Skip to main content

View Diary: Weekend Bike Blogging: The Perfect Bikeway (28 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Inre: Bicycle access to Industrial Parks... (4+ / 0-)

    Definitely something that is sorely needed...

    I live in Portland, Oregon...which is certainly one of the more 'bike-friendly' cities in the US, but I've had two jobs over in Swan Island (a large industrial park in North Portland) of which was graveyard-shift, after the City Buses stopped running up that way (there's a privately-operated nighttime shuttle...but it was useless to me as it only runs on weekdays, and I worked there on Saturday and Sunday nights...).  Just walking from the bus stop to my work site was dangerous enough, especially on the 3rd shift job; I can't even imagine trying to ride a bike up there.  From my apartment in Northeast Portland out to the general area there is easy enough...either MAX to the 72 (or 85 during the day-shift job) bus, or MAX to the Yellow Line N. Prescott St Station...but from there, riding a bike the final mile or so is pretty much taking your life into your hands...

    Here's the official 'recommendation' from the Swan Island TMA -

    On Going Street and the Swan Island roadway network, the Swan Island TMA recommends use of the sidewalk. This is legal and at least during peak hours with trucks and anxious commuters, the place to be. Be sure to watch for pedestrians and vehicles turning in and out of driveways.

    The sidewalk?!  FWIW, even when I walked it, I almost got run over by cyclists twice.  

    Yeah, and for pedestrians or cyclists - one of those 'turning vehicle crossways' that they fail to mention is the offramp from N. Interstate Avenue onto Going, which hosts an acceleration lane for cars, trucks and buses where they do not have to stop...and even our (Trimet #85) bus takes that turn at about 30 miles an hour.

    And that's not to mention that once you get off of that 'approved bike route', you're back on 4-lane pseudo-highways (Anchor, Channel...) with tractor-trailers (doubles and triples here in Oregon), and apparently no enforced speed limit.


    Yeah, we need to definitely start seeing bicycle paths as viable commuting options , in addition to 'recreational opportunities'.

    Federal (and state, county and municipal...) funding definitely needs to be a priority here.

    •  A big part of dedicated bikeways ... (4+ / 0-)

      ... is getting the hell around interstates ... exits, in the way, only direct transport corridor ... there are a wide variety of scenarios where those damn I-states are nothing but headaches.

      Indeed, the primary determinant of the route that I take to work is which one of three potential routes I use to get from one side of the Turnpike to the other ... and the one I use, while the best of the three, is the worst part of the whole trip in terms of interactions with cars.

      Heading home in the arvo, I am riding right to an embankment that is the Turnpike, then the road swings around and rises so that it can go over. A cycle subway under the Turnpike at that point would be brilliant.

      However, even though it is the Turnpike that creates the obstacle, the Turnpike is not responsible for removing the obstacle. and Energize America

      by BruceMcF on Sat Jan 05, 2008 at 10:05:04 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Cycle subways under highways is a great idea... (4+ / 0-)

        especially for urban areas back in the Northeast, where I originally come from...most of the North Jersey / NYC-area Interstates, Parkways and Turnpikes are above ground anyways...and towns and cities like Clifton, NJ have long ago built underground passages for pedestrians to 'cross' busy roads (the pathway from the Clifton middle school that goes under the hideous and dangerous Route 46, for example...).  Why can't they do the same for bikes?  That little solid white line a few feet from the curb doesn't offer much physical protection, eh?

        You know, I read about this in a magazine (I think it was "Good" magazine) back in maybe March or April of last year, and I can't remember which country it was...but it was in Europe, and they set up their bike lanes so that auto traffic traveled in the middle of the road, and then there was parallel-parking for cars on the side along the travel lanes; and beyond that were the bike lanes, and then finally the sidewalk.  That just makes so much sense to me, that I don't understand why we don't do that here?

        •  However, better to just get rid of the parking .. (3+ / 0-)

          ... and have a wider lane where the cars have room to pass the bikes within the lane. And of course, with no parking, there will be fewer cars.

          Oops, wait, those're not outside words. Those are inside words. A transport cyclist is not supposed to say them, only think them.

 and Energize America

          by BruceMcF on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 12:26:06 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Actually, I like the idea of a 'buffer', though.. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            epcraig, BruceMcF

            the parked cars between the travel lanes and the bike lanes provide sort of a 'buffer zone'...and in these sorts of arrangements, the cyclist won't have to worry about that SUV coming up on them at 35 or 40 mph and passing within 18 inches (or less...) of their left elbow; and also this leaves the sidewalk for pedestrians, outdoor cafe tables, street vendors, etc...of course, right now something like this is only plausible in urban cores; but we've got to start somewhere, eh?

            And of course, with no parking, there will be fewer cars.

            Oh, I'm all for that.  And fewer cars will be the reality soon enough, no matter how much collective wishful thinking the masses of current exurban and suburban commuters and others can gather...there will be no hydrogen / electrical / ethanol / prayer, etc...'cure' that will allow our current living arrangements in the US to continue for much longer.  

            A lot of people of all political stripes are going to be in for quite a rude awakening within the next 10 years or so, when this becomes apparent.  And they'll get angry (and quite possibly very violent, too...); but those of us trying to sound the 'alarms' right now, and warn them of what will soon happen...well, we're dismissed as 'quacks', or 'doomsdayers', or even 'urban elitists'...

            Sometimes, I think it'd probably be easier to not have this foresight, eh?

            •  That SUV coming up behind is ... (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              epcraig, Hardhat Democrat

              ... where I wish I had Effective Cycle training ... but the key danger areas are intersections, and if going through the intersection, it is sometimes necessary to take the lane to avoid getting caught in a right hook.

              And big SUV's running 45mph are not a permanent problem ... in another decade, any SUV's left on the main roads will be going well under the speed limit, to conserve gas.

     and Energize America

              by BruceMcF on Sun Jan 06, 2008 at 01:43:01 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site