike lane
(narrow lanes tend to encourage motorists to do particularly
stupid/unsafe manouvers).
I will qualify that, however. I live in a small city that has no bike
lanes, and the population isn't well-educated w.r.t. cyclists. This is
compounded by the fact that a large chunk of the 'cyclists' around here
use the sidewalk, travel without lights at night, and often act in
unpredictable manner. The addition of a few bike lanes would (1) help
get more cyclists on the road and (2) improve public awareness that
cyclists actually belong on the roads.
Now to read the report.... :)
|
| | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 18:44:04
From: Paul Hobson
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
dave_bonnell@hotmail.com wrote:
> Generally, I prefer slightly wider lanes to a dedicated bike lane
> (narrow lanes tend to encourage motorists to do particularly
> stupid/unsafe manouvers).
I'm with you on that. Athens, GA (I'm in ATL) has "sharrows" on several
major streets where there would normally be a bike lane. I find this to
be the sweet spot in the car/bicycle traffic dynamic.
\\paul
|
| |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 05:53:24
From: qui si parla Campagnolo
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
Earl Bollinger wrote:
> "Matt O'Toole" <mattotoole@letterboxes.org> wrote in message
> news:pan.2006.09.26.00.46.05.379570@letterboxes.org...
> > From the Bikeleague newsletter today:
> >
> > "By studying the interactions of drivers and bicyclists on Texas roads,
> > transportation engineers at The University of Texas at Austin have
> > discovered that having painted bike lanes on streets and roads helps both
> > commuters stay in safer, more central positions in their respective lanes.
> > The results are posted here:"
> >
> > http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/pdf_reports/0_5157_1.pdf
> >
> > Anyone care to engage in a little peer review?
> >
> > Matt O.
>
> My impression is it is a way for the goverment to save money and make it
> appear they are doing something positive.
> Thus they get a study supported their side, and they get off cheap with it
> only costing them paint and painting crews to go implement it.
> It doesn't really do anything, as painted bike lanes quickly become useless
> in a urban environment where all the motorists park on them, forcing a
> cyclist out into the roadway anyway. Plus they are totally useless with the
> typical inattentive motorist (think using a cell phone, and or eating at the
> same time they are driving).
$3 + per gallon didn't do it, perhaps scarce fuel will...take people
out of their 10 mpg SUVs and into smaller, fewer autos...plus a POTUS
that is concerned would be nice.
|
| | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 20:39:40
From: Mike Jacoubowsky
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
> $3 + per gallon didn't do it, perhaps scarce fuel will...take people
> out of their 10 mpg SUVs and into smaller, fewer autos...plus a POTUS
> that is concerned would be nice.
You can make a difference at the DC Bike Summit. Details here-
http://www.bikeleague.org/conferences/summit07/summit_schedule.php
--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA
"qui si parla Campagnolo" <peter@vecchios.com > wrote in message
news:1159275204.428679.179640@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Earl Bollinger wrote:
>> "Matt O'Toole" <mattotoole@letterboxes.org> wrote in message
>> news:pan.2006.09.26.00.46.05.379570@letterboxes.org...
>> > From the Bikeleague newsletter today:
>> >
>> > "By studying the interactions of drivers and bicyclists on Texas roads,
>> > transportation engineers at The University of Texas at Austin have
>> > discovered that having painted bike lanes on streets and roads helps
>> > both
>> > commuters stay in safer, more central positions in their respective
>> > lanes.
>> > The results are posted here:"
>> >
>> > http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/pdf_reports/0_5157_1.pdf
>> >
>> > Anyone care to engage in a little peer review?
>> >
>> > Matt O.
>>
>> My impression is it is a way for the goverment to save money and make it
>> appear they are doing something positive.
>> Thus they get a study supported their side, and they get off cheap with
>> it
>> only costing them paint and painting crews to go implement it.
>> It doesn't really do anything, as painted bike lanes quickly become
>> useless
>> in a urban environment where all the motorists park on them, forcing a
>> cyclist out into the roadway anyway. Plus they are totally useless with
>> the
>> typical inattentive motorist (think using a cell phone, and or eating at
>> the
>> same time they are driving).
>
> $3 + per gallon didn't do it, perhaps scarce fuel will...take people
> out of their 10 mpg SUVs and into smaller, fewer autos...plus a POTUS
> that is concerned would be nice.
>
>
|
| | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 08:17:42
From: di
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
"qui si parla Campagnolo" <peter@vecchios.com > wrote in message
news:1159275204.428679.179640@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> Earl Bollinger wrote:
>> "Matt O'Toole" <mattotoole@letterboxes.org> wrote in message
>> news:pan.2006.09.26.00.46.05.379570@letterboxes.org...
>> > From the Bikeleague newsletter today:
>
> $3 + per gallon didn't do it, perhaps scarce fuel will...take people
> out of their 10 mpg SUVs and into smaller, fewer autos...plus a POTUS
> that is concerned would be nice.
>
Again, the evil SUV is the problem!
|
| |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 07:12:11
From: Earl Bollinger
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
"Matt O'Toole" <mattotoole@letterboxes.org > wrote in message
news:pan.2006.09.26.00.46.05.379570@letterboxes.org...
> From the Bikeleague newsletter today:
>
> "By studying the interactions of drivers and bicyclists on Texas roads,
> transportation engineers at The University of Texas at Austin have
> discovered that having painted bike lanes on streets and roads helps both
> commuters stay in safer, more central positions in their respective lanes.
> The results are posted here:"
>
> http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/pdf_reports/0_5157_1.pdf
>
> Anyone care to engage in a little peer review?
>
> Matt O.
My impression is it is a way for the goverment to save money and make it
appear they are doing something positive.
Thus they get a study supported their side, and they get off cheap with it
only costing them paint and painting crews to go implement it.
It doesn't really do anything, as painted bike lanes quickly become useless
in a urban environment where all the motorists park on them, forcing a
cyclist out into the roadway anyway. Plus they are totally useless with the
typical inattentive motorist (think using a cell phone, and or eating at the
same time they are driving).
|
| | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 05:55:42
From: Mark Hickey
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
"Earl Bollinger" <earlwbollinger@comcast.net > wrote:
>"Matt O'Toole" <mattotoole@letterboxes.org> wrote in message
>news:pan.2006.09.26.00.46.05.379570@letterboxes.org...
>> From the Bikeleague newsletter today:
>>
>> "By studying the interactions of drivers and bicyclists on Texas roads,
>> transportation engineers at The University of Texas at Austin have
>> discovered that having painted bike lanes on streets and roads helps both
>> commuters stay in safer, more central positions in their respective lanes.
>> The results are posted here:"
>>
>> http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/pdf_reports/0_5157_1.pdf
>>
>> Anyone care to engage in a little peer review?
>
>My impression is it is a way for the goverment to save money and make it
>appear they are doing something positive.
>Thus they get a study supported their side, and they get off cheap with it
>only costing them paint and painting crews to go implement it.
>It doesn't really do anything, as painted bike lanes quickly become useless
>in a urban environment where all the motorists park on them, forcing a
>cyclist out into the roadway anyway. Plus they are totally useless with the
>typical inattentive motorist (think using a cell phone, and or eating at the
>same time they are driving).
You make some assumptions that don't hold water everywhere. For
example, here in the Phoenix, Arizona east valley, the specs for bike
lanes on roads calls for 6' / 2m wide lanes that are NOT for parking.
They're also on roads that aren't particularly narrow, so it's not
like the space is coming out of driving lane. In a word, it works,
and makes for a more pleasant cycling experience (I've ridden in urban
environments all over the world, and this is a LOT better).
But the thing I don't understand is the very common argument that cars
can drift across the bike lane's king anyway and run over us. Does
that get BETTER if there's no lane stripe for them to drift over, and
we're riding to the left (in the US) of the one line they use as a
boundary (instead of to the right of it)? Never figured out that
argument, never will apparently.
k Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame
|
| | | |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 21:45:26
From: Earl Bollinger
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
"k Hickey" <k@habcycles.com > wrote in message
news:ai8ih2hn3hhid6o5sfj52v0j155p87jlrq@4ax.com...
> "Earl Bollinger" <earlwbollinger@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>"Matt O'Toole" <mattotoole@letterboxes.org> wrote in message
>>news:pan.2006.09.26.00.46.05.379570@letterboxes.org...
>>> From the Bikeleague newsletter today:
>>>
>>> "By studying the interactions of drivers and bicyclists on Texas roads,
>>> transportation engineers at The University of Texas at Austin have
>>> discovered that having painted bike lanes on streets and roads helps
>>> both
>>> commuters stay in safer, more central positions in their respective
>>> lanes.
>>> The results are posted here:"
>>>
>>> http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/pdf_reports/0_5157_1.pdf
>>>
>>> Anyone care to engage in a little peer review?
>>
>>My impression is it is a way for the goverment to save money and make it
>>appear they are doing something positive.
>>Thus they get a study supported their side, and they get off cheap with it
>>only costing them paint and painting crews to go implement it.
>>It doesn't really do anything, as painted bike lanes quickly become
>>useless
>>in a urban environment where all the motorists park on them, forcing a
>>cyclist out into the roadway anyway. Plus they are totally useless with
>>the
>>typical inattentive motorist (think using a cell phone, and or eating at
>>the
>>same time they are driving).
>
> You make some assumptions that don't hold water everywhere. For
> example, here in the Phoenix, Arizona east valley, the specs for bike
> lanes on roads calls for 6' / 2m wide lanes that are NOT for parking.
> They're also on roads that aren't particularly narrow, so it's not
> like the space is coming out of driving lane. In a word, it works,
> and makes for a more pleasant cycling experience (I've ridden in urban
> environments all over the world, and this is a LOT better).
>
> But the thing I don't understand is the very common argument that cars
> can drift across the bike lane's king anyway and run over us. Does
> that get BETTER if there's no lane stripe for them to drift over, and
> we're riding to the left (in the US) of the one line they use as a
> boundary (instead of to the right of it)? Never figured out that
> argument, never will apparently.
>
> k Hickey
> Habanero Cycles
> http://www.habcycles.com
> Home of the $795 ti frame
True I make some assumptions, but
http://www.flickr.com/photos/seth_holladay/178118680/ here is a typical
problem I remember encountering before.
Also the door hazard zone is to absolutely die for too.
Maybe this one shoes something I forgot about is that all the debris
accumulates in the bike lane
http://www.humantransport.org/bicycledriving/library/carystripes/carystripes.htm
and no one ever cleans it either.
Now this bike lane is pretty fascinating in of itself too
http://www.flickr.com/photos/seth_holladay/154965167/in/set-72157594154060175/
Here you can see Austin Texas the place this study was done in has some
interesting paradoxes too http://bicycleaustin.info/roadways/shoalcreek.html
Of course in Seattle they have this nice bike lane with parking too.
http://homepage.mac.com/bicycle_driver/PhotoAlbum20.html
I remember riding in California near a University once and the entire bike
lane was filled with vehicles, and delevery trucks double parking no less
too. The motorists were definitely upset about it too. They did not want to
share the road at all.
Now this maybe better, but you still have to watch the door hazard zone
though
http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/06/27/this-is-what-bike-safety-looks-like/
but at least the bike lane is more or less clear so someone could actually
use it.
Actually I hope they do have gasoline shortages, and if you can find
gasoline, it costs over $5.00 a gallon too, if I remember in Europe gas was
going for around $5.00 a liter.
Currently when you look at all the vehicles at rush hour, all you see is
thousands of people all driving alone, one person.
Then I won't have to worry so much about the idiot drivers on the roads.
Currently they'll spend a billion dollars to rebuild a freeway interchange,
making it bigger, but they won't spend a dime on helping someone not use a
car to get to work or elsewhere. Here in Texas you can buy a "share the Road
License plate" but almost none of the $30 dollars actually goes to helping
cycling at all, the State Legislature voted to take a few dollars to give to
the budget for cycling, and put all the rest in their general fund.
So yeah I do see the bike lane painting as a lame attempt at making it look
like the government is doing something.
|
| | | | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 05:45:30
From: Mark Hickey
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
"Earl Bollinger" <earlwbollinger@comcast.net > wrote:
>"k Hickey" <k@habcycles.com> wrote
>> You make some assumptions that don't hold water everywhere. For
>> example, here in the Phoenix, Arizona east valley, the specs for bike
>> lanes on roads calls for 6' / 2m wide lanes that are NOT for parking.
>> They're also on roads that aren't particularly narrow, so it's not
>> like the space is coming out of driving lane. In a word, it works,
>> and makes for a more pleasant cycling experience (I've ridden in urban
>> environments all over the world, and this is a LOT better).
>>
>> But the thing I don't understand is the very common argument that cars
>> can drift across the bike lane's king anyway and run over us. Does
>> that get BETTER if there's no lane stripe for them to drift over, and
>> we're riding to the left (in the US) of the one line they use as a
>> boundary (instead of to the right of it)? Never figured out that
>> argument, never will apparently.
>True I make some assumptions, but
>http://www.flickr.com/photos/seth_holladay/178118680/ here is a typical
>problem I remember encountering before.
Normally when people "park", they don't have a foot on the brake
(since their feet are no longer in the car). ;-)
>Also the door hazard zone is to absolutely die for too.
>Maybe this one shoes something I forgot about is that all the debris
>accumulates in the bike lane
>http://www.humantransport.org/bicycledriving/library/carystripes/carystripes.htm
>and no one ever cleans it either.
The bike lanes in the Phoenix east valley are kept pretty clean -
doesn't mean there's never anything in them of course, but the right
few feet of whatever road surface you're going to be riding on IS
where stuff accumulates. You can overcome this by taking the full
lane all the time - but the fast moving metal "debris" in that part of
the road tends to be more dangerous than sand.
>Now this bike lane is pretty fascinating in of itself too
>http://www.flickr.com/photos/seth_holladay/154965167/in/set-72157594154060175/
It's in NYC - no one ever pays attention to kings anyway! ;-)
>Here you can see Austin Texas the place this study was done in has some
>interesting paradoxes too http://bicycleaustin.info/roadways/shoalcreek.html
Still, this has nothing to do with the bike lanes in the Phoenix east
valley. The bike lane through my neighborhood, for example. A wide
parking lane, with the wide (6') bike lane to its left. And yes, the
parking lane is wide enough that the bike lane isn't in the dreaded
door zone.
>Of course in Seattle they have this nice bike lane with parking too.
>http://homepage.mac.com/bicycle_driver/PhotoAlbum20.html
Again, nothing like the bike lanes here.
>I remember riding in California near a University once and the entire bike
>lane was filled with vehicles, and delevery trucks double parking no less
>too. The motorists were definitely upset about it too. They did not want to
>share the road at all.
>
>Now this maybe better, but you still have to watch the door hazard zone
>though
>http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/06/27/this-is-what-bike-safety-looks-like/
>but at least the bike lane is more or less clear so someone could actually
>use it.
That pales in comparison to Beijing (where I lived for a couple
years). I even saw bicycle cloverleaf intersections there!
<snip >
>
>So yeah I do see the bike lane painting as a lame attempt at making it look
>like the government is doing something.
But there are examples of "doing it right", and happily I live in a
city that does it right (actually, I ride through several cities that
"do it right"). The fact there are bad bike lanes out there doesn't
mean that there aren't good ones as well.
k Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame
|
| | | | | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 22:55:25
From: brink
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
"k Hickey" <k@habcycles.com > wrote in message
news:j1skh25irjt8rfqn5qqb5uklodv5jtf13a@4ax.com...
> "Earl Bollinger" <earlwbollinger@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>"k Hickey" <k@habcycles.com> wrote
>
>>> You make some assumptions that don't hold water everywhere. For
>>> example, here in the Phoenix, Arizona east valley, the specs for bike
>>> lanes on roads calls for 6' / 2m wide lanes that are NOT for parking.
>>> They're also on roads that aren't particularly narrow, so it's not
>>> like the space is coming out of driving lane. In a word, it works,
>>> and makes for a more pleasant cycling experience (I've ridden in urban
>>> environments all over the world, and this is a LOT better).
>>>
>>> But the thing I don't understand is the very common argument that cars
>>> can drift across the bike lane's king anyway and run over us. Does
>>> that get BETTER if there's no lane stripe for them to drift over, and
>>> we're riding to the left (in the US) of the one line they use as a
>>> boundary (instead of to the right of it)? Never figured out that
>>> argument, never will apparently.
>
>>True I make some assumptions, but
>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/seth_holladay/178118680/ here is a typical
>>problem I remember encountering before.
>
> Normally when people "park", they don't have a foot on the brake
> (since their feet are no longer in the car). ;-)
>
>>Also the door hazard zone is to absolutely die for too.
>>Maybe this one shoes something I forgot about is that all the debris
>>accumulates in the bike lane
>>http://www.humantransport.org/bicycledriving/library/carystripes/carystripes.htm
>>and no one ever cleans it either.
>
> The bike lanes in the Phoenix east valley are kept pretty clean -
> doesn't mean there's never anything in them of course, but the right
> few feet of whatever road surface you're going to be riding on IS
> where stuff accumulates. You can overcome this by taking the full
> lane all the time - but the fast moving metal "debris" in that part of
> the road tends to be more dangerous than sand.
>
>>Now this bike lane is pretty fascinating in of itself too
>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/seth_holladay/154965167/in/set-72157594154060175/
>
> It's in NYC - no one ever pays attention to kings anyway! ;-)
>
>>Here you can see Austin Texas the place this study was done in has some
>>interesting paradoxes too
>>http://bicycleaustin.info/roadways/shoalcreek.html
>
> Still, this has nothing to do with the bike lanes in the Phoenix east
> valley. The bike lane through my neighborhood, for example. A wide
> parking lane, with the wide (6') bike lane to its left. And yes, the
> parking lane is wide enough that the bike lane isn't in the dreaded
> door zone.
>
>>Of course in Seattle they have this nice bike lane with parking too.
>>http://homepage.mac.com/bicycle_driver/PhotoAlbum20.html
>
> Again, nothing like the bike lanes here.
>
>>I remember riding in California near a University once and the entire bike
>>lane was filled with vehicles, and delevery trucks double parking no less
>>too. The motorists were definitely upset about it too. They did not want
>>to
>>share the road at all.
>>
>>Now this maybe better, but you still have to watch the door hazard zone
>>though
>>http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/06/27/this-is-what-bike-safety-looks-like/
>>but at least the bike lane is more or less clear so someone could actually
>>use it.
>
> That pales in comparison to Beijing (where I lived for a couple
> years). I even saw bicycle cloverleaf intersections there!
> <snip>
>>
>>So yeah I do see the bike lane painting as a lame attempt at making it
>>look
>>like the government is doing something.
>
> But there are examples of "doing it right", and happily I live in a
> city that does it right (actually, I ride through several cities that
> "do it right"). The fact there are bad bike lanes out there doesn't
> mean that there aren't good ones as well.
Agreed. Phoenix and Southern California are similar in their traffic
patterns, parking needs, and bike lane facilities. I.e., heavy auto
traffic, not a lot of need for on-street parking, and usually pretty good
bike lanes on wide streets.
It works because parking isn't permitted in the lanes nor is it really
needed; no one wants or needs to park on the arterials where bike lanes are
found.
brink
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 28 Sep 2006 15:35:30
From: Matt O'Toole
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
On Wed, 27 Sep 2006 22:55:25 -0700, brink wrote:
> "k Hickey" <k@habcycles.com> wrote in message
> news:j1skh25irjt8rfqn5qqb5uklodv5jtf13a@4ax.com...
>> But there are examples of "doing it right", and happily I live in a
>> city that does it right (actually, I ride through several cities that
>> "do it right"). The fact there are bad bike lanes out there doesn't
>> mean that there aren't good ones as well.
> Agreed. Phoenix and Southern California are similar in their traffic
> patterns, parking needs, and bike lane facilities. I.e., heavy auto
> traffic, not a lot of need for on-street parking, and usually pretty
> good bike lanes on wide streets.
> It works because parking isn't permitted in the lanes nor is it really
> needed; no one wants or needs to park on the arterials where bike lanes
> are found.
Phoenix and southern CA are similar in their traffic patterns and parking
needs to many other places, such as northern VA (the Washington, DC
suburbs near Dulles airport). The reason Phoenix and southern CA work and
NoVA doesn't is planning and road design, or lack of it.
Take a ride through Irvine, CA, then Reston/Herndon/Dulles, VA, and you'll
see what I mean. Other than roads, these places are identical in their
types of commercial and residential development.
Matt O.
|
| | | | | |
Date: 27 Sep 2006 21:26:44
From: Earl Bollinger
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
"k Hickey" <k@habcycles.com > wrote in message
news:j1skh25irjt8rfqn5qqb5uklodv5jtf13a@4ax.com...
> "Earl Bollinger" <earlwbollinger@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>>"k Hickey" <k@habcycles.com> wrote
>
>>> You make some assumptions that don't hold water everywhere. For
>>> example, here in the Phoenix, Arizona east valley, the specs for bike
>>> lanes on roads calls for 6' / 2m wide lanes that are NOT for parking.
>>> They're also on roads that aren't particularly narrow, so it's not
>>> like the space is coming out of driving lane. In a word, it works,
>>> and makes for a more pleasant cycling experience (I've ridden in urban
>>> environments all over the world, and this is a LOT better).
>>>
>>> But the thing I don't understand is the very common argument that cars
>>> can drift across the bike lane's king anyway and run over us. Does
>>> that get BETTER if there's no lane stripe for them to drift over, and
>>> we're riding to the left (in the US) of the one line they use as a
>>> boundary (instead of to the right of it)? Never figured out that
>>> argument, never will apparently.
>
>>True I make some assumptions, but
>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/seth_holladay/178118680/ here is a typical
>>problem I remember encountering before.
>
> Normally when people "park", they don't have a foot on the brake
> (since their feet are no longer in the car). ;-)
>
>>Also the door hazard zone is to absolutely die for too.
>>Maybe this one shoes something I forgot about is that all the debris
>>accumulates in the bike lane
>>http://www.humantransport.org/bicycledriving/library/carystripes/carystripes.htm
>>and no one ever cleans it either.
>
> The bike lanes in the Phoenix east valley are kept pretty clean -
> doesn't mean there's never anything in them of course, but the right
> few feet of whatever road surface you're going to be riding on IS
> where stuff accumulates. You can overcome this by taking the full
> lane all the time - but the fast moving metal "debris" in that part of
> the road tends to be more dangerous than sand.
>
>>Now this bike lane is pretty fascinating in of itself too
>>http://www.flickr.com/photos/seth_holladay/154965167/in/set-72157594154060175/
>
> It's in NYC - no one ever pays attention to kings anyway! ;-)
>
>>Here you can see Austin Texas the place this study was done in has some
>>interesting paradoxes too
>>http://bicycleaustin.info/roadways/shoalcreek.html
>
> Still, this has nothing to do with the bike lanes in the Phoenix east
> valley. The bike lane through my neighborhood, for example. A wide
> parking lane, with the wide (6') bike lane to its left. And yes, the
> parking lane is wide enough that the bike lane isn't in the dreaded
> door zone.
>
>>Of course in Seattle they have this nice bike lane with parking too.
>>http://homepage.mac.com/bicycle_driver/PhotoAlbum20.html
>
> Again, nothing like the bike lanes here.
>
>>I remember riding in California near a University once and the entire bike
>>lane was filled with vehicles, and delevery trucks double parking no less
>>too. The motorists were definitely upset about it too. They did not want
>>to
>>share the road at all.
>>
>>Now this maybe better, but you still have to watch the door hazard zone
>>though
>>http://www.streetsblog.org/2006/06/27/this-is-what-bike-safety-looks-like/
>>but at least the bike lane is more or less clear so someone could actually
>>use it.
>
> That pales in comparison to Beijing (where I lived for a couple
> years). I even saw bicycle cloverleaf intersections there!
> <snip>
>>
>>So yeah I do see the bike lane painting as a lame attempt at making it
>>look
>>like the government is doing something.
>
> But there are examples of "doing it right", and happily I live in a
> city that does it right (actually, I ride through several cities that
> "do it right"). The fact there are bad bike lanes out there doesn't
> mean that there aren't good ones as well.
>
> k Hickey
> Habanero Cycles
> http://www.habcycles.com
> Home of the $795 ti frame
Well maybe Phoenix has some nice bike lanes and maybe not.
It still has some critics it seems:
http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/top/features/documents/02379848.htm
The door zone is still a serious hazard. Cars have those head rests making
it almost impossible to spot a driver or passenger inside about to flip open
a door on a hapless rider.
But I do commend Phoenix for their efforts, at least they are trying even if
it does lead to other hazards. They still need to do something about the
cars and the door hazards.
I know ban all motor vehcicles from say all ODD numbered roads. :-)
"Bike Use/Bike Lanes: The Phoenix Street Transportation Department has
increased the number of bicycle lanes from 75 miles in 1990 to more than 430
miles in 2003. The bike lane system is being expanded at a rate of eight to
10 miles each year.
City employees use bicycles on the job to save energy and reduce air
pollution. Instead of gas-powered vehicles, staff use bikes whenever
possible to travel within the 80-acre 23rd Avenue Waste Water Treatment
Facility. Vehicle use has been reduced there by more than 300 miles per
week.
Innovative bike racks, specially designed to carry two bikes, have been
installed on all buses throughout the region. "
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 28 Sep 2006 06:19:41
From: Mark Hickey
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
"Earl Bollinger" <earlwbollinger@comcast.net > wrote:
>"k Hickey" <k@habcycles.com> wrote in message
>> But there are examples of "doing it right", and happily I live in a
>> city that does it right (actually, I ride through several cities that
>> "do it right"). The fact there are bad bike lanes out there doesn't
>> mean that there aren't good ones as well.
>
>Well maybe Phoenix has some nice bike lanes and maybe not.
>It still has some critics it seems:
>http://www.bostonphoenix.com/boston/news_features/top/features/documents/02379848.htm
I'm at a loss as to what Boston bike lanes have to do with Phoenix
bike lanes.
>The door zone is still a serious hazard. Cars have those head rests making
>it almost impossible to spot a driver or passenger inside about to flip open
>a door on a hapless rider.
That's simply not an issue on the vast majority of bike lanes in this
area. They either have no on-street parking, or they've made the lane
wide enough to allow the cyclist to avoid doors and still remain in
the lane (yes, those are some very, very wide bike lanes).
>But I do commend Phoenix for their efforts, at least they are trying even if
>it does lead to other hazards. They still need to do something about the
>cars and the door hazards.
>I know ban all motor vehcicles from say all ODD numbered roads. :-)
>
>"Bike Use/Bike Lanes: The Phoenix Street Transportation Department has
>increased the number of bicycle lanes from 75 miles in 1990 to more than 430
>miles in 2003. The bike lane system is being expanded at a rate of eight to
>10 miles each year.
>City employees use bicycles on the job to save energy and reduce air
>pollution. Instead of gas-powered vehicles, staff use bikes whenever
>possible to travel within the 80-acre 23rd Avenue Waste Water Treatment
>Facility. Vehicle use has been reduced there by more than 300 miles per
>week.
>Innovative bike racks, specially designed to carry two bikes, have been
>installed on all buses throughout the region. "
k Hickey
Habanero Cycles
http://www.habcycles.com
Home of the $795 ti frame
|
| |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 13:24:12
From: Michael Warner
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 20:46:06 -0400, Matt O'Toole wrote:
> "By studying the interactions of drivers and bicyclists on Texas roads,
> transportation engineers at The University of Texas at Austin have
> discovered that having painted bike lanes on streets and roads helps both
> commuters stay in safer, more central positions in their respective lanes.
> The results are posted here:"
What I like about bike lane lines is that I can practise my balance by
riding along them without coming off. It probably reduces rolling
resistance and tyre wear a bit, too :-)
--
Home page: http://members.westnet.com.au/mvw
|
| |
Date: 26 Sep 2006 02:29:20
From: Wayne Pein
Subject: Re: The latest bike lane research
|
Matt O'Toole wrote:
> From the Bikeleague newsletter today:
>
> "By studying the interactions of drivers and bicyclists on Texas roads,
> transportation engineers at The University of Texas at Austin have
> discovered that having painted bike lanes on streets and roads helps both
> commuters stay in safer, more central positions in their respective lanes.
> The results are posted here:"
>
> http://www.utexas.edu/research/ctr/pdf_reports/0_5157_1.pdf
>
> Anyone care to engage in a little peer review?
>
> Matt O.
I'm currently working on a critique. The study is garbage.
Wayne
|
|
