DENVER | Transportation Thread

[bobg]

Originally Posted by RyanD

Pardon my ignorance but how is infrastructure contributing to the problem of cyclists not following the laws of the road? If 16th were to turn into a bike boulevard, they would still have to stop for the cross streets, in turn giving you the same problem of not following the rules of the road.

That's like saying, the roads are bad in this area so I'm going to just drive through stop signs and stoplights.

You put bikes on a side road with a bunch of stop signs and lights timed to calm down cars, and it frustrates cyclists who don't need the traffic calming going an already slow 10-15 mph. If you replace four way stops with mini-roundabouts, time the lights so cyclists don't have to stop twice at each one-way couplet, allow cyclists to take the lane throughout (so they don't feel the need to jump the light to avoid a right hook), etc and you have the calm traffic that you had before on 16th with a street cyclists aren't as frustrated by.

As a result of the frustration caused by the current road design some cyclists obey the laws and put up with it, some go to other routes like Colfax or 17th/18th where they aren't going to stop as much, and some stay on the route but use Idaho stops (or just flat out blow through them).

The blog you contribute to even said something similar about the infrastructure contributing to the issue for that exact route: http://denverurbanism.com/2013/08/bicycle-infrastructure-promotes-observance-of-bicycle-laws.html. You may or may not agree with that blog entry, but the studies I have seen and the behavior on the road I have seen seems consistent with what John Hayden said.

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by RyanD

Why is our culture here so hostile and feel like they don't need to obey the signals?

There's a reason why I don't support more infrastructure here, because it's just going to be abused.

So we should stop any road improvements until no more drivers speed? Come on, man. That's nonsense.

Read:
The Myth of the Scofflaw Cyclist

[RyanD]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

So we should stop any road improvements until no more drivers speed? Come on, man. That's nonsense.

Read:
The Myth of the Scofflaw Cyclist

Fair game. Haha!

But... That's Washington DC Man... We're a more... divided culture here. You know that.

[bunt_q]

EDIT: Nevermind. I don't want to anger the most important political force in Denver.

[bcp]

Nooooooo..I read that post and it was amazing. .put it back. Vote for bunt.

[Fritzdude]

Interesting... Denver comes in 4th in the 'best US cities for biking"..

http://www.msn.com/en-us/health/cardio/the-10-most-bike-friendly-us-cities/ss-BBkJs61#image=1

[DownhomeDenver]

Originally Posted by RyanD

EDIT: Also 15th Street cyclists don't use the lane half the time and ignore the bike signals PW has given them. I've spent many a hours observing the nature of our wonderful community and really can provide photo proof if needed. It's just getting ridiculous and I'm beginning to hate strongly dislike the culture here.

Ryan, I have witnessed this so many times. As a Denver taxpayer it pisses me off that we spent this money to create infrastructure that is not being used.

[TakeFive]

Boxcars

Photos credit: Confluence Denver

Bike storage available

[RyanD]

Originally Posted by DownhomeDenver

Ryan, I have witnessed this so many times. As a Denver taxpayer it pisses me off that we spent this money to create infrastructure that is not being used.

Like this? I was driving, fiancee took this and told me, you know, I hate when the cyclists don't use the lanes we built them. She melted my heart right then and there lol.

[Cirrus]

Was that person about to turn right? I agree cyclists should generally use bike lanes when bike lanes are available, but there are some legitimate reasons why they don't sometimes. Turning across traffic would be one of them. Unfortunately, even streets with bike lanes are rarely designed with cyclists' real needs in mind. OTOH, sometimes people are just overly-entitled jerks, cyclists, drivers, and pedestrians all included.

On the other other hand, was this person holding up car traffic? It looks like traffic is pretty light. Was anyone inconvenienced because he made the choice to bike in the general lane? If he wasn't hurting anything except your sense of entitlement to the full street, I'm not sure I agree that he's in the wrong, even if he didn't otherwise have a specific need to be outside the bike lane.

I tell you what: If you guys want to talk about how we can better plan, I'm all for that discussion. Bike planning absolutely suffers from a lack of holistic thinking. But if you just want to go all tribal and complain about one type of scofflaw while excusing the kinds you identify closer with, well, that's your prerogative but it's... unconstructive.

[bobg]

Originally Posted by RyanD

Like this? I was driving, fiancee took this and told me, you know, I hate when the cyclists don't use the lanes we built them. She melted my heart right then and there lol.

I am not sure if it's the case in this instance -it could be based on the location-, but a fair amount of cyclists start transitioning to the right after Arapahoe. This is because they don't like or understand the queue jump, but they still need to move to the right before Larimer where the lane ends. So that subset of cyclists usually goes to the right where the traffic patterns make it work closest to Larimer, which is usually between Lawrence and Arapahoe based on typical signal timing.

If you guys are really that concerned about the utilization of that bike lane I can start taking pictures and posting them (WARNING/DISCLAIMER: I can see 15th from my balcony, and am usually on it daily. So if it's a day like today where I am out a lot, and the cycling traffic is high those pictures would overwhelm this thread). Or I can do an afternoon rush hour bike count -people riding bikes in the bike lane, not in the bike lane, going contraflow, etc- some time this week if you are interested.

However, If you guys just want to rant have at it, and I'll shut up.

[TakeFive]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

Toronto just opened its airport DMU line this week. Here's their trains. If you think they look Japanese, you're right.

Not only their exteriors but get a good look at their interiors.

[RyanD]

But whining is sooooo fun!!!! That cyclist was just chillin, weaving around traffic from Tremont to Wynkoop.

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by bobg

If you guys are really that concerned about the utilization of that bike lane I can start taking pictures and posting them (WARNING/DISCLAIMER: I can see 15th from my balcony, and am usually on it daily. So if it's a day like today where I am out a lot, and the cycling traffic is high those pictures would overwhelm this thread). Or I can do an afternoon rush hour bike count -people riding bikes in the bike lane, not in the bike lane, going contraflow, etc- some time this week if you are interested.

However, If you guys just want to rant have at it, and I'll shut up.

I'd actually like that. I'm interested to see just how much bike traffic the 15th Street Lane gets. Does at average ten bikes per hour? A hundred? A thousand? Just how much do these lanes get utilized and is the trade-off of (possibly) eliminating a future transit lane along 15th St a good one?

[BG918]

I sometimes get over in the right lanes where the photo was taken to get on the bike lane going north on Lawrence. Maybe if there was a barrier between the lane and traffic more people would stay in it, also colored pavement along the entire stretch not just at intersections.

[bunt_q]

Oh look, another day, another streetsblog post attacking a project that every normal, rational human in the city thinks is a good idea: http://denver.streetsblog.org/2015/06/16...reet-wider-and-more-dangerous/#more-1220

So a month or two in, I think the biggest lesson I've learned from having them in Denver is this: While we might not be doing everything right that we could, we certainly aren't doing much wrong either. Because if the things they've chosen to attack are the most egregious examples we have around town, we're doing all right.

EDIT: While I am on the subject, the recent transportation articles in CityLab have been almost as bad. I am no lover of Stapleton. But anybody who thinks 30-foot curb radii are actually the reason Stapleton isn't more walkable/less car-oriented really needs to get out more. Could it perhaps be that there's nothing much within a few miles of most people to walk to? The only trips that aren't going to be made by car are some local shopping trips, and your occasional jaunt around the neighborhood - everything else is just too far. Anyways, here's the article: http://www.citylab.com/cityfixer/2015/04/a-case-study-in-flawed-street-design/389291/

I am not sure at what point planners working in transportation developed a mental block around land use, and its obvious (and overwhelming) effect on transportation. Is it because most of them come from a narrow demographic of people (i) whose lives have no time constraints and (ii) think a 5-mile bike ride is acceptable? I don't know. And at the same time, they all started thinking that sounding like half-baked-quasi-engineers was somehow going to make them more persuasive. These folks talking about induced traffic and road safety is akin to me talking about architecture - I do it, but nobody should ever take me seriously. Stay in your lane, gentlemen, and make an argument that's actually convincing to people who don't already agree with you. (Or don't, I guess, but I have no time for Fox-esque echo chambers.)

[RyanD]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

Oh look, another day, another streetsblog post attacking a project that every normal, rational human in the city thinks is a good idea: http://denver.streetsblog.org/2015/06/16...reet-wider-and-more-dangerous/#more-1220

So a month or two in, I think the biggest lesson I've learned from having them in Denver is this: While we might not be doing everything right that we could, we certainly aren't doing much wrong either. Because if the things they've chosen to attack are the most egregious examples we have around town, we're doing all right.

Oh come on Bunt! Wider streets with new sidewalks (because there weren't any before) FOR THE PEDESTRIANS is so so so so so much more dangerous!

DPW has decided to turn the 1.2-mile stretch into a four-lane chasm through a residential neighborhood of northeast Denver with five schools in the vicinity.

Jesus christ David Sachs... Do you know how much traffic schools generate? I have to drive all over Denver metro for my job and drive this part of Quebec a lot. The schools are the main cause for the traffic!

But... this chasm is going to destroy Quebec, in the most car oriented part of Quebec because there is no transit worth a damn out there. I made a worthy image for the great and powerful Streetsblog Denver...

[wong21fr]

Originally Posted by RyanD

But... this chasm is going to destroy Quebec, in the most car oriented part of Quebec because there is no transit worth a damn out there. I made a worthy image for the great and powerful Streetsblog Denver...

Aprops, Ryan, very aprops. StreetBlogs Denver seems to be struggling to find it's place in the smallish Denver urbanist community. Given the DenverInfill and DenverUrbanism swallow up a good amount of traffic I think that StreetBlogs is looking at the angry biker community to generate more interest and more site traffic. It's a good explanation for why the posts have gotten a lot more inflammatory in language. Before long it'll be like reading a Tea Party Patriot website for biking and pedestrians.

[RyanD]

Originally Posted by wong21fr

Before long it'll be like reading a Tea Party Patriot website for biking and pedestrians.

I... Love... Clipart...

This might need to get removed but... Enjoy it while it lasts!

[bunt_q]

Thanks Ryan. Consider that stolen. I was in the market for a new avatar anyways.