 |
Re: Placerville Branch public meetings re bike lane conversion
Author: mook
Date: 04-12-2015 - 18:06
> Only 1.6% of the federal transportation budget is spent on bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure.
That looks pretty low - probably only the funds that are directly allocated to bike facilities. The actual percentage is certainly higher but impossible to easily quantify, since road projects are supposed to consider including "complete street" concepts including bike lanes (painted) or paths (separated) where feasible. Feasibility depends on not only cost but also traffic studies to estimate probable bike traffic.
That said, trip surveys can yield surprisingly high numbers for bicycle usage in some areas. For instance, SACOG (Sacramento, CA) did some modal surveys in 2006 when preparing a Metropolitan Transportation Plan update. Some of the bicycle trip percentages (particularly at the shorter distances) were impressive - well over 10%, and over 20% even in places that are thoroughly suburban (i.e. NOT Davis, CA!). Look at some of the surveys at [www.sacog.org].
> ... local roads are not funded from gasoline tax revenues ...
That's generally true, at least for initial construction of collector and local roads associated with land development projects. Arterial roads generally do get some gas tax money for initial construction, though most of the funding does come from other sources. Heavy maintenance/reconstruction (actual overlays, not just patches & slurry seals; reconstruction or bridge work; extensive signal and intersection work, for example) almost always has a good bit of gas tax funding (at least 30-40%). There's even a gas-tax-funded program for building railroad/highway (including local arterial) grade separations, though the amount of funding is too small to be very effective.
> ... attitudes of cyclists ...
... are almost impossible to determine without some overt indication, or being inside their heads. Just like attitudes of motorists. That said, I have experienced a strong correlation between lack of following traffic rules and the resemblance of riders/their bikes to Real Racers. Try riding a regional bike trail sometime, sticking to the (usually) 15ish speed limit and at least slowing down for stop/yield signs and other trail users; you WILL be run down or off the trail at least once on any significant (over 10 miles or so) daytime ride by a pickup peleton. This of course is not on a street, but as both a bicycle rider and as a driver I've had my run-ins with the brightly-colored-with-advertising crowd, on the bikes that cost way more than my car did, there too. Of course, not that every motorist is pleasant to be around, either, regardless of what mode you're using ...
That looks pretty low - probably only the funds that are directly allocated to bike facilities. The actual percentage is certainly higher but impossible to easily quantify, since road projects are supposed to consider including "complete street" concepts including bike lanes (painted) or paths (separated) where feasible. Feasibility depends on not only cost but also traffic studies to estimate probable bike traffic.
That said, trip surveys can yield surprisingly high numbers for bicycle usage in some areas. For instance, SACOG (Sacramento, CA) did some modal surveys in 2006 when preparing a Metropolitan Transportation Plan update. Some of the bicycle trip percentages (particularly at the shorter distances) were impressive - well over 10%, and over 20% even in places that are thoroughly suburban (i.e. NOT Davis, CA!). Look at some of the surveys at [www.sacog.org].
> ... local roads are not funded from gasoline tax revenues ...
That's generally true, at least for initial construction of collector and local roads associated with land development projects. Arterial roads generally do get some gas tax money for initial construction, though most of the funding does come from other sources. Heavy maintenance/reconstruction (actual overlays, not just patches & slurry seals; reconstruction or bridge work; extensive signal and intersection work, for example) almost always has a good bit of gas tax funding (at least 30-40%). There's even a gas-tax-funded program for building railroad/highway (including local arterial) grade separations, though the amount of funding is too small to be very effective.
> ... attitudes of cyclists ...
... are almost impossible to determine without some overt indication, or being inside their heads. Just like attitudes of motorists. That said, I have experienced a strong correlation between lack of following traffic rules and the resemblance of riders/their bikes to Real Racers. Try riding a regional bike trail sometime, sticking to the (usually) 15ish speed limit and at least slowing down for stop/yield signs and other trail users; you WILL be run down or off the trail at least once on any significant (over 10 miles or so) daytime ride by a pickup peleton. This of course is not on a street, but as both a bicycle rider and as a driver I've had my run-ins with the brightly-colored-with-advertising crowd, on the bikes that cost way more than my car did, there too. Of course, not that every motorist is pleasant to be around, either, regardless of what mode you're using ...
