Our City Online

Messageboard - Transportation

NOTE: You are viewing an archived version of the Columbus Underground forums/messageboard. As of 05/22/16 they have been closed to new comments and replies, but will remain accessible for archived searches and reference. For more information CLICK HERE

Feds Deem Pedestrians, Cyclists and Motorists Equals

Home Forums General Columbus Discussion Transportation Feds Deem Pedestrians, Cyclists and Motorists Equals

  • This topic is empty.
Viewing 10 posts - 46 through 55 (of 55 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #355729

    lifeontwowheels
    Participant

    JedThorp wrote >>
    A lot of this can be alleviated by having designated bike ROUTES (as opposed to bike lanes, or bike paths) with adequate signage. For the uninitiated: a bike lane is a special lane on the side of the road next to the car lanes where bikes can/are supposed to safely ride. A bike path is like the trail along the Olentangy, where only bikes (and runners, and strollers, and walkers with iPods on) can go. A bike ROUTE is a designated, clearly marked network of streets (often side streets) where bikes can safely ride IN THE STREET, with cars. (Vancouver has a great network of bike routes.) If the bike route needs to merge with a busy street (High St., Dublin Road, Summit St.) then, on those roads, there’s a designated bike lane…but the usual prefrence is to avoid having to do that. Cars know to avoid the streets that are part of the bike routes, and it isn’t much of annoyance for them, since the bike routes are generally on “side streets.” Like I’ve said before…I don’t need (or want) a bike LANE, or necessarily need a costly dedicated bike trail…I just need to have a safe route to get from point A to point B…and a nice network of bike routes may be the cheapest way to accomplish that. Thoughts?

    This is largely what I am in favor of. As much as I argue for the right to take the lane (I’ll go through my bookmarks when I get home and have the time), I have been pretty consistent on other threads (here and YB!) about questioning the need to push cycling on the main roads.

    High Street Share The Road Campaign and Broad Street Bike Lanes are great, in theory, to promote multi-modal streets and transit networks. I just have a lot of issues supporting the current route some advocates and policy makers are taking with these “Mission Accomplished” projects.

    We have a great network of secondary roads that could be developed into a network of bike routes or boulevards. Berkley changed the street sign colors to mark specific routes-purple instead of green-that provide visibility to the route and offer way-finding when combined with proper signage.

    #355730

    I take the right lane on High all the time and %99.99 of drivers don’t honk or yell: they just pass. Maybe coming up from MV it’s a different story, since High St south of Downtown is unnecessarily wide which encourages drivers to speed. Here’s some video of me cycling in Clintonville. I personally avoid roads that are high-speed with only one lane in each direction. I accidentally took Weber off of High instead of Tulane and will not do so again: it’s uphill and has blind curves meaning you have me getting slowed down and impatient drivers who are more likely to pass in an unsafe manner. This is High St and you can see it’s just another day with no motorist outrage.

    I still haven’t received a response on the disparity of the tens of millions of dollars being alloted to car-oriented improvements on the outskirts of the city where investments have already been made (Hilliard-Rome, Alum Creek Dr, etc). Whereas major urban streets outside of N High are not seeing any much needed improvements to improve walking and biking conditions, many of which could be done for the price of adding three lanes onto just one road like they are doing now.

    Here’s the response I got.

    Thank you for your email. I’ve copied administrators from the Department of Public Service on this response so that they can provide you with a reply. Vince

    Vince Papsidero, AICP
    Planning Administrator / City of Columbus Planning Division

    That was at the end of December. Like Mike pointed out, you can go to a MORPC meeting or City Council like I did and they’ll just listen to you and then ignore you. The actions of the city government are mostly in opposition to the statement of the federal government’s new position, with very few exceptions.

    #355731

    Just a reminder that off of the city’s showpiece of N High that conditions are much worse for pedestrians. This is Cleveland Ave across from the Kroger Bakery. I missed a great photo of a woman who had to walk in the right lane and with a car that passed her in the lane. I got the 2nd best thing to show the dangerous conditions that the city has created here:

    Pedestrian forced to walk in the lane.

    35 MPH traffic traveling in that same lane.

    #355732
    Snarf
    Snarf
    Participant

    People can’t even walk, the horror!

    #355733

    envelope
    Member

    Ya know… The whole no cycling on sidewalks is kinda impractical. I propose it be legal if one is traveling under a certain speed (1-10mph) and by staying on the side furthest from the entrances of buildings. Also, yeilding to all traffic in crosswalks. The reason being what I call “taxi-ing”. How is a cyclist supposed to enter/exit the damn road? Walk into the middle of the lane in traffic and swing the ole leg around? If your only traveling a few blocks or simply riding from the road to the bike rack I don’t see the big deal, any more and your exposing yourself to crosswalk collisions (crosswalks are prolly the best place for cyclists to get hit by turning cars).

    Just my two cents, although I support equal right to the road, I find it naive to think the “same roads/same laws” is gonna work. Different vehicles have different capabilites.

    #355734

    envelope
    Member

    Sorry, I always doublepost or make mistakes on forums from my iPhone

    #355735

    lifeontwowheels
    Participant

    Just my two cents, although I support equal right to the road, I find it naive to think the “same roads/same laws” is gonna work. Different vehicles have different capabilites.

    The law already takes into account different capabilities. For instance, bikes can’t be cited for impeding traffic by moving too slow under the slow moving vehicle laws in ORC and Columbus City Code.

    #355736

    laChewla
    Participant

    envelope wrote >>
    How is a cyclist supposed to enter/exit the damn road? Walk into the middle of the lane in traffic and swing the ole leg around? If your only traveling a few blocks or simply riding from the road to the bike rack I don’t see the big deal, any more and your exposing yourself to crosswalk collisions (crosswalks are prolly the best place for cyclists to get hit by turning cars).

    Yes, wait for traffic to clear and walk into the lane and hop on or ride into the lane from a perch in a parking spot or coming out of a driveway. It’s pretty easy.

    It doesn’t matter how far you are riding your bike, it is safer to ride in the lane with traffic. If you can’t handle that you should probably walk there.

    #355737

    envelope wrote >>
    Ya know… The whole no cycling on sidewalks is kinda impractical. I propose it be legal if one is traveling under a certain speed (1-10mph) and by staying on the side furthest from the entrances of buildings. Also, yeilding to all traffic in crosswalks. The reason being what I call “taxi-ing”. How is a cyclist supposed to enter/exit the damn road? Walk into the middle of the lane in traffic and swing the ole leg around? If your only traveling a few blocks or simply riding from the road to the bike rack I don’t see the big deal, any more and your exposing yourself to crosswalk collisions (crosswalks are prolly the best place for cyclists to get hit by turning cars).
    Just my two cents, although I support equal right to the road, I find it naive to think the “same roads/same laws” is gonna work. Different vehicles have different capabilites.

    Disagree with your last sentiment. I have a 15 minute commute to work and everywhere else I need to go is within a 5-10 minute ride. Obviously, I’m going fast enough thank you very much. It’s not my fault there are drivers that live way out in Powell expecting everyone to cater to them so that they have the same commute time as I do. You chose to live in the middle of nowhere and drive dozens of miles to get anywhere: deal with it. If I’m slowing you down I’m only letting you do more of what you love to do: drive.

    Anyway, there are sidewalk cyclists who move at a speed close to that of a pedestrian, so in that case I’m not against it since they’re not endangering themselves anymore than a jogger and they’re not running over, err, into pedestrians. And then there are those bikes with those really tiny wheels. Those aren’t going to go very fast no matter what and even I would be somewhat perturbed by one in my path, but I doubt I would have much trouble passing.

    #355738

    NerosNeptune
    Participant

    envelope, you are supposed to walk your bike to wherever you’re putting it on the road in that case.

    I hope bike lanes don’t start showing up, unless they’re absolutely needed for some reason.. maybe on a very busy road with no side of the street parking. They would seem to encourage/force bikes to ride right up along side the cars parked on the side of the road. I wish some of the people I see riding up and down Neil Ave could see themselves, and how many problems it causes when they stay as far as possible to the right.

Viewing 10 posts - 46 through 55 (of 55 total)

The forum ‘Transportation’ is closed to new topics and replies.

Subscribe below: