Hubby are stepping up our exercise routine to include jogging in the Point Place area.
We now use the paved path from Cullen Park to Manhattan Blvd. Also the paved path in the grassy strip dividing the lanes on Manhattan Blvd between Summit and Suder.
While I think we would jog without these pathways, it is nice to jog away from traffic! (Our jogging route includes Suder, parts without sidewalks, which does get a bit challenging at times!)
These pathways, in my humble opinion, are a step in the right direction.
Congress will be voting on a transportation (spending) bill soon.
While there are many things to consider, money spent on improving pedestrian and bicycling infrastructures is beneficial in many ways.
A report by the National Alliance for Biking and Walking
expands on these highlights..
---In 2009, 40% of trips in the United States were shorter than 2 miles, yet 87% of these trips are by car. Twenty-seven percent of trips were shorter than 1 mile. Still, Americans use their cars for 62% of these trips.
---While bicycling and walking fell 66% between 1960 and 2009, obesity levels increased 156%.
---Bicycling and walking projects create 11-14 jobs per $1 million spent, compared to just 7 jobs created per $1 million spent on highway projects. Cost benefit analysis show that up to $11.80 in benefits can be gained for every $1 invested in bicycling and walking.
On a related note, an infographic I came across recently
(Do you have a favorite infographic?
Created by: Healthcare Management Degree
Yes -- beautiful graphics. And an important message.
My name is INeedCoffee and I approve this message.
quick quiet voice
Paid for by the superpac to endorse biking.
I'd love to see more bicycles on the roads. Obeying the rules of course.
Sadly, I think the only way to get more people out of their cars on onto bikes is not to talk to them about how healthy it is, but raise gas to at least $10 a gallon.
Even if gas was $10/gallon, I'd still drive my car. I have kids and riding a bike isn't exactly an option with them. I'm all for bikes as a form of transportation, as long as my tax dollars aren't being used to accommodate it.
so if it doesn't work as a feasible option for you, dell_diva, you're against investing in that option even if it would help you indirectly in numerous other ways? Can you explain?
I must be off kilter when it comes to this. I enjoy exrecise (run 2 1/12 miles per day) and certainly encourage it for whoever is physically able.
It burns me a bit though that people follow like sheep when the government or other entities (concerned citizen groups, etc) attempt to artificially force a lifestyle on others.
My case in point is the European Model listed above. No one has made uttered a peep of protest in these posts about the evil in forcing the masses to pay more for fuel in order to promote a lifestyle (i.e., a disincentive for driving)
We are a nation of large and sprawling cities. Our land was cheap and we spread out more than European cities. We aren't built for the same lifestyle (i.e., greater emphasis on biking or mass transit such as trains, etc.)
Sorry about the rant, but I hate the fact that some agencies, organizayions, etc., are trying to raise the cost of living ($8 a gallon for gas)for you and me because it fits their way of viewing how the world ought to be.
^I agree (even with ur mispelings)...and add the fact that this is Toledo/NW Ohio - the weather sucks, and I ain't wearing no stupid helmet like the dorks on those "old people are active" commercials.
I don't think the lifestyle is being forced on others. The issue is that most anywhere bicycling is promoted and accommodated, it takes off and people get into it. Just because America is big and sprawled out as a country is no excuse for its cities to be. Trains going literally everywhere will never be a replacement for cars, its not realistic, but in our cities, there shouldn't be any reason for a person to not be able to get anywhere without an automobile. Our cities werent originally built at the scale of the automobile (huge streets, deep setback buildings with room for parking) and its obvious in our downtown and other inner ring neighborhoods. We can improve our neighborhoods to accommodate other modes of transportation such as walking and bicycling though by doing simpler things like not widening streets, speed control measures such as speed bumps..and even having different textures of materials used for the street surface. Adding bicycle lanes is easy as well, but just as people complain about bicyclist needing to follow rules, so do cars by staying out of the areas reserved for bikes. Beyond that I would say ample spaces for the storage / lockup of bicycles in key places is important.
You can argue that were a "car country" and that's just how it is but thats only been true for so many decades. We weren't originally and this age will too pass. Cities that are not making alternative modes of transportation somewhat of a priority are getting left behind in comparison to cities with the fortitude to push boldly ahead. People, especially creative people, both technologically and artistically, are attracted to cities with amenities and accommodations for a walkable, healthy, quality of life. While I know Toledo is struggling financially, if we don't set forth in trying to make Toledo truly modern, and not just a city frozen in the 70s, well continue to lose population. "but we need jobs first!!, that's what attracts people!!"....Yes we do but waiting around for the next investment in the auto industry will never save us. And tax incentives only go so far in luring businesses. Believe it or not, some newer companies choice in location, often might have a lot to do with where its staff/employees want to live. We better make Toledo livable.
Kaj, first you explain how bikes will help me in "numerous other ways."
I also agree completely with shamrock and justareviewer's comments above. I feel it's nobody's damn business if I'm obese or not. It's also nobody's damn business if I want to feed my kids junk food every day (I don't, by the way before all you do-gooders start criticizing my parenting skills). I'm not ever going to ride a bike. Period. End of story.
Tobias, my main isuue was with social engineering through artifically increased costs of fuel. When one of the main strategies to accomplish the goal of promoting bicycle use is to increase fuel costs so much that it hurts your wallet when you drive. That hurts everyone.
Transportation costs are then higher, thus the cost of food and other products will also rise. There is a domino effect that adversely causes more of a financial burden on the poor. Some of may be able to (grudgingly, at least on my part)bear the burden of higher costs, but those who are not as fortunate will have to further stretch budgets that are already at the breaking point.
All that said, I would love to see improvements made in order to accommodate bicyclists, but I think that the effect that doing so on a large scale is not worth the costs associated with it.
We are a society that builds "out" not "up", which makes us much different than most of the European and/or Asian countries that are often cited as examples. The treks to work and even the simple trips to grocery stores, etc. are often out of your neighborhood and just not feasible via bicycle.
We have seen reference to the health benefits regarding increased exercise through activities such as biking. I am curious though as to whether that may be offset somewhat by the dangers of bicycle vs auto collisions. Not very many cyclists fair well when they have an abrupt, unplanned meeting with a car. Well, they may be ok if they hit a Prius, but I mean a real car. LOL
Wow, this is the last post I'd expect to see such heated exchanges.
Defending the right to be obese? That's fine, but no is forcing you to ride a bike. My post about raising the gas price was just humor.
As far as the statement about eating what you want and it's nobody's business, rent "Food Inc.". That documentary shows how you may not realize it, but the way some things are produced, priced, and promoted, just might be "making" you choose it as much as you do not choose biking.
it's not that europe forces a lifestyle on anyone - it is that we (you, me, and our government) subsidize gasoline that heavily - the europeans make gasoline cost what it really costs; we do not. we make it up with higher taxes.
just consider what we pay DoD to keep oil shipping lanes open and drive iraq out of kuwait and now run the US's longest war.
by the way 55 - thanks for the excellent info
I love this. My son in Philly does security on Penn's campus and he's on a bike year round, both at work and outside of it. When we visited him over Christmas, it was very cool to see how bike friendly the community was, with clearly marked lanes and plenty of places along city streets to lock up.
The boyfriend and I are hoping to buy bikes this spring to get out and about. Eventually, I hope to be able to ride to and from work.
Yeah, I keep looking at big ol' adult trikes and thinking, "I'd like to do some of my shopping that way." I even think about modifying a tricycle so it looks like something much cooler -- like a horseless carriage or an amusement park ride.
The Blade had an article in the Sunday paper about politicians who make an obligatory stop at The Villages in Florida, where the residents get around using golf carts. When given the opportunity to plan a whole new community, developers invest in bike lanes and golf-cart-friendly routes. There's a town west of Atlanta built with golf cart trails. I see these as two sides of the same coin.
I'll admit that bike lanes would be nice to have. Given that we have to repave roads in Toledo about every 10-15 years max (or have them look like they were carpet bombed by a B-1), why couldn't we figure out how to put in bike lanes in various places?
Also, when I was in Denmark, I noticed how they built their bike lanes which made absolute sense. The bike lane was next to the curb, but inside of the parked cars along the street. If you can picture it, there was the sidewalk, then about half a step down was the full-sized paved bike lane, then another half-step down (a second "curb" if you will) was the "curb" the where parked cars were. The parked cars formed a barrier that kept the bikers safe (nobody in a car wants to run into a car!)...and in areas where there were no parked cars, the slightly elevated bike lane/curb kept cars from just edging over into the bike lane.
Seemed like a much smarter and safer design than just painting a line on the road and saying "This is the bike lane" while cars whiz by at 35-50mph. Just a thought.
OHT - What happened when a passenger in one of the cars open his door? :)
The same thing that happens here in the US...but instead of being launched into traffic over a painted line, you'd at least be between parked vehicles and the sidewalk...where a friendly Dane would pick you up, take you to the pub, and buy you a Carlsberg or Tuborg.
Also, Denmark drives on the same side of the road as US; cars have steering wheels on the left side (as in the US). Like many places, most people drive alone, so people opening doors would most likely be opening them on the traffic (left) side, not the bike lane side.
I think it would be great if the city at least starting by connecting the Old West End and Downtown. We need wide (like 5ft)bike lanes on Collingwood and Bankcroft, and "Share The Road" signs on the residential streets.
Bike lanes on Monroe St would be a very, very bad idea; but it make sense to prioritize biking on a parallel road leading into downtown. I would love to see bikes be not only equal, but preferred along Madison Ave.
We also need bike parking stations at strategic points in the downtown/Warehouse District/Uptown. It's a pretty damn sensible (and cheap) way to make a huge impact (and incentive people to live downtown/Warehouse District/Uptown/OWE).
BB - What world do you live in where creating bike lanes on existing streets is considered "cheap"? The city can't even come up with the money to fix the potholes on the streets that exist. And "Share The Road" signs? I'm sure they'd make a great difference.
When Toledo can turn its budget problems around and come up with an infinite surplus of money, then they can have at it. But the priority for extra money should be the safety of this crime-ridden city first (more police officers please!) and fun stuff like bike paths later. Much later.
Crime ridden? For the most part crime is down. Diva, if you had your way there wouldn't be a city worth living in.
Most of these bike paths could be put in as they repave streets.
I often ride my bike from my home in Sylvania over to the UT area.
If there was a safe route from the UT area to downtown, I'd seriously consider doing some commuting to work on my bike too.
(Maybe I'd use TARTA to get my bike downtown in the morning, then ride home? Who needs to find time to hit the gym if you're biking from downtown Toledo to Sylvania a few times a week? Lol)
Of course, I do agree that we'd need to be careful about the financial aspect. It isn't something that I'd expect to see happen overnight.
dell_diva...what world DO YOU live in?
"Sharrows" and signs are pretty cheap, compared to the numerous other ideas and things the city has spent money on. Can't fix all of the potholes...well shit looks like there's one more thing the car is responsible for doing.
You really don't see the big picture do you? Cities across the country are crippled financially because the money moved outside of the city limits. The only way to win some of that money back is to make the city a good place to live again. The best advantage the city has is its geographical advantage over the suburbs.
You can throw a million cops on the roads, and that's fine, but unless you make the neighborhood a better--which is different than "safer") place to live people wont want to live there. One of the best things Toledo could do for its budgetary problem (other than passing Issue 2...which sadly failed) is to make the OWE a better place to live so the values go up and they get more in taxes. SEEEEEEE???????
It wouldn't break the bank for Toledo, when the next roadwork for the streets is scheduled, to remove some on-street parking and/or paint a lane for bikes. It's really not that hard and I think you're being painfully ignorant on the issue.
I'm sorry I should have elaborated.
Toledo desperately needs to connect OWE to downtown and make all of downtown (Uptown/WD/Downtown)a perfectly walkable/bikeable section of the of city to give it an advantage over the suburbs. There's not a lot you can do to beat the 'burbs, so you have to maximize your advantages and being walkable/biking is certainly one. It's a fact that young people desire these qualities and cities that are cognizant of that are going to win big time in the coming decades. Living 25min from where you work is becoming wildly unpopular, people want to live in a neighborhood from which they can bike to work for at least half of the year.
It's probably also worth noting that there are a ton of federal and state grants for these things. So relax, you're taxes wouldn't necessarily go up and this isn't a path towards socialism (like a scary amount of people on here tend to insinuate when the topic of communities comes up...).
Before comments flow in following Buster's remark about federal grants (which are generated by tax dollars, etc), it's an investment by the government, not just a give-away. The initial project of creating these bike lanes will cost money, but over time we'll see much more worthwhile benefits.
We'll have less traffic congestion on the roads.
We'll need less parking downtown (which we have a TON of. I stand by my claim that anyone who says we have too little parking in downtown Toledo is only basing this claim on their local suburban Walmart sprawl, and not the downtown area of any other city in the country)
Increasing bike ridership will bring oil demands down, having the two fold effect of:
a) improving price (basic economics - less demand, lower price)
b) less dependence on foreign oil, which I think everybody would agree is a good thing.
Fewer cars on the road means less wear-and-tear, which means lower frequency of repairs necessary, which means less construction.
So again, though it would cost money up front, it would save money over time, as well as increasing comfort level (less traffic, etc).
Well my point wasn't that federal grants are conjured out of thin air (well the Fed is printing too much, but that's a topic for a different day..) and the simple TINSTAAFL tells us that someone is paying for it.
But the City of Toledo wouldn't be necessarily, and your taxes wouldn't increase. That is my point. People here act like the the slightest investment in something other than cops and potholes will make their taxes increase. That isn't the case because many cities win the grants when they have a good plan to put in place. The stats and HUD rewards good planning.
Riding a bike or hoofing it from OWE to downtown is akin to the old carnival game where you shoot the little ducks as they float by...you being the ducks in this instance. You all want the European model? Move to Europe. I hear the economy and housing is just great there.
Thank you justareviewer. I don't know what makes me "ignorant" in my thinking but apparently I am. I have kids. I can't ride my bike. A lot of people are just like me, biking is a huge inconvenience and even if bike lanes were created it wouldn't change our way of thinking. There aren't going to be enough people suddenly riding their bikes to decrease our country's dependence on foreign oil.
Well that's it folks, dell_diva has spoken. Since she'll never use it, there obviously no point in doing it. Please keep dell_diva in mind when your tinkling about ways to improve the city and your own life and stop being so selfish.
If the cycling thing is too controversial, what about using the homeless to pull rickshaws?
Always love a Seinfeld reference!
Few things anger me more than when you tell someone that the American planning model is unsustainable (economically, socially, environmentally, etc) they turn around and tell you to MOVE TO EUROPE.
The huge irony here is that you are the same people who complain about the city's poor financial shape and how it's unsafe. Do you not understand that the rise of the automobile is the reason for all of this? Move to Europe???? Asshole have you ever met someone who has taken a trip to Europe say "Oh it's just the worst!!!! Their cities are full of life and people! Their neighborhoods have small tons of local stores and shops that the locals can walk to from their house! The streets are filled with bikers and couples on strolls! And worst of all their public spaces are filled with art that the citizens embrace! YUCK!! NEVER GO!!! Give me a city in which you have to drive everywhere or give me death! Wal-Marts for everyone!"
The Europeans have been building and living in cities for thousands of years, they know what they are doing. Their stupid macroeconomic policies has nothing to do with their planning policy which is far superior to our own.
Wake up and shake off your ignorance. American cities for the last few decades have been racing to restore their downtowns first-ring neighborhoods. People realized in the 1980s that you can't just build suburbs further and further outward and and drive into it. It is simply unsustainable. Cities in the United States that have invested in making their cities a great place to live have seen a rise in tax returns and are beginning to prosper again.
But no, let's just drive our car ever where and be constantly moving from one suburb to the rest while out city crumbles into a pile of shit...and then I'll complain about it! Get open a damn book on the matter and stop being so obtuse.
For the record I am in no way saying that Americans should become a biking society, or that there will ever be a day in which there are so many cyclists that it decreases the amount of oil that we buy from the middle east. I think those beliefs is incorrect. We need to drill offshore and in ANWR to do that.
It is entirely about fixing neighborhoods in the city again. If the downtown fails, the entire region fails. That is accepted as fact by everyone but only the absurd libertarians who think we can all live in cabins in the woods by ourselves in absence of a society. Those days ended in roughly, ummmmm, 1910.
How someone can be so staunchly opposed to a simple bike lane on the side of the street, is beyond me. Your priorities are wayyyy off.
hahah wow I reread that and there are quite a few errors. My MV education fails me again. :( Don't type while angry. hah
So dell_diva, we shouldn't do it because biking is an inconvenience for you? Okay, I don't particularly enjoy SUVs, so there shouldn't be any SUVs anymore.
And if Portland is leading the charge in this, let's just use their model on the national scale. If 6% of the US population starts biking regularly for their everyday trips, that's 18.5 million people. You don't think that would have an effect on our oil consumption if there are 18.5 million less people driving to or from work each day?
Well if anything, the increase in biking will have a positive effect on the funeral home industry.
No need to get so angry and call people assholes just because they disagree with you and have different priorities.
I have a love/hate relationship with Portland (but you should all check out the show Portlandia!). Some things are awesome, and some things are simply impractical for Americans at this point.
A point I didn't mention about reinvesting in neighborhoods is that when you get people living there again...THE CRIME GOES DOWN. You think all cities are unsafe?
I'll tell you what's unsafe: any place where there is an absence of people. Nothing drives away crime more than people.
People can make a thousand smartass remarks but when someone calls them out on it for having a beliefs that are factually incorrect, that's a bad thing? A strange world we live in. The constant pessimism is this city is more offensive than anything I could ever type.
Reposting a May 2008 comment from the thread Tuesday is Bike to Work Day in Toledo
"Risk Your Life on a Bike" day. I don't think Toledo is bicycle friendly.
How many miles of exist in Toledo? Not bike paths. Bike lanes, which can be used to actually get somewhere with some safety.
I'm only aware of two bike lanes in this area. One is along Starr Ave in Oregon, and the other is along Sylvania Ave near McCord in Sylvania. Perrysburg may have a bike lane or two. What about Toledo?
Look at all the new road construction that has occurred this decade on our major city roadways. These have been months-long road construction projects that have built new road beds, curbs, and sidewalks. They're still dinking around with the new Cherry Street road from Central Ave to St. V's hospital.
All of this road renovation and apparently, not enough room existed to add bike lanes, eh?
December, January, and February would be tough bicycle riding weather at times around here. Except for this past March, the Toledo weather is decent enough from March into November. We have a seven to nine-month bicycle riding season. Darkness is obviously an issue in the late fall and early spring. Need a good lighting system and proper clothing.
Portland, Oregon has a population over 500,000. It's considered the "Best Cycling City in the USA."
Toledo is continuing to add off-street paths, but what about bike lanes? Does Toledo have enough bike paths, bike lanes, and lower-traffic streets to produce a bicycle commuter map?
Past Toledo Talk threads :
I think it's now legal in Toledo to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk, correct?
Some comments from those two threads :
- "I can't wait to see a bike lane painted down Secor Rd., the drivers already have enough trouble staying between the curbs."
- "This happened on Alexis Road. Alexis Road! The one with No Bike Lane, and a legal speed limit of 45mph, which most people exceed anyway. It's bad enough that there are many places in town unreachable by bicycle if you want a safe ride. And the city of Toledo is doing nothing to accomodate cyclists with bike lanes."
- "Recently there was/is a resurfacing of Dorr street. For a while it was down to one lane either way with a large strip a half lane wide on either side. It served as a good bike lane for a time, and it looked like Toledo was implementing a road diet to help encourage bike use for students between UT ,Scott Park (via Parkside), and the Art Museum (via Parkside to Oakwood). But in a few weeks it was back to 2 lanes with no room for a bicycle. The only safe option there is the sidewalk."
- "How about making bike trails that actually GET you somewhere? It's one thing to make some bike paths in a park for recreation. It's another thing to facilitate the citiy's infrastructure to encourage bike use."
- "I'd rather see the city provide infrastructure to create biking corridors, like connecting the university trails path to the downtown, or adding a curb bike lane to some of the busier city streets like Dorr Street or Bancroft. Even a few loops to lock up a bike would be nice."
- "Bikes work fine on city streets when the lanes are configured to allow bicycles on the far right. Why does this area need a bike path when the streets work fine? I'd rather see the city invest in some paint."
- "The problem is that Toledo drivers lack the social skills to accomodate bike lanes and the people who use them."
- "There are some bike lanes on Bancroft St. through Ottawa hills and out along King Rd. from the university park trail to Sylvania and along Sylvania. Many of Toledo's streets are wide enough to have a bike lane if the lanes were repainted. Not all of Toledo's streets are as narrow as Secor Rd. is."
- "One opinion from a reader of the Blade said that they'd much rather see a cycle route (lane?) constructed on the [Anthony Wayne Trail] from Maumee, to allow bicycle commuting that the pols always give lip-service to. If any route needs to be constructed, an "AWT Bike Lane" makes greater sense and should take priority."
- "Where is Toledo's Critical Mass [bicycle ride]? Other Ohio cities [supposedly] have one. We need to organize one for Toledo. Get the Maumee Valley Wheelmen, the Toledo Area Bicyclists, and others involved. What's a critical mass ride? Critical Mass is a monthly bicycle ride to celebrate cycling and to assert cyclists' right to the road."
September 21, 2005 Toledo Blade - Escobar delays action on a bicycle safety bill :
The proposal by Councilman Ellen Grachek would allow bide riders over age 14 to ride on
on streets with speed limits of at least 35 mph. She said a lot of bike riders use
as a safe alternative to busy streets.
Ms. Grachek said she proposed the change after learning through a story in The Blade about a 22-year-old bike rider who was cited for riding his bike on the sidewalk following a collision with a delivery truck.
"The point is to make Toledo more bicycle-friendly and safer for bicyclists," Ms. Grachek said.
The rider rode on the sidewalk because no bike lane existed. In the minds of Toledo officials, they make the city bicycle-friendly by making it legal to ride on a sidewalk, instead of adding bike lanes.
- End May 2008 comment -
^^Great read. Thanks for that.
I would like to see this for starters:
Collingwood is maybe the grandest street in this city, it needs some bike lanes. Bancroft from I-75 eastward, Ashcroft, and Madison. Boom, connected.
Buster, did you draw that up yourself, or is that something someone has proposed? I think downtown/uptown/owe would be the ideal area to push bike ridership. "Downtown philosophy" has advanced quite a bit across the country the past couple decades, and Toledo has some catching up to do. One of the keys has been low speed limits, which in turn makes the areas extremely bike friendly.
Thinking about it, downtown has been making positive strides toward walkability with restructuring traffic flows downtown - converting one-way streets to two-way, and the proposed plan to remove the lanes for the downtown bus loop. Seems like the optimal time to plan in bike lanes, right?
Also, do you find it hard to type with a hook for a left hand?
Although I love the idea of bikeways in the city, I have reservations. Mainly the idiots who drive cars in this city are dangerous enough with or without marked lanes for bikes.
Also, remember local activist Robert Brundage who died from injuries ustained when he was assaulted on his bicycle. How safe would it be to ride from certain parts of Toledo to downtown or other areas ??
I'm sort of in the "deal with it" crowd. Crime happens. My parents live in a nice little neighborhood on a nice little street in Holland. Quiet, peaceful. Also happens to be across the street from the most horrific crime the Toledo area has seen in decades. Crime happens anywhere.
As Buster said, increases in people and activity cause decreases in crime. Crimes are rarely committed when there are a lot of people around. They tend to happen when someone is in a secluded place where nobody else can see.
Take the downtown area for example - if you look at the crime blotter or whatever it's called in the paper, the core area of downtown around the ballpark, arena, etc, is always bare. It's an area with a dense population, but also has a lot of activity. The more people you have out and about doing their thing, the less chance you have of crimes being committed.
And to expand my point about "crime happens" so as not to sound callow, I merely mean that you can't throw the baby out with the bath water. People die in car accidents every day, but we don't propose to remove cars from the road ways. It's unfortunate that someone died after being battered on a bicycle, but that doesn't mean we should just stop promoting bike ridership because of it.
I remember all the naysayers for putting the ball park downtown. There was no way THEY were going downtown because they didnít want to be raped and murdered. Now they are all eating their words.
It's definitely an uphill battle, trying to change people's perceptions of downtown. SensorG, that's really the who issue wrapped up in a nutshell. How much more successful could the ballpark possibly be, smack dab in the center of downtown, yet so many people still can't find a snide remark fast enough when the topic of downtown comes up.
No I drew those bike lanes last night pretty quickly. It's just what I have had in mind. I did a project on the OWE for a CRP class and suggested that as part of a idea/solution.
The real adventurous stuff would be something like this:
But let's not get carried away just yet. :)
dell_diva...who mentioned spending tax dollars on it?
We're just getting to the drawing board at this point. No tax increases or expenditures just yet, that is years away if we even started legitimately forming plans this hour.
Well if you're not going to get grant money for it, how else are you going to pay for it? Tax money, no?
I was simply providing a link to show you that another city (which Toledo could learn a lot from) is having the same discussion that we are. Jesus.
I didn't mean to be confrontation, at all, in my response. Simply saying that nothing has been done here other than 1) suggest some ideas for routes, and 2) fend off against people saying that Toledo can't pay for it.
I actually really liked your link. I love columbusunderground.com and frequent it almost daily. Toledo can learn a lot from Columbus in my opinion.
Is there an actual reason given as to why adding a bike lane to existing roads that could handle it is reacted to by some city officials and others like it's the civil engineering challenge of the century?
1.) Find suitable road
2.) Find out when it is scheduled to be repaved
3.) Survey/measure lanes for both vehicles and bicycles
4.) Pave road as scheduled
5.) Paint lines on newly paved road
6.) Happy driving and biking
Am I missing something in the construction process? Maybe MI_builder or others in construction can shed some light on this. I'm straining to see why this is so hard. The roads exist. The room exists. Repaving has to be done. Why is this so difficult? I'm not talking about "green lanes" and additional road building. I'm talking about simply throwing some accommodating lanes on existing roads. Why should it be any more expensive than repaving is currently? Why can't it be planned?
OHT, completely agree. That's what I was trying to say about how they're already repaving roads to take them from one-way to two-way, and plan to remove the bus lanes for the downtown loops, so why not just factor in the bike lanes while they do that?
Probably be as successful at laying them out as these guys were at spelling.
And isn't that a bike lane next to it?
Yes, I believe that was in NYC. If you're job was to paint those all day, you'd probably screw one up eventually too. Funny stuff though for sure.