[Carfreeliving] Will LA leapfrog San Francisco?

Tom Radulovich tomrad at well.com
Wed Aug 24 16:05:00 MDT 2005 

So I should stop being constantly negative, and just be thankful that  
bicycling in San Francisco is better than bicycling in Santa Clara  
county or Los Angeles. And content myself that we are making slow  
increments of progress, and should have a complete bike lane network  
several decades from now. Great.

What is so negative to imagine that bicycling in San Francisco  
shouldn't be as good as the best facilities in the best cities, and  
that the pace of change should be other than the glacial, muddling  
pace of transportation bureaucracy? We deserve much better than this.

Tom Radulovich
tomrad at well.com



On Aug 24, 2005, at 2:38 PM, Amandeep Jawa wrote:


> Come on folks!
>
> While your critiques are good (as usual), progress is being made,  
> good progress, and though it is difficult & far from perfect, the  
> constant negativity is not very productive.  The Market Street  
> lanes exist at all.  The Bike Plan has been approved.  Things are  
> dramatically better for cyclists here now than when I started  
> riding about 10 years ago (the Valencia lanes come to mind).  I  
> would SOOOOO much rather ride my bike in SF than in LA.  Hell if  
> you don't believe me, get out of our little bubble & ride your bike  
> in Santa Clara County as I do every day & you'll see the difference.
>
> I'm not saying that we can rest, or that we are done, only that you  
> don't get so lost in the struggle to see that we are making GOOD  
> progress.
>
> 'deep
>
>
>
> On Aug 24, 2005, at 2:18 PM, Tom Radulovich wrote:
>
>
>
>> Jason,
>>
>> A bike lane down Wilshire would be great, and if it happens before  
>> we get one the length of Market Street, shame on San Francisco.  
>> Wilshire does have a rapid bus line, one of 22 rapid bus corridors  
>> either in operation or being planned in LA County, while we have  
>> yet to build, or even plan, one.
>>
>> As I made my way down the Market Street lane this morning, dodging  
>> the pools of fetid water in the rotted pavement and double-parked  
>> Fed Ex trucks and tour buses, I realized that there is absolutely  
>> no sense of joy or beauty or delight involved in San Francisco  
>> bike planning. The best we can do is design facilities that are  
>> marginally safer than riding in mixed traffic, but what if the  
>> city set out to create bike lanes and paths that are a delight to  
>> ride on? The bike path along the Hudson River waterfront is  
>> designed not only for safety, but is designed to be attractive and  
>> fun as well. A friend from LA who lives there part time just  
>> bought a bike because he liked the path so much, and wanted to be  
>> able to ride on it. Will anyone look at the existing Market Street  
>> lane and say, "Cool, I want to get a bike so I can ride on that!"?
>>
>> My friend Jeannene tells the story of going to Vancouver and  
>> seeing Larry Beasley, Vancouver's Planning Director, say in a  
>> public meeting "We want to design a city that delights you." When  
>> was the last time you heard a bicycle, pedestrian, or transit  
>> planner here speak of delight, much less lay it out as an  
>> imperative of planning? When I was walking through Paris, I  
>> definitely got the impression that many of the better boulevards  
>> and promenades were designed to delight the walker, not just to  
>> keep us out of the way of cars. The Mayor's first "clean and  
>> green" project, the median landscaping and blue and gold fences  
>> (which are really there deter pedestrians from jaywalking on Van  
>> Ness and messing up traffic flow) are clearly aimed beyond the  
>> merely functional and are aimed at delighting the motorist. So  
>> where are the projects aimed at delighting bicyclists? As others  
>> have pointed out, the Panhandle bike paths are rather grudging and  
>> stingy accommodations compared to what they could have been, and  
>> Market Street and Embarcadero, which should be our grand bike  
>> boulevards, are pretty sad.
>>
>> Maybe it is the bureaucratic mindset of most transportation  
>> planners; I encounter the same "practical" mindset in transit  
>> planning here, where Muni buses are designed without padded seats  
>> so that they can be hosed down, much like the design of cattle  
>> cars. Maybe our movement has set its sights too low, focusing on  
>> technocratic aspects of design, and emphasizing safety while  
>> forgetting the importance of amenity, not to mention beauty, joy,  
>> or delight. But what is the point of living in a city that where  
>> joy and delight are not imperatives? I understand that sometimes  
>> incremental improvement is all we get, but there also seems to be  
>> no vision for what could be. I fear we could end up with a  
>> continuous bike network, but one so thin and stingy it fails to  
>> attract people to bicycling.
>>
>> Tom Radulovich
>> tomrad at well.com
>>
>>
>>
>> On Aug 23, 2005, at 10:04 PM, Jason Henderson wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>
>>> What about a bike lane on Wilshire? That would put LA
>>> ahead of San Francisco!
>>>
>>> I am reading "Long Emergency" by Kunstler. Anybody
>>> read it?
>>> -jh
>>>
>>> --- Tom Radulovich <tomrad at well.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> LA is creating a continuous bicycle path along the
>>>> LA river, and
>>>> dedicated a new "Bike Park" last month:
>>>>
>>>> http://www.smmc.ca.gov/PressRelease/Crystal.pdf
>>>>
>>>> Meanwhile, the rutted, discontinuous bike lane on
>>>> Market Street has
>>>> become a parking lane, with no apparent enforcement,
>>>> which might just
>>>> be more dangerous than no lane at all. Aargh!
>>>>
>>>> Tom Radulovich
>>>> tomrad at well.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Carfreeliving at livablecity.org mailing list
>>>> to facilitate and promote car-free living in SF
>>>> To unsubscribe:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> mailto:Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org?subject=unsubscribe
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> or, for all options, go to:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>> http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/ 
>>> carfreeliving_livablecity.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Jason Henderson
>>> San Francisco CA
>>> (415)-255-8136
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Carfreeliving at livablecity.org mailing list
>>> to facilitate and promote car-free living in SF
>>> To unsubscribe: mailto:Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org? 
>>> subject=unsubscribe
>>> or, for all options, go to:
>>> http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/ 
>>> carfreeliving_livablecity.org
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Carfreeliving at livablecity.org mailing listto facilitate and  
>> promote car-free living in SF
>> To unsubscribe: mailto:Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org? 
>> subject=unsubscribe
>> or, for all options, go to:
>> http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/carfreeliving_livablecity.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ----------------------------------
> Amandeep Jawa
> ----------------------------------
> deep at worker-bee.com
> 937 Valencia St.
> San Francisco, CA 94110-2320
>
> Home: 415 255 6257 (ALL MALP)
>
> personal: http://www.deeptrouble.com
> political: http://www.sflcv.org
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Carfreeliving at livablecity.org mailing listto facilitate and promote  
> car-free living in SF
> To unsubscribe: mailto:Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org? 
> subject=unsubscribe
> or, for all options, go to:
> http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/carfreeliving_livablecity.org
>
>
>
>

More information about the Carfreeliving mailing list