On Thursday, October 3, 2019 at 8:00:32 AM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 2019-10-01 16:46, Tom Kunich wrote:
On Tuesday, October 1, 2019 at 4:39:22 PM UTC-7, jbeattie wrote:
This was forwarded to me by one of my bike commuter cohorts:




-- Jay Beattie.

Pretty much the entire commuter bicycle movement is built around John
as a starting point. ...


I disagree with many of the things John Forester advocates. In this
interview he clearly dodged a key point:

Quote, "[Interviewer] ... I'm not a transportation policy person but I
would guess that there's data now to demonstrate that on avenues where
protected infrastructure has gone in that incidents with serious injury
or death have gone down since that infrastructure go put in. So I feel
like I see evidence in the US that in some places at least where it's
practical, that protected infrastructure can make a difference and
vastly increase the number of people who feel safer riding a bike.

JF: Your statement is full of false assumptions." ... and then he veered
off the topic above.

Which "false assumptions"? The interviewer was correct, the vast
majority of cyclists prefers cycling infrastructure.

On other things I agree with John Forester. For example, I always leave
bike lanes when I want to do a left turn, lining up with cars in the
turn lane. And sometimes getting grumpy when the traffic engineers were
too incompetent to make the loop for the light detect my bike.


... Though all of these bike lanes and bike trails ideas COME FROM BICYCLISTS.

But they don't. Most infrastructure design is the product of national planning organizations like NACTO or state DOTs or local planning departments. Some of it is from private enterprise like Alta Planning + Design. Many of these grand designs would never come from cyclists except perhaps those with suicidal ideations.


Exactly. And they know.

A lot of the planners don't know and you end up with facilities that are a nightmare.



... And I have to admit, after battling h4qvy
traffic getting on a nice quiet bike path has a remarkable calming
effect.


I know only one cyclist who doesn't care much whether he rides in the
lane or on a bike path, though even he is mostly found on long
segregated bike paths.

All others prefer, like myself, good quality bike paths. Even the
serious commuters do who easily spend 50mi/day on their bikes. What
many do is a split commute. They truck their bikes to parking lots near
the American River Bike Path an then continue the commute by bicycle. In
the evening all in reverse.

Linear parks are fine if you want to avoid traffic, but then again, you get hung up behind walkers with dog packs, homeless, etc., etc. Many times the added infrastructure is inferior to the prior road arrangement, which around here, may have included a bike lane or wide shoulder, e.g. https://c1.staticflickr.com/3/2440/3...340bfe29_c.jpg

The segregated MUP is now bisected by intersecting roads every 25-50 yards. The prior bike lane allowed you to ride without interruption down the main road. Danger is now increased because cyclists hit the intersections at the same time as entering traffic. It's the functional equivalent of putting bikes on sidewalks. Gee, thanks for that improvement. Now I get to stop every 25 yards.

There are many illustrations of foolish choices around here -- and some good choices, which are typically just wide shoulders and/or bike lanes.

-- Jay Beattie.