On 4/28/2019 2:21 AM, db wrote:
On Fri, 26 Apr 2019 15:58:42 -0700, sms wrote:

https://www2.bostonglobe.com/metro/2...e-putting-red-
cups-road-show-how-drivers-often-invade-bike-lanes/fskNwwciZ5I793zvL7hUWN/
story.html

“We ... need connected protected bike lanes to accommodate everyone from
age 8 to 80 to ride stress free to school, work, and to the store,” he
said. “We also need to educate drivers that cyclists are legally
entitled to ride on the road and for drivers to share the space and be
courteous.”

Come to Denmark; we have that here. Having cycled many
years in Australia, I am still amazed when a car lets
me go through an intersection while they wait to do a
turn, wow.

It's a different mindset in the U.S. than from Denmark, unfortunately.
But it varies by community, and there can be big differences between
cities very close to each other, based on the demographics, and even
within large cities. Palo Alto and Berkeley are more like Denmark. Parts
of San Jose are like Australia, parts of San Jose are okay. Towns with
big universities like Palo Alto, Berkeley, Davis, etc. have high rates
of cycling
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._cities_with_most_bicycle_commuters.

Of non-college towns, Portland and San Francisco are the standouts of
larger cities in terms of cycling levels. San Francisco has invested a
lot in bicycle infrastructure. Even a lawsuit by a resident against
bicycle lanes temporarily allowed the city to divert money into bicycle
infrastructure not affected by the lawsuit, and in retrospect was a good
thing because it forced the city to do an environmental study that
looked at bicycle lanes as a complete package rather than to create them
piecemeal. A disconnected network of bicycle infrastructure is a big
frustration to cyclists.

It's also a bit ironic that gridlocked car traffic does have benefits
for cyclists in terms of safety. When I was working in San Francisco,
from the train station I rode along the Embarcadero separated multi-use
path, but there was also a bicycle lane on the road. I was always going
much faster than the motor vehicle traffic.

One thing the people who keep repeating "danger danger" don't understand
is that in economically vibrant areas like Portland, Seattle, San
Francisco, and Silicon Valley, there is a need to try to mitigate
congestion by multiple means. Oregon has a 0.1% employee transit tax and
Portland has an employer tax of 0.7637% om wages. Oregon is big on
progressive taxes, while California has powerful big business groups
that advocate for regressive taxes, generally sales taxes and increased
tolls.

Of the ten largest cities in the U.S. only three are in the top ten for
transit use, New York, Chicago, and Philadelphia (all cities with good,
though aging, separated grade rail).

In economically vibrant areas, because of increased density without a
commensurate increase in mass transit, traffic congestion has increased
to levels where drivers get impatient and do stupid things. There's the
beautiful bike lane with just a few pesky cyclists using it so why not
turn it into an unofficial traffic lane and squeeze by all those cars.
Vehicles abusing the painted bicycle lanes make potential cyclists
reconsider bicycling, and it's the willing, but somewhat reluctant,
cyclists that we need to convince that they won't be run over by an
errant vehicle.

A good article about this is at
https://www.betterbike.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/Making-Cycling-Irresistible-Lessons-from-Europe-Pucher-2008.pdf
which examines how the Netherlands, Denmark, and Germany have succeeded
in increasing cycling. Pay attention to table 1 on page 512.