LOL I won't ride any of the LTS 4 and monst of the LTS3 streets here, which is where our city puts their "bike lanes". After seeing the "bike streets" and modal filters in Santa Barbara, California, I think that's the easiest way to make cycling possible in the suburbs here. #BikeTooter
@ai6yr So the thing about putting bike lanes on LTS4 and LTS3 streets is that yes, there IS a better alternative, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't serve the people who are going to cycle on those streets anyway. Invariably, people will cycle on them, so you should do the retrofitting to make them a SAFER space to do it. And last I checked, even shitty bike lanes do increase safety even though they don't ensure it. It should be done, but isn't the ONLY thing that should be done.
@HayiWena Oh yeah, there's an LTS3 street (which I think shoudl be LTS4) with NO BIKE LANES and I occasionally see kids trying to ride and I hope some kid doesn't get killed...๐Ÿ˜ฌ
@HayiWena @ai6yr if it's an LTS4 after bike lanes are installed, the engineer is bad but also I don't think it's worth installing it for whatever marginal gain you got. You now put a bike lane effectively no one is going to use on what is likely the most significant road, meaning people that don't want real changes can reasonably point to the shitty bike lane and say "why bother".
@HayiWena @ai6yr And since you clearly don't have good political or staff support fighting for something that actually improves the LTS, they will happily wilt under the most minimal push back.
@DemonHusky @HayiWena Yeah, part of this problem is one of the staff is not a fan of bicycling (I believe), and we had an APPROVED, FUNDED Class III bicycle lane being put into place at a critical connector, and he decided to run an (unsolicited) "test" by putting orange cones on that street for two weeks, soliciting what they say is "the most complaints ever to the city", so they s***canned the project. I believe it was a deliberate move. (I was in a bicycle meeting and he said "we don't want to do Class IV lanes or anything because then we can't reclaims the lanes in the future"... he tried to explain this as "it will be easier/cheaper if they have autonomous vehicles / future technology if we don't put in separation and only use paint". So we're fighting that.
@ai6yr @DemonHusky Oh yes, sacrificing today lives for future hypothetical savings when you have to support future magic technology. I must've been absent the day they covered that in my traffic engineering class.
@HayiWena @DemonHusky Yeah, I was kinda flabbergasted. I think he went to a traffic engineering school where "MAXIMUM SPEED AND THROUGHPUT OF CARS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING IN THE WORLD" was drilled into his head.
@ai6yr @DemonHusky @HayiWena I think everything wrong with transportation is some variant on a theme of car culture, where we have 10x redundant carway networks and you can aimlessly and incompetently wander through any city in a car without fear of death or even really getting honked at much. But we have like at-best 0.3x complete low-stress bikeway network, and if bicycling isn't outright dismissed as a sport, it's something we "don't have the money for" while cars burn billions in road wear.
@ai6yr @DemonHusky @HayiWena and due to how projects get funded in the comfortable world of 10x-redundant car networks, connecting a bike infrastructure network is never going to happen independently of rebuilding car streets (or at all), until politicians demand a quick-build connected bikeway network and set policy to allow extensive use of modal filters and reallocating space from car lanes without political meddling watering-down the protection from / restraints on car traffic.
@enobacon @ai6yr @HayiWena having the politicians require a quick build network on a timeline is how Cambridge (and now neighboring Somerville) are actually building a bike network
@DemonHusky @ai6yr @HayiWena exactly. It's the only way any city has ever built a bike network!
@DemonHusky @enobacon @ai6yr @HayiWena I had a long-running argument with Traffic Engineering and the Mayor (in parallel, via email) about a protected bike lane on an LTS 2 street despite a Master Plan listing four LTS 4 streets as our "near-term" protected bike network.
The best I got was "Mike (traffic engr) thought it was a good idea."
Yes, that LTS 2 segment is safer. No incidents since then, but none before then either. It's the opportunity cost of not improving something that was identified as riskier.
I asked the City Mgr why he wouldn't ask the bike/ped committee to offer opinions on priority among those four and he said, "I would never advise any one of my staff to go into a situation like that."
Hence, all of our bike/ped meetings are " here's your only option, we need you to pass a motion of support."
@enobacon @DemonHusky @HayiWena Yes, this seems to be the case, and it's extra-worse in suburban California. (although, not as terrible as some parts of Texas ๐Ÿ˜ฑ )
@ai6yr It's weird cus California has this reputation for being so environmentally friendly, but the urban planning is like, the opposite of that.

@DemonHusky @HayiWena @ai6yr

Yeah so frustrating! I've visited so many towns and small cities and neighborhoods in big cities, where the only bike infrastructure was on the main drag. With cars going 45mph and nothing but paint to protect you

We need to bicyclize the small streets first, and the main drag after

In places built during the era of the cul-de-sac, sometimes the main drag is the only route from a to b. That way means we need to create woonerfs, pave the often already existing informal paths that connect one cul-de-sac neighborhood to the next

I think the reason city planners put bike lanes on the main drag is partly that it's visible, so it looks like they're doing something. And partly that it doesn't occur to them that someone might take back streets to get from one place to another

Obviously the solution is to stack the planning committees with bicyclists, and give them a larger budget than the part of the transportation department that deals with car streets

Somehow we need to convince people that the future is micromobility, and any money spent accommodating cars is probably wasted

@NilaJones @DemonHusky @HayiWena Well, one thing that I'd love to do is force all the city staff/planners to ACTUALLY BICYCLE ON THE SHARROWS THEY PUT HERE NEXT TO THE HIGH SCHOOL (death trap). It might change their mind about their planning practices.

@ai6yr @DemonHusky @HayiWena

That is such a good idea!

I wonder if you could get it to happen by disguising it as something positive. Celebrating our bicycle infrastructure! Follow the route kids take to school! Ice cream sundaes at the school!

The trick is you gotta have it during rush hour ๐Ÿ˜ˆ

@NilaJones City planners don't put bike lanes anywhere. City engineers do. I think the main reason they put them on the main drags is that those roads get touched more often than neighborhood streets and so they get the opportunity to restripe them vs neighborhood streets don't really need bike lanes if the speed limit is 20 mph. Better signage, yes. But lanes, no.

Planning commissions also have no dog in this fight. They do not make engineering decisions.

@HayiWena @NilaJones On the plus side, looking at this plan -- on paper, at least, they took my (many) suggestions for easy wins on striping into the plan. Everything else... all future/unfunded, but the "easy wins" I proposed in feedback all seems to have been incorporated... very surprisingly. (ie marking some parallel/alternative streets as bike routes and adding sharrows markings/signs/even lanes...) But the paint is funded as is street paving/upgrades, so it comes free.

@ai6yr @HayiWena

Hooray! Fantastic job!

@NilaJones @HayiWena They had multiple ways to submit feedback, and I went through all the parts of town I knew and put in all my feedback about conditions there for pedestrians and cycling. So... their data set for developing plans (I think) heavily influenced by that. I don't know how many of these comments were mine... on their online map, they got 99 individual comments, and I put in at least 30 (if not more...maybe a lot more). I spent quite a bit of time going over the map and all the areas I travel. (so... lesson on these: put in all your input!)

@ai6yr @HayiWena

I remember when you were doing that!

@ai6yr

I haven't seen a map oriented feedback system like that for my city. But I do subscribe to their newsletter where they list the surveys, and I fill out the surveys!

And I used to write documents when they were soliciting public input. But eventually I figured out that they really didn't want input from individual people. They want input from groups. So I'm trying to find the energy to start a group

(I was at a city council meeting one time, and they were like, '... and feedback was submitted by This group and That group and.... Nila Jones.' And then everyone looked uncomfortable, at me)

@NilaJones @ai6yr My city is doing it for the second time after the MPO did it as well. First for the City's Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, then the MPO for the updated Bike Map, and now the City again for the Comprehensive Plan. I can't give the same feedback for the third time, I am exhausted.

@HayiWena @ai6yr

I don't know how it is in different places, but I've been pretty frustrated with the process here. I've been on committees, I've submitted feedback as a person or part of a group

There's a huge emphasis here on getting feedback from the public, but it really doesn't seem like the feedback is incorporated. It seems like the enormous amount of time and effort that is spent on feedback gathering comes after the decisions have already been made

The last official thing I did, I was on a committee to review the zoning code and suggest changes

We met weekly for about 6 months. We went through the whole code, and applied our expertise. We went through bucket loads of suggested changes from citizens, figured out when people were saying the same thing in different words, and which suggestions could be combined. Eventually we came up with a list of 30 or so top priority changes

THEN, after all that, they told us that they were only going to make three changes, and they had to be super minor like correcting typos

People involved in the process were pretty mad, and spoke up about it at the meeting. The folks from the city looked shamefaced, and said that they would do another process in 10 years where we could make slightly larger changes

I don't want to discourage people from getting involved in local government. But it's really important to find people who can tell you how stuff really works. I thought I had done enough of that, but I guess I didn't

@NilaJones @ai6yr That sounds like a bunch of BS! I'm guessing it was part of your comprehensive planning process. That happens every 10 years. I chaired my city planning commission for about half of my 6y term and wanted to stay on thru our comp plan revision process. The city has the power to change code any time (with council approval), though it needs to be in compliance with state law & consistent with the comp plan. We can update the comp plan annually.
@HayiWena @NilaJones The existence of our "bicycle advisory committee" is I believe driven not so much by the city's interest in bolstering cycling, as by statutory requirements to get feedback from constituent groups from California. The "Active Transportation Plan" they are working on is required to apply for grant funding for not only bicycling/pedestrian improvements, but road maintenance/other grants. That said, we do have a number of folks on the city council and county government who are athletic cyclists, so they are more friendly than one would expect in a suburban area. Anyway, there are "compliance with law/etc." efforts and then there are active efforts to support things. But understanding "how things work" is definitely important... lots of stuff here driven by real estate development.
@ai6yr @NilaJones We got our Comprehensive Safety Action Plan as a requirement to apply for Safe Streets for All grant funds. Our traffic engineer picks projects in good faith but there's so much need. Our streets were built for a different time with slower, lower, lighter vehicles that required active engagement to drive where the only distraction was the radio or yelling kids. All kinds of safety are in decline and legislators only authorize $ for capacity expansion.

@HayiWena @ai6yr

I know what you mean about the comprehensive plan, and I don't think it was the year for that. But this was a while back so my memory is fuzzy

If it was the comp plan, I would have been working on that!

@ai6yr @NilaJones @HayiWena I donโ€™t live anywhere near there, but so glad to do this.

@HayiWena

I guess it depends on where you live. In my city the planning subcommittees are all over it. The transportation planning committee, bicycle and pedestrian committee, all sorts of stuff

@NilaJones @HayiWena @ai6yr it's definitely depends on location (and by that I mostly mean political will), but the best case is to do the main streets with the destinations that people are traveling to first, because if you can't get to your destination safely, you aren't biking there.
@NilaJones @HayiWena @ai6yr
But if the options are uncomfortable bike lane on main road and real traffic calming on parallel residential street that is going to build support from non-cyclists for future projects because residents don't like fast cut thru, choose the second option.
@NilaJones @HayiWena @ai6yr Then, you gotta build power as a political group. Get people to consistently show up in front of electeds in all the ways possible. Wear the opposition down and find supporters to uplift. This part is super hard and very much a long game. (I've been lucky to join the Cambridge group after they built up success, but right now the Boston group is needing to recalibrate after our mayor changed her mind on safe streets, the fight doesn't end)
@DemonHusky @NilaJones @ai6yr In my town, you can do the main drag with a resurfacing project (every 10-15y) or a big, grant funded reconfiguration (once in a blue moon), but neighborhood traffic calming there's $X0,000/yr that neighborhoods have to compete for in a resident-nominated, >x% sign in support process. This in a town where the public works director and traffic engineer ride eBikes 8+ mi to work &/walk at lunch. Staff has the will, but need resources.
@HayiWena @NilaJones @ai6yr yeah, my main point is: build what you can that will build momentum. Don't build things that have minimal benefit and are going to weaken support for further improvements. Call that stuff out as being bad faith design, and use that in the future to call out the engineer for being bad at their job when their designs don't work.
@HayiWena @NilaJones @ai6yr
But also, build lots of quick build instead of waiting for major resurfacing projects. Flex post separated lanes on our main roads in Cambridge is why we have the best bike/car commute ratio in the country and still improving. (I'm particularly excited about this summer as we basically finish our plan with the last few major roads)
@DemonHusky @NilaJones @ai6yr It would be a lot easier to get support from engineers to do builds if there were Crash Modification Factors, but it's so hard to aggregate and statistically analyze the safety impacts of different types of infrastructure across jurisdictions. Don't get me wrong; most crash modification factors are developed off of tiny samples and weak sauce stats, but given low bike volumes and short timelines we need a statistical approach to demonstrate the CMF.

@DemonHusky @HayiWena @ai6yr

That's not how bicyclists get places

They don't go along the main drag, unless they are in a neighborhood that doesn't have any quiet through streets

And even then, they probably cobble together a zigzag route, that avoids the main drag as much as possible, cuts through alleys and parking lots and dirt trails, etc. Anything to avoid being where the cars are

After traveling a mile or two on back streets, they go the final block on a busier street, to get to the actual destination

The question is, how do we codify this and make it safer?

@NilaJones @DemonHusky @ai6yr Teens in particular are more likely to take the main drag because the only routes they know are the ones they've been driven on. Low income/under housed/people of color often take the main drag because they don't feel welcome/safe in the white wealthy burbs

@HayiWena @DemonHusky @ai6yr

Really good points! Thank you

I don't go in the white wealthy burbs myself, so I didn't think about that. Are people from outside passing through on bikes?

Maybe part of creating a safe route is letting people know where it is

And as you say, making sure it is safe for everyone!

I'm thinking about, for example, 'the wiggle' in San Francisco, which is a way of getting around the hills, staying relatively level, off the car streets, and also within the poorer neighborhoods

It's shown in a bright color on the bicycle map!

@NilaJones @HayiWena @DemonHusky @ai6yr also a minor issue with what do routing apps recommend? Some of them give dubious advice but some people follow that advice. Algorithms can follow car or strava choices, or wishful GIS annotations by local planners, or just minimize "estimated time".

@dr2chase got routed down some stairs once on a cargo bike pulling a trailer.

@NilaJones @HayiWena @DemonHusky @ai6yr

@dr2chase
lol!

I love getting 'dead-ended' into multiple disability ramp switchbacks with my long-tail cargobike & utility trailer

@NilaJones @HayiWena @DemonHusky @ai6yr

@HayiWena @NilaJones @DemonHusky I just bicycled through a block where they had "NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH, WE CALL 911" signs every three houses on a block.
@ai6yr @NilaJones @DemonHusky I took great delight putting Black Lives Matter stickers on those. One of these days I might take them down. My city doesn't support a neighborhood watch anymore, if they ever did, but hasn't taken the signs down. They had Facebook groups at one point for each police subdivision. Hopefully those got too hard to moderate. ๐Ÿคฃ
@NilaJones @HayiWena @ai6yr Cyclists don't travel on the main road because the main road is crap. Most cyclists (and here I'm including all the cyclists that choose not to ride because the destination isn't safe) don't /want/ to zig zag and take parking lots and alleys, they choose to get where they are going safely and efficiently. For some that means zigzag, most that means just not biking. But to my point above, a painted bike lane next to 45mph cars is not a sufficient bike lane.

@NilaJones @HayiWena @ai6yr There is a method to codify what a sufficient bike lane is for the car traffic and it is commonly used by industry (those LTS numbers used above) called Level of Traffic Stress.

https://peterfurth.sites.northeastern.edu/level-of-traffic-stress/

I promise you, if the bike lane is low enough stress, people /will/ bike on the main street, even with little kids in the middle of the winter
https://mas.to/@DemonHusky/114048940987545302

@DemonHusky @HayiWena @ai6yr

Well, this is getting into potato potahto territory

I've used bike lanes like that, with serious separation, and on a fairly busy street

They're not personally to my taste, I still prefer to take the quiet street one block over, where I can cruise along and look at buildings and greenery, and not have to focus on pedestrians constantly stepping out in front of me, lights at every intersection, etc

But I can certainly see how some people might prefer the busy shopping street

@NilaJones @HayiWena @ai6yr I totally choose to take a more scenic route often enough, but if the goal is to make a network that induces new ridership, you need to make the destination streets good. @TheWarOnCars talked about this recently with Portland, where they became a "bike city" by doing neighborhood greenways without making the main streets better, which hasn't been as durable of a change as other cities that have focused on main streets

@DemonHusky @HayiWena @ai6yr @TheWarOnCars

That's really interesting! I thought it was exactly the opposite

The cities I know, where biking to work is a normal thing, year round, have the neighborhood green streets. And the cities I know that have the bike lane along the main drag, nobody bikes there

But I would have counted Portland in the former group! When I've been there, in the winter, there were a lot of people biking

@NilaJones @HayiWena @ai6yr @TheWarOnCars my guess is that those bike lanes are pretty terrible for the level of traffic, so obviously people aren't using them. And I totally support making neighborways to improve connectivity and comfort. I mostly think that neighborways are for people currently biking and a GOOD bike lane on a main road is for people that wish they could bike, and that second group is so much larger than the first group

@DemonHusky @HayiWena @ai6yr @TheWarOnCars

That is a very interesting point

I was thinking in terms of a third group, the people who get on a bike with their kids on a sunny weekend day, but it would never even occur to them to take their bike to work, or grocery shopping. Because biking is a recreational family activity

I was thinking that the boutique street separated bike lane was targeting that group

But you're right that there's a whole other group, the people who don't think about biking unless they see a bike lane at the place that they are headed to in their car, and then they think hey I could do that maybe

@NilaJones @DemonHusky @HayiWena @ai6yr @TheWarOnCars

Related to the one street over: noise levels matter, and contribute to my sense of safety and enjoyment.

You give me a separated super safe bike lane on a busy street and I most likely will still be one street over โ€ฆunless I have to cross a bridge or something. just another aspect of it, at least for me.

@CJPaloma @NilaJones @HayiWena @ai6yr yeah, I've thought about noise, even had a short conversation with Prof Furth about how it might be missing from LTS. He has worked on an adjustment based on hilliness, so I think a similar thing could be for noise.

There's a great river path in Boston that sometimes is right next to the highway. There is a real highway barrier between the path and the highway so it's not really a safety concern, but the noise still makes that section more stressful.

@DemonHusky @NilaJones @HayiWena How about this grand idea here (now removed) from a few years ago? (speed limit 65, people driving up to 75mph or more).