On 2017-04-20 07:12, wrote:
On Wednesday, April 19, 2017 at 12:48:42 PM UTC-7, Joerg wrote:
On 2017-04-19 08:41, wrote:

[...]


Enforcing speed limits would do far more to reduce fatalities
than putting HUGE amounts of money into bicycle paths which would
no doubt parallel freeways making cyclists gag on carbon
monoxide.


Folsom did it right, bike paths are totally segregated, no cars at
all. Like this:

http://www.foothill.com/wordpress/wp...keTrail_01.jpg



--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

But there simply isn't any room for completely separate facilities
for both cars and bikes in the same towns. Especially the older ones
that were originally designed only for horse and buggy. Folsom could
do it because they were making entirely new neighborhoods.


All the way from my village to Folsom there clearly is enough room.
Inside Folsom they even created bike paths in old sections of town where
I thought that was impossible, such as the section Rainbow Bridge to
Leidesdorff Street which lets you avoid cycling in the crawling traffic
on Riley Street. A long bike path from East Natoma Street to Blue Ravine
also goes through a neighborhood that was built well before they decided
to become a bike-friendly city.

I believe the key advantage they achieved was the buy-in of the resident
population. In hindsight that was no sacrifice at all for those
resident, it increased the value of their homes. In real estate listings
one sometimes reads "bike path connection".

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/