Frank Krygowski wrote:
> Our major problem is that the Bikeway Promotional Complex (consulting
> firms, biased researchers, LAB, etc.) has been hard at work for decades.
> It's convinced the general public and most bicyclists (or wannabees)
> that Any Bike Facility Is A Good Bike Facility.

At least it Checks A Box. They've done their part, and now it's up to
the world to stop complaining.

Smith

Catrike Ryder wrote:
>> Perhaps now that USians have "bicycle paths" it is time to make
>> cycling even safer and ban them from those dangerious roads that
>> automobiles travel on.
>> And of course traveling solely on their own "paths" bicycling will
>> become a 100% safe activity.
> No, but I wouldn't agrue against banning electric scooters from
> bicycle paths.

I was on my nearby Multi-Use Path yesterday, and lots of reminders of
why I don't like to ride there. Some of it was put down by a contractor
that normally does sidewalks, and several sections barely wide enough to
pass two abreast. I happened to pass a tandem going the other way on
one of the narrower sections, and both of us barely got past each other
at slow speed without having to put a foot down and/or ride off the
concrete. A lot of the street crossings have signs for "no unauthorized
vehicles" (which I believe apply to all powered vehicles), but the guys
on the e-bikes ignore them -- I encountered one of those. And I think
the scooter riders also ignore, especially when it's not obviously clear
of what is authorized or not.

With sidewalk-quality paths (very good concrete, just narrow, and too
many seams) even a bike is often too fast for the other traffic that is
attracted, especially walkers. I'm far happier riding the major
streets, at least most of the time.

Smith

On 1/16/2024 3:06 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>> Our major problem is that the Bikeway Promotional Complex (consulting
>> firms, biased researchers, LAB, etc.) has been hard at work for decades.
>> It's convinced the general public and most bicyclists (or wannabees)
>> that Any Bike Facility Is A Good Bike Facility.
>>
>> A politician who approves any fancy or "innovative!" trap for cyclists
>> gets bonus points when he's up for election.
>>
>> And any bicyclists who disagree, or who point out the errors, are either
>> ignored or attacked by the know-nothings.
>>
>
> This seems to suggest half hearted efforts, ie bike lanes/cycleways in
> somewhere that gets significant snow/ice without thinking how to cope, is
> setting it up for failure.

Regarding snow and ice: I just had dinner with an old friend visiting
from out of state. He used to live near me. (He rides, not fast, but
during a couple recent years he's hit 10,000 miles.)

On the way back to my house, I drove on a street I've mentioned here,
one he's very familiar with, that has recently had a "road diet": four
narrow lanes reduced to two lanes, plus bike lanes painted adjacent to
each curb.

And as we turned onto the street, I briefly explained the design change.
He said "You mean there's a bike lane under all that snow?" The bike
lanes were literally invisible.

--
- Frank Krygowski

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On 1/16/2024 3:06 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Our major problem is that the Bikeway Promotional Complex (consulting
>>> firms, biased researchers, LAB, etc.) has been hard at work for decades.
>>> It's convinced the general public and most bicyclists (or wannabees)
>>> that Any Bike Facility Is A Good Bike Facility.
>>>
>>> A politician who approves any fancy or "innovative!" trap for cyclists
>>> gets bonus points when he's up for election.
>>>
>>> And any bicyclists who disagree, or who point out the errors, are either
>>> ignored or attacked by the know-nothings.
>>>
>>
>> This seems to suggest half hearted efforts, ie bike lanes/cycleways in
>> somewhere that gets significant snow/ice without thinking how to cope, is
>> setting it up for failure.
>
> Regarding snow and ice: I just had dinner with an old friend visiting
> from out of state. He used to live near me. (He rides, not fast, but
> during a couple recent years he's hit 10,000 miles.)
>
> On the way back to my house, I drove on a street I've mentioned here,
> one he's very familiar with, that has recently had a "road diet": four
> narrow lanes reduced to two lanes, plus bike lanes painted adjacent to
> each curb.
>
> And as we turned onto the street, I briefly explained the design change.
> He said "You mean there's a bike lane under all that snow?" The bike
> lanes were literally invisible.
>
If true is likely to be self perpetuating ie who is going to something like
that? In my experience utility/commuter cyclists are generally tolerant of
weather ie likely to use if maintained even in very cold conditions.

And maybe suggests maybe a less than full support from the town etc.

Roger Merriman

On 1/16/2024 10:41 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>> Regarding snow and ice: I just had dinner with an old friend visiting
>> from out of state. He used to live near me. (He rides, not fast, but
>> during a couple recent years he's hit 10,000 miles.)
>>
>> On the way back to my house, I drove on a street I've mentioned here,
>> one he's very familiar with, that has recently had a "road diet": four
>> narrow lanes reduced to two lanes, plus bike lanes painted adjacent to
>> each curb.
>>
>> And as we turned onto the street, I briefly explained the design change.
>> He said "You mean there's a bike lane under all that snow?" The bike
>> lanes were literally invisible.
>>
> If true is likely to be self perpetuating ie who is going to something like
> that? In my experience utility/commuter cyclists are generally tolerant of
> weather ie likely to use if maintained even in very cold conditions.
>
> And maybe suggests maybe a less than full support from the town etc.

Support from the town is an interesting point. As I've explained,
jurisdiction of roadways varies widely, in arcane ways.

The street in question forms part of a state route. I wonder if the
state decreed and designed the road diet and bike lanes. I wonder if the
city is responsible for the plowing and sweeping.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On 1/16/2024 10:14 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
> On 1/16/2024 10:41 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Regarding snow and ice: I just had dinner with an old
>>> friend visiting
>>> from out of state. He used to live near me. (He rides,
>>> not fast, but
>>> during a couple recent years he's hit 10,000 miles.)
>>>
>>> On the way back to my house, I drove on a street I've
>>> mentioned here,
>>> one he's very familiar with, that has recently had a
>>> "road diet": four
>>> narrow lanes reduced to two lanes, plus bike lanes
>>> painted adjacent to
>>> each curb.
>>>
>>> And as we turned onto the street, I briefly explained the
>>> design change.
>>> He said "You mean there's a bike lane under all that
>>> snow?" The bike
>>> lanes were literally invisible.
>>>
>> If true is likely to be self perpetuating ie who is going
>> to something like
>> that? In my experience utility/commuter cyclists are
>> generally tolerant of
>> weather ie likely to use if maintained even in very cold
>> conditions.
>>
>> And maybe suggests maybe a less than full support from the
>> town etc.
>
> Support from the town is an interesting point. As I've
> explained, jurisdiction of roadways varies widely, in arcane
> ways.
>
> The street in question forms part of a state route. I wonder
> if the state decreed and designed the road diet and bike
> lanes. I wonder if the city is responsible for the plowing
> and sweeping.
>

Yes. It's a complex system of hierarchy and subsidiarity.
In my area, rural townships have plows and drivers and are
responsible for county roads and lanes. Counties clear US
highways and Interstates and are recompensed by the State
and the Feds. Municipalities clear their own streets and
overlap on the highways passing through villages. There's a
lot of give and take in it.

Yesterday morning after coffee, I called a small town
streets department near here to advise them that one side of
the bridge over the Interstate entering their village was
heavily glazed such that the downhill half before the
stoplight had become an 'auto luge' sport course. I saw
three near-miss events which could have easily been serious
so I suggested some sand there would be helpful. Guy who
answered said their responsibility started after the stoplights.
--
Andrew Muzi
am@yellowjersey.org
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On 1/16/2024 10:41 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>
>>> Regarding snow and ice: I just had dinner with an old friend visiting
>>> from out of state. He used to live near me. (He rides, not fast, but
>>> during a couple recent years he's hit 10,000 miles.)
>>>
>>> On the way back to my house, I drove on a street I've mentioned here,
>>> one he's very familiar with, that has recently had a "road diet": four
>>> narrow lanes reduced to two lanes, plus bike lanes painted adjacent to
>>> each curb.
>>>
>>> And as we turned onto the street, I briefly explained the design change.
>>> He said "You mean there's a bike lane under all that snow?" The bike
>>> lanes were literally invisible.
>>>
>> If true is likely to be self perpetuating ie who is going to something like
>> that? In my experience utility/commuter cyclists are generally tolerant of
>> weather ie likely to use if maintained even in very cold conditions.
>>
>> And maybe suggests maybe a less than full support from the town etc.
>
> Support from the town is an interesting point. As I've explained,
> jurisdiction of roadways varies widely, in arcane ways.
>
> The street in question forms part of a state route. I wonder if the
> state decreed and designed the road diet and bike lanes. I wonder if the
> city is responsible for the plowing and sweeping.
>
Perhaps certainly Northern America in shocking news doesn’t seem to compare
well to various Nordic countries who do more plowing etc of bike lanes etc
so folks get around all winter.

Roger Merriman

On 1/17/2024 1:15 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> On 1/16/2024 10:41 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Regarding snow and ice: I just had dinner with an old friend visiting
>>>> from out of state. He used to live near me. (He rides, not fast, but
>>>> during a couple recent years he's hit 10,000 miles.)
>>>>
>>>> On the way back to my house, I drove on a street I've mentioned here,
>>>> one he's very familiar with, that has recently had a "road diet": four
>>>> narrow lanes reduced to two lanes, plus bike lanes painted adjacent to
>>>> each curb.
>>>>
>>>> And as we turned onto the street, I briefly explained the design change.
>>>> He said "You mean there's a bike lane under all that snow?" The bike
>>>> lanes were literally invisible.
>>>>
>>> If true is likely to be self perpetuating ie who is going to something like
>>> that? In my experience utility/commuter cyclists are generally tolerant of
>>> weather ie likely to use if maintained even in very cold conditions.
>>>
>>> And maybe suggests maybe a less than full support from the town etc.
>>
>> Support from the town is an interesting point. As I've explained,
>> jurisdiction of roadways varies widely, in arcane ways.
>>
>> The street in question forms part of a state route. I wonder if the
>> state decreed and designed the road diet and bike lanes. I wonder if the
>> city is responsible for the plowing and sweeping.
>>
> Perhaps certainly Northern America in shocking news doesn’t seem to compare
> well to various Nordic countries who do more plowing etc of bike lanes etc
> so folks get around all winter.

I'm sure we don't compare well. But there are logical reasons. If a city
government sees something like 0.5% bike mode share (which is the U.S.
typical), what percentage of their transportation budget should they
allocate to caring for bicyclists?

Even if a typical U.S. city were to devote, say, 10% of its budget to
cycling, it would be very unlikely to see even 5% bike mode share. The
low density sprawl of almost all U.S. cities and suburbs causes people
to use their cars to get around. No miraculous bike facility will cause
many Americans to routinely make 20 mile trips by bike.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:44:28 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 1/17/2024 1:15 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>> On 1/16/2024 10:41 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Regarding snow and ice: I just had dinner with an old friend visiting
>>>>> from out of state. He used to live near me. (He rides, not fast, but
>>>>> during a couple recent years he's hit 10,000 miles.)
>>>>>
>>>>> On the way back to my house, I drove on a street I've mentioned here,
>>>>> one he's very familiar with, that has recently had a "road diet": four
>>>>> narrow lanes reduced to two lanes, plus bike lanes painted adjacent to
>>>>> each curb.
>>>>>
>>>>> And as we turned onto the street, I briefly explained the design change.
>>>>> He said "You mean there's a bike lane under all that snow?" The bike
>>>>> lanes were literally invisible.
>>>>>
>>>> If true is likely to be self perpetuating ie who is going to something like
>>>> that? In my experience utility/commuter cyclists are generally tolerant of
>>>> weather ie likely to use if maintained even in very cold conditions.
>>>>
>>>> And maybe suggests maybe a less than full support from the town etc.
>>>
>>> Support from the town is an interesting point. As I've explained,
>>> jurisdiction of roadways varies widely, in arcane ways.
>>>
>>> The street in question forms part of a state route. I wonder if the
>>> state decreed and designed the road diet and bike lanes. I wonder if the
>>> city is responsible for the plowing and sweeping.
>>>
>> Perhaps certainly Northern America in shocking news doesn’t seem to compare
>> well to various Nordic countries who do more plowing etc of bike lanes etc
>> so folks get around all winter.
>
>I'm sure we don't compare well. But there are logical reasons. If a city
>government sees something like 0.5% bike mode share (which is the U.S.
>typical), what percentage of their transportation budget should they
>allocate to caring for bicyclists?
>
>Even if a typical U.S. city were to devote, say, 10% of its budget to
>cycling, it would be very unlikely to see even 5% bike mode share. The
>low density sprawl of almost all U.S. cities and suburbs causes people
>to use their cars to get around. No miraculous bike facility will cause
>many Americans to routinely make 20 mile trips by bike.

I see folks on the bike trails riding 20 miles or more pretty
regularly.

On 1/17/2024 4:19 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:44:28 -0500, Frank Krygowski
> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> On 1/17/2024 1:15 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>> On 1/16/2024 10:41 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regarding snow and ice: I just had dinner with an old friend visiting
>>>>>> from out of state. He used to live near me. (He rides, not fast, but
>>>>>> during a couple recent years he's hit 10,000 miles.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On the way back to my house, I drove on a street I've mentioned here,
>>>>>> one he's very familiar with, that has recently had a "road diet": four
>>>>>> narrow lanes reduced to two lanes, plus bike lanes painted adjacent to
>>>>>> each curb.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And as we turned onto the street, I briefly explained the design change.
>>>>>> He said "You mean there's a bike lane under all that snow?" The bike
>>>>>> lanes were literally invisible.
>>>>>>
>>>>> If true is likely to be self perpetuating ie who is going to something like
>>>>> that? In my experience utility/commuter cyclists are generally tolerant of
>>>>> weather ie likely to use if maintained even in very cold conditions.
>>>>>
>>>>> And maybe suggests maybe a less than full support from the town etc.
>>>>
>>>> Support from the town is an interesting point. As I've explained,
>>>> jurisdiction of roadways varies widely, in arcane ways.
>>>>
>>>> The street in question forms part of a state route. I wonder if the
>>>> state decreed and designed the road diet and bike lanes. I wonder if the
>>>> city is responsible for the plowing and sweeping.
>>>>
>>> Perhaps certainly Northern America in shocking news doesn’t seem to compare
>>> well to various Nordic countries who do more plowing etc of bike lanes etc
>>> so folks get around all winter.
>>
>> I'm sure we don't compare well. But there are logical reasons. If a city
>> government sees something like 0.5% bike mode share (which is the U.S.
>> typical), what percentage of their transportation budget should they
>> allocate to caring for bicyclists?
>>
>> Even if a typical U.S. city were to devote, say, 10% of its budget to
>> cycling, it would be very unlikely to see even 5% bike mode share. The
>> low density sprawl of almost all U.S. cities and suburbs causes people
>> to use their cars to get around. No miraculous bike facility will cause
>> many Americans to routinely make 20 mile trips by bike.
>
> I see folks on the bike trails riding 20 miles or more pretty
> regularly.

Can someone make this guy understand that's not part of bicycle mode
share? (That's a rhetorical question, obviously.)

The stated motivation of most segregated bike facilities is to increase
bicycle _transportation_ mode share, thereby reducing automobile mode
share. And the tricycle rider from Florida has mocked the very idea of
using bikes for transportation.

He "pretty regularly" sees someone riding back and forth on a kiddie
path, accomplishing nothing that couldn't be done on an exercycle.
Except that the ride on the kiddie path usually involves driving a motor
vehicle to and from the path, because gosh, riding near cars is so
scary! That added back-and-forth trip increases the amount of motoring
and motor vehicle mode share.

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 16:19:40 -0500, Catrike Ryder
<Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:

> I see folks on the bike trails riding 20 miles or more pretty
> regularly.

And their friends are all astounded and call them supermen.

Whenever I ride five miles to a store, the people I meet are
slack-jawed and astonished that I rode so far on a bicycle.

I found out why when I bought a "comfort" bike to heal a sprained
knee. On a bike such as *they* ride, five miles really is a long
distance.

--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at centurylink dot net
http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/

On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 20:00:30 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 1/17/2024 4:19 PM, Catrike Ryder wrote:
>> On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 15:44:28 -0500, Frank Krygowski
>> <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On 1/17/2024 1:15 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 1/16/2024 10:41 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>>>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regarding snow and ice: I just had dinner with an old friend visiting
>>>>>>> from out of state. He used to live near me. (He rides, not fast, but
>>>>>>> during a couple recent years he's hit 10,000 miles.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On the way back to my house, I drove on a street I've mentioned here,
>>>>>>> one he's very familiar with, that has recently had a "road diet": four
>>>>>>> narrow lanes reduced to two lanes, plus bike lanes painted adjacent to
>>>>>>> each curb.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And as we turned onto the street, I briefly explained the design change.
>>>>>>> He said "You mean there's a bike lane under all that snow?" The bike
>>>>>>> lanes were literally invisible.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> If true is likely to be self perpetuating ie who is going to something like
>>>>>> that? In my experience utility/commuter cyclists are generally tolerant of
>>>>>> weather ie likely to use if maintained even in very cold conditions.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And maybe suggests maybe a less than full support from the town etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> Support from the town is an interesting point. As I've explained,
>>>>> jurisdiction of roadways varies widely, in arcane ways.
>>>>>
>>>>> The street in question forms part of a state route. I wonder if the
>>>>> state decreed and designed the road diet and bike lanes. I wonder if the
>>>>> city is responsible for the plowing and sweeping.
>>>>>
>>>> Perhaps certainly Northern America in shocking news doesn’t seem to compare
>>>> well to various Nordic countries who do more plowing etc of bike lanes etc
>>>> so folks get around all winter.
>>>
>>> I'm sure we don't compare well. But there are logical reasons. If a city
>>> government sees something like 0.5% bike mode share (which is the U.S.
>>> typical), what percentage of their transportation budget should they
>>> allocate to caring for bicyclists?
>>>
>>> Even if a typical U.S. city were to devote, say, 10% of its budget to
>>> cycling, it would be very unlikely to see even 5% bike mode share. The
>>> low density sprawl of almost all U.S. cities and suburbs causes people
>>> to use their cars to get around. No miraculous bike facility will cause
>>> many Americans to routinely make 20 mile trips by bike.
>>
>> I see folks on the bike trails riding 20 miles or more pretty
>> regularly.
>
>Can someone make this guy understand that's not part of bicycle mode
>share? (That's a rhetorical question, obviously.)
>
>The stated motivation of most segregated bike facilities is to increase
>bicycle _transportation_ mode share, thereby reducing automobile mode
>share.

Actually, what I hear stated by bike path proponents is a desire to
get people off their couches.

>And the tricycle rider from Florida has mocked the very idea of
>using bikes for transportation.

I use my bike for transportation regularly.

What I mock is the ridiculous notion that a bike ride is only valid if
it's transportation to a job or the grocery store.

>He "pretty regularly" sees someone riding back and forth on a kiddie
>path, accomplishing nothing that couldn't be done on an exercycle.

<LOL> Only a fool would equate a real outdoor bike ride with an
exercize bike session, although I understand that some people prefer
the latter for their own reasons.

>Except that the ride on the kiddie path usually involves driving a motor
>vehicle to and from the path, because gosh, riding near cars is so
>scary! That added back-and-forth trip increases the amount of motoring
>and motor vehicle mode share.

Perhaps..

Why is that a problem for you?

As for me, I have no problem with people driving their cars and trucks
to their job or the grocery store.

Am Wed, 17 Jan 2024 22:50:19 -0500 schrieb Joy Beeson
<jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid>:

>On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 16:19:40 -0500, Catrike Ryder
><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>
>> I see folks on the bike trails riding 20 miles or more pretty
>> regularly.
>
>And their friends are all astounded and call them supermen.
>
>Whenever I ride five miles to a store, the people I meet are
>slack-jawed and astonished that I rode so far on a bicycle.
>
>I found out why when I bought a "comfort" bike to heal a sprained
>knee. On a bike such as *they* ride, five miles really is a long
>distance.

I even rode to work - 25 km / 150 m altitude gain roundtrip using this
bike
<https://www.mystrobl.de/Plone/radfahren/bild12.jpeg> for a few years.

That bike - sparta cornwall, built in the Netherlands - had a reasonably
good geometry compared to what is sold as "Dutch type" comfort trash
everywhere, nowadays. But even Gazelle have mostly switched to building
and advertizing E-Bikes, over there.

<http://archive.today/rsZ4I>
<https://archive.is/VnGRn>

Many people today who said to themselves, "Cycling is good for my
health," and believe to have taken up cycling actually are riding a
motorized bike now, with a "comfortable" geometry that is even worse
than that of the Dutch bike of lore. They don't feel the bad geometry
because they are not propelling a bike, but performing ritual gestures
with their legs to control how much power a motor with the power of a
Tour de France rider delivers.

You can recognize these people from a distance by their riding style:
dressed warmly even in summer, riding raised even higher up than usual
on classic Dutch bikes and with cadences that clearly do not match the
required power.

Personally, I switched back to a series of bicycles with essentially a
race bike geometry, after that episode, both for commuting and for
getting around during our vacations. But I still own such a cheap,
trashy "Dutch style" bike, which I bought about ten years ago, for
reasons not relevant here.

<https://www.mystrobl.de/ws/pic/fahrrad/hollandrad/prophete-hollandrad.jpg>

It is as bad as it looks from a performane point of view, but it is good
enough for shopping, because I only ride it for short distances, on flat
ground and somewhat slowly, just like people in the Netherlands do,
where that concept was invented.

--
Thank you for observing all safety precautions

On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 22:50:19 -0500, Joy Beeson
<jbeeson@invalid.net.invalid> wrote:

>On Wed, 17 Jan 2024 16:19:40 -0500, Catrike Ryder
><Soloman@old.bikers.org> wrote:
>
>> I see folks on the bike trails riding 20 miles or more pretty
>> regularly.
>
>And their friends are all astounded and call them supermen.

....or perhaps superwomen.

>Whenever I ride five miles to a store, the people I meet are
>slack-jawed and astonished that I rode so far on a bicycle.

A trip to my closest grocery is just short of a mile, but if I only
could ride the bike, I'd have to go nearly every day, so we drive the
car or truck, and we usually only need a trip every six or seven days,
and often to a grocery a bit further away.

>I found out why when I bought a "comfort" bike to heal a sprained
>knee. On a bike such as *they* ride, five miles really is a long
>distance.

Different spokes for different folks. I ride a Catrike that allows me
to stretch out. I was never comfortable on bikes that required me to
scrunch up.

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On 1/17/2024 1:15 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>> On 1/16/2024 10:41 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>>> Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Regarding snow and ice: I just had dinner with an old friend visiting
>>>>> from out of state. He used to live near me. (He rides, not fast, but
>>>>> during a couple recent years he's hit 10,000 miles.)
>>>>>
>>>>> On the way back to my house, I drove on a street I've mentioned here,
>>>>> one he's very familiar with, that has recently had a "road diet": four
>>>>> narrow lanes reduced to two lanes, plus bike lanes painted adjacent to
>>>>> each curb.
>>>>>
>>>>> And as we turned onto the street, I briefly explained the design change.
>>>>> He said "You mean there's a bike lane under all that snow?" The bike
>>>>> lanes were literally invisible.
>>>>>
>>>> If true is likely to be self perpetuating ie who is going to something like
>>>> that? In my experience utility/commuter cyclists are generally tolerant of
>>>> weather ie likely to use if maintained even in very cold conditions.
>>>>
>>>> And maybe suggests maybe a less than full support from the town etc.
>>>
>>> Support from the town is an interesting point. As I've explained,
>>> jurisdiction of roadways varies widely, in arcane ways.
>>>
>>> The street in question forms part of a state route. I wonder if the
>>> state decreed and designed the road diet and bike lanes. I wonder if the
>>> city is responsible for the plowing and sweeping.
>>>
>> Perhaps certainly Northern America in shocking news doesn’t seem to compare
>> well to various Nordic countries who do more plowing etc of bike lanes etc
>> so folks get around all winter.
>
> I'm sure we don't compare well. But there are logical reasons. If a city
> government sees something like 0.5% bike mode share (which is the U.S.
> typical), what percentage of their transportation budget should they
> allocate to caring for bicyclists?
>
> Even if a typical U.S. city were to devote, say, 10% of its budget to
> cycling, it would be very unlikely to see even 5% bike mode share. The
> low density sprawl of almost all U.S. cities and suburbs causes people
> to use their cars to get around. No miraculous bike facility will cause
> many Americans to routinely make 20 mile trips by bike.
>
Cleaning cycle lanes be that or debris or snow is hardly likely to be
expensive and frankly bare minimum really.

I suspect that few places have folks routinely doing 20 mile trips. London
SW commuters into the city being outlier.

Roger Merriman

On 1/16/2024 7:41 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:

<snip>

> If true is likely to be self perpetuating ie who is going to something like
> that? In my experience utility/commuter cyclists are generally tolerant of
> weather ie likely to use if maintained even in very cold conditions.
>
> And maybe suggests maybe a less than full support from the town etc.

Precisely. If a municipality doesn't have public works department that
is diligent about street clearing and street sweeping, including the
bike lanes, then this situation can occur.

Those opposed to bicycle infrastructure will miss no opportunity to
pounce on anecdotes of any outlier incident of something like snow or
leaves being present in a bike lane to proclaim "look at that snow (or
leaves) bicycle infrastructure is a failure."

But for those of us that look at actual data to evaluate the
effectiveness of things, including bicycle infrastructure, the reality
is clear.

Frank can begin his education on bicycle infrastructure by reading
<https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5105030/> and
<https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1476-069X-8-47>.
These are data-driven studies, not anecdotes. Yet it is certain that he
will have some bizarre excuse as to why his anecdotes are valid but
peer-reviewed studies are not.

--
“If you are not an expert on a subject, then your opinions about it
really do matter less than the opinions of experts. It's not
indoctrination nor elitism. It's just that you don't know as much as
they do about the subject.”—Tin Foil Awards

On 1/18/2024 10:41 AM, sms wrote:
> On 1/16/2024 7:41 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> If true is likely to be self perpetuating ie who is going to something
>> like
>> that? In my experience utility/commuter cyclists are generally
>> tolerant of
>> weather ie likely to use if maintained even in very cold conditions.
>>
>> And maybe suggests maybe a less than full support from the town etc.
>
> Precisely. If a municipality doesn't have public works department that
> is diligent about street clearing and street sweeping, including the
> bike lanes, then this situation can occur.
>
> Those opposed to bicycle infrastructure will miss no opportunity to
> pounce on anecdotes of any outlier incident of something like snow or
> leaves being present in a bike lane to proclaim "look at that snow (or
> leaves) bicycle infrastructure is a failure."
>
> But for those of us that look at actual data to evaluate the
> effectiveness of things, including bicycle infrastructure, the reality
> is clear.
>
> Frank can begin his education on bicycle infrastructure by reading
> <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5105030/> and
> <https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1476-069X-8-47>.

:-) As if I wouldn't have already read a 2009 article by Techke, Harris
et. al. and a 2016 article by Pucher and Buehler! Did Mr. Scharf (AKA
"sms") really just discover those?

Pucher, Techke, Harris et. al. are not bad people, and they are correct
on some points; but they (especially Pucher) have spent the past 20+
years comparing the U.S. with selected chunks of Northern Europe and
pretending the only difference is their bike lanes. Despite decades of
promising that fancier bike infrastructure would transform U.S.
transportation, and despite countless U.S. cities trying to follow their
recommendations, the U.S. bike mode share is still stuck at ~0.5%. When
will these miracles come to pass?

> These are data-driven studies, not anecdotes.

"Data driven studies" vary widely in quality. How about Lusk's "data
driven" study comparing streets in Montreal? The study that claimed the
bike lanes were the main difference making some streets safer - but
others showed those labeled "safer" far less traffic volume and far
fewer intersections and driveways, such that the streets were in no way
comparable?

Why not link to the data driven IIHS study that found "protected"
bikeways having over ten times as many crashes as ordinary roads, unless
the "protected" bikeways were on bridges, where no intersections are
possible?

How about the recent FHWA study that claimed a 52% reduction in crashes
for bike facilities - but failed to highlight that they counted crashes
only _between_ intersections, and ignored increased crashes at
intersections, where most crashes actually happen, and where bike
facilities add complications?

There is a research sub-culture that begins with the axiom that "Any
Bike Facility Is A Good Bike Facility" and does all it can, accurate or
not, to promote that idea. The promise is always more people on bikes,
fewer people in cars.

Yet after decades of efforts by people who believe them and build what
they ask, U.S. bike mode share remains at about 0.5%. THAT is reality!

--
- Frank Krygowski

On Thu, 18 Jan 2024 11:29:41 -0500, Frank Krygowski
<frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

>On 1/18/2024 10:41 AM, sms wrote:
>> On 1/16/2024 7:41 PM, Roger Merriman wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> If true is likely to be self perpetuating ie who is going to something
>>> like
>>> that? In my experience utility/commuter cyclists are generally
>>> tolerant of
>>> weather ie likely to use if maintained even in very cold conditions.
>>>
>>> And maybe suggests maybe a less than full support from the town etc.
>>
>> Precisely. If a municipality doesn't have public works department that
>> is diligent about street clearing and street sweeping, including the
>> bike lanes, then this situation can occur.
>>
>> Those opposed to bicycle infrastructure will miss no opportunity to
>> pounce on anecdotes of any outlier incident of something like snow or
>> leaves being present in a bike lane to proclaim "look at that snow (or
>> leaves) bicycle infrastructure is a failure."
>>
>> But for those of us that look at actual data to evaluate the
>> effectiveness of things, including bicycle infrastructure, the reality
>> is clear.
>>
>> Frank can begin his education on bicycle infrastructure by reading
>> <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5105030/> and
>> <https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1476-069X-8-47>.
>
>:-) As if I wouldn't have already read a 2009 article by Techke, Harris
>et. al. and a 2016 article by Pucher and Buehler! Did Mr. Scharf (AKA
>"sms") really just discover those?
>
>Pucher, Techke, Harris et. al. are not bad people, and they are correct
>on some points; but they (especially Pucher) have spent the past 20+
>years comparing the U.S. with selected chunks of Northern Europe and
>pretending the only difference is their bike lanes. Despite decades of
>promising that fancier bike infrastructure would transform U.S.
>transportation, and despite countless U.S. cities trying to follow their
>recommendations, the U.S. bike mode share is still stuck at ~0.5%. When
>will these miracles come to pass?
>
>> These are data-driven studies, not anecdotes.
>
>"Data driven studies" vary widely in quality. How about Lusk's "data
>driven" study comparing streets in Montreal? The study that claimed the
>bike lanes were the main difference making some streets safer - but
>others showed those labeled "safer" far less traffic volume and far
>fewer intersections and driveways, such that the streets were in no way
>comparable?
>
>Why not link to the data driven IIHS study that found "protected"
>bikeways having over ten times as many crashes as ordinary roads, unless
>the "protected" bikeways were on bridges, where no intersections are
>possible?
>
>How about the recent FHWA study that claimed a 52% reduction in crashes
>for bike facilities - but failed to highlight that they counted crashes
>only _between_ intersections, and ignored increased crashes at
>intersections, where most crashes actually happen, and where bike
>facilities add complications?
>
>There is a research sub-culture that begins with the axiom that "Any
>Bike Facility Is A Good Bike Facility" and does all it can, accurate or
>not, to promote that idea. The promise is always more people on bikes,
>fewer people in cars.
>
>Yet after decades of efforts by people who believe them and build what
>they ask, U.S. bike mode share remains at about 0.5%. THAT is reality!

Not that any significant people carehow many people ride to their jobs
or to the library. The fact is that more and more people are riding
bikes every year.

https://www.statista.com/statistics/191204/participants-in-bicycling-in-the-us-since-2006/

On Tue Jan 9 16:02:52 2024 Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Jan 2024 11:10:42 -0800 (PST), Tom Kunich
> <cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >Here we have a road that crosses the hills into the Livermore Valley. It's about a 500 foot single climb but it is preceded by a couple of climbs that are steeper and make the round trip about 2,400 feet, It is right next to a freeway that has slow traffic for about 2 miles and then 65 mph limit on which everyone drives 75. So of course everyone turns off of the high speed road and drives 75 on the two lane bidirectional road. At least we have a good bike lane when people decide to honor it. But being winter they are more xconcerned about seeing their brightly marked road than obeying traffic laws.
>
> The Peoples Republic of California has enacted their solution to your
> problem. Just lower the traffic limits. If traffic engineers can't
> seem to reduce the traffic fatality rate during a pandemic, then the
> politicians will implement their solution state wide. I'm not sure
> how to calculate the increase in traffic congestion at or near the
> speed limit for a 5 mph drop in what looks like every speed limit sign
> in California. Also, any semblance to revenue enhancement from
> additional speeding tickets is strictly coincidental.
>
> "California?s New Speed Limit Law"
> <https://walkbikecupertino.org/2023/12/californias-new-speed-limit-law-ab43/>
>
> The next step will surely be a self-driving bicycle. Notice that it
> can drive itself without a driver. Therefore, there can't be any
> traffic fatalities when not riding one of these. Also notice that
> it's a pedal powered bicycle, not an eBike.
>
> "Self-driving bicycle developed by huawei engineers can operate
> unmanned"
> <https://www.designboom.com/technology/self-driving-bicycle-huawei-engineers-operate-unmanned-06-14-2021/>
>
> Soon, everyone in RBT will be riding self-driving bicycles.
>
>
> --
> Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
> PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
> Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
> Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

Aren't we all impressed that someone that doesn't ride bikes has the answer to everyone's bicycle questions. It is just like having your own idiot traffic engineer.