Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I don't think it is the change in slope that occurs with a curb cut or driveway that people are concerned about...so far, I have yet to see an SUV swerve out at me from my small bathroom or down my staircase.
No one's angry here that I know of. Also, no one has singled you out as far as I can see.
That's BS! See below.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJNEOA
This is exactly the right. It's crystal clear who does not walk, ride transit, or bike for transportation in this forum (and really rely on it). Anybody who has lived in an urban area and relied on these forms for transportation woils understand these concepts. What's surprising, is that there are so many people who are interested in this forum that fit that criteria.
Perhaps you could get your crystal ball out and tell us who these people are since it's so "crystal clear".
IMO, there needs to be some kind of bike school, just like drivers ed, if the bikes are going to be riding alongside cars. Too many times I have seen bicyclists doing absolutely insane things, getting into accidents with cars, and the motorists ending up paying for the bicyclist's injuries. If the bikes are going to be in the road with cars, then they should follow the same rules as the cars; for example, stopping at red lights (even to make a right turn), waiting for green lights/arrows before going/turning, signalling before changing lanes/turning onto a different roads, stopping for pedestrians/school buses, etc. Now before you say "well that's obvious", I see these simple obvious rules broken almost every single time I see a bicyclist on the road (maybe it's just Florida, IDK). But I think that there should be 1) bicyclist's ed, and 2) more ticketing for bicyclists that break these rules.
As far as the main topic, it's pretty easy to see how freeways destroy communities, but I think at this point, the destruction is done and there isn't much that can be done to fix it. So complaining about it won't do anything. But there are ways to put a patch on it and start working toward putting these broken neighborhoods back together. It's expensive, but I think that burying some of these interstates underground, and either building over it or placing a park on top would be beneficial to both drivers and community residents. However, there are some communities where this would be useless because the divided neighborhood has now become two separate communities.
See, that's it--very often, the motorists don't end up paying for the cyclists' injuries. Often they aren't even charged with any crime for maiming or killing a cyclist or pedestrian--it is seen as an unavoidable tragedy, not an act of criminal negligence. Part of the shaming of cyclists is this assumption that all cyclists are to be lumped in with the irresponsible ones who don't follow the law, make motorists upset with their presence, or so casually allow themselves to be maimed or killed by automobiles. But if someone characterized all drivers as drunk driving, inattentive sociopaths, just because drunk drivers kill about 10,000 people a year, that would be perceived as an unfair stereotype of all drivers.
Do schools still teach driver's education? I was under the impression that driver's ed was no longer part of school curriculum. When I was in school, I learned both bike safety rules and then later driver safety as part of driver's ed classes. That's part of why I try to be aware of cyclists and pedestrians when I drive, and of automobiles when I bike or walk. So the idea of cyclist/driver education has merits--as well as pedestrian safety--and are critical, since we all have the right to share the road, and the responsibility to not hit anyone else if we can possibly avoid it.
See, that's it--very often, the motorists don't end up paying for the cyclists' injuries. Often they aren't even charged with any crime for maiming or killing a cyclist or pedestrian--it is seen as an unavoidable tragedy, not an act of criminal negligence. Part of the shaming of cyclists is this assumption that all cyclists are to be lumped in with the irresponsible ones who don't follow the law, make motorists upset with their presence, or so casually allow themselves to be maimed or killed by automobiles. But if someone characterized all drivers as drunk driving, inattentive sociopaths, just because drunk drivers kill about 10,000 people a year, that would be perceived as an unfair stereotype of all drivers.
Do schools still teach driver's education? I was under the impression that driver's ed was no longer part of school curriculum. When I was in school, I learned both bike safety rules and then later driver safety as part of driver's ed classes. That's part of why I try to be aware of cyclists and pedestrians when I drive, and of automobiles when I bike or walk. So the idea of cyclist/driver education has merits--as well as pedestrian safety--and are critical, since we all have the right to share the road, and the responsibility to not hit anyone else if we can possibly avoid it.
Re: bold-total BS! I'm not at the right computer right now to look up some links, but I can tell you that is absolute horse-s***. (Again, if anyone does not like my language they can go post on the religion forum.)
In Colorado, driver's ed is required to get a license at a certain age, I believe 16-17. The schools do not offer it; you have to go to a private driving school, and I believe there are some online courses as well.
Ok so why does having sidewalks make a place walkable?
Because you don't have to walk in the street?
Quote:
Originally Posted by chirack
They want an version of an city that faded a long time ago. In olden days there were lots of stores in walking distance because you needed to shop more often(no refrigeration or freezer), workers needed to eat lunch(without a microwave, lunch would be pretty limited unless the place had an cafeteria. and even then the cafeteria might not be available for all shifts.). People simply could not travel as far to find better prices, quality or even hours.
And women stayed home, meaning they had time to shop every day. We really don't want to go back to that, do we?
Quote:
Originally Posted by jade408
I've nearly been hit quite often with the curb cuts. They aren't safe.
The best thing to do is to limit the number of curb cuts on any length of the block, but that would require cooperation between land owners and developers ... and that might be too much to ask when $$$ comes in to play.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jade408
I've met a range of types that bike for transportation. Just the other day I met a new neighbor who just got a bike and started biking to work. I didn't chat with her long, but she was wearing work clothing on her bike. Think nice pants and a button down!
I used to bike to work in a suit and heels. That was before it was hip to bike to work, and before it was hip to wear sneakers with your stockings and suit.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei
In general, the people who aren't picky about walkability don't seem to walk much for transportation and generally drive. I think they'd notice more if they walked much more.
I walk daily, mostly for exercise but also for transportation to the convenience store, the dry cleaner, the produce store, etc., thankyouverymuch. Yet I am still capable of crossing a six-lane street, crossing a sea of asphalt from the sidewalk to the store, or walking alongside 45 mph traffic. The aforementioned curb cuts can be a concern (and me with my old knees, the elevation changes are a problem!), but awareness of your surroundings - and a mean stare at the driver - help.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
Furthermore, I have walked a lot in my lifetime. I'm one of the few on here, I'd bet, who actually walked to school, not once, but twice a day as we came home for lunch in elementary school.
Me, too. No yucky cafeteria food. Dang, we're old.
Quote:
Originally Posted by AJNEOA
If you have lived without a car, and you claim that this is walkable:
I could walk there.
Quote:
Then you've never lived in a place like this:
Oh, the irony. LOL That looks like a lovely neighborhood, but is it by your definition walkable? Where are the trendy restaurants? The overpriced shops? The happy hip urbanists? Where do you walk to?
Quote:
When some are arguing that highways are not obstructive to local neighborhoods that are walkable, they've never had to deal with traversing this on a day-to-day basis:
I could walk there. The crosswalks could be wider and better marked, I'll grant you that. Sidewalks could always be wider.
Quote:
Originally Posted by goofy328
I'm not sure how this forum turned into one about walk-ability
They always do.
Quote:
Going out a ways, like Hudson, maybe not so much.
The same Hudson that is the quintessential small town? Not walkable? LOL
When some are arguing that highways are not obstructive to local neighborhoods that are walkable, they've never had to deal with traversing this on a day-to-day basis:
Curb cuts, highways, large frontal parking lots and low density commercial development (e.g. big box stores) do not make an environment walkable. Can you walk there? Of course. The difference is that it's difficult, more dangerous, less enjoyable, and not something you'd want to do for a long time.
I'm going to address the rest of this post now.
First, you are doubting my veracity. Well, tough.
You think you can get a Google shot of some totally unwalkable scene and use that as some sort of "proof" when for all we know, there's a crosswalk with a nice pedestrian bridge just outside of the picture. Not going to work, for me anyway.
I don't know why I would be in that neighborhood in Pittsburgh walking alone in the dark of night, but I did do plenty of walking at night in that city.
Not in a world where you expect all these "accommodations".
I pay for them, I expect to get them.
Funny, you say that, yet you expect developers to accommodate you by building parking lots to park your car for free. Where did you pay for that? Also, did your taxes really cover all the eminent domain, building and maintenance? How about country roads?
Quote:
Originally Posted by IC_deLight
Not typically subject to a vote, period.
Do you recall a ballot provision requesting "permission" to build such a road? Do you believe that your personal opinion is relevant?
We're not talking about all roads, we're talking about highways that pass through dense urban neighborhoods.
Community associations (you know, those ambiguous groups of people) and other organizations have absolutely halted road and rail construction.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IC_deLight
The only thing I recall about Baltimore is all the people wandering around asking for money whether at the airport or elsewhere. Also lot of public drunks and apparent homeless in the areas I saw. Not a model to extend to other areas.
Walkability is the sum of several factors, not just one single factor. So, no, whether or not a place has sidewalks is not the sole determining factor in whether or not the place is walkable, but a walkable place should have places where people can walk, and places to walk to that are within walking distance of each other. Nor is walkability only found in big cities--big cities can have profoundly unwalkable places, often due to large obstacles like interstate highways, and some of the most walkable parts of big cities are generally highly regarded for their "small-town charm." Neither is whether or not a place has trendy restaurants or overpriced shops. Nor do the people have to be hip--although there is some evidence that people who live in walkable places are healthier and happier, even if their favorite gourmet meal is bacon, grits and eggs, and their favorite designer label is Carhartt.
Last edited by wburg; 03-09-2014 at 12:31 PM..
Reason: Relating back to topic
Oh, the irony. LOL That looks like a lovely neighborhood, but is it by your definition walkable? Where are the trendy restaurants? The overpriced shops? The happy hip urbanists? Where do you walk to?
I could walk there. The crosswalks could be wider and better marked, I'll grant you that. Sidewalks could always be wider.
You could walk there, but that doesn't make it a good place to walk. I'm guessing you know that after posting in this forum for years.
Last edited by AJNEOA; 03-09-2014 at 12:45 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
- help.
