Downtown 2010 Plan Idea #4 - Broad Street « Columbus Underground Messageboard

Columbus Underground Messageboard » General Columbus Discussion » Development

Downtown 2010 Plan Idea #4 - Broad Street

[80 posts] [22 contributors]

Topic Rating:

(Total Ratings: )
Rate this topic:

Started 2 years ago by Walker
Latest reply from Pickerington_Kyle

Tags:

« Previous 123 4 Next »

lifeontwowheels
Highland West
Login to Send PM

alove wrote >>
Blah blah blah
We want more transit options, right? What's wrong with expert cyclists riding on the road with a choice of riding on a SAFE, AWAY FROM CARS path?
I'm tired of hearing about the dangers of creating bike paths. We want our community to become more active, right? I doubt the way to get people to increase their bicycle use is to force them to ride down streets like High and Broad. I am scared shitless whenever I do so and I ride in the sidewalk when appropriate, and I am not ashamed either.
We need to be taking cues from Europe.

No, we need to look at the strengths and weaknesses of our transportation infrastructure and grid, our culture and our citizens. Trying to shoehorn in an idea based on how sexy and cool it looks, while ignoring available data, is reckless and completely ignorant.

Now I would agree with you: forcing cyclists onto roads like Broad and High is not a good thing and won't do much to encourage greater numbers. Which is exactly what projects like this are doing. They are ignoring the strengths of our current transportation infrastructure: a well connected gridded system with alternatives to those roads.

A few simple changes, some marked signage (something as simple as changing the street signs from green to purple like Berkley did) and you can have a safe, well connected and non-threatening bike network at a much lower cost than uber-sexy Euro Broad St. This is a network that can easily tie into existing off road bike trails as well as projects like High Street Share the Road. It exists, it's built...we just need to promote and utilize it.

Alove, I'm curious: have you actually ridden in a city with an extensive and well developed separated bike path network? I used to ride like you when I first started riding again. To get to class from my first apartment I would cut through an alley, ride the sidewalk along High for a few blocks to a cross walk and get over to the side roads through OSU. I wasn't confident to ride the roadways. You know what I did? I started to get involved with the cycling community. I met people with more experience than me, learned better alternatives to these roads and new route options, sought education from informal group rides and formal classes. I have no issue using Front for part of a commute or jogging down Summit if my route takes me that way.

Posted 2 years ago #
lifeontwowheels
Highland West
Login to Send PM

For the visual learners:

Posted 2 years ago #
Columbusite
Minneapolis
Login to Send PM

No one is forcing anyone on major streets like High and Broad. If you're "scared shitless" riding there it's very likely because you're not driving your bike properly. I suggest sticking to riding properly on side streets (this is how I eased myself from sidewalk cycling to proper vehicular cycling) and walking your bike where you're uncomfortable if you don't want to use the infrastructure already there for you on major urban roads. You can always look into buying a scooter/moped/motorcycle if you just can't get over the fear of riding in traffic. I rode up High St from King today to the Cup O Joe in Clintonville and had no reason to feel scared. Up in Cville there was a van behind me for a couple of blocks, but so what? There's another lane if they don't want to be behind me and they didn't honk or otherwise act aggressively towards me.

Encouraging an increase in the number of cyclists should simply not be a goal in any plan related to cycling. It should instead highlight the current infrastructure for motorist and cyclist awareness about the presence of cyclists in the lane and safe, proper riding technique. Redesigning some streets for pedestrians alone by adding traffic signals (see the Short North for how essential this is for urban business districts) and curb bumpouts and medians to shorten distances also have a positive side-effect of working in the favor of cyclists by slowing traffic speeds. Making a street pedestrian-friendly by and large ends up with a street that is more attractive for cycling without needlessly compromising the safety of vehicular cyclists who are already using our roads correctly.

Posted 2 years ago #
Columbusite
Minneapolis
Login to Send PM

I totally agree with the signed side streets for novices. It's cheap, effective, and the streets are already great for beginners and experts alike. I've since changed my position on the bike boulevards planned for numerous streets. I've ridden them and they're mostly empty and not at all intimidating, so why spend large chunks of cash for huge changes in infrastructure that really aren't warranted when we can sign them all in one fell swoop? Save those for sprawling parts of the city where side streets are few and far between and where drivers are more likely to act aggressively because you're biking on their one and only shortcut. Here there is also the possibility of creating a bike boulevard where the side roads just don't exist.

Posted 2 years ago #
lifeontwowheels
Highland West
Login to Send PM

Columbusite wrote >>
I totally agree with the signed side streets for novices. It's cheap, effective, and the streets are already great for beginners and experts alike. I've since changed my position on the bike boulevards planned for numerous streets. I've ridden them and they're mostly empty and not at all intimidating, so why spend large chunks of cash for huge changes in infrastructure that really aren't warranted when we can sign them all in one fell swoop? Save those for sprawling parts of the city where side streets are few and far between and where drivers are more likely to act aggressively because you're biking on their one and only shortcut. Here there is also the possibility of creating a bike boulevard where the side roads just don't exist.

I can get behind that. Basically:

Sign and promote existing secondary roads that provide safe, accessible solutions for all.

Sharrows and outreach on arterial roads.

Bike Lanes and MUPs where they won't affect commercial corridors and were they are the most effective at closing gaps in connectivity.

Better transit options to assist in closing those gaps.

Education and Safe Routes To Schools.

That right there is an easy, doable cycling solution for the greater Columbus area. Some of it is already being done or exists and just needs the promotion, others need to be considered.

Posted 2 years ago #
DianeHoenig
Unviersity District
Login to Send PM

Perfect... this is what we need to hear... everyone's opinion and why.

I personally take the streets. Utilitarian (can't you tell from my avitar?). If it's shorter, I take the path that's the only time - I like being on the street with cota... this is my safety net. If I have a problem, I rack it on the bus. When I ride with my kids we mostly take the side walk if it's a major road, if not, we're on the street - they are learning to ride safe young.

Posted 2 years ago #
Analogue Kid
5th by West-Northwest
Login to Send PM

alove wrote >>
Blah blah blah
We want more transit options, right? What's wrong with expert cyclists riding on the road with a choice of riding on a SAFE, AWAY FROM CARS path?
I'm tired of hearing about the dangers of creating bike paths. We want our community to become more active, right? I doubt the way to get people to increase their bicycle use is to force them to ride down streets like High and Broad. I am scared shitless whenever I do so and I ride in the sidewalk when appropriate, and I am not ashamed either.
We need to be taking cues from Europe.

I agree. As much as the hardcore cyclists here wax eloquent about the virtues of shared space, every non-avid bike rider I've ever met prefers to be separated from motor vehicle traffic. Most people (myself included) have no problem riding on side streets but that does not extend to any road with more than 5,000 cars per day.

Posted 2 years ago #
lifeontwowheels
Highland West
Login to Send PM

Analogue Kid wrote >>

alove wrote >>
Blah blah blah
We want more transit options, right? What's wrong with expert cyclists riding on the road with a choice of riding on a SAFE, AWAY FROM CARS path?
I'm tired of hearing about the dangers of creating bike paths. We want our community to become more active, right? I doubt the way to get people to increase their bicycle use is to force them to ride down streets like High and Broad. I am scared shitless whenever I do so and I ride in the sidewalk when appropriate, and I am not ashamed either.
We need to be taking cues from Europe.

I agree. As much as the hardcore cyclists here wax eloquent about the virtues of shared space, every non-avid bike rider I've ever met prefers to be separated from motor vehicle traffic. Most people (myself included) have no problem riding on side streets but that does not extend to any road with more than 5,000 cars per day.

Good thing you can get around most of Columbus using MUPs and side roads.

I'm sorry but please tell me how you are served when that bike lane you love ends after 3 miles while the city waits for the next resurfacing project to complete the next 3 miles of bike lanes?

Posted 2 years ago #
futureman
Grandview Heights
Login to Send PM

Anyone know what section of Broad they are talking about? Is this just downtown or extending to the east side to Bexley (as I was assuming)?

Honestly I find riding my bike on Broad st to be arather pleasant experience. Due to the width, motorists have more than enough room to change lanes and zoom by me at 40+mph.

(side point, I took last year off riding so I haven't been on Broad for awhile. The amount of foreclosed former mansions is terrible :( Amazing what difference a year makes)

@lifeontwowheels

I appreciate the suggestion of taking Oak or Bryden, but I'm not all that comfortable doing that as it heads east towards franklin park/rail road lines.

My preference is purely from recreational cycling perspective - I like dedicated trails. Now if I'm going from point A to B on a commuter bike I'm sure I'd have a very different opinion.

Posted 2 years ago #
lifeontwowheels
Highland West
Login to Send PM

Perfectly understandable.

Posted 2 years ago #
colrex7
Ohio
Login to Send PM

The gentleman behind the table at the meeting said that it is meant for just downtown...but could definitely be expanded to Bexley if its something the citizens or the city want to do.

Posted 2 years ago #
psgorder

Login to Send PM

lifeontwowheels wrote >>

Frankly there are better paths for rec cyclists than Broad.
Separation really isn't all that safe since it takes you away from the line of sight for motorists, couple that with speeds greater than a pedestrian, and you have some interesting and potentially dangerous moments when a vehicle is making a left or right onto a side street and the bike is on a tree lined separate path with the right of way.

My mother in law was a nurse. She used to say "You don't want your tombstone to say, 'She had the right of way.'" I understand that you are talking about bicyclists observing all the appropriate laws, but on a separate bike path, cyclists would have to be extra careful and STOP, and WAIT, and make sure that cars were not turning. We may be within our rights to charge across a side street, but it's better not to if it means safety.

I would add that the purple signs are awesome, and would be a welcome addition. Anything to make drivers more aware. I'm just saying that as the least armored persons on the road, we have to be extra careful, regardless of what the law says.

Posted 2 years ago #
Walker
The KLD / Downtown
Login to Send PM

Regardless of whether these paths are used for bikes or pedestrians, I think the more important part of this is that Broad Street gets the road diet that it deserves and beautification that will make it a more pleasant strip to travel on no matter what your transportation method may be.

Posted 2 years ago #
Displaced Columbusite

Login to Send PM

joev wrote >>
How about a bus rapid transit development like Cleveland's Euclid Ave.?

I am skeptical about this, since they have redone the routes, the "healthline" busses that run on the Euclid corridor are mostly empty, they run a bus something like every 5 minutes and sometimes there are 3 in a row with no passengers that the city is largely subsidizing. Not to harp on the subject, but waste of resources.

Posted 2 years ago #
lifeontwowheels
Highland West
Login to Send PM

psgorder wrote >>

lifeontwowheels wrote >>

Frankly there are better paths for rec cyclists than Broad.
Separation really isn't all that safe since it takes you away from the line of sight for motorists, couple that with speeds greater than a pedestrian, and you have some interesting and potentially dangerous moments when a vehicle is making a left or right onto a side street and the bike is on a tree lined separate path with the right of way.

My mother in law was a nurse. She used to say "You don't want your tombstone to say, 'She had the right of way.'" I understand that you are talking about bicyclists observing all the appropriate laws, but on a separate bike path, cyclists would have to be extra careful and STOP, and WAIT, and make sure that cars were not turning. We may be within our rights to charge across a side street, but it's better not to if it means safety.
I would add that the purple signs are awesome, and would be a welcome addition. Anything to make drivers more aware. I'm just saying that as the least armored persons on the road, we have to be extra careful, regardless of what the law says.

I get what you are saying and I would tend to agree on the point that we should be safe. Safety comes not from deferring your rights but respecting your place within the current laws and traveling in a predictable, legal and safe manner. It makes it harder for those of us that do this when a driver is expecting us to do it all wrong, thinking we will defer to them when we do have the right of way.

Walker,

The road diet is great, I love the idea in theory. I will be interested to see what comes of it.

Posted 2 years ago #
tree_sketcher
Columbus
Login to Send PM

i think the whole ride in the street thing is fine for cyclists that are comfortable with it, we can put up share the road signage on Broad in addition to the off-street path.

I think this concept proposes a bike facility that will be more comfortable for the portions of the C.O. public who would like to bike downtown but don't want to be on the street. How many biking parents with the child trailer do you see cruising around downtown? Or kids?

It absolutely infuriates me when avid cyclists promote cycling endlessly, then say something like "it's very likely because you're not driving your bike properly". If you want people to get on board with cycling, don't alienate them and make them feel stupid or inadequate. That is the dumbest thing you could do. There will always be weekend warriors or people that want to ride recreationally with their children and don't want to ride on the street. Point being, if you want biking to continue to grow in popularity, there have to be different types of facilities for different types of riders. This is an example of that and will help to get the folks using the Scioto trail into downtown.

Posted 2 years ago #
Columbusite
Minneapolis
Login to Send PM

Hence the side streets comment. A lot of cyclists are not riding properly and needlessly put themselves in situations that compromise their safety, perhaps even their lives in the case of "bike-lane syndrome" which results in getting doored or hit by right-turning vehicles at intersections, whether a bike lane is present or not it makes no difference. I'm just calling it like it is; bad cycling practices result in dead people. If more people want to bike that's great, but not at the expense of real safety for perceived safety. Unfortunately, the city has demonstrated that they're much too vested in the latter than the former by listening to consultants that don't even rides bikes as transportation.

If the city was serious about including cyclists in this plan then expert cyclists such as LO2W and myself would be currently working with the city as we speak. At the public input meeting on the bikeways master plan I pointed out the serious problems inherent with bike lanes as did others. And the plan still looks the same. I'm hoping the plan for Broad is modified a bit since I like it overall, but I won't hold my breath. If I have to deal with motorists honking at me and yelling at me to get on the cycletrack as a result of its existence I can and will deal with it, but it's off-putting for many and as I posted earlier there's plenty of evidence that the cycletrack is not safer, not to mention that this one is planned to be shared with pedestrians meaning we'd see quite an increase in pedestrians getting hit by sidewalk cyclists riding too fast. Just think of current problems between some peds and some on the shared multi-use trails, but worse.

Posted 2 years ago #
Core_Models
Columbus
Login to Send PM

Displaced Columbusite wrote >>

joev wrote >>
How about a bus rapid transit development like Cleveland's Euclid Ave.?

I am skeptical about this, since they have redone the routes, the "healthline" busses that run on the Euclid corridor are mostly empty, they run a bus something like every 5 minutes and sometimes there are 3 in a row with no passengers that the city is largely subsidizing. Not to harp on the subject, but waste of resources.

Again, people need to stop seeing BRT (or rail) as purely a mode of transit. Once they do, they'll stop counting heads on the bus and start counting dollars instead.

http://www.cleveland.com/arts/index.ssf/2008/02/euclid_corridor_project_helps.html

Amid all the bad news about Cleveland's economy, one big, positive number is sure to impress all but the most hardened cynics: $4.3 billion. That's how much fresh investment -- conservatively speaking -- is being poured into the four-mile-long strip of land flanking Euclid Avenue, the city's Main Street, between Public Square and University Circle.

One big reason for the energy is the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority's $200 million Euclid Corridor project, which is reshaping Euclid Avenue around a bus rapid transit line.

Posted 2 years ago #
lifeontwowheels
Highland West
Login to Send PM

tree_sketcher wrote >>
i think the whole ride in the street thing is fine for cyclists that are comfortable with it, we can put up share the road signage on Broad in addition to the off-street path.
I think this concept proposes a bike facility that will be more comfortable for the portions of the C.O. public who would like to bike downtown but don't want to be on the street. How many biking parents with the child trailer do you see cruising around downtown? Or kids?
It absolutely infuriates me when avid cyclists promote cycling endlessly, then say something like "it's very likely because you're not driving your bike properly". If you want people to get on board with cycling, don't alienate them and make them feel stupid or inadequate. That is the dumbest thing you could do. There will always be weekend warriors or people that want to ride recreationally with their children and don't want to ride on the street. Point being, if you want biking to continue to grow in popularity, there have to be different types of facilities for different types of riders. This is an example of that and will help to get the folks using the Scioto trail into downtown.

If you go back and read my comments, I am all for different facilities. I'm just not in favor of those that do more harm than good.

Remember when you first learned to drive? How intimidating it was to be in traffic? The first time you merged on the freeway? How did you get over that? Did you take drivers ed? Go out and practice in a parking lot? Move to a residential road with low traffic volume?

Same can be said with cycling. I grew up riding side roads and only used the sidewalk on busy roadways. That's how I started riding as an adult and by seeking out advice gradually came to be more comfortable and confident. I think it infuriates me that people are either too lazy or too ignorant to seek out advice, study the laws or look at map to realize that "Hey, maybe instead of riding Broad I can ride x,y or z adjacent and be more comfortable". We have the infrastructure in place already to support all levels of cycling, we just need to promote it's use. Why spend the money where it's really not needed when there are much worse areas to bike, where gaps do exist and create connection issues? Those are the places we need to be looking at first.

Posted 2 years ago #
johnwirtz
Evanston, IL
Login to Send PM

lifeontwowheels wrote >>

alove wrote >>
Blah blah blah
We want more transit options, right? What's wrong with expert cyclists riding on the road with a choice of riding on a SAFE, AWAY FROM CARS path?
I'm tired of hearing about the dangers of creating bike paths. We want our community to become more active, right? I doubt the way to get people to increase their bicycle use is to force them to ride down streets like High and Broad. I am scared shitless whenever I do so and I ride in the sidewalk when appropriate, and I am not ashamed either.
We need to be taking cues from Europe.

A few simple changes, some marked signage (something as simple as changing the street signs from green to purple like Berkley did) and you can have a safe, well connected and non-threatening bike network at a much lower cost than uber-sexy Euro Broad St. This is a network that can easily tie into existing off road bike trails as well as projects like High Street Share the Road. It exists, it's built...we just need to promote and utilize it.

You probably already know this, but I want to make it clear that Berkeley's bike boulevards involve a lot more than purple signs. Also, purple was previously an unassigned color for street signs, but the 2009 edition of the MUTCD has now reserved purple for toll roads. Pink anyone?

Posted 2 years ago #