Since Nick's reply to John missed my earlier reply to John and gunnar, I repeat it here to keep it in the thread-Frank
If Van Voorhis had a wide lane uphill, we wouldn't have to "vie with cars". They would be able to pass us leaving a 3-foot gap between them and us. A wide lane is 14-feet wide. The lanes on Beechurst are 8-feet wide.
I hope everyone reads the links that gunnar provided. Our discussions and decisions would be more productive if they came from information rather than just personal opinion.
I will take issue with the second link "How to Not Get Hit by Cars vs."Effective Cycling"", however. The unidentified author claims that Effective Cycling teaches that bicycles = cars. Saying that "Cyclists fare best when they ACT and ARE TREATED AS DRIVERS of vehicles" in no way says that bicycle = car. That fundamental principle of Effective Cycling is about behavior not machinery.
Having taken the Road I course, gunnar knows well that our instructor explicitly stated that bicycles are narrower, lighter and slower than cars. gunnar can also tell you that our instructor taught us how to optimize the advantages and how to minimize the disadvantages that those differences present. We learned that being visible, predictable, assertive and courteous = safe cycling. We learned that our body language and our lane position informs the motorist of what to expect and we learned appropriate body language and lane position for every situation. We learned how to ride straight and how to scan, signal and negotiate to obtain the right of way. We also learned that most crashes occur at intersections and that's where proper body language and lane position are most important.
I can only suppose adults riding bikes on sidewalks downtown is illegal because bicycles present an unacceptable danger to pedestrians. I really doubt the law was passed to protect bicyclists from getting hit by a car exiting a driveway or parking lot, or getting hit by a car that doesn't expect to see the cyclist pop off the sidewalk in mid-block or at the corner. I also suppose that riding on sidewalks outside of downtown is not illegal because there aren't many sidewalks and they're not very used. This week, the Traffic Commission created a Pedestrian Safety Board. If that Board is successful, and I hope it is, we will have sidewalks along all roadways and they will be used by multitudes of pedestrians. Of course that will take years. In the meantime, if the community gets the idea that bicycles are not supposed to ride on the roads and bicycles present an unacceptable danger to pedestrians we will be left to ride our rollers in our living rooms.
My voice is so loud because I dearly love road cycling. I have ridden well over 100,000 miles and I've ridden in London, Paris, Munich, Vienna, Venice, New York, DC, Chicago, Pittsburgh, San Francisco, Denver, Austin and many of the roads and the biggest mountains in between. Until I studied Effective Cycling and took the Road I course, every time I rode in traffic, I was afraid. When I heard a loud motor vehicle come up behind me I would cringe. Since studying and implementing Effective Cycling, confidence and relaxation have replaced that fear and now, 99.99% of the motorists I encounter treat me with respect. Heck, many of them even smile and wave!
My voice is so loud because I can imagine a time when it will become impossible for you to experience what I have.
Frank
Nick Hein wrote:
John, I don't see where there's any conflict with recommending paved shoulders. I DONT contend that they should be marked as bike lanes. I DO contend that cyclists should have some training before using them, and that they have a place to practice that training without undue risk of getting hit by cars. If you don't consider that a suitable solution, what would you propose - under the assumption that a separated path along VanVoorhis would be impractical? Would a path along West Run (creek) be acceptable as the training ground?
I'm as interested as anyone in coming up with a solution that serves the most people in the best way for the longest time - and I agree that the ECer's get a little myopic (they dis recumbents for instance) and I don't want to get sucked into anyone's myopia. If you think there's a way to put a separated path along VanVoorhis please give details.
For such a task I'd recommend the website mapmyride.com. You can overlay topo and satellite maps to help with routing.
You can also find mon county plat maps at www.assessor.org http://www.assessor.org if there's any question about property ownership.
For information, the entire length of Van Voorhis from Burroughs (BBT) is 2 miles. From VanVoorhis to the Mon River trail on West Run Creek is 1.5 miles. What are the thoughts on a suggestion for paved shoulders on VanVoorhis and a bike trail along West Run Creek. What do you propose instead? What do you object to in this proposal?
Nick
----- Original Message ----- *From:* John Lozier <mailto:jl@harpingforharmony.org> *To:* gunn4r Shogren <mailto:gshogren@gmail.com> *Cc:* Nick Hein <mailto:nick.hein@verizon.net> ; Paula Hunt <mailto:pjhunt@xemaps.com> ; bikeboard@cheat.org <mailto:bikeboard@cheat.org> *Sent:* Friday, September 07, 2007 5:22 PM *Subject:* Re: [Bikeboard] "Improvements" to Van Voorhis Road Thanks, Gunnar, for interesting links and supportive words. I don't want to be involved in rigid thinking one way or another. I encourage folks to read the following links you sent, and consider in relation to the loudest voices on our bike board. http://bicyclesafe.com/index.html http://bicyclesafe.com/eci.html On Sep 7, 2007, at 3:57 PM, gunn4r Shogren wrote:Judging from the results from google using "cyclists fare best when they"- http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=mozilla&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aunofficial&q=cyclists+fare+best+when+they&btnG=Search <http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=mozilla&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aunofficial&q=cyclists+fare+best+when+they&btnG=Search> and these few pages that I brought up- http://bicyclesafe.com/eci.html http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1119262 It seems that we're not alone in our two sided argument and such. Bicycles are in a really interesting postion, they can go both ways, they are quite flexible, square-peg-round-hole. Whether you like it or not. And children, kids, use them, which only adds to the confusion and problems. Education can goe a long way, but insistence of either way probably won't do it all. So somewhere compromise probably has to rear it's ugly head and step in. Strange but true. Sometimes gray can be good. Sometimes gray is better than nothing. It's not the same as selling your soul. I personally think that each situation can demand a different answer, no one-size-fits-all. Let's keep harping for Harmony. Sounds nice. gunnar. On 9/7/07, John Lozier <jl@harpingforharmony.org <mailto:jl@harpingforharmony.org>> wrote:All: That stretch of Van Voorhis is curvy and very steep. To me it doesn't seem practical to widen the traffic lanes and expect bicyclists to vie with cars for priority. Downhill maybe, but not uphill. That would be a near-perfect example of a place where I would like to see either 1) a separate bike path, with a curb or other physical barrier between it and the auto lane, or 2) a wide sidewalk designated for bike-ped use. Actually, my two options are not really different, as I would allow pedestrians on my bike path (keep to the right, of course). Okay, this is not what the loudest voices want to hear. However, that is my story and I'm sticking to it. John On Sep 7, 2007, at 8:54 AM, Nick Hein wrote: Paula, The best recommendation to make is that the road be built with a paved shoulder so there is room for bikes, pedestrians AND motor vehicles. As a bike board member (and personally as well) my experience has been that dedicated bike lanes confuse motorists about where bikes are allowed - essentially giving them the mistaken impression that they don't belong in the traffic lane. Under state and federal law bicyclists are a vehicle subject to the same rights and responsibilities as any other vehicle operator, so they should be in the vehicle lane except when there is overtaking traffic (ie when they are going below the speed limit). Thanks for bringing up this issue. I've cc'ed this to the bike board. I don't believe the road is in the city limits, but it certainly feeds alot of traffic to the city - many of whom are potential cyclists. I'll call Chet today and ask him about the issue. Sorry if it sounded like a rant. Nick ----- Original Message ----- From: Paula Hunt To: Bill Reger-Nash ; Nick Hein Cc: tim.warner@mail.wvu.edu <mailto:tim.warner@mail.wvu.edu> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 8:15 PM Subject: "Improvements" to Van Voorhis Road Dear Bill and Nick, Tim and I attended the "Road Service Fee" meeting last night, and I was intrigued when Chet Parson said a bike lane or trail was proposed to go down Van Voorhis Rd. and end at West Run Rd. The following is my note to him asking him to "connect" the lane/trail all the way to the Mon River Trail (Rail Trail). I thought I would keep you both in the loop. Maybe you were aware of this already (?). Thanks to you both for all your good work to make Morgantown a more walkable and cyclable place! paula Subject: Improvements for Van Voorhid Road [yes, I spelled Van Voorhis incorrectly!] From: "Paula Hunt" <pjhunt@xemaps.com <mailto:pjhunt@xemaps.com>> To: parsons@plantogether.org <mailto:parsons@plantogether.org> Dear Mr. Parsons, During the meeting at South Middle School last night I was interested to hear that one of the suggested road improvements was safe bicycle access along Van Voorhis Road ending at West Run Road. I respectfully ask you to consider continuing the bicycle lane all the way down to the Rail Trail at the end of Van Voorhis Road. Stopping at West Run is sooooooo close, but not close enough. I calculate that it will only add 1¼ miles to the bike lane. As you know, VanV Road is steep, narrow, and twisty down there, and a lot of people live on it. A bike lane would be an inexpensive and welcome improvement. I'm sure you know that many people use the Trail to commute in to Morgantown. I live along the newly opened northern section of the Mon River Trail, and I know a few people who live in Point Marion and are using the Trail to commute to work in Morgantown. The number of cyclists that go by our house all times of the day is amazing! My husband is now riding his bike to work at the University via the Trail. Many others travel from the south. Students living in The District could safely access the Trail. I'm sure you agree that linking the Trail to neighborhoods, major apartment blocks, schools, and major employers will get a lot of people out of their cars. As you know, bike lanes and walking trails are much cheaper to build than roads. Perhaps we could do them as a first step rather than as a last step? I wish *I* could ride the Trail to work! Thanks for all your time with this, Paula Hunt Treasurer Mon River Trails Conservancy ________________________________ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.6/991 - Release Date: 9/5/2007 2:55 PM _______________________________________________ Bikeboard mailing list Bikeboard@cheat.org <mailto:Bikeboard@cheat.org> http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/bikeboard _______________________________________________ Bikeboard mailing list Bikeboard@cheat.org <mailto:Bikeboard@cheat.org> http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/bikeboard------------------------------------------------------------------------ No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.485 / Virus Database: 269.13.6/991 - Release Date: 9/5/2007 2:55 PM
Bikeboard mailing list Bikeboard@cheat.org http://cheat.org/mailman/listinfo/bikeboard