Comments on: Springfield: The Next Great Cycling City?

By: Andy Cline

Andy Cline — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 15:34:21 +0000

Keri… Thanks for that information!

By: Keri

Keri — Sat, 15 Nov 2008 02:52:45 +0000

I think it’s even more fundamental than the numbers of cyclists. Orlando doesn’t have an urban University or large numbers of cyclists, but my experience with drivers in downtown is the same. I think it’s an expectation of speed—or lack-thereof that drives the patience/impatience factor.

We have a state university out on the east side of the sprawl zone. Motorists there are intolerant jerks. All the roads are high-volume arteries that move them to their exurban lairs. By the time they get out there, they’re frustrated, exhausted and just want to get home. They take it out one everyone, with little consciousness of how their choices have degraded their quality of life… oh, but that’s another rant

Good luck with getting the bad lanes fixed. And if you get them to implement sharros on the road with on-street parking, watch them like a hawk. The MUTCD recommendation for sharrow placement is too close to the cars. It needs to be at least 2 feet farther left. I think it’s best to center it in the travel lane.

Here’s a PDF that might be of use.

By: Andy Cline

Andy Cline — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 20:45:33 +0000

Keri… Yes. I am thinking along these same lines. We’re not going to be able to build separate facilities in the downtown area. So I’m hoping for sharrows and education first, i.e. encourage people in that circle to make one trip per week by foot or bicycle. I also think money needs to be spent to fix the existing lanes, which means eliminating the dangerous areas that were created.

You’re right about grids and low speeds. Downtown Springfield is a very easy place to ride a bicycle in traffic. And the drivers are respectful. I think that may be because so many college students from MSU and Drury ride downtown. So we also have the safety-in-numbers thing going for us.

By: Keri

Keri — Fri, 14 Nov 2008 16:46:20 +0000

To add to Tracey’s sentiment, I would suggest that the majority of downtown areas are very easy to cycle due to low speeds and grids of low-volume streets (lots of choices). Because of the very complexity created by all those street choices, it is very difficult to create separated infrastructure in such an environment without compromises in safety and/or efficiency of travel. In other words, what you’d create would be illusion, not solution.

I would focus my efforts on cyclist education, public awareness, social marketing encouragement and sharrows within that core circle and turn infrastructure attention toward the corridors which bring people into that core. The corridors into town are where the higher-speed, more intimidating roads are. It, too is very challenging to solve with infrastructure, but it deserves priority and it needs solutions.

Andy, I just want to say that I really appreciate the way you are thinking through the issues and working the problems. The end is worthy!

By: Andy Cline

Andy Cline — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 14:08:06 +0000

Tracy… Yes. There are many things that need to be done. There are sympathetic ears in city government. And also yes, a tax hike for cycling infrastructure would go nowhere.

Right now I’m trying to generate ideas that will get non-cyclists to try cycling for one trip per week. That’s why it makes sense to me to focus on downtown.

You should attend the advocacy committee meetings. We need more commuter voices. Check the SpringBike web site. I’ll also give you a holler.

Amster… Good first try on a name And, unfortunately, too late for me to attend. Maybe the next one