From rob_leone at earthlink.net Tue Jan 1 00:07:18 2008 From: rob_leone at earthlink.net (Robert Leone) Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 21:07:18 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Batteries (was Bike mantra...) In-Reply-To: <002201c84c0c$5d9c44e0$b9cd6544@D9CXGJ41> References: <002201c84c0c$5d9c44e0$b9cd6544@D9CXGJ41> Message-ID: <4779CA86.2050000@earthlink.net> Dear SDCBCers: Stephan Vance wrote: Nobody carries them locally that I know of, > but someone should. Those are the only negatives.** > > > > Stephan Vance I THINK I've seen a few dynamo sets in Veloculture on La Jolla Blvd, the old Sanyo-branded ('80's) system where the generator roller worked off the center of the tire (mounted by the bottom bracket) instead of the sidewall. Specialized (some of the Globes), Bianchi (Castro Valley) and Novarra (REI house brand, check out the "Fusion") are some the bikes available or orderable locally that come with generators (sidewall or hub). However, as they're an expensive and rarely ordered item it's no wonder those wishing to add generator capability to their current bike fleet get to experience the joys of local bike shop special orders or go internet-shopping with Peter White Cycles, Velo-Orange and I don't know whom all else. Then there's rechargeable batteries. However, they currently have their own problems. Lead-acid batteries are reliable, but weight like a lead ingot. Feeding consumer NiMH rechargeable AA and AAA batteries into small bright lights sort of works, except most NiMH (there are exceptions coming out onto the market, I'm told, but they've got premium pricing) cells have a high "self discharge" rate. They lose "juice" comparatively quickly just sitting there. Example one: I came across a commuting cyclist switching batteries around at night in Mission Bay Park. His ready replacement set of NiMH cells were dead, so he was going with the back-up back-up alkalines. Example two: My father claims he'd put freshly charged cells into his digital camera a month or so before he tried to take some panoramic landscape shots, or was it the cat eviscerating a persimmon, I forget. As a fountain pen user, I am somewhat habituated to ordering small parts, obscure fluids and special tools from far away. But at least someone out there in brick-and-mortar and on line sell these things. Still, I miss the pen counter at H.G. Daniels on India Street. Robert Leone Robert Leone From rob_leone at earthlink.net Tue Jan 1 00:12:31 2008 From: rob_leone at earthlink.net (Robert Leone) Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 21:12:31 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Batteries (was Bike mantra...) In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4779CBBF.4030907@earthlink.net> JonIsaacs at aol.com wrote: SNIP > My concern is not the drag, though I think one would notice the drag of > a generator capable of powering a 25watt system. > > Jon > SNIP The current crop of generators create 3 watts. Halogen and now LED headlights pulling 3 watts can be pretty impressive, expecially when they've got a reflector and/or lens designed to throw the light just right for cycling. In fact, even one of those old Sanyo-Union systems can look like it's coming from an (old) Harley-Davidson and not a bicycle! Besides, some people ride for three hours or more at night. It's happened to me (rarely, but it has happened). Robert Leone From gcarman at san.rr.com Tue Jan 1 00:44:32 2008 From: gcarman at san.rr.com (Gene Carman) Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 21:44:32 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Batteries (was Bike mantra...) In-Reply-To: <4779CA86.2050000@earthlink.net> References: <002201c84c0c$5d9c44e0$b9cd6544@D9CXGJ41> <4779CA86.2050000@earthlink.net> Message-ID: <20080101054440.FIQD16228.cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com@ppg1.san.rr.com> I actually have 2 of those old Sanyo generators... the last one died a couple years ago with the internal bearings going dry and the thing causing more drag than it should. That generator was my second leg in a three leg lighting system that uses a Niterider 32 watt system as the primary lighting, a Sanyo generator as the backup to the battery system, and a basic alkaline battery system forming the final or tertiary leg of my system. I have never been without light. I am however looking for a suitable replacement for the Sanyo generator. I actually had a cross-brace designed and installed on my commuter so the Sanyo generator would ride high on the wheel instead of down low and dirty. (nothing more than an extra tube brazed in a location that allows the generator to work at the top vice at the bottom bracket). At 09:07 PM 12/31/2007, Robert Leone wrote: >Dear SDCBCers: > > >Stephan Vance wrote: > Nobody carries them locally that I know of, > > but someone should. Those are the only negatives.** > > > > > > > > Stephan Vance > >I THINK I've seen a few dynamo sets in Veloculture on La Jolla Blvd, the >old Sanyo-branded ('80's) system where the generator roller worked off >the center of the tire (mounted by the bottom bracket) instead of the >sidewall. Specialized (some of the Globes), Bianchi (Castro Valley) and >Novarra (REI house brand, check out the "Fusion") are some the bikes >available or orderable locally that come with generators (sidewall or >hub). However, as they're an expensive and rarely ordered item it's no >wonder those wishing to add generator capability to their current bike >fleet get to experience the joys of local bike shop special orders or go >internet-shopping with Peter White Cycles, Velo-Orange and I don't know >whom all else. > >Then there's rechargeable batteries. However, they currently have their >own problems. Lead-acid batteries are reliable, but weight like a lead >ingot. Feeding consumer NiMH rechargeable AA and AAA batteries into >small bright lights sort of works, except most NiMH (there are >exceptions coming out onto the market, I'm told, but they've got premium >pricing) cells have a high "self discharge" rate. They lose "juice" >comparatively quickly just sitting there. Example one: I came across a >commuting cyclist switching batteries around at night in Mission Bay >Park. His ready replacement set of NiMH cells were dead, so he was going >with the back-up back-up alkalines. Example two: My father claims he'd >put freshly charged cells into his digital camera a month or so before >he tried to take some panoramic landscape shots, or was it the cat >eviscerating a persimmon, I forget. > >As a fountain pen user, I am somewhat habituated to ordering small >parts, obscure fluids and special tools from far away. But at least >someone out there in brick-and-mortar and on line sell these things. >Still, I miss the pen counter at H.G. Daniels on India Street. > >Robert Leone > >Robert Leone > >_______________________________________________ > >You are subscribed to the SDCBC mailing list as gcarman at san.rr.com >To unsubscribe or change mailing options, go to >http://www.bikesandiego.org/mailman/listinfo/sdcbc >List privacy information is located at http://www.stickman-computing.org/aup >For help or to talk with someone other than the mail robot, send >e-mail to postmaster at stickman-computing.org From smcneil2 at san.rr.com Tue Jan 1 02:23:38 2008 From: smcneil2 at san.rr.com (Steve McNeil) Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 23:23:38 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] New Law on Bicycle Lights In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20071230130112.03bd2a60@cox.net> Message-ID: Does anyone know of a reflector that would attached to my Shimano clipless pedals? Most of the ones that reflectors could be attached to are not any of the clipless ones. And regarding "relectorized tires", tha last I heard was that none of them would be acceptable to the police or Highway Patrol. --Steve McNeil. -----Original Message----- From: sdcbc-bounces at bikesandiego.org [mailto:sdcbc-bounces at bikesandiego.org]On Behalf Of Jim Baross Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2007 2:18 PM To: sdcbc at bikesandiego.org Cc: caboforum at topica.com Subject: Re: [SDCBC] New Law on Bicycle Lights The present, soon to be old, law required, "Every bicycle operated upon any highway during darkness ..." to be properly equipped, per CVC 21201(d), . A "highway" for CVC purposes does however include the whole right of way including Bike Lanes and sidewalks, but strictly speaking does not include Bike Paths separate from the roadway/highway; another indication that Bike Paths are not considered regular transportation facilities as they should be, IMHO. :-( Though we, CBC and CABO (and others?), worked to bring along additional changes to the original idea brought forward by Sac Sheriffs - to include Bike Paths and sidewalks in the law - the pedal reflector change will help more people to meet minimum legal requirements w/less effort. There certainly are other CVC changes that would benefit us, but working through the legislature is very tricky. More resources - your participation, donations and memberships - help us protect and promote improvements for bicycling. [Also, your continued efforts to be legal and courteous though assertive bicyclists certainly help!] Congrats that we got something improved. Bike Equipment - Lights, Reflectors, Brakes, Handlebars & Frame Size (Modified 01/01/2008) 21201. -- snip -- (d) A bicycle operated during darkness upon a highway, a sidewalk where bicycle operation is not prohibited by the local jurisdiction, or a bikeway, as defined in Section 890.4 of the Streets and Highways Code, shall be equipped with all of the following: (1) A lamp emitting a white light that, while the bicycle is in motion, illuminates the highway, sidewalk, or bikeway in front of the bicyclist and is visible from a distance of 300 feet in front and from the sides of the bicycle. (2) A red reflector on the rear that shall be visible from a distance of 500 feet to the rear when directly in front of lawful upper beams of headlamps on a motor vehicle. (3) A white or yellow reflector on each pedal, shoe, or ankle visible from the front and rear of the bicycle from a distance of 200 feet. (4) A white or yellow reflector on each side forward of the center of the bicycle, and a white or red reflector on each side to the rear of the center of the bicycle, except that bicycles that are equipped with reflectorized tires on the front and the rear need not be equipped with these side reflectors. The reflectors and reflectorized tires shall be of a type meeting requirements established by the department. (e) A lamp or lamp combination, emitting a white light, attached to the operator and visible from a distance of 300 feet in front and from the sides of the bicycle, may be used in lieu of the lamp required by paragraph (1) of subdivision (d). Happy New Year! Jim B At 12:03 AM 12/30/2007, Stephan Vance wrote: Beginning with the new year, California law will require bicyclists to use proper lights when riding on bike paths at night. Heres a story from Sacramento Bee. Stephan Vance It's the Law: Bike mantra: If it's night, use a light Law clarifies standards so police can issue citations. By Kevin Yamamura - kyamamura at sacbee.com Published 12:00 am PST Friday, December 28, 2007 Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A3 One in a series of reports on new laws that take effect Jan. 1. Lea Brooks routinely passes cyclists riding without lights when she bike-commutes along the American River Parkway from downtown to her Gold River home after work. "It's very dangerous," she said. "Imagine if you were driving your car and you saw a vehicle with its lights off. It's very dark out there, and if cyclists have dark clothing on, you really cannot see them. They blend into the shadows." If a new state law proves effective, that could change. Starting Tuesday, cyclists riding on bikeways and sidewalks at night will be required to use a headlight, as well as rear and side reflectors, under a law passed by the Legislature and signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger this year. Before Assembly Bill 478 was signed, state law was ambiguous as to whether cyclists riding on off-road paths such as the American River Parkway or greenbelts in Davis were required to use lights at night. The measure allows law enforcement to ticket cyclists riding without lights on such bikeways or on sidewalks in cities that allow cyclists to ride on sidewalks. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080101/ed265d04/attachment.html From gcarman at san.rr.com Tue Jan 1 09:21:57 2008 From: gcarman at san.rr.com (Gene Carman) Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2008 06:21:57 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] New Law on Bicycle Lights In-Reply-To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20071230130112.03bd2a60@cox.net> Message-ID: <20080101142213.WNUD2942.cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com@ppg1.san.rr.com> How about reflectorized shoes? Do they work well enough? All of my biking shoes have built in reflector areas... so I don't worry about the pedals. You may have to shop a bit to find suitable shoes. At 11:23 PM 12/31/2007, Steve McNeil wrote: >Does anyone know of a reflector that would attached to my Shimano >clipless pedals? Most of the ones that reflectors could be attached >to are not any of the clipless ones. And regarding "relectorized >tires", tha last I heard was that none of them would be acceptable >to the police or Highway Patrol. > >--Steve McNeil. >-----Original Message----- >From: sdcbc-bounces at bikesandiego.org >[mailto:sdcbc-bounces at bikesandiego.org]On Behalf Of Jim Baross >Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2007 2:18 PM >To: sdcbc at bikesandiego.org >Cc: caboforum at topica.com >Subject: Re: [SDCBC] New Law on Bicycle Lights > >The present, soon to be old, law required, "Every bicycle operated >upon any highway during darkness ..." to be properly equipped, per >CVC 21201(d), . A "highway" for CVC purposes does however include >the whole right of way including Bike Lanes and sidewalks, but >strictly speaking does not include Bike Paths separate from the >roadway/highway; another indication that Bike Paths are not >considered regular transportation facilities as they should be, IMHO. :-( > >Though we, CBC and CABO (and others?), worked to bring along >additional changes to the original idea brought forward by Sac >Sheriffs - to include Bike Paths and sidewalks in the law - the >pedal reflector change will help more people to meet minimum legal >requirements w/less effort. > >There certainly are other CVC changes that would benefit us, but >working through the legislature is very tricky. More resources - >your participation, donations and memberships - help us protect and >promote improvements for bicycling. [Also, your continued efforts to >be legal and courteous though assertive bicyclists certainly help!] > >Congrats that we got something improved. > >Bike Equipment - Lights, Reflectors, Brakes, Handlebars & Frame Size >(Modified 01/01/2008) 21201. >-- snip -- > (d) A bicycle operated during darkness upon a highway, a > sidewalk where bicycle operation is not prohibited by the local > jurisdiction, or a bikeway, as defined in Section 890.4 of the > Streets and Highways Code, shall be equipped with all of the following: > (1) A lamp emitting a white light that, while the bicycle is in > motion, illuminates the highway, sidewalk, or bikeway in front of > the bicyclist and is visible from a distance of 300 feet in front > and from the sides of the bicycle. > (2) A red reflector on the rear that shall be visible from a > distance of 500 feet to the rear when directly in front of lawful > upper beams of headlamps on a motor vehicle. > (3) A white or yellow reflector on each pedal, shoe, or ankle > visible from the front and rear of the bicycle from a distance of 200 feet. > (4) A white or yellow reflector on each side forward of the > center of the bicycle, and a white or red reflector on each side to > the rear of the center of the bicycle, except that bicycles that > are equipped with reflectorized tires on the front and the rear > need not be equipped with these side reflectors. > The reflectors and reflectorized tires shall be of a type > meeting requirements established by the department. > (e) A lamp or lamp combination, emitting a white light, attached > to the operator and visible from a distance of 300 feet in front > and from the sides of the bicycle, may be used in lieu of the lamp > required by paragraph (1) of subdivision (d). > >Happy New Year! >Jim B > >At 12:03 AM 12/30/2007, Stephan Vance wrote: >>Beginning with the new year, California law will require bicyclists >>to use proper lights when riding on bike paths at night. Heres a >>story from Sacramento Bee. >> >>Stephan Vance >> >> >> >> >>It's the Law: Bike mantra: If it's night, use a light >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>Law clarifies standards so police can issue citations. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >>By Kevin Yamamura - kyamamura at sacbee.com >> >> >> >> >> >>Published 12:00 am PST Friday, December 28, 2007 >>Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A3 >> >>One in a series of reports on new laws that take effect Jan. 1. >> >>Lea Brooks routinely passes cyclists riding without lights when she >>bike-commutes along the American River Parkway from downtown to her >>Gold River home after work. >> >>"It's very dangerous," she said. "Imagine if you were driving your >>car and you saw a vehicle with its lights off. It's very dark out >>there, and if cyclists have dark clothing on, you really cannot see >>them. They blend into the shadows." >> >>If a new state law proves effective, that could change. >> >>Starting Tuesday, cyclists riding on bikeways and sidewalks at >>night will be required to use a headlight, as well as rear and side >>reflectors, under a law passed by the Legislature and signed by >>Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger this year. >> >>Before Assembly Bill 478 was signed, state law was ambiguous as to >>whether cyclists riding on off-road paths such as the American >>River Parkway or greenbelts in Davis were required to use lights at night. >> >>The measure allows law enforcement to ticket cyclists riding >>without lights on such bikeways or on sidewalks in cities that >>allow cyclists to ride on sidewalks. > >_______________________________________________ > >You are subscribed to the SDCBC mailing list as gcarman at san.rr.com >To unsubscribe or change mailing options, go to >http://www.bikesandiego.org/mailman/listinfo/sdcbc >List privacy information is located at http://www.stickman-computing.org/aup >For help or to talk with someone other than the mail robot, send >e-mail to postmaster at stickman-computing.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080101/ee0483f0/attachment.html From JimBaross at cox.net Tue Jan 1 14:53:35 2008 From: JimBaross at cox.net (Jim Baross) Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2008 11:53:35 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Huh? RE: New Law on Bicycle Lights In-Reply-To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20071230130112.03bd2a60@cox.net> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080101113606.0036c6c8@cox.net> Steve: Two questions: 1) Though I suspect that pedal reflectors might be more conspicuous/reflective than reflective shoe or reflective ankle straps, are you aware that these alternatives now meet the legal (minimum) requirements? It seemed to us that the new alternatives to meeting the minimum requirements would be cheaper, easier to have on-hand, etc. to allow us to more easily ride legally at night (though many people discount the added value of pedal reflectors at all, and they are of very limited value to those using certain style recumbent bikes). New CVC 21201 states in part: >(3) A white or yellow reflector on each pedal, shoe, or ankle >visible from the front and rear of the bicycle from a distance of 200 feet. 2) Where did you hear that "none of them [reflectorized tires] would be acceptable to the police or Highway Patrol"? The CHP web site, http://www.chp.ca.gov/html/bicycleriding.html shows the following information, outdated as of today, regarding Night Riding Bicycle must be equipped with the following: * Light: * A white headlamp, attached to the bicycle or your body, visible from 300 feet to the front and from the sides * Reflectors * Red rear reflector * White or yellow reflectors on front and back of each pedal * White or yellow reflectors on each side forward of center of bike, and red or white reflectors on each side rear of center - usually mounted on wheel spokes (If you have reflectorized tires in front and rear, you do not need side reflectors.) The new CVC 21201 also has this text. No department that I know of has established requirements; is that the issue? > (4) A white or yellow reflector on each side forward of the > center of the bicycle, and a white or red reflector on each side to > the rear of the center of the bicycle, except that bicycles that > are equipped with reflectorized tires on the front and the rear > need not be equipped with these side reflectors. > The reflectors and reflectorized tires shall be of a type > meeting requirements established by the department. If someone/department is telling you otherwise, I'd like to challenge them. Jim (willing to help establish requirements) Baross At 11:23 PM 12/31/2007, you wrote: >Does anyone know of a reflector that would attached to my Shimano >clipless pedals? Most of the ones that reflectors could be attached >to are not any of the clipless ones. And regarding "relectorized >tires", tha last I heard was that none of them would be acceptable >to the police or Highway Patrol. > >--Steve McNeil. >-----Original Message----- >From: sdcbc-bounces at bikesandiego.org >[mailto:sdcbc-bounces at bikesandiego.org]On Behalf Of Jim Baross >Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2007 2:18 PM >To: sdcbc at bikesandiego.org >Cc: caboforum at topica.com >Subject: Re: [SDCBC] New Law on Bicycle Lights > >The present, soon to be old, law required, "Every bicycle operated >upon any highway during darkness ..." to be properly equipped, per >CVC 21201(d), . A "highway" for CVC purposes does however include >the whole right of way including Bike Lanes and sidewalks, but >strictly speaking does not include Bike Paths separate from the >roadway/highway; another indication that Bike Paths are not >considered regular transportation facilities as they should be, IMHO. :-( > >Though we, CBC and CABO (and others?), worked to bring along >additional changes to the original idea brought forward by Sac >Sheriffs - to include Bike Paths and sidewalks in the law - the >pedal reflector change will help more people to meet minimum legal >requirements w/less effort. > >There certainly are other CVC changes that would benefit us, but >working through the legislature is very tricky. More resources - >your participation, donations and memberships - help us protect and >promote improvements for bicycling. [Also, your continued efforts to >be legal and courteous though assertive bicyclists certainly help!] > >Congrats that we got something improved. > >Bike Equipment - Lights, Reflectors, Brakes, Handlebars & Frame Size >(Modified 01/01/2008) 21201. >-- snip -- > (d) A bicycle operated during darkness upon a highway, a > sidewalk where bicycle operation is not prohibited by the local > jurisdiction, or a bikeway, as defined in Section 890.4 of the > Streets and Highways Code, shall be equipped with all of the following: > (1) A lamp emitting a white light that, while the bicycle is in > motion, illuminates the highway, sidewalk, or bikeway in front of > the bicyclist and is visible from a distance of 300 feet in front > and from the sides of the bicycle. > (2) A red reflector on the rear that shall be visible from a > distance of 500 feet to the rear when directly in front of lawful > upper beams of headlamps on a motor vehicle. > (3) A white or yellow reflector on each pedal, shoe, or ankle > visible from the front and rear of the bicycle from a distance of 200 feet. > (4) A white or yellow reflector on each side forward of the > center of the bicycle, and a white or red reflector on each side to > the rear of the center of the bicycle, except that bicycles that > are equipped with reflectorized tires on the front and the rear > need not be equipped with these side reflectors. > The reflectors and reflectorized tires shall be of a type > meeting requirements established by the department. > (e) A lamp or lamp combination, emitting a white light, attached > to the operator and visible from a distance of 300 feet in front > and from the sides of the bicycle, may be used in lieu of the lamp > required by paragraph (1) of subdivision (d). > >Happy New Year! >Jim B -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080101/76a87b39/attachment-0001.html From JimBaross at cox.net Tue Jan 1 15:03:41 2008 From: JimBaross at cox.net (Jim Baross) Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2008 12:03:41 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Vending bike - someone should use this Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080101120139.034f20f0@cox.net> http://sandiego.craigslist.org/nsd/bik/522277757.html Yours for only $1,000! Add states: Antique vintage classic three wheeled ice cream/cold drinks vendor tricycle with front large unique curved shaped heavily insulated freezer or hot food box. Box is mounted on scaled down automobile-like leaf springs with drop forged steel front axle. Made to carry heavy loads. Stainless steel front bumper at leading edge of box. Made by the Acorn Vending Company, Chicago, Illinois. Lighted valences on each side of box to illuminate your company name or menu items which can be powered by a car battery of which there is a compartment with removable lid for in the box. Change box built in also with hinged lid. Heavy duty freezer type latch on top door. This is a professional manufactured bicycle and box by the Acorn company from years ago. Two 24" heavy duty rims with heavy duty spokes in front and one 26" heavy duty rim with heavy duty spokes for rear driving wheel. Bendix rear hub and skip tooth chain date this vehicle from the 1940-50's. Geared for low speed vendor use in parks or at events. Acorn company nameplates on box and frame of bicycle authenticate it. The perfect vintage vehicle for a catering company, steet event/park vendor or bicycle collector. $1000.00 firm. (760) 473-6201 Pictures will be added to this ad soon. (760) 473-6201 Carlsbad. From thomas.treynolds at gmail.com Tue Jan 1 15:22:57 2008 From: thomas.treynolds at gmail.com (Thomas Reynolds) Date: Tue, 1 Jan 2008 12:22:57 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] New Law on Bicycle Lights In-Reply-To: References: <7.0.1.0.2.20071230130112.03bd2a60@cox.net> Message-ID: <998c822f0801011222u66f89bbbo406ec4a62beaee61@mail.gmail.com> Shimano makes an insert that goes into one side of their double sided SPD pedals. Many bike shops will give them to you for free since that end up taking them off of new bikes. I use these on my commuter bike, just to be in compliance with the now-superseded law. Tom On Dec 31, 2007 11:23 PM, Steve McNeil wrote: > > Does anyone know of a reflector that would attached to my Shimano clipless > pedals? Most of the ones that reflectors could be attached to are not any > of the clipless ones. And regarding "relectorized tires", tha last I heard > was that none of them would be acceptable to the police or Highway Patrol. > > --Steve McNeil. > > > -----Original Message----- > From: sdcbc-bounces at bikesandiego.org > [mailto:sdcbc-bounces at bikesandiego.org]On Behalf Of Jim Baross > Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2007 2:18 PM > To: sdcbc at bikesandiego.org > Cc: caboforum at topica.com > Subject: Re: [SDCBC] New Law on Bicycle Lights > > The present, soon to be old, law required, "Every bicycle operated upon any > highway during darkness ..." to be properly equipped, per CVC 21201(d), . A > "highway" for CVC purposes does however include the whole right of way > including Bike Lanes and sidewalks, but strictly speaking does not include > Bike Paths separate from the roadway/highway; another indication that Bike > Paths are not considered regular transportation facilities as they should > be, IMHO. :-( > > Though we, CBC and CABO (and others?), worked to bring along additional > changes to the original idea brought forward by Sac Sheriffs - to include > Bike Paths and sidewalks in the law - the pedal reflector change will help > more people to meet minimum legal requirements w/less effort. > > There certainly are other CVC changes that would benefit us, but working > through the legislature is very tricky. More resources - your participation, > donations and memberships - help us protect and promote improvements for > bicycling. [Also, your continued efforts to be legal and courteous though > assertive bicyclists certainly help!] > > Congrats that we got something improved. > > Bike Equipment - Lights, Reflectors, Brakes, Handlebars & Frame Size > (Modified 01/01/2008) 21201. > -- snip -- > (d) A bicycle operated during darkness upon a highway, a sidewalk where > bicycle operation is not prohibited by the local jurisdiction, or a bikeway, > as defined in Section 890.4 of the Streets and Highways Code, shall be > equipped with all of the following: > (1) A lamp emitting a white light that, while the bicycle is in motion, > illuminates the highway, sidewalk, or bikeway in front of the bicyclist and > is visible from a distance of 300 feet in front and from the sides of the > bicycle. > (2) A red reflector on the rear that shall be visible from a distance of > 500 feet to the rear when directly in front of lawful upper beams of > headlamps on a motor vehicle. > (3) A white or yellow reflector on each pedal, shoe, or ankle visible > from the front and rear of the bicycle from a distance of 200 feet. > (4) A white or yellow reflector on each side forward of the center of the > bicycle, and a white or red reflector on each side to the rear of the center > of the bicycle, except that bicycles that are equipped with reflectorized > tires on the front and the rear need not be equipped with these side > reflectors. > The reflectors and reflectorized tires shall be of a type meeting > requirements established by the department. > (e) A lamp or lamp combination, emitting a white light, attached to the > operator and visible from a distance of 300 feet in front and from the sides > of the bicycle, may be used in lieu of the lamp required by paragraph (1) of > subdivision (d). > > Happy New Year! > Jim B > > At 12:03 AM 12/30/2007, Stephan Vance wrote: > Beginning with the new year, California law will require bicyclists to use > proper lights when riding on bike paths at night. Here s a story from > Sacramento Bee. > > Stephan Vance > > > It's the Law: Bike mantra: If it's night, use a light > > Law clarifies standards so police can issue citations. > > By Kevin Yamamura - kyamamura at sacbee.com > > Published 12:00 am PST Friday, December 28, 2007 > Story appeared in MAIN NEWS section, Page A3 > > One in a series of reports on new laws that take effect Jan. 1. > > Lea Brooks routinely passes cyclists riding without lights when she > bike-commutes along the American River Parkway from downtown to her Gold > River home after work. > > "It's very dangerous," she said. "Imagine if you were driving your car and > you saw a vehicle with its lights off. It's very dark out there, and if > cyclists have dark clothing on, you really cannot see them. They blend into > the shadows." > > If a new state law proves effective, that could change. > > Starting Tuesday, cyclists riding on bikeways and sidewalks at night will be > required to use a headlight, as well as rear and side reflectors, under a > law passed by the Legislature and signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger this > year. > > Before Assembly Bill 478 was signed, state law was ambiguous as to whether > cyclists riding on off-road paths such as the American River Parkway or > greenbelts in Davis were required to use lights at night. > > The measure allows law enforcement to ticket cyclists riding without lights > on such bikeways or on sidewalks in cities that allow cyclists to ride on > sidewalks. > > _______________________________________________ > > You are subscribed to the SDCBC mailing list as thomas.treynolds at gmail.com > To unsubscribe or change mailing options, go to > http://www.bikesandiego.org/mailman/listinfo/sdcbc > List privacy information is located at http://www.stickman-computing.org/aup > For help or to talk with someone other than the mail robot, send e-mail to > postmaster at stickman-computing.org > From markw at wolfenet.org Wed Jan 2 02:38:56 2008 From: markw at wolfenet.org (markw) Date: Tue, 01 Jan 2008 23:38:56 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] New Law on Bicycle Lights In-Reply-To: <998c822f0801011222u66f89bbbo406ec4a62beaee61@mail.gmail.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20071230130112.03bd2a60@cox.net> <998c822f0801011222u66f89bbbo406ec4a62beaee61@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <477B3F90.3060208@wolfenet.org> These laws make 2 of my bikes illegal to ride at night. I know you can't see my feet from 200 feet behind me. So now we have this "new" law that'll be enforced like the old laws. :) I'll stick with my C2 reflector tape and UMCA reflector scheme, and take my chances. I've only been pulled over once and that was for not riding in the bike lane, those guys get irritable when you don't pull into the door zone like they tell you too. :) Mark Thomas Reynolds wrote: > Shimano makes an insert that goes into one side of their double sided > SPD pedals. Many bike shops will give them to you for free since that > end up taking them off of new bikes. I use these on my commuter bike, > just to be in compliance with the now-superseded law. > > Tom From execdir at sdcbc.org Mon Jan 7 15:00:36 2008 From: execdir at sdcbc.org (Kathy Keehan) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 12:00:36 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Volunteer night this Wednesday, Jan 9th Message-ID: <001501c85167$f9396a30$ebac3e90$@org> We'll be having volunteer night this Wednesday, January 9th, 6:30 to 8:30 p.m. at the downtown office - 740 13th St, Suite 220. We'll have food, drinks, and a little work to do, so come on by! Kathy ------------------------------------------ Kathy Keehan Executive Director San Diego County Bicycle Coalition P.O. Box 34544 San Diego, CA 92163 858.487.6063 execdir at sdcbc.org www.sdcbc.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080107/92741d3b/attachment.html From tah at san.rr.com Mon Jan 7 19:36:30 2008 From: tah at san.rr.com (Tom Harvey) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 16:36:30 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] UT: SDSU groups press for more cycle paths Message-ID: <20080108003630.GA15425@bart.simpson.private> hmmm, legalize bike riding? what will they demand next? > SDSU groups press for more cycle paths > > Students at San Diego State are fed up with a no-bicycling policy on > campus. > > Biking is a main mode of transportation for many college students. It's > a green mode of transportation. And most days, San Diego offers > near-perfect weather for bike travel. > > But at SDSU, bikes must be walked on most of the campus. Riders can > pedal only along the perimeter and on a service road that goes partially > through the grounds. Many say it can be a hike from one end of the > 270-acre campus to the other. Campus police enforce the no-biking rule > with tickets. > > A group of students that is trying to get more green initiatives going > at the university is taking on the policy. The group wants to reverse it > and is advocating for bike paths. full story at: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/20080107-9999-1m7bikes.html From rob_leone at earthlink.net Mon Jan 7 19:39:34 2008 From: rob_leone at earthlink.net (rob_leone at earthlink.net) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 16:39:34 -0800 (GMT-08:00) Subject: [SDCBC] How Deep the Rose Canyon Bike Path puddle? Message-ID: <16279595.1199752774661.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Dear SDCBCers: Hello! I'll be commuting by bike on Tuesday and Wednesday via the Rose Canyon Bike Path. The persistant mid-path puddle was a nice 16 foot wide mess of muck on the morning of the 5th of January (Saturday), and we've gotten a lot of rain since then. Has anyone more recently ridden through, by, past or into it? Robert Leone From JonIsaacs at aol.com Mon Jan 7 20:03:49 2008 From: JonIsaacs at aol.com (JonIsaacs at aol.com) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:03:49 EST Subject: [SDCBC] UT: SDSU groups press for more cycle paths Message-ID: In a message dated 1/7/2008 4:37:51 PM Pacific Standard Time, tah at san.rr.com writes: > hmmm, legalize bike riding? what will they demand next? I saw that story. After reading it, I was much happier with the situation we have UCSD. We have an active Pedal Club that encourages staff and students to use bicycles not only to get to campus but also to get around campus. There is even the Triton Bike program that provides departments with bikes for on-campus transportation. UCSD also has an on Campus Bike shop run by the university... Brian Parent and I also able provide input in the general campus planning as well as very specific issues. Pedal Club members get 10 day free parking/quarter, a nice perk, and Brian has been able to include a "self-teaching bicycle safety quiz" as part of the Pedal Club prerequisites. While there is the momentum of a bureaucracy that slows progress, I think there is a genuine interest at UCSD in increasing the role cycling plays in the transportation solution for the future... Jon ************** Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape. http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080107/1e427922/attachment-0001.html From dwhite7 at san.rr.com Mon Jan 7 20:56:15 2008 From: dwhite7 at san.rr.com (Dave White) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 17:56:15 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Fwd: UT: SDSU groups press for more cycle paths Message-ID: <88cf75a08e0103a2c2f34444729c76fa@san.rr.com> While handing out shamrocks for green steps, this might be a time to inform the list that the Padres have announced a full 2008 season of 'Cycling Sundays' with the Bicycle Parking Pavilion service for cyclists. Its easy, safe, secure, and free, and available Sunday April 6th and September 28th, and every Padres Sunday home game in between. More information is available at http://pedaltothepark.com For a ride to remember, join us on Memorial Day Weekend May 25th, and Pedal to the Park. Online registration now open. Let's fill up the Pavilion on cycling sundays at Petco Park. Dave White Begin forwarded message: > From: JonIsaacs at aol.com > Date: January 7, 2008 5:03:49 PM PST > To: tah at san.rr.com, sdcbc at bikesandiego.org > Subject: Re: [SDCBC] UT: SDSU groups press for more cycle paths > > In a message dated 1/7/2008 4:37:51 PM Pacific Standard Time, > tah at san.rr.com writes: > > > I saw that story.? After reading it, I was much happier with the > situation we have UCSD.? We have an active Pedal Club that encourages > staff and students to use bicycles not only to get to campus but also > to get around campus.? There is even the Triton Bike program that > provides departments with bikes for on-campus transportation.? UCSD > also has an on Campus Bike shop run by the university... > > Brian Parent and I also able provide input in the general campus > planning as well as very specific issues.? Pedal Club members get 10 > day free parking/quarter, a nice perk, and Brian has been able to > include a "self-teaching bicycle safety quiz" as part of the Pedal > Club prerequisites.? > > While there is the momentum of a bureaucracy that slows progress, I > think there is a genuine interest at UCSD in increasing the role > cycling plays in the transportation solution for the future... > > Jon > > > > ************** > Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape. > > http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise? > NCID=aolcmp00300000002489______________________________________________ > _ > > You are subscribed to the SDCBC mailing list as dwhite7 at san.rr.com > To unsubscribe or change mailing options, go to > http://www.bikesandiego.org/mailman/listinfo/sdcbc > List privacy information is located at > http://www.stickman-computing.org/aup > For help or to talk with someone other than the mail robot, send > e-mail to postmaster at stickman-computing.org -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 3037 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080107/284d6dc7/attachment.bin From JimBaross at cox.net Tue Jan 8 00:31:07 2008 From: JimBaross at cox.net (Jim Baross) Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 21:31:07 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] LCI seminar in San Luis Obispo Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080107212917.03691520@cox.net> I may be going and could offer a ride to someone participating in the League Cycling Instructor seminar to be held there Feb 29, Mar 1 & 2nd. More info at the bikeleague.org site under Programs/Education From mpless at servo.ucsd.edu Tue Jan 8 12:47:18 2008 From: mpless at servo.ucsd.edu (Marcus Pless) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 09:47:18 -0800 (PST) Subject: [SDCBC] How Deep the Rose Canyon Bike Path puddle? In-Reply-To: rob_leone@earthlink.net "[SDCBC] How Deep the Rose Canyon Bike Path puddle?" (Jan 7, 4:39pm) References: <16279595.1199752774661.JavaMail.root@elwamui-muscovy.atl.sa.earthlink.net> Message-ID: <10801080947.ZM793512@servo.ucsd.edu> I'm probably too late to be of any help, but the Rose Canyon mud bog was really soupy this morning (Tuesday). I usually just ride up and around it (through the weeds) but this morning I dismounted and walked up to the railroad tracks to avoid as much muck as possible. --Marcus On Jan 7, 4:39pm, rob_leone at earthlink.net wrote: > Subject: [SDCBC] How Deep the Rose Canyon Bike Path puddle? > Dear SDCBCers: > Hello! I'll be commuting by bike on Tuesday and Wednesday via the Rose Canyon Bike Path. The persistant mid-path puddle was a nice 16 foot wide mess of muck on the morning of the 5th of January (Saturday), and we've gotten a lot of rain since then. Has anyone more recently ridden through, by, past or into it? > > Robert Leone > _______________________________________________ > > You are subscribed to the SDCBC mailing list as mpless at servo.ucsd.edu > To unsubscribe or change mailing options, go to http://www.bikesandiego.org/mailman/listinfo/sdcbc > List privacy information is located at http://www.stickman-computing.org/aup > For help or to talk with someone other than the mail robot, send e-mail to postmaster at stickman-computing.org >-- End of excerpt from rob_leone at earthlink.net From tony at tonypietsch.com Tue Jan 8 23:19:24 2008 From: tony at tonypietsch.com (Tony Pietsch) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 20:19:24 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] FW: 7 days left to register; From Scooters to SUVs: A Revolutionary New Transmission Technology; Fallbrook Technologies, presented by San Diego MIT Enterprise Forum; January 16 Message-ID: <005b01c85276$d20d1370$6501a8c0@tonyvaio> With Tony Ellsworth there with some bikes and SDBC joining in on sponsorship, this promises to be interesting... Tony _____ From: San Diego MIT Forum [mailto:mitforum at connect.org] Sent: Tuesday, January 08, 2008 9:36 AM To: tony at tonypietsch.com Subject: 7 days left to register; From Scooters to SUVs: A Revolutionary New Transmission Technology; Fallbrook Technologies, presented by San Diego MIT Enterprise Forum; January 16 Case Presentation by Fallbrook Technologies Wednesday, January 16, 2008; 5pm - 8pm The Salk Institute >From Scooters to SUVs: A Revolutionary New Transmission Technology If it needs to change speeds, Fallbrook Technologies makes shifting gears, well, gearless. Did you ever dream of "owning" the market with your technology? Fallbrook Technologies has the opportunity to do just that. With applications that range from two- and four-wheel vehicles to wind turbines, the opportunity for Fallbrook Technologies' new transmission technology, called NuVinci, is huge. Join us in an open forum to discuss the best approaches for commercialization. 1. Commercialization has begun: How should Fallbrook Technologies balance short term cash flow opportunities from its current 2-wheel market with its long term potential in the 4-wheel market and beyond? 2. The applications are seemingly endless: Where to start? What are the fastest methods for technology adoption? -- a) write the textbook for the engineering schools; b) find a partner to license and run with it, c) Drive application from within, or d) Other. When was the last time you rode a bicycle? Experience the NuVinci technology during the reception before the program, and network with a large, diverse audience of entrepreneurs, technologists, and professionals. SPECIAL GUEST: Tony Ellsworth of Ellsworth Bikes will be available with some his bikes that have the NuVinci transmission. Who Should Attend? Engineers who enjoy dreaming up new applications for enabling technologies. CEOs, entrepreneurs, technologists, and professionals who are experienced with broad based applications and diverse market adoption strategies. Cycling and automotive enthusiasts. About the Company Fallbrook Technologies is causing a revolution in drivetrain technology that's winning prestigious awards and gaining rapid acceptance worldwide. It's a new way of transmitting mechanical power based on spheres instead of gears. The NuVinci continuously variable planetary (CVP) technology, an innovative new continuously variable transmission (CVT), is not only helping vehicle designers and component manufacturers improve performance, ride quality, and capabilities in existing products, it's driving change and new designs never before thought possible. Fallbrook has been successful in the bicycle and scooter market, for which it licenses its technology. With more than 100 patents, its CVP technology has broad applications to many other markets, including lawn & garden vehicles, light electronic vehicles, and traditional automotives. You might say that the NuVinci is the "next big transmission invention." _____ PRESENTER: William G. Klehm III, President & CEO, Fallbrook Technologies MODERATOR: Gary Jacobs - Managing Director, Jacobs Investment Company LLC PANELISTS: Drew Haygeman - Creative Director, Phase2Design, Inc. Gad Shaanan - CEO, GadShaananDESIGN, Inc. Les Silver - Chairman/CEO, Service Repair Solutions, Inc. Presenting Sponsor Community Partners CleanTECH San Diego Media Sponsors Registration * MITEF Forum Members & MITEF Sponsors: FREE (Registration Required) Non-MITEF Members: $40 MIT Alumni: $25 Students: $15 * On-site registration at the event is $50 _____ The San Diego MIT Enterprise Forum provides a distinctive perspective on today's most challenging business issues by featuring one of San Diego's most exciting, emerging growth technology companies in a case study presentation. Experienced and successful CEOs receive creative coaching from a panel of local business experts. With real companies discussing real issues, everyone has a front row seat to behind-the-scenes success. _____ www.sdmitforum.org Event details Case Presentation on Fallbrook Technologies >From Scooters to SUVs: A Revolutionary New Transmission Technology When: WEDNESDAY January 16, 2008 5pm - 8pm Where: The Salk Institute 10010 North Torrey Pines Road La Jolla, CA 92037 Cost: Non-MITEF Members: MIT Alumni: Students: MITEF Members: MITEF Sponsors: $40 $25 $15 FREE FREE (Registration Required) * On-site registration at the event is $50 _____ Upcoming Events Special Presentation: Wednesday, February 20 Top Ten Technologies for 2008 Featuring Jason Pontin, Editor/Publisher, MIT Techology Review _____ The San Diego MIT Enterprise Forum 8950 Villa La Jolla Drive Suite A124 La Jolla, CA 92037 858.964.1346 www.sdmitforum.org This message was intended for: tony at tonypietsch.com You were added to the system November 30, 2005. For more information click here. Update your preferences | Unsubscribe -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080108/361a21a9/attachment-0001.html From JimBaross at cox.net Wed Jan 9 00:07:34 2008 From: JimBaross at cox.net (Jim Baross) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:07:34 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Fw: [sbbike] cold weather biking video Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080108210609.03cefa20@cox.net> Brrrrrrr, and I thought it was/is cold here...! >http://www.startribune.com/video/12962607.html >Subject: Fw: [sbbike] cold weather biking video >To: >From: John Cinatl >Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 16:57:06 -0800 >Hi All > >Check out the video below - bicycling in Minneapolis in the winter. > >Interesting to say the least. > >This video link came to be via the Santa Barbara Bicycle Coalition. > >JOHN >____________________________ >John F. Cinatl, Associate Transportation Planner >North Region & Bicycle Facilities Planning >Caltrans - District 6 - Fresno, CA >1352 West Olive Ave. (2nd. Floor) >Fresno, CA 93778 >(559) 444-2500 >FAX (559) 488-4088 >john_cinatl at dot.ca.gov > >"Caltrans Improves Mobility Across California - For Bicycles Too" > > >----- Forwarded by John Cinatl/D06/Caltrans/CAGov on 01/08/2008 04:54 PM >----- > > David Lawson > > Sent by: To > sbbike-owner at list sbbike at lists.riseup.net > s.riseup.net cc > > Subject > 01/05/2008 12:00 [sbbike] cold weather biking video > PM >http://www.startribune.com/video/12962607.html From gcarman at san.rr.com Wed Jan 9 10:47:22 2008 From: gcarman at san.rr.com (Gene Carman) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:47:22 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Well it looks like I am not the only one... In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080108210609.03cefa20@cox.net> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080108210609.03cefa20@cox.net> Message-ID: <20080109154721.TLQU14132.cdptpa-omta02.mail.rr.com@ppg1.san.rr.com> http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/justfixit/20080109-9999-lz1m9fixit.html Going gets rough with unpaved access to bike path near Route 56 By Ruth McKinnie Braun UNION-TRIBUNE STAFF WRITER January 9, 2008 THE PROBLEM: The San Diego bike path along state Route 56 from Carmel Valley to Rancho Pe?asquitos is straight and smooth, but getting to it from El Camino Real is a jarring experience. Mitch Lynn sets out from his home in Mission Hills twice a month for a ride that loops north to Carmel Valley across to Interstate 15 and then back home. [] THE SITE: State Route 56 bike path in Carmel Valley. Lynn said the 10-mile path beside Route 56 is one of the region's best rides. He just wishes it was easier to get to. When Caltrans built the path, it included a paved entrance from southbound El Camino Real, but not from the northbound side. Cyclists have forged a 200-foot dirt trail to the asphalt bike path, but there are no signs and no curb cuts leading there. Some cyclists, Lynn said, ride down the somewhat steep trail filled with ruts, but many walk. ?If you are not a strong rider, you will fall down,? Lynn said. Northbound riders can use the southbound entrance, but that requires riding against traffic on El Camino Real, cutting across six lanes of 50 mph traffic and a center median or riding to a traffic light more than a block away and circling back. Lynn and other riders who have contacted Just Fix It want Caltrans or the city of San Diego to pave the trail and put in a curb cut. Lynn also said part of the paved path between El Camino Real and Carmel Creek Road is chronically flooded. STATUS: Just Fix It called Caltrans, which said San Diego is responsible for maintaining the path. Brad Jacobsen, a city associate traffic engineer, said paving the trail would cost about $245,000 and is not as simple as it appears. Because of sensitive habitat near the trail, the city would have to provide environmental mitigation. The city has unsuccessfully applied for money for the project from the half-cent sales tax that pays for transportation projects in the region. Jacobsen said the city will apply again and is looking at other options. The flooding is caused by an overgrowth of native plants in Carmel Creek. Jacobsen said the city is looking for money to install a flood-control channel. WHO'S RESPONSIBLE: Brad Jacobsen, who can be reached at (619) 533-3126 or bjacobsen at sandiego.gov. The city has a bicycle hotline at (619) 533-3110. NEED A PROBLEM SOLVED: Is there a problem government hasn't taken care of despite your complaints? Whether it's a missing bus bench or an unkempt park anywhere in San Diego County, Just Fix It might be able to help. [] Complaint forms are at justfixit.uniontrib.com, or call (800) 820-8714 to describe your problem. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080109/4cec9776/attachment.html From markw at wolfenet.org Wed Jan 9 12:20:49 2008 From: markw at wolfenet.org (mark wolfe) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 09:20:49 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Well it looks like I am not the only one... In-Reply-To: <20080109154721.TLQU14132.cdptpa-omta02.mail.rr.com@ppg1.san.rr.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080108210609.03cefa20@cox.net> <20080109154721.TLQU14132.cdptpa-omta02.mail.rr.com@ppg1.san.rr.com> Message-ID: <47850271.30701@wolfenet.org> Ha, "Sensitive Habitat" looks like it stays that way. I'm surprised they don't "ban" access to the trail because of that. :) Sounds like we can thank environmentalists for this one. Mark Gene Carman wrote: > http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/justfixit/20080109-9999-lz1m9fixit.html > > > > Going gets rough with unpaved access to bike path near Route 56 > From serge at issakov.org Wed Jan 9 12:41:30 2008 From: serge at issakov.org (Serge Issakov) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 09:41:30 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Well it looks like I am not the only one... In-Reply-To: <47850271.30701@wolfenet.org> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080108210609.03cefa20@cox.net> <20080109154721.TLQU14132.cdptpa-omta02.mail.rr.com@ppg1.san.rr.com> <47850271.30701@wolfenet.org> Message-ID: <69ec985b0801090941h49ba0dcak7c9af289068a1b74@mail.gmail.com> Yeah, it's a hassle to get on/off the path to/from n/b El Camino Real, but I'm not sure it's worth $250K to fix it. The fact that what is essentially a narrow driveway a few dozen feet in length costs a quarter of a million dollars to pave is what is the real problem here. I wonder how much of that is actual cost of doing the work, versus hidden costs of bureaucracy. Serge On Jan 9, 2008 9:20 AM, mark wolfe wrote: > Ha, "Sensitive Habitat" looks like it stays that way. I'm surprised > they don't "ban" access to the trail because of that. :) Sounds like > we can thank environmentalists for this one. > > Mark > > Gene Carman wrote: > > > http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/justfixit/20080109-9999-lz1m9fixit.html > > > > > > > > Going gets rough with unpaved access to bike path near Route 56 > > > _______________________________________________ > > You are subscribed to the SDCBC mailing list as serge at issakov.org > To unsubscribe or change mailing options, go to > http://www.bikesandiego.org/mailman/listinfo/sdcbc > List privacy information is located at > http://www.stickman-computing.org/aup > For help or to talk with someone other than the mail robot, send e-mail to > postmaster at stickman-computing.org > -- NOTE: Any opinions expressed above are mine and not necessarily shared by any organization in which I am involved. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080109/97654cb6/attachment.html From JonIsaacs at aol.com Wed Jan 9 13:56:38 2008 From: JonIsaacs at aol.com (JonIsaacs at aol.com) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 13:56:38 EST Subject: [SDCBC] Well it looks like I am not the only one... Message-ID: In a message dated 1/9/2008 9:44:38 AM Pacific Standard Time, serge at issakov.org writes: > Yeah, it's a hassle to get on/off the path to/from n/b El Camino Real, but > I'm not sure it's worth $250K to fix it. The fact that what is essentially a > narrow driveway a few dozen feet in length costs a quarter of a million > dollars to pave is what is the real problem here. I wonder how much of that is > actual cost of doing the work, versus hidden costs of bureaucracy. > > Serge It may be "expensive" to fix it but it needs fixing so I say: Fix it. In the big picture, $250K is peanuts, I wonder how much the recent work on the I-5/805 Merge cost... And all so the developers can build more houses in North County... As cyclists, we should not be afraid to spend to bring the facilities up to standard, we need to think we have a place and money spent on cycling facilities is money well spent. Jon ************** Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape. http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080109/0446e5f1/attachment.html From thomas.treynolds at gmail.com Wed Jan 9 14:04:38 2008 From: thomas.treynolds at gmail.com (Thomas Reynolds) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 11:04:38 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Well it looks like I am not the only one... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <998c822f0801091104j609ac934l88fad42efbc445d0@mail.gmail.com> Out in my neighborhood, Spring Valley, a 1.2 mile section of bike lane on busy Jamacha Blvd has been taken away by K-rails placed over it, forcing cyclists out into traffic. A developer has promised to rebuild the road. It has sat there for FOUR YEARS. I've tried almost everything to get action but no one who can take action cares. So please keep that in perspective when complaining about water on your bike path or, in this case, having to pick up a bike and carry it 50 feet to get to northbound El Camino Real. Sorry, I needed to vent some frustration. Tom On Jan 9, 2008 10:56 AM, wrote: > In a message dated 1/9/2008 9:44:38 AM Pacific Standard Time, > serge at issakov.org writes: > > Yeah, it's a hassle to get on/off the path to/from n/b El Camino Real, but > I'm not sure it's worth $250K to fix it. The fact that what is essentially > a narrow driveway a few dozen feet in length costs a quarter of a million > dollars to pave is what is the real problem here. I wonder how much of that > is actual cost of doing the work, versus hidden costs of bureaucracy. > > Serge > > It may be "expensive" to fix it but it needs fixing so I say: Fix it. > > In the big picture, $250K is peanuts, I wonder how much the recent work on > the I-5/805 Merge cost... And all so the developers can build more houses > in North County... > > As cyclists, we should not be afraid to spend to bring the facilities up to > standard, we need to think we have a place and money spent on cycling > facilities is money well spent. > > Jon > > > > > ************** > Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape. > http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489 > _______________________________________________ > > You are subscribed to the SDCBC mailing list as thomas.treynolds at gmail.com > To unsubscribe or change mailing options, go to > http://www.bikesandiego.org/mailman/listinfo/sdcbc > List privacy information is located at http://www.stickman-computing.org/aup > For help or to talk with someone other than the mail robot, send e-mail to > postmaster at stickman-computing.org > From JimBaross at cox.net Wed Jan 9 14:36:35 2008 From: JimBaross at cox.net (Jim Baross) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 11:36:35 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Well it looks like I am not the only one... In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080109112203.03da40a8@cox.net> I hope I'm not getting complacent or just too tired of the same-ol/same-ol inadequate approach to providing adequately (or at all) for non-motorized/sustainable transportation/bicycling. Building the required Bike Path/MUP w/o providing for reasonable, not just one-sided, access was/is short-sighted to say the least! I'm wondering why the funding for appropriate design and construction and maintenance wasn't/isn't included in the original (Caltrans?) effort.... well, yes, I guess I don't have to wonder; providing for bicycling or walking is an afterthought if a thought at all. :-( There does seem to be some real efforts by at least some Caltrans staff to support bicycling and walking - pushed by CBC and other advocates... but it's a long road uphill against the predominant winds of considering bicycles as toys, bicycling as discretionary recreation, and operation of a bicycle in traffic as dangerous when the REAL DANGER comes from inappropriate operation of motor vehicles. [end of rant] Shouldn't bicycling and walking and transit be the preferred transportation mode for a government and people concerned with the negative impacts from over reliance on motor vehicles for getting around; instead funding for comfort, speed and prestige of motor vehicle travel is beating out rational travel mode choices...? [another end of rant] At 10:56 AM 1/9/2008, JonIsaacs at aol.com wrote: >In a message dated 1/9/2008 9:44:38 AM Pacific Standard Time, >serge at issakov.org writes: > >>Yeah, it's a hassle to get on/off the path to/from n/b El Camino >>Real, but I'm not sure it's worth $250K to fix it. The fact that >>what is essentially a narrow driveway a few dozen feet in length >>costs a quarter of a million dollars to pave is what is the real >>problem here. I wonder how much of that is actual cost of doing >>the work, versus hidden costs of bureaucracy. >> >>Serge > > >It may be "expensive" to fix it but it needs fixing so I say: Fix it. > >In the big picture, $250K is peanuts, I wonder how much the recent >work on the I-5/805 Merge cost... And all so the developers can >build more houses in North County... > >As cyclists, we should not be afraid to spend to bring the >facilities up to standard, we need to think we have a place and >money spent on cycling facilities is money well spent. > >Jon -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080109/0ba2dedb/attachment-0001.html From wblomgren at gmail.com Wed Jan 9 15:11:02 2008 From: wblomgren at gmail.com (Wade Blomgren) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 12:11:02 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Well it looks like I am not the only one... In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080109112203.03da40a8@cox.net> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080109112203.03da40a8@cox.net> Message-ID: On Jan 9, 2008 11:36 AM, Jim Baross wrote: >Building the required > Bike Path/MUP w/o providing for reasonable, not just one-sided, access > was/is short-sighted to say the least! I'm wondering why the funding for > appropriate design and construction and maintenance wasn't/isn't included in > the original (Caltrans?) effort.... I think there's something funky in the history of the design and implementation of this path - the access on the west side of ECR is very marginal - there is a curb cut, but the connection down to the path is unusually steep and at an absurd angle, and in very poor condition compared to the rest of the path. Furthermore, the path goes in both directions from the marginal connector - north-ish around under ECR, fully connected to points east, but also south towards the bank and other buildings to a dead end - why? The connector that's there looks like an afterthought, or perhaps it even existed before the path - to access a fire road behind the buildings? It's not part of any reasonable design. See what I mean here: http://tinyurl.com/yovhfb The connector is at the top right. Panning down to the south you see the "real" (dead)end of the path here: http://tinyurl.com/ywj69w behind Ruth's Chris etc. Does it appear that the path was going to connect from there under the freeway to old SV Road, maybe before the freeway widening made that less feasible? There's no way to get from the end of the path up into the building parking lot...if there was, that might be a reasonable connection to ECR, as there is a signal at the parking lot intersection. I recall that the path terminus is well below the building grade though... None of this really speaks to whether there should (now) be good connections from the path directly to ECR - I think there should be of course....just trying to shed some light on what may have happened (or failed to happen) with the original design. The dead end is sort of a square pad area...maybe the assumption was that by the time all the surrounding development was completed, personal jet packs or mini-helicopters (cold-fusion powered, of course) would be the norm and that would be a landing pad, from which you could start a bike ride. I mean, we were definitely supposed to have the personal jet packs by now, right? It's been like 40 years since I was explicitly told that I, and everyone else, would have one in the "Future". Well, not so much told as I assumed it based on some imaginary conflation of seeing James Bond in Thunderball and watching the Jetsons. But still, I was counting on it. I'm kind of pissed. Wade ps. I'm getting me one of those robot vacuums pretty soon now. And a robot lawnmower, definitely a robot lawnmower. That's pretty much all I need. Those, and this paddle game... From abulifia1 at cox.net Wed Jan 9 15:45:35 2008 From: abulifia1 at cox.net (Abulifia) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 12:45:35 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Well it looks like I am not the only one... In-Reply-To: <20080109154721.TLQU14132.cdptpa-omta02.mail.rr.com@ppg1.san.rr.com> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080108210609.03cefa20@cox.net> <20080109154721.TLQU14132.cdptpa-omta02.mail.rr.com@ppg1.san.rr.com> Message-ID: <4785326F.6050007@cox.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080109/a3d85b10/attachment.html From execdir at sdcbc.org Wed Jan 9 17:13:23 2008 From: execdir at sdcbc.org (Kathy Keehan) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 14:13:23 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Help needed for Bicycle Leadership Conference Jan 18 - 20th Message-ID: <007301c8530c$d9a0b4c0$8ce21e40$@org> The bike industry is in town again and would like some help putting on a ride or two. Here's what they have scheduled - January 18 between 09:00 AM and 11:00 AM ( have to be back by Noon for Lunch) January 19 06:15 AM - 07:15 AM January 19 Slow Pedal Ride 04:00 PM - 05:00 PM (have to be back by 05:30 PM) January 20 06:15 AM - 07:15 AM All rides start and end at the Holiday Inn downtown on Harbor Drive. As in past years, ride leaders are entitled to food and free admission to the conference. If you would be available and interested to lead a ride, please let me know ASAP! Kathy ------------------------------------------ Kathy Keehan Executive Director San Diego County Bicycle Coalition P.O. Box 34544 San Diego, CA 92163 858.487.6063 execdir at sdcbc.org www.sdcbc.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080109/353456a9/attachment.html From JimBaross at cox.net Wed Jan 9 16:12:07 2008 From: JimBaross at cox.net (Jim Baross) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 13:12:07 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Well it looks like I am not the only one... In-Reply-To: <4785326F.6050007@cox.net> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080108210609.03cefa20@cox.net> <20080109154721.TLQU14132.cdptpa-omta02.mail.rr.com@ppg1.san.rr.com> <4785326F.6050007@cox.net> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080109130344.0397e058@cox.net> Bicyclists and beggars can't be choosers, right? Good enough for you with your bike equipped for dirt roads should be good enough for everyone, right? So, curb cuts and ramps for handicapped shouldn't be paid for with public money? So why pave any roads if we can all get SUVs anyway? Do you have any idea how much money was spent to provide a hugely wide paved freeway so that people could travel in all weather conditions in cars at high speed in relative safety - and ban bike use on it?... and you think a dirt path connector that no money have been spent on is just fine for bicycling? If you wish to reduce paving of the planet, how about considering a rational allocation of the use of the existing and future pavement; are you in support of the current allocation of more for car travel and none for bicycling? Just wondering... At 12:45 PM 1/9/2008, Abulifia wrote: >What, exactly is the big deal? It's a trail! If you insist on >using a road bike, then take another route or buy a mtn. >bike. Personally, I'm happy with it as is and see absolutely >nothing to complain about. But then again, I don't want the planet >paved over just for the sake of a few highly vociferous, special >rear bumpers don't get jostled. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080109/75f27095/attachment.html From serge at issakov.org Wed Jan 9 18:34:24 2008 From: serge at issakov.org (Serge Issakov) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 15:34:24 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Well it looks like I am not the only one... In-Reply-To: <998c822f0801091104j609ac934l88fad42efbc445d0@mail.gmail.com> References: <998c822f0801091104j609ac934l88fad42efbc445d0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <69ec985b0801091534j289fc3daj7627b6115f181042@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 9, 2008 11:04 AM, Thomas Reynolds wrote: > Out in my neighborhood, Spring Valley, a 1.2 mile section of bike lane > on busy Jamacha Blvd has been taken away by K-rails placed over it, > forcing cyclists out into traffic. This statement implies that the bike lane kept cyclists out of traffic. We may disagree on the pros and cons of bike lanes, but please don't make the mistake of thinking that a bike lane is a facility that keeps you out of traffic. Whether a street has a bike lane or not, a wide lane or a narrow lane, the bicyclist is part of traffic, and needs to think and behave accordingly. Any extent to which a bicyclist thinks a bike lane keeps him out of traffic is detrimental to his safety. This is particularly important whenever approaching any intersection or junction with a place that traffic can move in or out of. But same-direction motorists inadvertently drift into bike lanes and bicyclists in them that they have not noticed as well, so I stay alert in between junctions too. In order to improve my sight lines and conspicuity, during gaps in same-direction traffic I've developed the habit to merge out of the bike lane until the next platoon approaches, preferably not returning to the bike lane until I've been able to verify that I've been noticed. This technique requires the use of a rear view mirror to establish and maintain rearward situational awareness. Not only does this improve my sight lines and conspicuity, but it makes it more likely that I'm already properly positioned as I approach and enter each intersection. Anyway, next time you're riding in a bike lane, try to keep yourself from assuming you're not out in traffic. Don't be deceived by a 6 inch wide stripe of paint! To be sure, you're in traffic. Serge --- NOTE: Any opinions expressed above are mine and not necessarily shared by any organization in which I am involve -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080109/644e51bf/attachment.html From thomas.treynolds at gmail.com Wed Jan 9 19:02:09 2008 From: thomas.treynolds at gmail.com (Thomas Reynolds) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 16:02:09 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Well it looks like I am not the only one... In-Reply-To: <69ec985b0801091534j289fc3daj7627b6115f181042@mail.gmail.com> References: <998c822f0801091104j609ac934l88fad42efbc445d0@mail.gmail.com> <69ec985b0801091534j289fc3daj7627b6115f181042@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <998c822f0801091602j4640e241w7d06c83638d4d3b9@mail.gmail.com> I don't want to debate bike lanes. I have at least as much experience riding in traffic as anyone on the list. I could rephrase my statement to say that a 1.2 mile section of busy Jamacha Blvd has been narrowed to the point where the road is dangerous for cyclists. My point is that a wide, safe road has been transformed into a narrow dangerous road by a developer, has remained that way for four years, and no one cares. Further, there is no practical alternative for cyclists, aside from cutting through private driveways (which is what I do). It's likely that the problem will only be rectified when someone is injured or killed there. Tom On Jan 9, 2008 3:34 PM, Serge Issakov wrote: > > > On Jan 9, 2008 11:04 AM, Thomas Reynolds wrote: > > Out in my neighborhood, Spring Valley, a 1.2 mile section of bike lane > > on busy Jamacha Blvd has been taken away by K-rails placed over it, > > forcing cyclists out into traffic. > > This statement implies that the bike lane kept cyclists out of traffic. > > We may disagree on the pros and cons of bike lanes, but please don't make > the mistake of thinking that a bike lane is a facility that keeps you out of > traffic. > > Whether a street has a bike lane or not, a wide lane or a narrow lane, the > bicyclist is part of traffic, and needs to think and behave accordingly. > Any extent to which a bicyclist thinks a bike lane keeps him out of traffic > is detrimental to his safety. This is particularly important whenever > approaching any intersection or junction with a place that traffic can move > in or out of. But same-direction motorists inadvertently drift into bike > lanes and bicyclists in them that they have not noticed as well, so I stay > alert in between junctions too. > > In order to improve my sight lines and conspicuity, during gaps in > same-direction traffic I've developed the habit to merge out of the bike > lane until the next platoon approaches, preferably not returning to the bike > lane until I've been able to verify that I've been noticed. This technique > requires the use of a rear view mirror to establish and maintain rearward > situational awareness. Not only does this improve my sight lines and > conspicuity, but it makes it more likely that I'm already properly > positioned as I approach and enter each intersection. > > Anyway, next time you're riding in a bike lane, try to keep yourself from > assuming you're not out in traffic. Don't be deceived by a 6 inch wide > stripe of paint! To be sure, you're in traffic. > > Serge > > --- > > NOTE: Any opinions expressed above are mine and not necessarily shared by > any organization in which I am involve > From serge at issakov.org Thu Jan 10 00:09:55 2008 From: serge at issakov.org (Serge Issakov) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 21:09:55 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Well it looks like I am not the only one... In-Reply-To: <998c822f0801091602j4640e241w7d06c83638d4d3b9@mail.gmail.com> References: <998c822f0801091104j609ac934l88fad42efbc445d0@mail.gmail.com> <69ec985b0801091534j289fc3daj7627b6115f181042@mail.gmail.com> <998c822f0801091602j4640e241w7d06c83638d4d3b9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <69ec985b0801092109v2b50201ewd3de25a5e1e099cd@mail.gmail.com> Tom, I'm not familiar with that particular road, but I have a hard time believing it could be significantly more challenging or appear be significantly more dangerous than many of the high speed arterials with narrow outside lanes in San Diego (including La Jolla Village Drive which is on my commute). I don't know of any studies that indicate roads with narrow outside lanes are any more dangerous to cyclists than roads with additional width, but even if it's true, I suspect the added danger is relatively small, and could easily be mitigated with cyclist behavior. Most cyclists are unaware that in most states the "cyclists must keep right" rule does not apply when the lane is too narrow to be safely shared by a car and bike side by side. CA law does not specify what "too close" is, but states and European countries that do almost universally use 3 feet or 1 meter, so that's a reasonable number to use. Now, motor vehicles range from about 5' to 8.5' (max legal limit), so any lane that is 14' or narrower is arguably too narrow to safely fit a car and bike fully within it side by side, and the keep right law (CVC 21202) does not apply. Even if the, say, 7' wide (outside edge of side mirror to outside edge) car moves all the way to the left edge, in a 14' wide lane that leaves only 7' for the 3' buffer in between, the 2' wide cyclist, plus 2 more feet on the right side of the cyclist, arguably a bare minimum. If the vehicle is any wider, or the cyclist requires more than 2' to his right, then even 14' is not wide enough. If the lane is narrower, than it's definitely not sharable except maybe with the smallest cars. That means you can legally ride near the center, including as far left as the left tire track, which may be appropriate depending on the situation, of the rightmost narrow lane on Jamacha Blvd, requiring faster traffic approaching from behind to slow down and change lanes to pass you. Being that far out lets them notice you sooner, and realize with still plenty of time and space that they will have to adjust to pass you. What might be unsafe is to right further right, thus inviting them to squeeze in next to you in a lane too narrow to do that safely. This is what we teach in the LAB classes, and even folks with decades of riding experience seem to find that this approach is new, different, and, dare I say, liberating. Serge On Jan 9, 2008 4:02 PM, Thomas Reynolds wrote: > I don't want to debate bike lanes. I have at least as much experience > riding in traffic as anyone on the list. > > I could rephrase my statement to say that a 1.2 mile section of busy > Jamacha Blvd has been narrowed to the point where the road is > dangerous for cyclists. > > My point is that a wide, safe road has been transformed into a narrow > dangerous road by a developer, has remained that way for four years, > and no one cares. Further, there is no practical alternative for > cyclists, aside from cutting through private driveways (which is what > I do). > > It's likely that the problem will only be rectified when someone is > injured or killed there. > > Tom > > On Jan 9, 2008 3:34 PM, Serge Issakov wrote: > > > > > > On Jan 9, 2008 11:04 AM, Thomas Reynolds > wrote: > > > Out in my neighborhood, Spring Valley, a 1.2 mile section of bike lane > > > on busy Jamacha Blvd has been taken away by K-rails placed over it, > > > forcing cyclists out into traffic. > > > > This statement implies that the bike lane kept cyclists out of traffic. > > > > We may disagree on the pros and cons of bike lanes, but please don't > make > > the mistake of thinking that a bike lane is a facility that keeps you > out of > > traffic. > > > > Whether a street has a bike lane or not, a wide lane or a narrow lane, > the > > bicyclist is part of traffic, and needs to think and behave accordingly. > > Any extent to which a bicyclist thinks a bike lane keeps him out of > traffic > > is detrimental to his safety. This is particularly important whenever > > approaching any intersection or junction with a place that traffic can > move > > in or out of. But same-direction motorists inadvertently drift into > bike > > lanes and bicyclists in them that they have not noticed as well, so I > stay > > alert in between junctions too. > > > > In order to improve my sight lines and conspicuity, during gaps in > > same-direction traffic I've developed the habit to merge out of the bike > > lane until the next platoon approaches, preferably not returning to the > bike > > lane until I've been able to verify that I've been noticed. This > technique > > requires the use of a rear view mirror to establish and maintain > rearward > > situational awareness. Not only does this improve my sight lines and > > conspicuity, but it makes it more likely that I'm already properly > > positioned as I approach and enter each intersection. > > > > Anyway, next time you're riding in a bike lane, try to keep yourself > from > > assuming you're not out in traffic. Don't be deceived by a 6 inch wide > > stripe of paint! To be sure, you're in traffic. > > > > Serge > > > > --- > > > > NOTE: Any opinions expressed above are mine and not necessarily shared > by > > any organization in which I am involve > > > -- NOTE: Any opinions expressed above are mine and not necessarily shared by any organization in which I am involved. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080110/af88760b/attachment.html From gcarman at san.rr.com Thu Jan 10 00:23:49 2008 From: gcarman at san.rr.com (Gene Carman) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 21:23:49 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Well it looks like I am not the only one... In-Reply-To: <4785326F.6050007@cox.net> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080108210609.03cefa20@cox.net> <20080109154721.TLQU14132.cdptpa-omta02.mail.rr.com@ppg1.san.rr.com> <4785326F.6050007@cox.net> Message-ID: <20080110052347.TTWV16228.cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com@ppg1.san.rr.com> Actually it is not a trail, it is a nice wide path with a big chunk missing. It is akin to a freeway off ramp stopping in mid air. You would not tolerate that as a driver... but as a cyclist... tough luck. At 12:45 PM 1/9/2008, you wrote: >What, exactly is the big deal? It's a trail! If you insist on >using a road bike, then take another route or buy a mtn. >bike. Personally, I'm happy with it as is and see absolutely >nothing to complain about. But then again, I don't want the planet >paved over just for the sake of a few highly vociferous, special >rear bumpers don't get jostled. > > > > >Gene Carman wrote: >>http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/justfixit/20080109-9999-lz1m9fixit.html >> >> >> >_______________________________________________ > >You are subscribed to the SDCBC mailing list as gcarman at san.rr.com >To unsubscribe or change mailing options, go to >http://www.bikesandiego.org/mailman/listinfo/sdcbc >List privacy information is located at http://www.stickman-computing.org/aup >For help or to talk with someone other than the mail robot, send >e-mail to postmaster at stickman-computing.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080110/2affb90e/attachment.html From gcarman at san.rr.com Thu Jan 10 00:35:18 2008 From: gcarman at san.rr.com (Gene Carman) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 21:35:18 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Well it looks like I am not the only one... In-Reply-To: <69ec985b0801090941h49ba0dcak7c9af289068a1b74@mail.gmail.co m> References: <7.0.1.0.2.20080108210609.03cefa20@cox.net> <20080109154721.TLQU14132.cdptpa-omta02.mail.rr.com@ppg1.san.rr.com> <47850271.30701@wolfenet.org> <69ec985b0801090941h49ba0dcak7c9af289068a1b74@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080110053517.TVJN16228.cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com@ppg1.san.rr.com> I know a contractor that could probably do it for 25K. 50K tops... I'll split the other 200K with you... GRIN. IMHO I think rather than focus on any new projects, SDCBC should focus on getting the current incomplete projects finished. As far as the sensitive habitat issue... sure seems like that issue would have been enough to also stop the whole 5/805 bypass that took place, just yards away... sure didn't seem to slow it down one bit. And BTW, 2 tenths of one percent of that project would have more than finished the bike path. At 09:41 AM 1/9/2008, Serge Issakov wrote: >Yeah, it's a hassle to get on/off the path to/from n/b El Camino >Real, but I'm not sure it's worth $250K to fix it. The fact that >what is essentially a narrow driveway a few dozen feet in length >costs a quarter of a million dollars to pave is what is the real >problem here. I wonder how much of that is actual cost of doing the >work, versus hidden costs of bureaucracy. > >Serge > > >On Jan 9, 2008 9:20 AM, mark wolfe ><markw at wolfenet.org> wrote: >Ha, "Sensitive Habitat" looks like it stays that way. I'm surprised >they don't "ban" access to the trail because of that. :) Sounds like >we can thank environmentalists for this one. > >Mark > >Gene Carman wrote: > > > http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/justfixit/20080109-9999-lz1m9fixit.html > > > > > > > > > Going gets rough with unpaved access to bike path near Route 56 > > >_______________________________________________ > >You are subscribed to the SDCBC mailing list as >serge at issakov.org >To unsubscribe or change mailing options, go to >http://www.bikesandiego.org/mailman/listinfo/sdcbc > >List privacy information is located at >http://www.stickman-computing.org/aup >For help or to talk with someone other than the mail robot, send >e-mail to >postmaster at stickman-computing.org > > > > >-- >NOTE: Any opinions expressed above are mine and not necessarily >shared by any organization in which I am involved. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080110/2426b590/attachment.html From gcarman at san.rr.com Thu Jan 10 09:51:11 2008 From: gcarman at san.rr.com (Gene Carman) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 06:51:11 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Jamacha Blvd issues In-Reply-To: <69ec985b0801092109v2b50201ewd3de25a5e1e099cd@mail.gmail.co m> References: <998c822f0801091104j609ac934l88fad42efbc445d0@mail.gmail.com> <69ec985b0801091534j289fc3daj7627b6115f181042@mail.gmail.com> <998c822f0801091602j4640e241w7d06c83638d4d3b9@mail.gmail.com> <69ec985b0801092109v2b50201ewd3de25a5e1e099cd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080110145109.WQZG16228.cdptpa-omta01.mail.rr.com@ppg1.san.rr.com> Serge, the sad thing is: >Most MOTORISTS are also unaware that in most states the "cyclists >must keep right" rule does not apply when the lane is too narrow to >be safely shared by a car and bike side by side. CA law does not >specify what "too close" is, but states and European countries that >do almost universally use 3 feet or 1 meter, so that's a reasonable >number to use. Now, motor vehicles range from about 5' to 8.5' (max >legal limit), so any lane that is 14' or narrower is arguably too >narrow to safely fit a car and bike fully within it side by side, >and the keep right law (CVC 21202) does not apply. Even if the, >say, 7' wide (outside edge of side mirror to outside edge) car moves >all the way to the left edge, in a 14' wide lane that leaves only 7' >for the 3' buffer in between, the 2' wide cyclist, plus 2 more feet >on the right side of the cyclist, arguably a bare minimum. If the >vehicle is any wider, or the cyclist requires more than 2' to his >right, then even 14' is not wide enough. If the lane is narrower, >than it's definitely not sharable except maybe with the smallest cars. So while it may be legally acceptable to ride in the middle of a narrow lane, on a busy road, you will likely encounter harassment from motorists. While I applaud SDCBC for their LAB program... most cyclists are also drivers... so the very knowledge you state that most cyclists are not aware of, that should have been learned in a proper driver training program, is apparently missing. Perhaps a few "Cyclists May Use Full Lane" signs might remind motorists of the aforementioned rights, and the responsibilities of other users of the road. And along the way, perhaps notifying one of the local media "troubleshooters" about the long term issues of the Blvd might invoke some action. 4 years... what in the world are they building??? From markw at wolfenet.org Thu Jan 10 15:49:56 2008 From: markw at wolfenet.org (mark wolfe) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 12:49:56 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Well it looks like I am not the only one... In-Reply-To: <69ec985b0801092109v2b50201ewd3de25a5e1e099cd@mail.gmail.com> References: <998c822f0801091104j609ac934l88fad42efbc445d0@mail.gmail.com> <69ec985b0801091534j289fc3daj7627b6115f181042@mail.gmail.com> <998c822f0801091602j4640e241w7d06c83638d4d3b9@mail.gmail.com> <69ec985b0801092109v2b50201ewd3de25a5e1e099cd@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <478684F4.6050200@wolfenet.org> This was why I was pulled over last year on Mast Blvd in Santee by some deputy. That street has a 3 foot bike lane next to parked cars, and a 9 foot travel lane. The other lane is like 12 foot. 40mph zone. For some reason since no one has been seriously maimed or killed by riding a bike there, the City of Santee thinks it's "safe." I routinely take the center of the lane to force traffic to pass in the left lane when I go through that 4 or so block section of Mast Blvd. Got pulled over for not getting in the bike lane, when I pointed out the door zone, the narrow lane, and that I had the choice of "door, mirror, or take the lane" I was going to take the lane every time. It ended with a "Be safe." I've pointed this out to Santee a few times, and they ignore it since no one's been killed. So, with that said, it looks like they're getting ready to repave that section, so maybe it's time for new markings. Mark Serge Issakov wrote: > Tom, > > I'm not familiar with that particular road, but I have a hard time believing > it could be significantly more challenging or appear be significantly more > dangerous than many of the high speed arterials with narrow outside lanes in > San Diego (including La Jolla Village Drive which is on my commute). > > I don't know of any studies that indicate roads with narrow outside lanes > are any more dangerous to cyclists than roads with additional width, but > even if it's true, I suspect the added danger is relatively small, and could > easily be mitigated with cyclist behavior. > > Most cyclists are unaware that in most states the "cyclists must keep right" > rule does not apply when the lane is too narrow to be safely shared by a car > and bike side by side. CA law does not specify what "too close" is, but > states and European countries that do almost universally use 3 feet or 1 > meter, so that's a reasonable number to use. Now, motor vehicles range from > about 5' to 8.5' (max legal limit), so any lane that is 14' or narrower is > arguably too narrow to safely fit a car and bike fully within it side by > side, and the keep right law (CVC 21202) does not apply. Even if the, say, > 7' wide (outside edge of side mirror to outside edge) car moves all the way > to the left edge, in a 14' wide lane that leaves only 7' for the 3' buffer > in between, the 2' wide cyclist, plus 2 more feet on the right side of the > cyclist, arguably a bare minimum. If the vehicle is any wider, or the > cyclist requires more than 2' to his right, then even 14' is not wide > enough. If the lane is narrower, than it's definitely not sharable except > maybe with the smallest cars. > > That means you can legally ride near the center, including as far left as > the left tire track, which may be appropriate depending on the situation, of > the rightmost narrow lane on Jamacha Blvd, requiring faster traffic > approaching from behind to slow down and change lanes to pass you. Being > that far out lets them notice you sooner, and realize with still plenty of > time and space that they will have to adjust to pass you. What might be > unsafe is to right further right, thus inviting them to squeeze in next to > you in a lane too narrow to do that safely. This is what we teach in the > LAB classes, and even folks with decades of riding experience seem to find > that this approach is new, different, and, dare I say, liberating. > > Serge From JimBaross at cox.net Thu Jan 10 18:25:55 2008 From: JimBaross at cox.net (Jim Baross) Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 15:25:55 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Door Zone Bike Lane, was Re: Well it looks like I am not the only one... In-Reply-To: <478684F4.6050200@wolfenet.org> References: <998c822f0801091104j609ac934l88fad42efbc445d0@mail.gmail.com> <69ec985b0801091534j289fc3daj7627b6115f181042@mail.gmail.com> <998c822f0801091602j4640e241w7d06c83638d4d3b9@mail.gmail.com> <69ec985b0801092109v2b50201ewd3de25a5e1e099cd@mail.gmail.com> <478684F4.6050200@wolfenet.org> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080110152204.039b3470@cox.net> You might refer them to the crash experiences in San Francisco. Apparently the leading cause of bike into car crashes has been Dooring; riding too close to a parked vehicle from which someone illegally opens the door into the path of the cyclist. There have been several deaths from this. Seems to me that a properly written notice of hazard (maybe drafted by a friendly attorney - hint, hint) to the City of Santee would encourage them to move the door zone bike lane away from parked cars, drop the lane line and add Sharrows, or some other treatment. At 12:49 PM 1/10/2008, mark wolfe wrote: >This was why I was pulled over last year on Mast Blvd in Santee by some >deputy. That street has a 3 foot bike lane next to parked cars, and a >9 foot travel lane. The other lane is like 12 foot. 40mph zone. For >some reason since no one has been seriously maimed or killed by riding a >bike there, the City of Santee thinks it's "safe." I routinely take >the center of the lane to force traffic to pass in the left lane when I >go through that 4 or so block section of Mast Blvd. Got pulled over for >not getting in the bike lane, when I pointed out the door zone, the >narrow lane, and that I had the choice of "door, mirror, or take the >lane" I was going to take the lane every time. It ended with a "Be >safe." I've pointed this out to Santee a few times, and they ignore it >since no one's been killed. So, with that said, it looks like they're >getting ready to repave that section, so maybe it's time for new markings. > >Mark > > >Serge Issakov wrote: > > Tom, > > > > I'm not familiar with that particular road, but I have a hard > time believing > > it could be significantly more challenging or appear be significantly more > > dangerous than many of the high speed arterials with narrow > outside lanes in > > San Diego (including La Jolla Village Drive which is on my commute). > > > > I don't know of any studies that indicate roads with narrow outside lanes > > are any more dangerous to cyclists than roads with additional width, but > > even if it's true, I suspect the added danger is relatively > small, and could > > easily be mitigated with cyclist behavior. > > > > Most cyclists are unaware that in most states the "cyclists must > keep right" > > rule does not apply when the lane is too narrow to be safely > shared by a car > > and bike side by side. CA law does not specify what "too close" is, but > > states and European countries that do almost universally use 3 feet or 1 > > meter, so that's a reasonable number to use. Now, motor vehicles > range from > > about 5' to 8.5' (max legal limit), so any lane that is 14' or narrower is > > arguably too narrow to safely fit a car and bike fully within it side by > > side, and the keep right law (CVC 21202) does not apply. Even if the, say, > > 7' wide (outside edge of side mirror to outside edge) car moves all the way > > to the left edge, in a 14' wide lane that leaves only 7' for the 3' buffer > > in between, the 2' wide cyclist, plus 2 more feet on the right side of the > > cyclist, arguably a bare minimum. If the vehicle is any wider, or the > > cyclist requires more than 2' to his right, then even 14' is not wide > > enough. If the lane is narrower, than it's definitely not sharable except > > maybe with the smallest cars. > > > > That means you can legally ride near the center, including as far left as > > the left tire track, which may be appropriate depending on the > situation, of > > the rightmost narrow lane on Jamacha Blvd, requiring faster traffic > > approaching from behind to slow down and change lanes to pass you. Being > > that far out lets them notice you sooner, and realize with still plenty of > > time and space that they will have to adjust to pass you. What might be > > unsafe is to right further right, thus inviting them to squeeze in next to > > you in a lane too narrow to do that safely. This is what we teach in the > > LAB classes, and even folks with decades of riding experience seem to find > > that this approach is new, different, and, dare I say, liberating. > > > > Serge >_______________________________________________ > >You are subscribed to the SDCBC mailing list as jimbaross at cox.net >To unsubscribe or change mailing options, go to >http://www.bikesandiego.org/mailman/listinfo/sdcbc >List privacy information is located at http://www.stickman-computing.org/aup >For help or to talk with someone other than the mail robot, send >e-mail to postmaster at stickman-computing.org From bikes.alot at cox.net Fri Jan 11 14:23:42 2008 From: bikes.alot at cox.net (Bicyclist) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 11:23:42 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Fwd: coming south Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080111112019.039b0e40@cox.net> The bike tourists from Isreal who are planning a bike expedition from SD through SoAmerica (all the way?) will be here today and leaving soon. I am thinking that a get-together and send off, maybe even riding out part way would be interesting to some of you. If you are interested, let me know. Jim Baross 619-280-6908 >Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 12:00:53 -0800 >From: "rami rosenbaum" >To: "Julie & Jim Baross San Diego" >Subject: coming south > >hi, >We'll be leaving soon south to Long Beach. >Hope to arrive to SD tomorrow noon. >Will call you tonight. > >-- >Gal & Rami >http://ourbicycletrip.blogspot.com/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080111/8a4c11bc/attachment.html From JimBaross at cox.net Fri Jan 11 19:55:52 2008 From: JimBaross at cox.net (Jim Baross) Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 16:55:52 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Safety of "going south"? Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080111165252.03b67680@cox.net> My house guests who are embarking on a bike expedition to/through SoAmerican are wondering about the recent spate of robberies of tourists in Mexico and what the safest route through Mexico might be; what should better be avoided? Baja through TJ? Baja through Tecate? Mainland Mexico? Any info? From jwstump at cox.net Sun Jan 13 02:12:08 2008 From: jwstump at cox.net (jwstump at cox.net) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 2:12:08 -0500 Subject: [SDCBC] Fwd: UT Mid City Transit Article Saturday Message-ID: <20080113021208.G6DHD.253811.root@fed1wml20> There was a good Jim Baross quote about Bike Route ============= SEE http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080112/news_1cz12midcity.html Mid-City residents pledge to pursue public transit By Steve Schmidt STAFF WRITER January 12, 2008 Maria Cortez and many of her neighbors have lived through this tale before, and they know how it usually ends ? with their community feeling shortchanged. CRISSY PASQUAL / Union-Tribune Maria Cortez, a City Heights resident, is upset that Caltrans hasn't followed through on its plans to build more mass transit through her neighborhood and others along state Route 15. Not this time, she vows. ?We're not going to be pushed around. We're not going to give up.? In the 1980s and early '90s, Cortez and other Mid-City community activists struck deals with San Diego and state officials that cleared the way for the construction of state Route 15 through the neighborhoods of Normal Heights, Kensington and City Heights. Under the signed agreements, officials made a string of promises critical to residents, including setting aside the freeway median for public transit. The community pushed for ? and got ? an agreement calling for a trolley or bus line along the spine of the freeway. The eight-lane roadway opened in 2000. Today the median remains empty, leaving Cortez and others frustrated and angry at the California Department of Transportation for failing to deliver. ?Why did they promise to do it? Just to make us happy, to get us off their backs?? said Jim Baross, chairman of the Normal Heights Community Planning Group. Some are upset that Caltrans is making major improvements farther north on the freeway, while the Mid-City area waits for its transit-only line. The agency is spending $428 million to build additional lanes for car pools, buses and toll-paying commuters on Interstate 15 from Sabre Springs to Escondido. The Mid-City stretch of the freeway ? running from Interstate 805 to Interstate 8 ? is considered a state route rather than an interstate because of the way it was funded. Caltrans District Director Pedro Orso-Delgado acknowledged at a recent meeting in City Heights that the agency had agreed to develop the special lanes. He said Caltrans now considers the idea impractical and unsafe. He suggested putting in lanes that could be shared by car pools, buses and toll-paying commuters, not the transit-only lanes desired by the community. ?Now I'm saying to you that we have to move on, and we have to do something different,? Orso-Delgado told Baross and others at the community meeting. Few community leaders appear ready to move on. Some see Caltrans' position as a sign that transportation officials continue to value cars over mass transit. ?Nobody in this community should roll over,? said Steve Russell, a longtime City Heights activist. Russell is chairman of a new community panel charged with resolving the issue over the next few months. The group is working with Caltrans, the San Diego Association of Governments and Councilwoman Toni Atkins, who represents the area. AdvertisementCaltrans has delivered on some of the community's demands, including the creation of more parks, along with bus transit hubs at University Avenue and El Cajon Boulevard. At both hubs, on freeway overpasses, space was set aside for elevators or stairs that would have connected riders to a planned transit-only route. In a 1993 agreement signed by the city and Caltrans, the state agency pledged to develop a ?Light Rail Transit or express bus system along SR-15 . . . accommodated in the median.? Transportation officials later backed off plans for the trolley line. Then last year, Caltrans officials in Sacramento said an express bus line would be unsafe. They say the idea raises a host of operational and logistical problems. For instance, buses would be forced to swap lanes at each stop due to the placement of the doors. Bus doors are typically on the opposite side of the driver. Bus stops would be in the center of the median. Northbound buses would have to shift to the southbound side of the median to pick up passengers. Southbound buses would have to briefly switch to the north. Caltrans officials say this would be impractical, time-consuming and unsafe. They suggest that the community would be better off with a new express bus system, with stops on nearby streets. The California Highway Patrol believes the median bus stops would be dangerous to passengers and regular motorists, even though the stops would be walled off from the freeway. The agency worries about pedestrians wandering onto the freeway. Backers of a transit-only route ? known in the Mid-City area as the CenterLine ? consider many of the arguments bogus. For one thing, they point out, local transit officials could purchase buses with specially placed doors that would not require the vehicles to swap lanes. For another, many of the safety concerns raised by the CHP exist on other stretches of urban freeway, such as the worry over people walking onto the road. Many members of the Russell panel want to look at other unsettled issues related to the freeway, including concerns over air and noise pollution. Central Elementary borders Route 15. Recent scientific studies have linked highway pollution to respiratory problems among children who live or attend school next to freeways. Community activists recently made headway on one long-running concern: truck traffic. SANDAG, the region's long-range planning agency, in November removed Route 15 as a designated route for long-haul truck traffic through San Diego. Jay Powell, executive director of the City Heights Community Development Corp., praised the decision. But he stressed that a critical piece of Route 15 remains missing: the CenterLine. Until the line is established, Powell said, ?the construction of the freeway is not done.? Powell and others believe a transit-only line through the area, which would make it easier to travel north and south, would be a catalyst for neighborhood renewal. ?We're still determined to get a CenterLine,? Cortez said. And, she added, ?we're going to get it.? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Steve Schmidt: (619) 293-1380; steve.schmidt at uniontrib.com ?Next Story ---- Jay Powell wrote: ============= Wendy: This should be emailed to all mobility people we notified plus Roberta F. at mid city clinic.. who has been added to list. - Jay _____ From: Jim Varnadore [mailto:chapc_chairman at yahoo.com] Sent: Thursday, January 10, 2008 12:23 PM To: Friends_of_City_Heights at yahoo.com Subject: Fairmount and 43rd Dear friends of City Heights, A memorandum about Fairmount Avenue, 43rd Street, and the Fairmount/43rd merge at Poplar/Redwood is attached in two formats for your convenience. Jim Varnadore Chair _____ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.============= -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: IMAP jan 6 Draft.doc Type: application/msword Size: 40960 bytes Desc: not available Url : http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080113/d6b9b943/attachment-0001.doc From gmikeg at gmail.com Sun Jan 13 13:54:32 2008 From: gmikeg at gmail.com (Michael Guerrero) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 10:54:32 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Ron @ Black Smith Wheels Message-ID: <328c49b0801131054o561346f8l7c48370f09e165cc@mail.gmail.com> Hey guys, does anyone have Ron's mobile #? Ron called me yesterday but his call went to directly to vmail so his # never showed up on my caller ID. If you have his # but don't feel comfortable giving it to me please have him call me asap. Ron if you see this pls call me! thanks, Mike From gmikeg at gmail.com Sun Jan 13 14:22:31 2008 From: gmikeg at gmail.com (Michael Guerrero) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 11:22:31 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Ron @ Black Smith Wheels Message-ID: <328c49b0801131122p476e9dk77966f97f931eaf4@mail.gmail.com> Hey guys, Ron called me yesterday but his call went directly to vmail w/o leaving his # on my caller id. Can someone pls give me his mobile # or if you don't feel comfortable w/that pls have him call me. Ron if you see this pls call me! thanks, Mike From abulifia1 at cox.net Mon Jan 14 10:20:57 2008 From: abulifia1 at cox.net (Abulifia) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 07:20:57 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Fwd: UT Mid City Transit Article Saturday In-Reply-To: <20080113021208.G6DHD.253811.root@fed1wml20> References: <20080113021208.G6DHD.253811.root@fed1wml20> Message-ID: <478B7DD9.9060800@cox.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080114/c02ee39e/attachment.html From forester at johnforester.com Mon Jan 14 13:07:35 2008 From: forester at johnforester.com (John Forester) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 10:07:35 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Fwd: UT Mid City Transit Article Saturday In-Reply-To: <478B7DD9.9060800@cox.net> References: <20080113021208.G6DHD.253811.root@fed1wml20><478B7DD9.9060800@cox.net> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080114093214.02e39e88@johnforester.com> I disagree with Abulifia's description of motor traffic as "the gunshot wound", and with his description of the conditions necessary for "serious consideration of mass transit in California." I also disagree with the conclusions stated in the article in Saturday's UT. Nowadays, by and large, motor traffic congestion drives business away. This leads to decentralization, which makes it much less economic for mass transit. There a few cities in which mass transit has propped up the urban centers. Manhattan in NYC is the prime example, Boston is less so. But these are old cities in which the mass transit system was developed before the prevalence of auto traffic. San Francisco is the only modern example, with BART propping up the SF financial district. I think that the extent to which San Diego's mass transit props up its downtown is small, despite the success of the traffic from Tijuana. The individual chooses motoring over the other competing modes when that decision provides the most benefit to him or her. If conditions occur that make motoring very difficult, there will be enormous dislocation in both economic and social activities that mass transit will not be able to solve. Even the extent to which mass transit would alleviate those difficulties is beyond prediction today. I also think that the proposal for mass transit along 805, as desired by the Normal Heights residents and as promised by Caltrans, was never well thought out by either party, and that failure was not noted by the reporter, either. Just having a "station" is only the beginning of a story and does nothing for the analysis. At 07:20 AM 1/14/2008, Abulifia wrote: >And there lies the crux of the matter. Mass transit does not equal >the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ San Diego County can collect in >tolls from individual vehicles. When toll lanes reach critical >mass, and those lanes are just as congested and clogged as the >regular routes, and gas goes up to $10.00/gallon, only THEN will >mass transit be given serious consideration in California. Until >then Caltrans, just like the feds, will continue to dance around the >issue and apply band aids to the gunshot wound. John Forester, MS, PE Bicycle Transportation Engineer 7585 Church St. Lemon Grove, CA 91945-2306 619-644-5481 www.johnforester.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080114/6bf7369a/attachment.html From JimBaross at cox.net Mon Jan 14 17:23:18 2008 From: JimBaross at cox.net (Jim Baross) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 14:23:18 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] bike routing through TJ? Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080114142018.03520dd8@cox.net> Our guests from Israel are leaving tomorrow to bike to and through TJ to Rosirita and would like some recommendations for best routes or directions for bicycling through that City. So, yes they are going to do it; what routing would work best for a Tuesday morning at around noon? Thanks Jim From cleath at j9k.org Mon Jan 14 18:48:45 2008 From: cleath at j9k.org (Colin Leath) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 15:48:45 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Meeting about integrating San Diego organizations' calendars, & announcements/blogging & and maps: Sun, Jan 20th, 10 am, Meade & Utah st. (Northpark?) Message-ID: This is the closest we've gotten yet to a meeting strategizing about how we can integrate web calendaring, mapping, and develop a collaborative blog for San Diego organizations. Mariah of Food Not Lawns has been already working on the calendar-- see foodcalendar.org or the sdtjdph event calendar . I briefly presented the idea for the collaborative blog, calendar, and mapping at the last SD Food Not Lawns meeting. We don't have a solid agenda, but as you've expressed interested in at least some of the features of the SDTJDPH blog , I wanted you to know about this! If you're just interested in the SDTJDPH blog technology features and how to use them, perhaps wait for a later meeting that we plan to set up specifically to demonstrate how to use the technology. If you think you'll make it, please let me know- Peace, Colin WhatTech Meeting ~ SDFNL WhenSun Jan 20 10am ? Sun Jan 20 11:30am 20080120T100000/20080120T113000 WheremapIan's place, 2866 Meade Ave., San Diego, CA 92116 Created BySD Description For those interested in discussing/helping with various web-technical aspects of SDFNL ~ calendar, wiki, blog efforts, and other geeketry. http://www.google.com/calendar/event?eid=Y2w4bmh1cmFnb2ZucTB1YmxlaWJrNXR1dTAgc2Rmb29kbm90bGF3bnNAbQ&ctz=America/Los_Angeles -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080114/01adba3e/attachment.html From abulifia1 at cox.net Tue Jan 15 21:34:59 2008 From: abulifia1 at cox.net (Abulifia) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 18:34:59 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Fwd: UT Mid City Transit Article Saturday In-Reply-To: <7.0.1.0.2.20080114093214.02e39e88@johnforester.com> References: <20080113021208.G6DHD.253811.root@fed1wml20><478B7DD9.9060800@cox.net> <7.0.1.0.2.20080114093214.02e39e88@johnforester.com> Message-ID: <478D6D53.3080201@cox.net> An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080115/e6c588fc/attachment-0001.html From forester at johnforester.com Wed Jan 16 10:28:16 2008 From: forester at johnforester.com (John Forester) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 07:28:16 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Fwd: UT Mid City Transit Article Saturday In-Reply-To: <478D6D53.3080201@cox.net> References: <20080113021208.G6DHD.253811.root@fed1wml20><478B7DD9.9060800@cox.net><7.0.1.0.2.20080114093214.02e39e88@johnforester .com><478D6D53.3080201@cox.net> Message-ID: <7.0.1.0.2.20080116071712.02e2cb68@johnforester.com> Abulifia is playing with words, only with words rather than facts, when he argues about the age of cities. The crucial facts concern when and how the city had its significant growth. San Diego is an automotive city, regardless of the age of its oldest building. And I have been downtown frequently, by trolley, by bike, and by car; and during the working day, also. I know the situation, but I also know the situations in many other cities, and San Diego is not nearly as congested as many other cities, and is less centralized, also, because its recent growth has been in the automotive era. Abulifia asserts that I think that San Diego need not plan for the future. That's just one more ignorant assertion, that depends on Abulifia's belief that planning for growth requires much expansion of the mass transit system, probably rail based. It doesn't. At 06:34 PM 1/15/2008, Abulifia wrote: >I see the "old cities" argument never does quite go away even when >it flies in the face of ::REALITY:: > >Exactly how long does a city have to be existence in order to get >its mass transit act together - 100 years? 200? If that is the >criteria, then San Diego, having been visited and named in 1542 by >Juan Cabrillo, has that covered and then some. Now to be fair, San >Diego didn't really start to pick up in population until WW II, but >even then, we're talking over 50 years to get some kind of mass >transit system in place. The city has had more than enough time to >plan for future population growth; It simply chose NOT to. Whether >that was due to political expediency or just plain laziness, is >immaterial. San Diego did not just come into existence 10 or 20 yrs >ago. It did not just discover that it had a traffic problem. BTW - >If you want to get technical, then SF is actually younger than San >Diego having been settled in 1776 vs Cabrillo's 1542 visit. And >Boston, as well as NYC are also considerably younger cities than San >Diego by at least almost 100 years. But I won't quibble with >technicalities. The fact remains that San Diego has had the time to >plan for growth. > >And as to your assessment that San Diego's mass transit rider >population is "small," let me ask you this much - Have you ever >taken the trolley downtown? Or the bus, for that matter? Have you >ever actually been downtown during the week and experienced the >magnificence of gridlock and mind numbing fees for parking? I'm >guessing not in this lifetime, otherwise you wouldn't casually make >such a staggeringly ignorant statement. >If the mass transit numbers were so small, Mr. Forester, then 67% of >the voters in 2004 would not have approved a 40 yr extension of >Transnet, which has been estimated to generate an addtl $14 billion >to improve the region's transportation infrastructure. If your >statements were to be given any kind of credibility whatsoever, then >you would have this listserv believe that San Diego didn't have a >congestion problem OR need to plan for future growth. John Forester, MS, PE Bicycle Transportation Engineer 7585 Church St. Lemon Grove, CA 91945-2306 619-644-5481 www.johnforester.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080116/c22bcf75/attachment.html From wondernerd at juno.com Wed Jan 16 10:56:39 2008 From: wondernerd at juno.com (Frank Paiano) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:56:39 GMT Subject: [SDCBC] Fwd: UT Mid City Transit Article Saturday - What does pla nning for growth depend upon? Message-ID: <20080116.075639.3977.0@webmail24.vgs.untd.com> > ...depends on [the] belief that planning for growth requires much > expansion of the mass transit system, probably rail based. It > doesn't. Then exactly what does it depend upon? Keeping our sick addiction to foreign oil at $whatever-price-the-market-will-bear? Engaging in the greatest CHEM-101 experiment in recorded history by pumping hundreds of millions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year to see how long it will take to raise the temperature of the oceans by 1 degree Celius? I'm with Mr. A! We must bite the bullet some day! Raise gas prices to $8 per gallon and fund the largest expansion in mass transit in the world. (It can't cost more than the current Iraq war, that's for sure.) Make it "inconvenient" for motorists to use their cars in the cavalier manner we use them today. We are 4% of the world's population and we use 25% of the world's resources. "Unsustainable trends can not continue." -- Steve Watson Off of Soapbox -- Awaiting counter-invectives. Respectfully submitted, Frank Paiano Ocean Beach . . . . _____________________________________________________________ Protect your eyes. Click here for free information on eye care. http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL2111/fc/Ioyw6iier1t6qdreacmnQBLlMsNVHXiiJaDysofA199VSCcG0P80b4/ From JonIsaacs at aol.com Wed Jan 16 11:11:24 2008 From: JonIsaacs at aol.com (JonIsaacs at aol.com) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 11:11:24 EST Subject: [SDCBC] Fwd: UT Mid City Transit Article Saturday Message-ID: In a message dated 1/16/08 7:31:23 AM Pacific Standard Time, forester at johnforester.com writes: > Whether that was due to political expediency or just plain laziness, is > immaterial. San Diego did not just come into existence 10 or 20 yrs ago. It > did not just discover that it had a traffic problem. I have lived in San Diego county for nearly all of my 60 years. As I recall, traffic problems did not surface until probably around 1980. In the 70's I could drive from north county to Mission Bay early in the morning and see one or two cars total. To my educated eye, the traffic problems are recent and to a great extent a result of the developments outside the city limits, Carlsbad, Escondido, Vista, Chula Vista, etc... San Diego is a new city, it grew up the era of the automobile and as such is dependent on the automobile. Older cities were hubs for the surrounding areas so radial mass transit works reasonably well, suburbs to the city, city to the suburbs. The city is quite compact. San Diego to a large extent, is one large suburb with many hubs that all need to be interconnected. How do you get from Del Mar to Santee or Poway via Mass Transit... As John points out, San Diego is an automobile era city and San Francisco was a big city by the time the automobile hit the scene. In 1900, at the dawn of the automotive age, San Diego was a city of about 16,000, San Francisco was about 342,000. Since then San Diego has grown about by a factor of 70 while San Francisco has not quite doubled. San Francisco was a mature city in 1900. http://www.sandiegohistory.org/links/sandiegopopulation.htm http://www.abag.ca.gov/abag/overview/datacenter/popdemo/sanfran.html Jon ************** Start the year off right. Easy ways to stay in shape. http://body.aol.com/fitness/winter-exercise?NCID=aolcmp00300000002489 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080116/26e51d2c/attachment.html From big50_1 at yahoo.com Wed Jan 16 12:02:46 2008 From: big50_1 at yahoo.com (Big50_1@yahoo.com) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 09:02:46 -0800 (PST) Subject: [SDCBC] UT Mid City Transit Article Saturday - What does pla nning for growth depend upon? Message-ID: <227511.30808.qm@web34510.mail.mud.yahoo.com> Thank you, Frank Paiano, for that inflamatory rant! Hey, jack up the price of oil until the motorized world comes to a halt! Screw whoever it hurts because Green is where it's at. --- Were it up to me, we would all be riding bicycles and hauling stuff around on motorized trikes with efficient engines. But it's not! We don't even have locally the political will to get SR56 in San Diego paved the way it should be. In the end, the market place will figure out what happens. The bottom line is as long as we keep electing officials, of both parties, who take the easy route on passing "nonsensical or nanny" legislation and don't do the "heavy lifting", mass-transit will remain a dream. Mass transit? We're flooding the roads not with bicycles but with poorly inspected trucks (NAFTA) from other countries. Hey, I want a Green car but the last time I looked I can't get a hybrid car for the same price as low-end gas models. --------------------------------- Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080116/b26e4e7a/attachment.html From execdir at sdcbc.org Wed Jan 16 18:10:34 2008 From: execdir at sdcbc.org (Kathy Keehan) Date: Wed, 16 Jan 2008 15:10:34 -0800 Subject: [SDCBC] Board meeting next Wednesday, Jan 23 Message-ID: <002701c85895$00c94160$025bc420$@org> Our next board meeting is Wednesday, Jan 23, 7:00 to 8:30 p.m. at the office, 740 13th St, Suite 220, San Diego. On the agenda so far is 1. Budget discussion and adoption of 2008 budget 2. Discussion of the new lobbying regulations for the City of San Diego, and how they might affect the Coalition 3. Bike School updates 4. Active Transportation Campaign updates If you have other agenda items, please send them by Sunday either to me or to Brian Parent (bparent at ucsd.edu) Hope to see you there! Kathy ------------------------------------------ Kathy Keehan Executive Director San Diego County Bicycle Coalition P.O. Box 34544 San Diego, CA 92163 858.487.6063 execdir at sdcbc.org www.sdcbc.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080116/bef485bc/attachment-0001.html From sdmcgale at yahoo.com Thu Jan 17 03:02:59 2008 From: sdmcgale at yahoo.com (Gale Chan) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 00:02:59 -0800 (PST) Subject: [SDCBC] Fwd: UT Mid City Transit Article Saturday - What does pla nning for growth depend upon? In-Reply-To: <20080116.075639.3977.0@webmail24.vgs.untd.com> Message-ID: <630639.83719.qm@web55808.mail.re3.yahoo.com> I'm glad that there are folks who continue to advocate for improving mass transit, reducing use of foreign oil, etc. It's nice to know there are at least SOME people out there whose life goal isn't to drive a lifted truck. To specifically answer your question "Then exactly what does it depend upon?", the answer is "parking". It depends on when parking for all the vehicles becomes an issue. That's really what drove the development of BART way back when. When parking becomes a problem you have achieved what seems necessary for mass transit to gain the edge over driving: enough volume of potential users, and their willingness to switch from driving to using mass transit. I don't know the cost of a parking place in NY but in Tokyo it's like $500/mo. When parking costs here start getting like that we'll see some improvements to mass transit! -- Gale Frank Paiano wrote: > ...depends on [the] belief that planning for growth requires much > exp