RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - General


Archive Home >> General(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 )


Santa Cruz Sez: Bicycles bad for environment(4 posts)

Santa Cruz Sez: Bicycles bad for environmentMeDotOrg
Aug 22, 2001 7:52 AM
The City of Santa Cruz has decided that an 8-foot swath of blacktop on a 63-acre site supporting bicycle traffic is too much a threat to the environment.

The area is a popular "off-leash" run for dogs, which are far more destructive to the environment than any bike path would be.

The path was killed by pulling funding for the completion of an environmental impact report, which had been nearly six years in the making.

I guess those who were opposed didn't want to be confused by the facts.

The complete story:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2001/08/22/MN235024.DTL
I'm not terribly surprised ...Humma Hah
Aug 22, 2001 8:05 AM
Yesterday, I rode down a stretch of the parkway I normally don't take, and ran into construction vehicles working on a stretch of bike path. Heavy highway equipment was being used. They'd cut down over a foot, were compacting a thick bed of gravel, over which was going an asphalt cap suitable for handling truck traffic.

This effort, to pave about 100 yards of bike path, involved a large articulated loader, heavy roller, paving machine, misc other equipment, and a number of heavy trucks. Must have been 20 or more people involved. I can only imagine the expense. And, of course, they eat more right of way space.

What ever makes them think we need this? Just make the lanes of the regular road comfortably wide, and maybe expend a little paint for bike lanes in the tricky spots, especially at ramps and intersections (where they normally give up).

There should be a rule prohibiting traffic engineers from specifying bike paths and lanes unless they log a certain number of road miles a year.
re: Santa Cruz Sez: Bicycles bad for environmentTig
Aug 22, 2001 9:37 AM
Gotta love the bureaucracy! Too bad Cali is so crowded. My guess is that over population is what caused/required such extreme ecological measures in the first place, or at least what makes them so easy to pass. It sounds like you gotta have an environmental impact study and a few committees to even fart there! LOL
I loved riding around Del Mar and am not bashing Cali or wise ecological measures, but I'm glad I don't live there. Texas isn't exactly a complete paradise, but the open country roads away from the cities are great for riding.
Thanks for the article.
Ah, bureaucrats ...Humma Hah
Aug 22, 2001 1:52 PM
... let's see, at our home-owners association in West Virginia, we've had the gravel driveways paved. The first phase was half a mile for about $17,000. Just saved up our money and had it done, no permits required. The road is about 12 ft wide. It doesn't like 30,000 pound delivery trucks, but will handle a bicycle just fine.

The paving was done in a couple of days.

This means, in a rational world, the bike path could have gone in in a couple of days for a few tens of thousands of dollars? Yet they wasted at least ten times what it should have cost on an environmental impact assessment? And, no doubt, if they'd gone ahead with it, somebody would have found a way to make it cost millions in over-engineering.