Thanks John,
Good to hear about your epic cycling trip across the U.S.
I will be delighted to give my assessments of London cycling as soon
as I undertake them! :)
For now I'm still hoping to find the time to fully document and
critique the rather unique and diverse bikeways of Bologna.
Regarding cycling on interstate freeways, in fact this is also legal
in California. Last I checked over 1,000 miles were open to cyclists.
Policy guides that this be provided wherever there lacks an alternate
route. Unfortunately the most critical links of all, bridges, have
proven difficult to open in the Bay Area. I led multi-year campaigns
beginning in 1996 for equal access to the San Francisco-Oakland Bay
Bridge (SFOBB), the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge (RSR), and others. We
won inclusion on the new link halfway to San Francisco, but were
thwarted once again on other efforts. On the RSR, maddeningly enough,
there are 12 feet (~4m) of unused shoulder, closed in 1972 during a
drought in Marin County and never reopened. One can cycle up to the
bridge on as little as 4 feet of winding downhilll rock strewn
shoulder next to traffic going upwards of 70mph and more, only to be
turned away at the crossing. Long story!
The official concerns included liability and, more rarely, terrorism.
The real reason is widely thought to be preservation of roadway for
future increases in traffic due to sprawl development.
I bring this up because we did several studies in the course of
advocating for equal access, including an inquiry into the safety of
riding on the shoulders of freeways and bridges (aka unfreeways)
during an official collaborative report managed by the Bay
Conservation and Development Commission, required of Caltrans (the
DOT) in the permitting process for the new work on the bridge. Taking
data from throughout California and from comparable facilities in
other states that were not so restrictive, riding on the shoulders of
freeways including bridges appeared to be clearly safer than riding on
city streets, despite the deadly high speeds of adjacent traffic,
because of factors such as long sight lines and separation of use
(although it is possible that aggressive drivers use shoulders to pass
on occasion and that can be mitigated). However, in contrast it was
deemed highly risky to cross the exits and entrances (on and off
ramps).
Near the Bay Area there are routes such as I-24 east into the suburbs
over the east bay hills, where cyclists can ride on expressways, but
are required to exit and re-enter at each exit due to the safety
concern.
Regarding the barrier system in Berkeley, as you mentioned:
> In Berkeley they seemed to be experimenting with reducing
> permeability to cars (rat-running) by placing planters into streets to
> restrict flows (this was 1998), which seemed to have caught the attention of
> many (and not just in the US) without too much protest from motorists.
The Berkeley system of intersection closures (barriers/bollards) is
indeed unique and famous. It has a long and tumultuous history,
including a legal battle appealed to the California Supreme Court,
although the system remains and other cities have implemented such
barriers for various purposes, most notably for bicycle boulevards /
green streets, and in some cases for crime control efforts. My recent
proposal to reform the barrier system has unfortunately languished in
my absence. My idea would be to favor more comprehensive traffic
calming through increased permeability for residents, allowing a
concomitant increase in the number of restricted areas. The barriers
system created winners and losers and greatly inhibits options for
continued improvements. Presently there are hard limits on how many
streets can be closed, simply to ensure that residents can access
their homes with motor vehicles.
Jason
On Sat, Feb 18, 2012 at 5:09 AM, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Welcome, Jason
>
> I too have some experience of cycling in San Francisco and California, and
> Idaho, at the end of a trans-America ride on my recumbent trike (albeit some
> years ago) and didn't find it particularly dangerous or off-putting relative
> to my European experience with the same trike (hence my comparisons with
> London).
>
> The most off-putting part of cycling in SF seemed to be coming down
> amazingly steep concrete side streets and watching my front tyres blister
> and peel, particularly as they were my last set! I covered a fair bit of
> ground in the Bay Area, including the city, Oakland, Berkeley, Richmond and
> parts of Marin Country, and didn’t find it particularly problematic, other
> than the narrowness of the ramp to get onto the ferries across the bay.....
>
> Contrary to "over here" I felt that, when the engineers do decide to do
> something to help cyclists (and pedestrians) they did very well (and
> cheaply). In Berkeley they seemed to be experimenting with reducing
> permeability to cars (rat-running) by placing planters into streets to
> restrict flows (this was 1998), which seemed to have caught the attention of
> many (and not just in the US) without too much protest from motorists.
> Elsewhere they (and engineers in Oregon) had installed warning lights on
> most of the short road tunnels that exist in the mountainous areas of the
> western states. A very neat and cheap solution to difficult problem for
> cyclists (though not one seen often in the UK).
>
> In Idaho, as with other Rocky Mountain states, cyclists are allowed to use
> the Interstates and the main cycle route into Boise (from the south) runs
> along I84. I must admit to have cycled up it with some trepidation, but the
> worst part of it was the broken glass, general detritus and occasional
> snakes (I actually managed to hit one, fortunately at speed). To be honest
> it wasn't any worse than trying to cycle along one of the four lane urban
> arteries in London.
>
> So I'm not surprised at your comments about US cycling provision in those
> particular states.
>
> It sounds like Italy is an "interesting" challenge for cyclists. (I've
> never had the pleasure of cycling there). I'd be interested to hear your
> comments after a trip to London, without the benefit of an experienced
> guide. Then we can have the benefit of a new set of eyes on the problems of
> cycling in the UK!
>
> Cheers
>
> John Meudell
> C.Eng, MIMechE
> Research Associate, Swansea University
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Jason Meggs
> Sent: 18 February 2012 00:58
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: An introduction [Re: A request for help]
>
> Dear all,
>
> I'm new on this list but not so new to cycling...it was just over 20 years
> ago my bicycle activist career began in earnest. Currently in Italy working
> on the BICY project (BICY.it). A researcher from UC Davis recommended I join
> this list. Thought as long as San Francisco was mentioned I'd introduce
> myself, since my first post on the dreary topic of non-work trip estimates
> wasn't so popular. :)
>
> Much of my experience in advocacy is focused on California, particularly the
> SF Bay Area, which, true, is a relatively great place to ride now, not that
> it's been an easy process at all (a landmark example is surely the more than
> three years when nobody could install even a bike rack in the city due to
> environmental lawsuits (a misuse of environmental laws), claiming the
> Bicycle Plan needing more study lest it cause environmental harm, e.g., by
> making drivers wait in queues). But I've also been involved in a lot of
> international efforts, lived in quite a few countries and around the US,
> made many long bike trips, etc., focused on International Comparisons in my
> Transport/Land Use/Environmental Health Science dual Master's programme at
> UC Berkeley, and served on the Steering Committee for the World Carfree
> Network, which puts on the Carfree Cities conference (York, England 2010;
> Guadalajara, Jalisco, Mexico, 2011).
>
> So, I'd agree San Francisco is certainly dangerous in many places but it's
> come a long way and has a highly developed focus now with the well advanced
> advocacy organization, the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition. The City is
> featured in the new 2012 Benchmarking report from the Alliance for Biking &
> Walking (focused on the USA):
> www.PeoplePoweredMovement.org/benchmarking
>
> But lest we think it's all good, it certainly isn't. Actually this video of
> a pedestrian being run over in San Francisco, with the police doing nothing,
> says a lot (and nothing new in my all too familiar
> experience):
> http://sf.streetsblog.org/2012/02/16/sfpd-declares-open-season-on-pedestrian
> s-with-the-right-of-way/
>
> Admittedly I don't have a lot of experience cycling in London and I'm not
> going to get into the comparisons game, but it's interesting that people
> around and about in Europe keep telling me if I have bicycle expertise I
> should go to London and help out (make a plan, do an analysis, be a
> consultant, etc. etc., they are fairly broad in their recommendations -- I
> usually tell them I'm sure there must be local folks capable of this!).
> While this idea is flattering, and I'd be interested to help such an effort,
> thus far my biggest inspiration was to do a study of the viability of
> lorry-free city centers, starting with London. When in York for Carfree
> Cities I got very excited about this idea, we had folks from big shipping
> (DHL), from successful bicycle cargo delivery companies, and someone who had
> worked as an urban delivery van driver, plus a host of carfree cities
> theorists.
> They ALL unanimously agreed it would be more time efficient AND more
> profitable to switch to bicycle delivery (not that all deliveries can be
> carried by bicycle, but most delivery trips could be replaced). I
> hypothesised that perhaps the precedent of the Congestion Pricing area could
> be used to also make a Lorry-Free zone. (I also met advocates furious about
> the deaths from lorries in London.) Nobody quite took me up on the idea and
> other projects came up, and since then there's a project called Cycle
> Logistics which I hope will be very successful in moving the world toward
> lorry-free cargo systems(naturally, bicycle delivery ranking high in that
> mix!).
> http://cyclelogistics.eu/
>
> I certainly have appreciated the analysis in London finding those who run
> red lights are safer from being crushed by right-turn running lorries than
> those (mostly women, sad to say) who don't. Some of my research has focused
> on the Idaho Law, a law in the USA state of Idaho giving cyclists the choice
> to yield, rather than stop, at stop signs and red lights (stop signs are
> everywhere on bike routes in the USA, and typically unwarranted for cars,
> let alone cyclists, and needlessly serve to discourage and even endanger
> cyclists). This topic takes on an added international dimension now that
> *griller le feu* is being tested in Paris.
> An article I wrote lasts September:
> http://meggsreport.wordpress.com/2011/09/29/the-idaho-law-allowing-safer-cho
> ice-and-happier-travel/
> An article on Paris ("not totally false" confided the Parisian cycling
> advocacy group, MDB):
> http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/public/cyclesafety/article3311182.ece
>
> So consider me a friendly resource if I can be. I'm relatively new in Europe
> and would love to chat with people and better understand what's going on and
> how I could be of assistance. Any advice on research sources, groups, etc.
> I'm all ears. By good fortune I helped start the Carfree Research Group,
> with a list also hosted on this service,
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/carfree-research
> where a lovely new edition of World Transport Policy and Practice, out of
> York, was just announced (a special edition around the open question of: 'A
> Future Beyond the Car?'):
> http://www.eco-logica.co.uk/pdf/wtpp17.4.pdf.
> and was present for the inaugural meeting of the ECF Scientists for Cycling,
> http://www.ecf.com/projects/scientists-for-cycling-2/
>
> Meanwhile, to be perfectly honest, can't say I'm fully adjusted to working
> in Italy, particularly with the motor scooter traffic severely adding to air
> and noise pollution. There's a lot I'd like to know and recommendations I'd
> like to make, but the good news is every time I think I've heard my last
> "don't even try to change it," I find out some group, often in the
> government, is taking strides.
>
> Cheers and best wishes,
> Jason Meggs
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jan 29, 2012 at 7:10 PM, John Meudell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> Guys
>>
>>
>>
>> A précis of my response to Kira.
>>
>>
>>
>> “””
>>
>> Kira
>>
>>
>>
>> I don’t know if you’ve seen Nicholas Oddy’s contribution but I tend to
>> agree….comparing Canada and Denmark is probably too narrow.
>>
>>
>>
>> I’ve worked in Canada (in fact not far from where you are)and cycled
>> across the US some years ago (New York to San Francisco). I also
>> lived and worked in Holland on and off for many years (since the late
>> 70’s) and cycled extensively in Northern Europe and Scandinavia.
>> Based on those experiences I’d suggest that, on this subject, the
>> geographical reasons drive history and culture…and not the other way
> around.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Basically, distances are so huge in North America that, even in the
>> more populated coastal states, cycling on a daily basis is limited to
>> leisure/sport and, to a lesser extent, utility.
>>
>>
>>
>> In contrast distances between population centres, villages and the
>> like in Europe are so small as to ensure leisure/day touring is both
>> feasible and attractive. Roads are winding, often sheltered by trees
>> and hedges, there’s variety in the scenery and topography….which,
>> although it exists to an extent in the coastal and eastern mountain
>> states of North America, the distances preclude day touring.
>>
>>
>>
>> I think cycling research has missed a trick in not identifying the
>> role of day touring in the development and support for utility and
>> sport cycling (in Europe), it maintains ownership of cycling in the
>> minds of many people, creating a tacit base on which to maintain
>> interest in the high profile sporting side.
>>
>>
>>
>> That situation can’t really exist in North America, at least outside
>> of the large urban conurbations and aforementioned states, so the
>> sporting side is equally poorly recognised.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> This bigness has inhibited the wider importation of the bicycle
>> culture. In North America, outside of the big urban conurbations
>> cycling is very easy and very safe (well, ignoring cattle truck
>> drivers in Wyoming!). Traffic densities are low on most county
>> highways, likewise the old US Highways, with their wide hard shoulder.
>> Furthermore the construction of tarmac paved roads is still
>> considerably less than in Europe, particularly through the Mid-West, even
> today.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cyclists are seen as unusual and non-threatening….I and many US
>> side-to-side cyclists find themselves invited for coffee and to stay.
>> A couple of places I was chased by local small town reporters for a
>> story (I was riding a recumbent tricycle, not exactly the usual human
>> powered machinery seen around small towns!). The kids all have bikes
>> but, even if they get into serious mountain biking, the focus is on
>> the first car which is (has to be) an important mode of transport to
>> get around. Again, outside of the urban conurbations there’s little
>> in the way of public transport, apart for the school bus system, so a
>> car is essential to everyone. On the whole motorists drive slower
>> (than the UK) though, admittedly don’t take prisoners…but at least
>> they don’t deliberately try to run you off the road like they do in
>> the UK. So, unlike the UK, it’s actually a very benign environment for
> cycling….it’s just not very practical!
>>
>>
>>
>> On that particular point, I’d suggest making a clear distinction
>> between the UK and Europe. My experience is that, if you can cycle
>> confidently cycle around London without getting intimidated, run off
>> the road or killed, you can survive anywhere!
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> That said I’d suggest that your question “Why it's so hard to
>> incorporate bicycles in Canadian traffic?” is a bit general. I’m told
>> by a Canadian friend that places like Ottawa, Montreal, Vancouver and
>> Victoria have good cycling routes and infrastructure networks. San
>> Francisco, which I have cycled around, has an established set of bike
>> routes and is real easy to cycle around….and traffic is often much
>> less of a problem than in London (UK). The authorities have thought
>> about the problems of getting around the Bay, so bikes are carried on
>> the ferries and there used to be a bus-trailer to take cyclists across
>> the bridges. So I cycled around Oakland, Berkeley and Richmond, across
> the Bay and there’s not really much of a problem.
>>
>>
>>
>> So I’m not sure the position is as clear cut as your first thoughts.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>>
>>
>> John Meudell
>>
>> C.Eng, MIMechE
>>
>> Research Associate, Swansea University
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Cycling and Society Research Group discussion list
>> [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
>> [log in to unmask]
>> Sent: 27 January 2012 15:34
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: A request for help
>>
>>
>>
>> This was forwarded from the ICHC. If anybody wishes to respond, bear
>> in mind she may not be on this list.
>>
>> ----- Forwarded message -----
>> From: "Renate Franz" <[log in to unmask]>
>> Date: Fri, Jan 27, 2012 14:57
>> Subject: Another question for help :)
>> To: "Renate Franz" <[log in to unmask]>
>>
>>
>>
>> selectName: Ms.
>>
>> Last Name: Falsing
>>
>> First Name: Kira
>>
>> Street: 308 Wharncliffe
>>
>> Zip: N6G 1E2
>>
>> Town: London
>>
>> Country: Canada
>>
>> Email: [log in to unmask]
>>
>> Relationship: I'm writing an article about the main differences
>> between North America (Canada) and Europe (Copenhagen), when it comes to
> bicycling.
>> Why it's so hard to incorporate bicycles in Canadian traffic, and the
>> historical and geographical reasons for this.
>>
>> So I have some questions, that I was hoping you could help me with.
>>
>>
>>
>> Is the reasons to be found in the geographical background, like North
>> America is a much 'newer' world than Europe, so they just builds roads
>> immediately, beause of the invension of the automobile at that time,
>> or is it rather a cultural thing like a fascination in cars and big
> machines?
>>
>>
>>
>> Hope to hear from you and that you can enlighten me or suggest some
>> articles or websites to look at. the article will also include the the
>> history of the bicycle as transportation.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best
>>
>> Kira Falsing
>>
>>
>>
>> University of Western Ontario
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --
>>
>>
|
