The app is just giving me timeouts now though, and I've never seen mention of an old light rail system elsewhere.
In 1897, a Bicycle Superhighway Was the Future of California Transit
41–50 of 90 posts
Re: In 1897, a Bicycle Superhighway Was the Future of California Transit
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why not just build a wall as a sound barrier to push the noise upward and over the bike lane?
Listing all the problems with any idea of a bike lane along a freeway will tire me out (starting with: there's no space, high barriers are regarded as ugly, there's no way to make the interchanges work, the freeway under road overpasses will permit larger road widths only with enormous expense, we can't even build carpool lanes and light rail, people won't stand for the construction delays). Let's not do this.
I do not think a freeway-adjacent bikeway would be popular with cyclists if open-air. LA has a freeway-adjacent bus rapid transit line (the "Sliver Line") which isn't very popular at 12K avg boardings in March 2013, compared to the far more successful rail-route-replacing "Orange Line" at 30K+ avg weekday boardings for the same month.
The Orange Line has a parallel bike lane which is popular with cyclists and pedestrians, even into the evening as it's well-lit and well-landscaped.
Edit: Reference for LA Metro system boardings: http://www.metro.net/news/ridership-statistics/
Re: In 1897, a Bicycle Superhighway Was the Future of California Transit
#43Earlier quoted context omitted.
Cycling right next to a freeway sounds gross. All you need to do is take some back roads, slap down some speed bumps, sharrows and other things to slightly annoy cars, and call it a day: http://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/article/348902 Nice and cheap, plus you get bikes away from cars entirely, not simply relegated to the side of a high traffic, high speed street. I think it's the best option for any city…
You could also take unused railroad tracks and pave over them. It's been done elsewhere. Nice, long, straight bike paths.
Re: In 1897, a Bicycle Superhighway Was the Future of California Transit
#44Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I remember watching shows as a kid in the 1970's about how you couldn't get Californians out of their cars. Southern Californians. I think Northern Californians (bay area) are much easier to get out of their cars.
I think the prevailing opinion of most Californians now is "we'd like to, but can't do it as often as we'd like."
------
[1] https://billrosendahl.wordpress.com/2013/04/23/ciclavia-to-t...
Re: In 1897, a Bicycle Superhighway Was the Future of California Transit
#45Earlier quoted context omitted.
LA is slowly improving its transit situation from what it used to be, though unevenly. A light-rail line from downtown to Pasadena was opened in 2003, and the subway system is finally being extended, it seems, through some of the more densely populated area of the westside: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purple_Line_Extension The Metrolink commuter-rail system also runs 500 miles of track, and is now a reasonable optio…
The biggest issue with public transit in LA for commuting is the last mile problem. It's similar to the "last mile" problem of fast fiber optic cables to slow copper wires to homes. Here the issue is efficient and fast rail transit to extremely inefficient bus system for that last few miles from stations to work. I once tried to plan my commute using public transit and here's what I found: 1) Drive to rail station fo…
Re: In 1897, a Bicycle Superhighway Was the Future of California Transit
#46Re: In 1897, a Bicycle Superhighway Was the Future of California Transit
#47* Some related thoughts:
___ o My favorite LA commute replaced a 80-minute auto commute with a 90-minute total { auto + Metrolink commuter rail + bike locker + 1.6 mile bike ride } commute. By driving to the "home end" and renting a bike locker (where I kept a bike in storage overnight) at the "work end" of the commute, I solved the "last mile problem". And I got 20 minutes of reading time each way on commuter rail.
____ o Folding bikes [1] solve the "last mile" problem given that (within certain restrictions) they can be taken on-board folded on LA busses [2]. Having put over 8,000 miles on three different folding bikes, I have found them to be practical but at-times finicky.
____ o LA is getting a bike share program under beta rollout in "LA-adjacent"-Anaheim [3]. These bikes use driveshafts (instead of chains) for cleanliness.
____ o Adapting a mountain bike or hybrid bike using an "Xtracycle" attachment [4] creates a long wheelbase cargo bike cable of carrying a week's groceries for a family of four. I have over 2500 miles on one of these. It won't go on public transportation nor on the bike rack of a car, but it can carry up to 300 pounds (if the hills aren't too steep and the load is well-distributed).
____ o My present LA commute is 5 miles, suburban all the way, and takes 30 to 35 min by bike, independent of auto traffic. Taking my auto instead saves 10 to 15 minutes, depending on traffic.
-------
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folding_bicycle
[2] http://www.metro.net/bikes/bikes-metro/
Re: In 1897, a Bicycle Superhighway Was the Future of California Transit
#48I think this is still an excellent idea for a lot of areas, especially Los Angeles where the traffic is horrendous all the time. It wouldn't take much to build this alongside major freeways so that you won't have to claim eminent domain and go through private properties. This would take up a max of an extra 10-15 feet on the side of freeways. Now, in LA a lot of freeways are built out so much that there's not even 10…
3 hours for 10 miles is about 3X slower than on a bicycle... :O
Re: In 1897, a Bicycle Superhighway Was the Future of California Transit
#49I think this is still an excellent idea for a lot of areas, especially Los Angeles where the traffic is horrendous all the time. It wouldn't take much to build this alongside major freeways so that you won't have to claim eminent domain and go through private properties. This would take up a max of an extra 10-15 feet on the side of freeways. Now, in LA a lot of freeways are built out so much that there's not even 10…
Cycling right next to a freeway sounds gross. All you need to do is take some back roads, slap down some speed bumps, sharrows and other things to slightly annoy cars, and call it a day: http://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/article/348902 Nice and cheap, plus you get bikes away from cars entirely, not simply relegated to the side of a high traffic, high speed street. I think it's the best option for any city…
Re: In 1897, a Bicycle Superhighway Was the Future of California Transit
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
LA is slowly improving its transit situation from what it used to be, though unevenly. A light-rail line from downtown to Pasadena was opened in 2003, and the subway system is finally being extended, it seems, through some of the more densely populated area of the westside: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purple_Line_Extension The Metrolink commuter-rail system also runs 500 miles of track, and is now a reasonable optio…
The biggest issue with public transit in LA for commuting is the last mile problem. It's similar to the "last mile" problem of fast fiber optic cables to slow copper wires to homes. Here the issue is efficient and fast rail transit to extremely inefficient bus system for that last few miles from stations to work. I once tried to plan my commute using public transit and here's what I found: 1) Drive to rail station fo…