NOTE: Comments
Note to all who wish to comment to BASC committee blog: In order to post to this blog…ALL COMMENTS MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY YOUR “FULL (REAL) NAME” IF NOT, YOUR COMMENT WILL NOT POST AND WILL BE DELETED IMMEDIATELY! Again, “Alias” citizen comments/questions will not post. With that said…BASC will address and post “All legitimate, eminant, concerns and questions”. Please note as well, comments must be approved to post. TROLLERS WILL BE DELETED IMMEDIATELY!
16 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Did enjoy the Basc mtg sept ‘09. would like to take part in the future. also, no posts on the blog since july??? updates would be nice. thanks! ~b
Benjo,
It was very good of you to attend. Getting folks from the public will certainly keep us on our toes – which I think is a very healthy thing to happen.
We will work to improve communications to the public and update this blog more regularly. In the past year BASC has gone through many growing pains and some efforts have been hit & miss.
Thank you very much for your comment and suggestion.
Peter Hannah
My take on “Share the Road” – some motorists see this as “Cyclists You Should, Share the Road” and promotes cars passing cyclists within the same lane. Safety shows that in most instances where cars have access to a passing lane Cyclist should “Take the Lane” – and force cars to pass in the adjoining lane.
Do a Google Images search for “Bicycles Allowed Use of Full Lane Change Lanes to Pass”, as this sign sends a CLEAR message to motorists on how they should treat cyclists on the roadways. This sign would be best for research park, and other areas where there are TWO or more lanes such that a Car can freely pass a cyclists. This sign was developed for use in California and it’s roadways.
If planning new cycling routes in congested areas or future anticipated congested areas, do a Google Video Search for “Case for Separated Bike Lanes in NYC” as this may help plan routes that are heavily congested by cars.
Larry,
This is a very good observation. The sign you speak of is actually approved by MUTCD and we discussed ordering them about a year ago. Unfortunately, the “Share the Road” signs had already been purchased with what little money we had at the time, and therefore they were the first to go up.
However, there is good news around the bend. We are getting more money to spend on signage and I am confident that BASC will be very open to getting this new sign installed to send a clearer message. I have brought your comment to their attention.
Thanks!
Peter
Peter,
I look forward to seeing these in the future. Also something that is not as important as a change of signs, but I was not sure who to alert. The traffic signal at the intersection of Sparkman Drive and Technology Drive coming out of UAH does not pickup cyclists (neither the steel frame bike, nor the wheels). I know that as a cyclist we must obey all traffic laws and intersections; however, this one intersection requires me to dismount my bike, push the crosswalk signal, and walk my bike across Sparkman Drive (coming out of UAH). On the loop back home there is usually enough traffic to signal the light heading into UAH from this light and I believe the trigger in the road works fine again heading into UAH from this direction (pushing the crosswalk and walking it across the other way is far too dangerous, motorists look left and do not check for pedestrians on their right – if I “wanted” to get run over to collect someone’s insurance money and risk my hand at the darwin awards, this would be the spot I would choose).
I’ve read these old inductive loop signal lights can be triggered with the rare earth ND magnets glued to the bottom of a cyclists shoes or on the metal in the wheels if a cyclist positions their bike in the correct spot; therefore, it’s not a positioning of the bike issue on the UAH side. Maybe there is a signal adjustment that can be made on the UAH side to pickup the wheels better? Anyways, if you could pass that info along it would be appreciated.
Additionally, I wish the Cyclists around UAH were better informed on cycling laws and safety, and the cyclists I see riding around at night without a light is a pure shame. Some cities either warn the cyclists or fine them, and give them a light on the spot so it gets used. A small fine to pay for the “free” light would be more than acceptable if it means these riders are visible.
Thanks again!
I would like to give a point-of-view of a motorist (i.e. non-bicycle) citizen. I fully support the need to Share The Road. Just because I don’t ride a bicycle is no reason for me to get mad at those that do. Sure, I get annoyed when I realize that the reason my lane suddenly slowed down is because all of the cars are trying to get around a bicyclist. But we do need to be aware of each other and to keep each other safe. With all of the distractions on the road it is up to everybody to try and be as safe as possible.
It is because of safety that I would like to see some thought given to the idea that there are some roads that bicyclist should not be allowed on. As a group, I think that two lane country roads should be bike-free unless there is an actual bike lane available. Specifically, my concern is Green Mountain Road. While this road may be a great challenge, and a lot of fun, for bicyclist it is also very dangerous for both the biker and the car driver. The road is very curvy with limited visibility around the sharp curves. There is also a guard rail on the lane going up which pushes the bike away from the mostly non-existent shoulder. Should a car come upon a bike on the way up then the driver may instinctively swerve away from the bike. But this puts the driver into the path of any vehicles that may be coming down the mountain. And come down it they do. At a very high speed. There are so many sharp curves that it is very realistic to imagine swerving to the left to avoid a bike and then having only fractions of a second to avoid an on-coming car.
Additionally, throw in the construction trucks, cement mixer trucks, etc. that routinely travel Green Mountain Road and it just seems to me that it is too dangerous to allow bikes on that road. It is a threat to both your (the biker) safety as well as my (driver) safety.
Personally, I wish that all roads had bike lanes. But that is not the reality. As we all share the road we must also be aware that our actions may endanger other people.
1) I would like to see the section of the City’s Inventory Control list that itemizes the bike racks- number, size, and location. With this information, I hope the committee can see which ones need to be re-appropriated.
IMO the rack on Newport “the Dead Children’s Playground” behind Maple Hill, is far larger than what is needed at that location. I suggest swapping a small one & using this long one in a high bike traffic area.
-inc
2) I thought last week’s meeting went well with few exceptions that could easily be improved upon for future meetings:
A) Establish a simple procedure to give speaker the floor. I suggest Peter, or someone else, recognize each speaker through holding up hands, so some people aren’t going to a podium etc.
B) Instead of telling us why an idea CANNOT be done, help us work toward that goal.
When I asked for the timeline, what I heard was a member tell me she was too busy & no no one would do this & her refusal took 15+ minutes. I beleive she was not present when the mayor spoke in the beginning of the meeting…
Instead, it would have been productive & representative to ask questions about what it is I specifically wanted & see how we could get there.
I was not asking her to do it. Nor was I asking for some fancy MS Project timeline.
Instead, I relating this to Mayor Battle’s earlier talk where he mentioned his 20 yr goals. He implied incremental steps, and I would like to see them. I am not asking for them in stone. I understand about funding & the economy, and all that.
Actually, I would be fine with a newspaper sheet and a sharpie & 15 minutes of someone saying this is our 20 yr goal. 10 year goal. 5 year goal. A simple visualization based on the mayor’s 20 yr goal. I am not asking for the fancy, detailed timelines (step-by-step) that many departments have.
However, I would be interested in seeing these, since this was offered. Please do post them or email with them. I would appreciate it.
B) Not to bash anyone, but when a committee member says they are too busy etc it gives the audience the feeling that that member either does not have the time for or commitment to BASC, whether this is the case or not.
Perhaps, the committee needs more members or members with more time. I think this is very bad PR- off-putting when a simple statement like we need time to work toward that(said in earnest) would have had the opposite effect & alleviate some of the feelings of not being represented or that “burearcracy” has bogged down our high hopes for BASC.
Nolen,
We do hear you.
I will try to do a better job at moderating the forum. The intent was to manage it in the way you suggest, but there is a fine line between being heavy handed with protocol and allowing a more free-flow of thought. We’ll try to be more balanced next time.
Your timeline idea is a very good one. Once I get the data from Sharon’s minutes, a timeline or priority list is exactly what we will do. We need to assess what was learned from the public forum(s), define the problems in clear terms, categorize the goals, and stay on top of them until they are reached.
Regarding the statement about being too busy – I understand your concern. I think Jamie wanted to relay the fact that we do not have special powers to flip a switch and make “it” happen overnight. We are citizens just like you who hold full-time jobs in addition to the responibilities we’ve been given with BASC. The BASC responsibilities are not taken lightly and I hope that is not how the public sees it.
Her point was to emphasize that BASC hasn’t been given the authority to do the things that are ultimately the city’s responsibility. But, we can advise them on it,and hold them accountable – which is much better than what we had before. A few years ago, they weren’t even listening to us. Now, we meet with city officials once a month. We have their ear.
We are all busy, but we still find time to address this important cause. Believe it or not, much hard work has been done, and we recognize that much more has yet to be done.
Thank you for your feedback and suggestions. Your opinion does matter, and I encourage more people to write in with their comments as you have.
v/r
Peter
Co-chair, BASC
“As a group, I think that two lane country roads should be bike-free unless there is an actual bike lane available.”
Now, there’s a share-the-road attitude for you! The safest, least crowded & most enjoyable roads should be bike free! Mr. Distler conflates driver’s convenience (or fears?) with safety – a common pov of non-riding drivers. Make driving easier for drivers by banning cyclists is the underlying belief.
As to Green Mtn Rd, it is arguably unsafe for all users, especially incompetent operators &/or downhill speeders. I suspect more driver’s have been killed & injured on it over the years than cyclists. Thus it is autos that ought to be banned. But let’s not be ridiculous, shall we (see above quote)?
Please consider the following sited for the cyclists crossing signs (like on Hastings,YEA!:
Please consider the following sites for the cyclists crossing signs (like on Hastings,YEA!):
* Andrew Jackson/California at the light at Clinton
* Clinton at Coleman
* Clinton at Lincoln
(These go together as this is a popular route from town to 5 Pts (East/West route)
* Williams at Church/Gallatin (S Corner of Big Springs)
* Gallatin at Governors (Corner of hospital)
* Gallatin & Bob Wallace
(These go together as this is a popular route from town going south/north- to Marathon route)
* California at Lowe/Fraser
* Franklin at Governors
* Governors at Seminole
* Meridian and Cleveland
* Clinton at Greene
* Clinton at Church (N Corner of Big Springs)
* Walker at Pratt (or near Old Towne Coffee)
I applaud the signs designating Bike Route where Hastings crosses Drake (I use this route occasionally) and I hope more will follow. Perhaps some of the CARS money could be used to encourage cyclists to use the Bike Route and avoid the more dangerous streets where we are an impediment to regular traffic flow. I know we have a right to be there, but the Bike Route is just as quick for a cyclist and a lot less dangerous – not to mention the factor of not irritating drivers who don’t want us on “their” street.
Thank you for this input! I will certainly make this known to the rest of BASC – especially our traffic engineering representative.
I would like to add to my request list for signage & crossing remediation of sorts:
The Hampton cove Intersection- I believe that is Old 431 & Sutton. as this is on a SCCC cycling route & connects HC & the Sutton area neighbors- for WM & groceries etc.
Please consider the following sites for the cyclists crossing signs (like on Hastings,YEA!):
* Andrew Jackson/California at the light at Clinton
* Clinton at Coleman
* Clinton at Lincoln
(These go together as this is a popular route from town to 5 Pts (East/West route)
* Williams at Church/Gallatin (S Corner of Big Springs)
* Gallatin at Governors (Corner of hospital)
* Gallatin & Bob Wallace
(These go together as this is a popular route from town going south/north- to Marathon route)
* California at Lowe/Fraser
* Franklin at Governors
* Governors at Seminole
* Meridian and Cleveland
* Clinton at Greene
* Clinton at Church (N Corner of Big Springs)
* Walker at Pratt (or near Old Towne Coffee)
I would like to open the discussion of where we would want crossings of Memorial Parkway- so they can, at least, get on some long term plan.
I would suggest:(not prioritized)
University area
Oakwood area (a number of cyclist have been hit here- Kroger)
Governors or Bob Wallace
Drake Or Bob Wallace. Drake gives Kroger & Wal Mart but I think Bob Wallace. Drake leads to another RSA entrance too.
Airport Rd area.
Although not ideal, cyclist and pedestrians can cross at Holmes, Clinton, and Charlotte area.
Way South– something that connects neighborhoods and Arsenal access.
—
Reasonably, I know we won’t get them all but I would like to know what would be citizens’ first several choices & why.
Went with Leela Pahl as she presented the complete streets petition today. How awesome 1,400 signatures! She did a great job of summarizing the comments to the mayor. I did a short presentation explaining Complete Streets.
Thanks everyone who worked on the petition for all their hard work.