Author Topic: Cycling infrastructure built to encourage commuting by bike?? Crazy talk!!  (Read 8507 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

shovelhd

  • Guest
But they'd keep the trail to the side of it somehow.

That sounds exciting. A 10,000 ton train passing by you at 150mph.

RUOkie

  • Guest
That sounds exciting. A 10,000 ton train passing by you at 150mph.
drafting opportunity  :trainer:

Offline WCroadie

  • Forum Friend
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 9,344
  • Location: Not Philly, PA
    • Strava Profile
Mrs Obama was in town yesterday talking to Mayor Nutter about bicycle infrastructure, still don't think it will get done.

Here is the new MUP near me, took these on the way home yesterday and there were several people using it as I stopped


WC is the Debil.

EDR

  • Guest
To many people here think its our god given right to drive gas guzzling cars and have cheap gas.  In the summer of 2008 I was still living in SoCal and gas was over 5 buck a gallon.  Suddenly the trains were full. People were riding to the train stations then riding to work. The waiting list for a Prius suddenly went from 'take your pick' to 3-5 months. Then gas prices went down and the trains were half full again.

You want people to start commuting by bike?  Then force our politicians to stop using out military as a security force for Exxon/Mobil and let them fend for themselves. They can roll the cost of being their own protector into the cost of fuel and suddenly we will have 7 dollar a gallon gas.  We then can have a foreign policy that doesn't include the middle east and maybe this country will start to lead the world in alternative  fuel development. 
« Last Edit: July 19, 2012, 09:08:43 AM by EDR »

Offline WCroadie

  • Forum Friend
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 9,344
  • Location: Not Philly, PA
    • Strava Profile
BUT, Exxon/Mobile I am sure gives kickbacks or donations to the politicians so that will never happen.  I Want to move to Europe, or my own island in the Caribbean
WC is the Debil.

dragonfly

  • Guest
Part of the issue here is how cities have been developed.


David Byrne does a good job of discussing this in his book "Bicycle Diaries"


The great cycling cities I have seen in Europe are developed at all levels of infrastructure to be friendly to the pedestrian and non-motorized traffic.  Cities here may have started out that way, but have spread outward in a pattern that makes it very difficult if not impossible to get from point A to point B across the city on just surface roads. I see that in the Newark area to some degree. There are several arterial roads that bisect the area and a road that at one time went through is now segmented with dead ends. I have a few choke points I have to get across to get to and from campus. Both of those main highways (Parkway and Rt 280) have very few places to get across, and those cross points are larger city roads with two lanes of traffic in each direction, street side parking, and no place to buffer between you and traffic.  Once I do get across the highways, I have to zig zag all over the place to get anywhere if I want to avoid the high traffic/low safety roads.  To get around this with bike paths would involve a major reworking of all the infrastructure - car and bike.  It isn't just that the drivers aren't bike friendly, it is the way the cities have been built out.


I would love to see street side parking turned into bike lanes, however, in the neighborhoods I ride through, lots of residences don't actually have driveways. They only place for those people to park is street-side. I don't think we should punish the people living in those places for having cars - many of them probably need those cars to get to work because highways have cut off their neighborhoods from surface road access to the business districts.


I'm not saying things shouldn't be tried and I am not saying there are ways to improve the bikability of places that don't involve major construction. I just think it in many places it is a bigger project than people may realize in particular in the cities that have been developed in particularly car-centric ways. Build it and they will come, but to build it, someone has to front a hefty price tag it will take, and seeing so few people out on bikes isn't likely to breed confidence in the people holding the purse strings. 

EDR

  • Guest
See I don't think the issue is "how do we get bikes and cars to co-exist" as much as "how do we get people to change their commuting behavior"  The only way to get that to happen is to make gas cost what gas costs.  That would include the the security forces cost something which right now we are paying with our income tax and the defense budget.  I'd rather see Shell and Exxon paying that cost themselves and not have we, the American Tax Payer, subsidize this for them.   If that cost was put directly on to Exxon et al the cost of gas would double, but we wouldn't be a military presence in the middle east.  Thus lowering our defense spending, and keeping us out of stupid wars in places that we don't belong. 


Trust me you start charging 5 bucks or more a gallon for gas and people will start using mass transit. This would remove a lot of cars from the road and making it safer for people to commute on their bikes. 

Offline wens

  • Global Moderator
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 1,783
  • Location: Ohio
See I don't think the issue is "how do we get bikes and cars to co-exist" as much as "how do we get people to change their commuting behavior"  The only way to get that to happen is to make gas cost what gas costs.  That would include the the security forces cost something which right now we are paying with our income tax and the defense budget.  I'd rather see Shell and Exxon paying that cost themselves and not have we, the American Tax Payer, subsidize this for them.   If that cost was put directly on to Exxon et al the cost of gas would double, but we wouldn't be a military presence in the middle east.  Thus lowering our defense spending, and keeping us out of stupid wars in places that we don't belong. 


Trust me you start charging 5 bucks or more a gallon for gas and people will start using mass transit. This would remove a lot of cars from the road and making it safer for people to commute on their bikes.

I think it would take more than five bucks a gallon, there are places where there's no effective mass transit. It'll take years to get anything other than buses in those place, and even then those cost money. I don't think it'll change overnight regardless of what happens, I think ten to fifteen years minimum.
Do you think we're gonna make it? / I don't know unless we try / you could sit here scared to move / or we could take them by surprise

Offline WCroadie

  • Forum Friend
  • *
  • Join Date: Jan 2011
  • Posts: 9,344
  • Location: Not Philly, PA
    • Strava Profile
I think it would take more than five bucks a gallon, there are places where there's no effective mass transit. It'll take years to get anything other than buses in those place, and even then those cost money. I don't think it'll change overnight regardless of what happens, I think ten to fifteen years minimum.
Like where I live. There is no train station in WC, it's like 7 miles away and it doesn't go anywhere near where I work.  I can get a bus 3 miles from my house and take it for over an hour, to change to another bus and take near my work, almost a 2hr commute by bus, each way.  Or I could ride my bike to the train station and take a train then a bus but that trip would be even longer and riding to the train station in winter would be deadly.  I would still have to walk to the bus stop 3 miles away, in the winter that too would be deadly, and some of the roads I'd have to walk on are 2 lane country roads with no shoulder or sidewalk.

Public transportation here isn't adequate enough and lots of area's are too built up already to put in such an infrastructure.  Raising gas prices to insane amount will crush a lot of people.
WC is the Debil.

Offline globecanvas

  • Ninny
  • 2,000 and up!
  • **
  • Join Date: Mar 2012
  • Posts: 2,404
  • Location: The Gunks
    • Strava Profile
Raising gas prices to a sane amount will crush a lot of people.

I agree with almost everything you wrote, except I would change one word as above.

shovelhd

  • Guest
See I don't think the issue is "how do we get bikes and cars to co-exist" as much as "how do we get people to change their commuting behavior"  The only way to get that to happen is to make gas cost what gas costs.  That would include the the security forces cost something which right now we are paying with our income tax and the defense budget.  I'd rather see Shell and Exxon paying that cost themselves and not have we, the American Tax Payer, subsidize this for them.   If that cost was put directly on to Exxon et al the cost of gas would double, but we wouldn't be a military presence in the middle east.  Thus lowering our defense spending, and keeping us out of stupid wars in places that we don't belong. 


Trust me you start charging 5 bucks or more a gallon for gas and people will start using mass transit. This would remove a lot of cars from the road and making it safer for people to commute on their bikes.

No offense, but that's a classic liberal point of view. I know what's best for you, we all need to do it my way, we'll save a ton of money and make the evil profit making corporations pay for it. It's never that simple.

Doubling gas prices will crush this fragile economy. The low and middle income folks with a long commute who feel fortunate to have a job, basically your core voting block, are going to be hurting significantly more than they are now. What about the people that have no mass transit option?

The time to build out a public transit infrastructure is in good economic times. The federal highway system was built in the post-WWII era of prosperity. It won't take another war, but it will take more than a Clinton-era Internet bubble economy or cuts in the evil defense budget to do it.

EDR

  • Guest
So you think making Exxon pay for their own security forces is a liberal idea?  Subsidizing a multi billion dollar corp with our armed forces is a conservative idea?  WTF are talking about.  Forcing Exxon to take care of their own defense and if they decide to roll that cost into the price of gas then the market would decide if driving an F350 or a Prius is a better option.  Yep that's left wing crazy talk.

Doing what I just suggested is about as libertarian as you can get. I must have missed the part where Ron Paul became the standard barer for the left. 
« Last Edit: July 19, 2012, 04:58:07 PM by EDR »

Offline globecanvas

  • Ninny
  • 2,000 and up!
  • **
  • Join Date: Mar 2012
  • Posts: 2,404
  • Location: The Gunks
    • Strava Profile
Libertarianism is where the far left (don't subsidize corporations with my taxes, don't tell me I can't smoke weed) meets the far right (don't subsidize lazy people with my taxes, don't tell me I can't carry a gun).  The political spectrum is more like a political color wheel.

shovelhd

  • Guest
Exactly.

EDR

  • Guest
Exactly.


You are so far right that you think Libertarians are leftist?  Yikes!