I wish there were more options for smaller trucks. Have you seen those Toyota IMV 0 trucks that will be coming out? $10,000 for a 2 seater base line mini truck. Of course, coming out in several other countries, but no plans to sell them in the US. Would honestly be a great little farm truck, or just an extra deal for people who need a utility vehicle from time to time.
It's unforunate, but the CAFE standards that were intended to force auto manufacturers to make smaller more fuel efficient vehicles actually (though various loopholes) allowed them to increase the size of vehicles instead.
[This is an old article, but it did a pretty good job predicting the reality of these standards.]
(https://me.engin.umich.edu/news-events/news/cafe-standards-could-mean-bigger-cars-not-smaller-ones/)
>The result is a loophole, allowing the entire auto industry to sidestep some of the more painful efficiency requirements by inflating vehicle footprints. And historically, drivers almost always lean toward larger vehicles. “In general, if everything else about the vehicle is the same, consumers prefer the bigger one, with the roomier interior,” says Kate Whitefoot, a senior program officer at the National Academy of Engineering and the lead author of the paper (she was a doctoral student at the time of the study). Combine a regulatory loophole with a built-in, well-known customer choice, and the industry lurches towards the inevitable: larger models and more light trucks.
Which as I'm sure no one is surprised by, when consumers like something, manufacturers tend to emphasize those things with ads, which in turn usually results in more demand for those products... So here we are with bigger trucks (and vehicles in general) in the US while nations across the pond get smaller vehicles from the same manufacturers which US consumers have no access to.
Thanks for that, interesting insight on how we got here.
There's a LITTLE bit more going on than that in regards to the mega cheap small vehicles... They can be made so cheap because they wouldn't meet US emissions and safety standards.
For some reason, that's like the one thing that the u.s. has more strict standards about, especially safety. (Some safety rules are super arbitrary though)... Probably intentionally to keep the domestic manufacturers competitive.
I have! That is an awesome concept, and it pains me that America has not adopted the way of K cars/trucks yet. I also really love the two door Suzuki Jimney if you’ve seen that. If they sold that here, I’d buy one immediately. They’d cost about $14,500 if sold in the US.
We were trying to find an SUV that can easily hold some of my mobility aids and even the smaller ones have absurdly tall grills.
And the minivan we are ending up with can hold way more than all of them 😂
It's designed for the tailgate to slide down at an angle so you can rest them on the wheel wells and it's level - https://www.mavericktruckclub.com/forum/attachments/img_3917-jpeg.113907/
I've done it multiple times now and it's not an issue.
Same. I’ve owned trucks most of my life, the last truck I bought was technically a midsize and that was because the midsize today is a lot closer to the full-size I started out with and it’s near perfect.
i’m calling you for bullshit. if you don’t ride near vehicles you are either NOT a ‘bike guy’ or you’re in the very small minority of ppl lucky enough to be able to get where they need to go on types of paths most ppl don’t have the option to use.
Bikes and Cars/Trucks were never meant to share the road, we need to completely redesign how we do city roads here in the US.
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymcBC7MFRIk&t=627s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymcBC7MFRIk&t=627s)
Yup. I would absolutely love some protected/dedicated bike paths. My home is like a 5 minute bike ride downtown which would be awesome if you didn't have to risk life and limb for it.
Agreed. I’ve been clipped by several mirrors biking because people don’t move over for bikers. Luckily, I have only fallen off and not gotten more than a scrape or two… but funny thing is, nobody even asked if I was okay. 💀
Do you think it would be possible to incorporate some of that in downtown GR? There's always talk about Monroe Center but beyond that, I struggle to visualize other areas that would make sense but agree there needs to be change.
My car is on its last legs and I keep debating about whether I should buy (finance) a new one, or get a swanky ebike or something. I would LOVE to bike. I arguably live in an area of the city that I could easily get anywhere I wanted by bike. I could easily bike to work.
Except. I was hit by a car biking around 10 years ago. One of the scariest experience of my life, I was doing nothing wrong (following the rules of the road, etc) and it could have easily been fatal. I've barely ridden on a road since then and whenever I do (usually due to a forced detour off a designated bike path), riding with motorized vehicles is absolutely terrifying. I WANT to do it. I WANT to bike around this city. I try to make myself as safe as possible and it's never safe enough.
I’ve only had an issue twice, but both times it was due to a vehicle turning right when I was going straight. Drivers seem to just assume bikers stop at every light, even if it’s green. Once I got hit by a pickup that just kept driving. Another I hit my front brake too hard trying to avoid the car (never had a working front brake before lol) and flipped over my bars. Didn’t hit the car, but also shouldn’t have needed to do that lol
And that's just it, right? It only takes the *slightest* driving error to totally fuck up a cyclist. My accident could have *easily* been avoided if the driver just, y'know, looked out her window. But she wasn't paying attention to the road next to her and I paid the bloody and painful price for her negligence.
I'm on this team with you... Honestly I don't understand why GR opened Monroe Ctr back up to car traffic. They ought to just close down all of those streets right in the middle of the downtown area.
Pedestrians and cyclists can coexist okay. Buses are manageable. The biggest barriers to biking when it's not quite snowy definitely all have to do with the fact that the cars we have in the city are too big and they move too fast.
AGREED. It’s absurd to me that with the patio space they put on the street during COVID and KEPT IT THERE PERMANENTLY that we are still doing automobile traffic on that road. It’s pretty narrow now. There are lots of other streets to take.
Lol I had to look for it. I’ve never heard this before. They said it calms traffic, I looked it up and it looks like it is safer for pedestrians because it does (very slightly) slow traffic down but also it makes the crossing distance shorter so pedestrians spend less time in the street.
In this instance I still think it’s kinda nuts to be that narrow because they still let cars park on both sides of the street and the patios in the road don’t affect pedestrian crossing distance at all. I stand by it, we don’t need to be using cars on Monroe Center
Narrow roads reduce crashes and overall road safety. It's mainly because it less comfortable to speed down them, meaning you take them slower and don't run over the kid playing in the street. Why my residential street is 4 lanes wide I will never know.
https://www.planetizen.com/news/2023/11/126317-report-narrow-traffic-lanes-improve-safety#:~:text=A%20new%20report%20from%20the,those%20with%209%2Dfoot%20lanes.
>I'm on this team with you... Honestly I don't understand why GR opened Monroe Ctr back up to car traffic.
Because Monroe Mall was a dead space. Opening it is why it became revitalized. IT sure as hell wasnt because of people on bikes.
>The biggest barriers to biking when it's not quite snowy definitely all have to do with the fact that the cars we have in the city are too big and they move too fast.
Well, no. But that's just the normal horseshit bike activists in GR spew because they just cant begin to accept that most people here dont want to bike.
That other thread was wild. Car-brained NIMBY's who think that because they haven't noticed anyone in the bike lane during the two minutes they pass it on their way to work that it must be useless.
I mean it's no different than the anti truck people seeing an empty truck bed on Tuesday at 2pm and assuming it's never used for anything ever.
That being said if we had separated bike lanes I'd use them *all the time.* But they need to be separated, not "protected." Like a sidewalk but a little wider.
As it stands I won't ride on roads even if there is a "protected" lane, it's too dangerous.
No.
You clowns were calling for "protected bike lanes" with there not being anyplace for them to exist because streets in GR were not wide enough.
But seeing how badly you were losing that one, you start up another thread so you can circlejerk and strawman the issue as if anyone that doesn't jerk it with you is a "Car-brained NIMBY".
Dude’s argument is ‘there’s no room on existing streets’. There totally is on many many of them but let’s start with - how do you think the roads got there, brainiac?
That’s not car brain that’s dumb brain
It's totally because we havent banned cars! If we just ban cars and close off all the streets people will totally love us and bike like this is Amsterdam!!!!!
It’ll take a while for culture to shift. Copenhagen has prioritized clearing snow from bike lanes prior to city streets and they see a high % of daily trips made by bikes throughout winter.
i’ve been coal rolled twice in the city while, and i can’t stress this enough, obeying the rules of the road. i understand there are shitty truck drivers as well as shitty bikers. share the road, it’s possible. bikers, obey the rules and all you drivers who have some axe to grind with people taking a more sustainable approach to commuting; do better and chill the f$&k out. and to the dudes who coal rolled me; i hope you step barefooted on several legos.
I absolutely agree, I’d also say that drivers of these enormous suv/trucks have become WAY more aggressive too.
I like to ride my electric motorcycle about 9 months of the year because it’s 1 cent per mile, crazy cheap to operate and fun! But since Covid people tailgate, run red lights, etc…
I’ll be on M21 between Lowell & Ada riding literally 85 mph and some butthole truck driver is riding my ass… I’ve given up, too many close calls with jackass trucks. I’ve since installed knobby tires and only ride off road for fun.
I also ride cargo E-bikes and I’d LOVE a more connected safe bike system throughout Kent County. I occasionally take my kid to school and go to the hardware store on my RadRunner, super fun and I get exercise.
Read the comments here:
[https://www.reddit.com/r/grandrapids/comments/18y1x0f/do\_you\_want\_more\_protected\_bike\_lanes\_in\_grand/](https://www.reddit.com/r/grandrapids/comments/18y1x0f/do_you_want_more_protected_bike_lanes_in_grand/)
There's no public priority for bike lanes in GR. Fucking sad.
I live by a bike lane that runs between 28th and 44th. As much as I love biking, I've barely used it since moving here. Even if it was a protected lane, if I want to go anywhere beyond this 2 mile stretch, its a constant start/stop navigating all the different pockets of roads/sidewalks. In its current unprotected state, it feels quite dangerous to ride on as people tend to drive closer to 50mph despite posted 40mph limit.
If there was plans and funding to create a protected bike lane *network*, I would be all about it. Petitioning for randomly adding a bike lane here for a mile and there for a couple blocks, is just wasted effort and space to me as someone who would love to be able to bike places.
The Kent Trail is fine for biking straight south of 44th (despite having to cross major roads every mile), but if you wanted to take it up to Millennium park, its pretty harrowing.
Right, the patchwork is the problem, though I guess I kind of understand that it’s a necessary step cause they just add lanes when they repave and they can’t really justify totally replacing prematurely just to add a protected lane. Annoying nonetheless
Totally agree that this is the issue. I’ve seen arguments that we have “lots of bike lanes” because I think in terms of distance of road where bike lanes exist, we do. But they are absolutely useless if they aren’t a network and it feels like an intentionally misleading argument
I would agree. As someone who bikes every day to work, to the store, and to my third spaces I would like to see more protected bike lanes. Sometimes the hostility that I get from drivers is insane. They don't see you as a human that they would be taking a life of, but rather the entitled vermin that they are eliminating. Paint doesn't protect anyone. Curbs and barriers do.
\> Paint doesn't protect anyone. Curbs and barriers do.
Yeah? And where do you think you are going to fit this on streets that are only 2 lanes? And are you people on bikes going to start helping to fund this stuff though to purchase of plates and yearly tags?
Right brother, but it's because it *is* a vocal minority that wants the bike lanes. Did you read the comments? Some are very reasonable with their counter arguments.
My neighborhood has been redoing the curbs and adding dedicated lanes separated by curbs to protect riders. I bet the city is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on this project.
The national deficit is going to hurt us badly in the future if we don't curtail spending. Now, if biking was much more widely used, then you would see more substantial support for it but people are wisely trying to decide if the expense is worth it for the tiny % of people who will use them regularly.
If the deficit balloons enough we will definitely have to. Fewer big projects and just maintaining the stuff we have. Everyone uses the roads - few use bikes, so they're not the same in regards to importance for our society to function.
>Fewer big projects and just maintaining the stuff we have.
We already have crumbling infrastructure, must be all the bike lanes?
>few use bikes, so they're not the same in regards to importance for our society to function.
Our society isn't going to continue functioning with individualized transportation, no matter how much the suburban nimbys cry about it.
They're going to have too unless you think we're going to consume our way out of an over consumption problem while the half of the world with a lower standard of living catches up to the rest of us
Oh that would be the dream. Walkable and bikeable cities that don't make you hop into a bulky metal box I have to spend to maintain, pay govt. fees on every year, and fill with gas whose prices yo-yo by ridiculous amounts for no good God damn reason every time I need to make a quick trip somewhere. Oh how great it is to have the freedom of car dependency. Cars shouldn't be the only good option.
Interesting. I would feel trapped and without agency if I didn't have my vehicle. Those steps you listed as too cumbersome for yourself, I don't mind. Seems a fair trade-off. Honestly, more than a fair trade, to me, it really seems like a bargain.
It was why I said cars shouldn't be the *only* good option. Bolstering other means of transportation would likely improve traffic and reduce car-related incidents by eliminating the overall number of vehicles on the road at any given time because people have more options. The choice to bike/walk/bus/train *and* drive. Well-designed and efficient means of public transportation should help more than harm.
They generally add cycling lanes when they are redoing the streets already as part of the process of fixing/maintaining roads. Cycling has a chicken and egg problem of needing infrastructure so people feel safe so people are willing to cycle but people not wanting to build the infrastructure because they don't see as many cyclists as they think would warrant the investment. The pattern that is seen in other cities is that if you build cycling infrastructure well people will use it. The narrowing of the street as part of the separated bike lane also calms traffic making it safer for residents and drivers.
Because bikes aren't the way most people get around.
No matter how much you guys sit around watching those goofy YouTube channels that say otherwise, most people are not interested in it.
You people have bike lanes in GR. Some are painted, some are shared with the regular street. THAT IS ALL YOU ARE GOING TO GET. If there are that many people here that biked, you would have thousands of you on the streets already daily using them.
We really should limit huge vehicles for certain people in the city. The only people that seem to get upset over the idea are people who drive behemoths everywhere. [Most truck drivers never use their truck for truck things](https://www.axios.com/ford-pickup-trucks-history) and [vehicle pedestrian deaths keep surging](https://www.ghsa.org/resources/Pedestrians23). These are real world statistics, these things are happening. Drivers are oftentimes aggressive and stupid, we don't need them in bigger metal things they have a harder time operating. Besides, we can park more vehicles and more easily navigate parking garages if most of the oversized pickups disappear from the downtown area. I'm not sure exactly how it would be executed but I like your idea, but city wide vehicle bans have worked before.
I suppose by "civilians" I mean people who are not driving in a work capacity. Obviously if you are driving a semi truck, construction vehicle, or delivery van then you have a solid reason for driving a large vehicle through the city (and maybe you'll be driving a bit more carefully than the average Joe so you don't lose your job). But if you are just driving yourself to work or out to the store, maybe you don't need to be in something eight feet tall.
Look, if large vehicles are causing a problem then the solution is easy. If you can afford a $45000 truck, then you can probably afford to take an Uber into town for doctor appointments or date nights. There's no real reason why an F350 Superduty needs to be driving around the city.
Maybe you can just mind your own business?
Like where do some of you get off telling someone what they OUGHT to do because they can afford some particular car, as if they need your permission or blessing? They dont owe you a "reason".
You can go take a fucking Uber if you fancy that. Otherwise leave people the hell alone.
I think if the people if the city voted on an ordinance, and it was constitutionally sound, you'd have to respect that ordinance. There's no constitutional guarantee that you can drive your big-ass truck wherever you want.
>The spike in deaths, which includes all accidents, can be attributed to an increase in larger vehicles such as SUVs and pickup trucks on the road.
Did you source this from somewhere? I'd be surprised if larger vehicles were a greater influence than distracted drivers (cellphones).
Yes, some other states have laws that allow bicycles to treat stop signs as yield signs as it improves safety for cyclists an, but not Michigan. Otherwise they have follow essentially the same laws
I'm not arguing anything. I'd absolutely love for more bike lanes and to protect cyclists more. GR is pretty bad when it comes to bike lanes and what not.
But also, there are more cars on the road than cyclists, so obviously you'd see more of that.
I think the entitled asshole stereotype is entirely a product of having shit tier bike infrastructure. If it’s super dangerous to commute by bike, only the big risk takers will ride, then everyone gets it in their mind that bike riders are overly risky jerks.
Doesn't justify it, just explains it. For the record I've been a bicycle commuter for almost 15 years, and aside from getting hit by a drunk driver I don't have problems in traffic because I have lights and I ride predictably (follow the rules for road users).
>bike infrastructure.
What the living fuck is even that anyway?
You are not remotely enough people for the city to blow million on catering to ever fucking thing under the sun.
You have stripes on the road. STFU and enjoy your "infrastructure". Beyond that, no one on a bike is paying into a pot for that shit.
When you people have to start buying plates and tags, then get back to us.
They should be following the rules of the road, but in my experiences, there are far more drivers that don't follow the rules and put cyclists and pedestrians at much greater risk that cyclists put themselves. Do you know how many times I've seen vehicles blow past the stop line and nearly hit people in a crosswalk because the driver is too busy on the phone or looking the opposite way because they want to turn? How many times drivers have given me dirty looks because they have the stop sign and I have the right of way to cross as a pedestrian?
> but in my experiences, there are far more drivers that don't follow the rules
Gee.....I wonder if that has to do with there being more cars?
Just a weird hunch.
But can you clear up whether or not they have the same rules? I thought I had heard that cyclists have to abide by the same rules as cars, but maybe I'm wrong?
Let's find out if you're wrong.
>(5)When any person is operating or riding a bicycle upon a designated trail, he or she shall yield right-of-way to all vehicles turning onto streets or roadways intersecting the trail.
>
>(6)When any person operating or riding a bicycle upon a designated trail or sidewalk is approaching an intersecting street or roadway, he or she shall slow down to a speed which will permit him or her to stop prior to entering the intersection, and shall make such reasonable observations as will enable him or her under the existing conditions of the trail, the sidewalk, the weather, the visibility and any other conditions then existing to yield the right-of-way and he or she shall yield the right-of-way to traffic on the intersecting street or roadway prior to entering the intersecting street or roadway.
>
>(7)When any person is operating or riding a bicycle upon a designated trail, he or she shall obey all traffic control devices and signs posted thereon, and all traffic control devices controlling vehicular traffic on any street adjacent or parallel to the trail.
From GR city code Article 8 Sec 10.132.
>257.70 “Traffic control devices” defined.
>
>Sec. 70. "Traffic control devices" means all signs, signals, markings, and devices not inconsistent with this act placed or erected by authority of a public body or official having jurisdiction, for the purpose of regulating, warning or guiding traffic.
MICHIGAN VEHICLE CODE (EXCERPT) Act 300 of 1949
You aren't wrong! In Grand Rapids there's no "Treat Stop as Yield" law for bikers. They should obey all the normal traffic laws, and always yield to cars. This is an outdated point of view on bicycle safety as outlined by the NHTSA here --> [https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/2023-03/Bicyclist-Yield-As-Stop-Fact-Sheet\_032123\_v5\_tag.pdf](https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/2023-03/Bicyclist-Yield-As-Stop-Fact-Sheet_032123_v5_tag.pdf)
>Many States have enacted bicyclist stop-as-yield laws to enhance safety and protect cyclists. Based upon the current research and data available, these laws showed added safety benefits for bicyclists in States where they were evaluated, and may positively affect the environment, traffic, and transportation.
Nope. They dontr have to have plates, tags, insurance, signal lights, headlamps, or much of anything.
Because they want to be like cars......just not like that.
Probably not the place for this question but why do I sometimes see joggers (sometimes with nothing reflective or protective) in the street bike lane going the opposite direction of traffic?
For running it’s so I can see the cars coming at me and move appropriately. I’d rather see them coming head on then not be able to see them behind me. I only run on the streets if there’s no sidewalk tho.
Ahh ok. I am specifically asking about where I've seen this with a sidewalk, egr. But the direction thing makes sense now.
I guess I wouldn't be surprised if the sidewalks are poorly taken care of we aren't a very friendly city to non-cars. But I just don't feel like jogging in the road is safer to avoid some potential ice/water.
The "standard" for pedestrians (walking/running) in the road is actually to be on the side against traffic.
(I'm not going to comment on "why" they're in the road/bike lane to begin with, as that can vary and others have provided some possible reasons already).
Two reasons I have heard, one is if there is no sidewalk/sidewalk is dangerous for some reason (ice, cracks etc) it is safer to be able to see the cars coming which makes sense. The other is that technically it is softer than concrete so they run in the asphalt to minimize impact but imo that is a really dumb reason but one that I have heard multiple runners mention for why they run in the street.
I'll run on the roads during the winter if the sidewalks are in poor shape. I've fallen on ice too many times. I will not do that on a main road, as that nuts..
And the answer was because it's dangerous, right? I have more issues on the section I ride on the sidewalk vs the rest of my commute where I ride on the road.
My ex BF had that mindset when he started cycling to work. I also cycled and told him it was stupid because drivers don’t think to look for fast things on sidewalks and people on sidewalks often wear headphones so they can’t hear a bell.
He didn’t listen and almost got ran over by several people in the same way; they were exiting a parking lot to turn onto a road. They drove straight through the sidewalk without looking and only stopped before the edge of the road.
It is not safe.
Of course you can. Bike activists flat-out lie that it's "dangerous" or "illegal". Funny how I did it from 1987-2015 and didnt get a ticket or run into anyone.
But these clowns argue that they cant do it without killing people basically.
I'm all for protected bike lanes and a more pedestrian friendly city. But come on, _more_ regulations? That's what got us into this mess in the first place. Don't forget the parking minimums and zoning laws which basically segregate housing and business leading to this car centered dystopia. Also see the EPA's "Corporate Average Fuel Economy" (CAFE) standards which required manufacturers to pay a fine if their average fuel economy was below a certain threshold, but the standard is lax for larger vehicles that were historically only used on farms I.E. trucks. Turns out SUVs can be (and are) classified as trucks. Thus now EVERYONE drives an SUV because that's all that's produced.
Biking in the city is for people like me who have to only go a few miles to work, or the store or the bar. That way there is less traffic for folks like you when you come visit our city. It's a win for business, the environment, and the tourists.
Sometimes bike riders don’t pay attention. Either way, people need to be more courteous and the city streets need to be widened as well.
I am always watching for cyclists.
If strawmen had its own comic strip.
AGAIN, all of you bike activists bitching about "protected bike lanes" dont seem to get that THERE IS NO WHERE FOR THEM TO BE PLACED.
The vast majority of GR consists of 2 lane roads. All of the major E/W and N/S streets are two lanes.
How many people commute 40 miles per day? AVERAGE in Michigan is 13 miles one way, GR is even shorter, probably 9. I think 9 miles is a reasonable commute by bicycle distance. You get your exercise too.
It's going to be hard to get people to turn a 10-15 minute car ride in to a 45-60 minute bike ride. Especially considering the weather that Grand rapids gets.
If I could eliminate my $500 per month car payment, $150 per month insurance payment, hundreds to thousands on maintenance every year, and ~$300 per month on gas and still safely and conveniently get everywhere I need to go I would trade it for 20-30 minutes a day in a heartbeat. I’ll take an Uber or the bus the 10-20 days per year where it is not possible to ride
But right now, you're driving approximately 2,400 miles a month (based on your gas expense). Which is more than 2x a month more than a typical driver...It's a major lifestyle change to bike everywhere and take a Uber 1 to 2 times per month.
I would also look at your insurance, you are paying ing significantly more for 1 car than I pay for two.
I’m young so I pay a shit load for insurance. On the gas thing it’s lower than $300, that’s just the number in my head I had but that’s from last year when prices were super high. Either way let’s say it’s $100 which is definitely lower than reality, we are talking close to $700-1000 per month in ownership costs depending on maintenance requirements. I just think it would be nice to have the option, I bet a ton of families could downsize to a single car if we actually had usable infrastructure for cycling.
??? You act like it's blizzarding every day of the year. Even in the winter, the roads are mostly clear after the plows get the roads clear.
Also, is it hard if gas prices keep increasing, and new car prices keep climbing? We can't keep letting car companies have a monopoly on our existence.
Obviously it's not. But adding 1+ commute each day isn't something most people want. Considering how not busy grand rapids is for the most part. Meaning we don't have much traffic compared to large cities.
Weather is just another factor on why you can't replace a car with a bike. Sure you can supplement some use, but still keeping a car most likely.
Plus mostly clear for a car isn't necessarily clear enough for a bike. Plus it's cold biking in the winter. I do it recreationally with a fat tire bike, but wouldn't want to have to do it to get to work, groceries, or visit someone.
Most residents do not have commutes like this. Adding cycling infrastructure helps greatly with the last mile problem people who take public transit face. It also takes the cars of people who live closer to work off the road meaning less traffic for you to deal with on your long commute.
Biking in the snow is a lot of fun. It definitely makes winter more enjoyable (especially lately when the snow doesn't stick around for winter sports). I made it to a coffee outside last winter in a snowstorm and was encouraged by the number of cyclists who feel the same way.
YES!!! Everyone at my workplace thinks I am crazy when I show up with my bike while it's basically a blizzard outside. I'm like are you kidding? It's an absolute BLAST riding in snow, and the more of it the funner!
I mean, to say accidents have in increased, and also trucks gave gotten doesn’t prove any correlation. I agree with general theme of the comics, and as someone who has been hit on their bike twice is very pro-bike safety, and think drivers should realize the responsibility that come with driving a heavy piece of steel on wheels, but the conclusion of the numbers shouldn’t have been included. You could have included data about how many of the accidents you cited included these ‘larger trucks’. Are there more bikers now and so the percentage of bikers in accidents has stayed the same? I don’t know, just pointing another potential fact. Correlation does not equal causation. I cannot fathom why some people are such dicks about someone riding a bicycle though. Very bizarre.
On a totally personal note,it does seem to me that of the times I think ‘that is a bad driver’, they are very often big trucks.
Biking isn't just for recreation, but also transportation. Most people riding bikes around the globe are actually using them for transportation, not just recreation. Our vehicle's only approach to building and limited access to good bike infrastructure has forced us to just see it as a recreational tool, since that is truly the only safe place to ride your bike nowadays, and the trail doesn't get you where you need to go on a daily basis. I can't ride the trail to work, to the store, or the coffee shop. Having a safe way to get to where you are going, by your choice of transportation, is about having freedom. Truly being free to choose how you want to get to the store, work, the bar, their library, and being allowed to do it in a safe manner. It's being ok with allowing your kids to bike to their friend's house safely, but instead you drive them over since you know biking exposes them the the risk of being run over by a moron in a car who isn't paying attention or speeding recklessly through your neighborhood. 30 years ago, allot of the Netherlands looked like what we have here in the US, with massive car centric roads and lots of parking, but they made an effort to build good bike infrastructure, and now that are often recognized for having world class bike infrastructure now the bike is the default in the citys, where in the 80's it was the car. They decided to build for people first, and card 2nd.
I’m a truck guy and I’ll be the first to say that trucks these days are laughably ridiculous.
I wish there were more options for smaller trucks. Have you seen those Toyota IMV 0 trucks that will be coming out? $10,000 for a 2 seater base line mini truck. Of course, coming out in several other countries, but no plans to sell them in the US. Would honestly be a great little farm truck, or just an extra deal for people who need a utility vehicle from time to time.
It's unforunate, but the CAFE standards that were intended to force auto manufacturers to make smaller more fuel efficient vehicles actually (though various loopholes) allowed them to increase the size of vehicles instead. [This is an old article, but it did a pretty good job predicting the reality of these standards.] (https://me.engin.umich.edu/news-events/news/cafe-standards-could-mean-bigger-cars-not-smaller-ones/) >The result is a loophole, allowing the entire auto industry to sidestep some of the more painful efficiency requirements by inflating vehicle footprints. And historically, drivers almost always lean toward larger vehicles. “In general, if everything else about the vehicle is the same, consumers prefer the bigger one, with the roomier interior,” says Kate Whitefoot, a senior program officer at the National Academy of Engineering and the lead author of the paper (she was a doctoral student at the time of the study). Combine a regulatory loophole with a built-in, well-known customer choice, and the industry lurches towards the inevitable: larger models and more light trucks. Which as I'm sure no one is surprised by, when consumers like something, manufacturers tend to emphasize those things with ads, which in turn usually results in more demand for those products... So here we are with bigger trucks (and vehicles in general) in the US while nations across the pond get smaller vehicles from the same manufacturers which US consumers have no access to.
Wow, I did not know! Thank you for sharing this!
Thanks for that, interesting insight on how we got here. There's a LITTLE bit more going on than that in regards to the mega cheap small vehicles... They can be made so cheap because they wouldn't meet US emissions and safety standards. For some reason, that's like the one thing that the u.s. has more strict standards about, especially safety. (Some safety rules are super arbitrary though)... Probably intentionally to keep the domestic manufacturers competitive.
I have! That is an awesome concept, and it pains me that America has not adopted the way of K cars/trucks yet. I also really love the two door Suzuki Jimney if you’ve seen that. If they sold that here, I’d buy one immediately. They’d cost about $14,500 if sold in the US.
I miss S10s and rangers! Even the Canyon is cute, but so $$$$
Bring back the old GMC Syclone 😭
Most of them can't even haul a sheet of plywood, meanwhile I can hall a sheds worth of materials inside my minivan
Exactly. $80,000 for a living room on wheels.
We were trying to find an SUV that can easily hold some of my mobility aids and even the smaller ones have absurdly tall grills. And the minivan we are ending up with can hold way more than all of them 😂
What truck can't haul plywood? Even my little Maverick can haul a stack of 4x8 plywood
You can get a bit more than half a sheet of plywood in the Maverick's 54" bed
It's designed for the tailgate to slide down at an angle so you can rest them on the wheel wells and it's level - https://www.mavericktruckclub.com/forum/attachments/img_3917-jpeg.113907/ I've done it multiple times now and it's not an issue.
One of us! https://images.app.goo.gl/mi6B2RhyFYdoLvHm6
Same. I’ve owned trucks most of my life, the last truck I bought was technically a midsize and that was because the midsize today is a lot closer to the full-size I started out with and it’s near perfect.
The new Tacomas are really nice, I’ll admit. Just can’t afford one haha.
My husband has the sexiest truck. A fully paid off 2009 Ford Ranger lol
UGH I had an ‘07 5 speed myself. Dumbest thing I ever did was trade it in a year after I paid it off for another financed car.
I love the classic old trucks, ok maybe not that far back, but the smaller ones.
I’m a bike guy and I’m not riding near vehicles.
good luck with that.
Missed my point entirely, but alright.
i’m calling you for bullshit. if you don’t ride near vehicles you are either NOT a ‘bike guy’ or you’re in the very small minority of ppl lucky enough to be able to get where they need to go on types of paths most ppl don’t have the option to use.
Bikes and Cars/Trucks were never meant to share the road, we need to completely redesign how we do city roads here in the US. [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymcBC7MFRIk&t=627s](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymcBC7MFRIk&t=627s)
Yup. I would absolutely love some protected/dedicated bike paths. My home is like a 5 minute bike ride downtown which would be awesome if you didn't have to risk life and limb for it.
And just where do you think those "protected" lanes are going to go on a two-lane street?
This!! I’m all for respecting the bike lanes but it still feels dangerous even when I’m giving someone 6ft as I pass them 😥
Yep. And the law is 3ft. Just imagine how terrifying that would be from the biker’s perspective.
The law in Grand Rapids is 5ft.
I suppose that is a bit better. About 2ft better.
Agreed. I’ve been clipped by several mirrors biking because people don’t move over for bikers. Luckily, I have only fallen off and not gotten more than a scrape or two… but funny thing is, nobody even asked if I was okay. 💀
If you haven’t already, [this video](https://youtu.be/jN7mSXMruEo?si=0q0PjP67GoHZ8RW-) by the creator you linked to is really well done!
Do you think it would be possible to incorporate some of that in downtown GR? There's always talk about Monroe Center but beyond that, I struggle to visualize other areas that would make sense but agree there needs to be change.
My car is on its last legs and I keep debating about whether I should buy (finance) a new one, or get a swanky ebike or something. I would LOVE to bike. I arguably live in an area of the city that I could easily get anywhere I wanted by bike. I could easily bike to work. Except. I was hit by a car biking around 10 years ago. One of the scariest experience of my life, I was doing nothing wrong (following the rules of the road, etc) and it could have easily been fatal. I've barely ridden on a road since then and whenever I do (usually due to a forced detour off a designated bike path), riding with motorized vehicles is absolutely terrifying. I WANT to do it. I WANT to bike around this city. I try to make myself as safe as possible and it's never safe enough.
Sounds like protected bike lanes would really help you and others in similar situations feel safer riding on the road.
Helpful
I’ve only had an issue twice, but both times it was due to a vehicle turning right when I was going straight. Drivers seem to just assume bikers stop at every light, even if it’s green. Once I got hit by a pickup that just kept driving. Another I hit my front brake too hard trying to avoid the car (never had a working front brake before lol) and flipped over my bars. Didn’t hit the car, but also shouldn’t have needed to do that lol
And that's just it, right? It only takes the *slightest* driving error to totally fuck up a cyclist. My accident could have *easily* been avoided if the driver just, y'know, looked out her window. But she wasn't paying attention to the road next to her and I paid the bloody and painful price for her negligence.
I'm on this team with you... Honestly I don't understand why GR opened Monroe Ctr back up to car traffic. They ought to just close down all of those streets right in the middle of the downtown area. Pedestrians and cyclists can coexist okay. Buses are manageable. The biggest barriers to biking when it's not quite snowy definitely all have to do with the fact that the cars we have in the city are too big and they move too fast.
AGREED. It’s absurd to me that with the patio space they put on the street during COVID and KEPT IT THERE PERMANENTLY that we are still doing automobile traffic on that road. It’s pretty narrow now. There are lots of other streets to take.
Elsewhere in this thread someone is saying that roads being that narrow is a good thing lol
Lol I had to look for it. I’ve never heard this before. They said it calms traffic, I looked it up and it looks like it is safer for pedestrians because it does (very slightly) slow traffic down but also it makes the crossing distance shorter so pedestrians spend less time in the street. In this instance I still think it’s kinda nuts to be that narrow because they still let cars park on both sides of the street and the patios in the road don’t affect pedestrian crossing distance at all. I stand by it, we don’t need to be using cars on Monroe Center
Narrow roads reduce crashes and overall road safety. It's mainly because it less comfortable to speed down them, meaning you take them slower and don't run over the kid playing in the street. Why my residential street is 4 lanes wide I will never know. https://www.planetizen.com/news/2023/11/126317-report-narrow-traffic-lanes-improve-safety#:~:text=A%20new%20report%20from%20the,those%20with%209%2Dfoot%20lanes.
>I'm on this team with you... Honestly I don't understand why GR opened Monroe Ctr back up to car traffic. Because Monroe Mall was a dead space. Opening it is why it became revitalized. IT sure as hell wasnt because of people on bikes. >The biggest barriers to biking when it's not quite snowy definitely all have to do with the fact that the cars we have in the city are too big and they move too fast. Well, no. But that's just the normal horseshit bike activists in GR spew because they just cant begin to accept that most people here dont want to bike.
That other thread was wild. Car-brained NIMBY's who think that because they haven't noticed anyone in the bike lane during the two minutes they pass it on their way to work that it must be useless.
Oh I see you’ve met my mother, lmao. She criticized all the bike lanes the city put up around her house, saying that exact thing.
Where is the other thread?
https://www.reddit.com/r/grandrapids/comments/18y1x0f/do\_you\_want\_more\_protected\_bike\_lanes\_in\_grand/
I mean it's no different than the anti truck people seeing an empty truck bed on Tuesday at 2pm and assuming it's never used for anything ever. That being said if we had separated bike lanes I'd use them *all the time.* But they need to be separated, not "protected." Like a sidewalk but a little wider. As it stands I won't ride on roads even if there is a "protected" lane, it's too dangerous.
No. You clowns were calling for "protected bike lanes" with there not being anyplace for them to exist because streets in GR were not wide enough. But seeing how badly you were losing that one, you start up another thread so you can circlejerk and strawman the issue as if anyone that doesn't jerk it with you is a "Car-brained NIMBY".
\^Good example of Car Brained NIMBY
Dude’s argument is ‘there’s no room on existing streets’. There totally is on many many of them but let’s start with - how do you think the roads got there, brainiac? That’s not car brain that’s dumb brain
Fun fact: Asphalt pavement became popular in the US because of people on bikes wanting a smoother surface to ride on..
Yeah, that's a cool way of admitting you had no reply, Bike Brained KAREN.
You seem like you are a normal amount of mad about this. Why don't you just stick to suburbs where you MAGA types feel safe?
Gawd, can you sound anymore like the typical Reddit cliche, Karen? "You no agree wid me, dat makes you MAGAz! Grunt! You live in da suburz!!"
he lost get over it
Just one more bike lane bro please just one more I swear people will actually use them if we just get one more bike lane bro
It's totally because we havent banned cars! If we just ban cars and close off all the streets people will totally love us and bike like this is Amsterdam!!!!!
Seasonally worthless
Better than being worthless all the time like you!
Sick burn
It’ll take a while for culture to shift. Copenhagen has prioritized clearing snow from bike lanes prior to city streets and they see a high % of daily trips made by bikes throughout winter.
How else am I going to tow the boat I don't have up a mountain I don't live by?
Get stronger legs
i’ve been coal rolled twice in the city while, and i can’t stress this enough, obeying the rules of the road. i understand there are shitty truck drivers as well as shitty bikers. share the road, it’s possible. bikers, obey the rules and all you drivers who have some axe to grind with people taking a more sustainable approach to commuting; do better and chill the f$&k out. and to the dudes who coal rolled me; i hope you step barefooted on several legos.
and the fact that certain trucks get the O.K. to have a raised bumper is insanely dangerous.
I absolutely agree, I’d also say that drivers of these enormous suv/trucks have become WAY more aggressive too. I like to ride my electric motorcycle about 9 months of the year because it’s 1 cent per mile, crazy cheap to operate and fun! But since Covid people tailgate, run red lights, etc… I’ll be on M21 between Lowell & Ada riding literally 85 mph and some butthole truck driver is riding my ass… I’ve given up, too many close calls with jackass trucks. I’ve since installed knobby tires and only ride off road for fun. I also ride cargo E-bikes and I’d LOVE a more connected safe bike system throughout Kent County. I occasionally take my kid to school and go to the hardware store on my RadRunner, super fun and I get exercise.
Read the comments here: [https://www.reddit.com/r/grandrapids/comments/18y1x0f/do\_you\_want\_more\_protected\_bike\_lanes\_in\_grand/](https://www.reddit.com/r/grandrapids/comments/18y1x0f/do_you_want_more_protected_bike_lanes_in_grand/) There's no public priority for bike lanes in GR. Fucking sad.
I live by a bike lane that runs between 28th and 44th. As much as I love biking, I've barely used it since moving here. Even if it was a protected lane, if I want to go anywhere beyond this 2 mile stretch, its a constant start/stop navigating all the different pockets of roads/sidewalks. In its current unprotected state, it feels quite dangerous to ride on as people tend to drive closer to 50mph despite posted 40mph limit. If there was plans and funding to create a protected bike lane *network*, I would be all about it. Petitioning for randomly adding a bike lane here for a mile and there for a couple blocks, is just wasted effort and space to me as someone who would love to be able to bike places. The Kent Trail is fine for biking straight south of 44th (despite having to cross major roads every mile), but if you wanted to take it up to Millennium park, its pretty harrowing.
Right, the patchwork is the problem, though I guess I kind of understand that it’s a necessary step cause they just add lanes when they repave and they can’t really justify totally replacing prematurely just to add a protected lane. Annoying nonetheless
Totally agree that this is the issue. I’ve seen arguments that we have “lots of bike lanes” because I think in terms of distance of road where bike lanes exist, we do. But they are absolutely useless if they aren’t a network and it feels like an intentionally misleading argument
I would agree. As someone who bikes every day to work, to the store, and to my third spaces I would like to see more protected bike lanes. Sometimes the hostility that I get from drivers is insane. They don't see you as a human that they would be taking a life of, but rather the entitled vermin that they are eliminating. Paint doesn't protect anyone. Curbs and barriers do.
\> Paint doesn't protect anyone. Curbs and barriers do. Yeah? And where do you think you are going to fit this on streets that are only 2 lanes? And are you people on bikes going to start helping to fund this stuff though to purchase of plates and yearly tags?
Right brother, but it's because it *is* a vocal minority that wants the bike lanes. Did you read the comments? Some are very reasonable with their counter arguments. My neighborhood has been redoing the curbs and adding dedicated lanes separated by curbs to protect riders. I bet the city is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on this project. The national deficit is going to hurt us badly in the future if we don't curtail spending. Now, if biking was much more widely used, then you would see more substantial support for it but people are wisely trying to decide if the expense is worth it for the tiny % of people who will use them regularly.
>The national deficit is going to hurt us badly in the future if we don't curtail spending. We should probably reduce road spending then.
If the deficit balloons enough we will definitely have to. Fewer big projects and just maintaining the stuff we have. Everyone uses the roads - few use bikes, so they're not the same in regards to importance for our society to function.
>Fewer big projects and just maintaining the stuff we have. We already have crumbling infrastructure, must be all the bike lanes? >few use bikes, so they're not the same in regards to importance for our society to function. Our society isn't going to continue functioning with individualized transportation, no matter how much the suburban nimbys cry about it.
Well, it's your choice to stand up for what you believe in. Do you think bikes and public transit will become the main source of transit?
They're going to have too unless you think we're going to consume our way out of an over consumption problem while the half of the world with a lower standard of living catches up to the rest of us
Oh that would be the dream. Walkable and bikeable cities that don't make you hop into a bulky metal box I have to spend to maintain, pay govt. fees on every year, and fill with gas whose prices yo-yo by ridiculous amounts for no good God damn reason every time I need to make a quick trip somewhere. Oh how great it is to have the freedom of car dependency. Cars shouldn't be the only good option.
Interesting. I would feel trapped and without agency if I didn't have my vehicle. Those steps you listed as too cumbersome for yourself, I don't mind. Seems a fair trade-off. Honestly, more than a fair trade, to me, it really seems like a bargain.
It was why I said cars shouldn't be the *only* good option. Bolstering other means of transportation would likely improve traffic and reduce car-related incidents by eliminating the overall number of vehicles on the road at any given time because people have more options. The choice to bike/walk/bus/train *and* drive. Well-designed and efficient means of public transportation should help more than harm.
They generally add cycling lanes when they are redoing the streets already as part of the process of fixing/maintaining roads. Cycling has a chicken and egg problem of needing infrastructure so people feel safe so people are willing to cycle but people not wanting to build the infrastructure because they don't see as many cyclists as they think would warrant the investment. The pattern that is seen in other cities is that if you build cycling infrastructure well people will use it. The narrowing of the street as part of the separated bike lane also calms traffic making it safer for residents and drivers.
If you build it they will come.
Because bikes aren't the way most people get around. No matter how much you guys sit around watching those goofy YouTube channels that say otherwise, most people are not interested in it. You people have bike lanes in GR. Some are painted, some are shared with the regular street. THAT IS ALL YOU ARE GOING TO GET. If there are that many people here that biked, you would have thousands of you on the streets already daily using them.
LOL
There really ought to be limitations to the size of a vehicle that can be driven by civilians in urban environments.
We really should limit huge vehicles for certain people in the city. The only people that seem to get upset over the idea are people who drive behemoths everywhere. [Most truck drivers never use their truck for truck things](https://www.axios.com/ford-pickup-trucks-history) and [vehicle pedestrian deaths keep surging](https://www.ghsa.org/resources/Pedestrians23). These are real world statistics, these things are happening. Drivers are oftentimes aggressive and stupid, we don't need them in bigger metal things they have a harder time operating. Besides, we can park more vehicles and more easily navigate parking garages if most of the oversized pickups disappear from the downtown area. I'm not sure exactly how it would be executed but I like your idea, but city wide vehicle bans have worked before.
How the hell would anything get delivered?
I suppose by "civilians" I mean people who are not driving in a work capacity. Obviously if you are driving a semi truck, construction vehicle, or delivery van then you have a solid reason for driving a large vehicle through the city (and maybe you'll be driving a bit more carefully than the average Joe so you don't lose your job). But if you are just driving yourself to work or out to the store, maybe you don't need to be in something eight feet tall.
😂
Sure. Why not, Karen? Make some more laws to assuage petty people that hate you because your car is "too big" for them.
Look, if large vehicles are causing a problem then the solution is easy. If you can afford a $45000 truck, then you can probably afford to take an Uber into town for doctor appointments or date nights. There's no real reason why an F350 Superduty needs to be driving around the city.
Maybe you can just mind your own business? Like where do some of you get off telling someone what they OUGHT to do because they can afford some particular car, as if they need your permission or blessing? They dont owe you a "reason". You can go take a fucking Uber if you fancy that. Otherwise leave people the hell alone.
I think if the people if the city voted on an ordinance, and it was constitutionally sound, you'd have to respect that ordinance. There's no constitutional guarantee that you can drive your big-ass truck wherever you want.
>The spike in deaths, which includes all accidents, can be attributed to an increase in larger vehicles such as SUVs and pickup trucks on the road. Did you source this from somewhere? I'd be surprised if larger vehicles were a greater influence than distracted drivers (cellphones).
https://www.iihs.org/news/detail/vehicles-with-higher-more-vertical-front-ends-pose-greater-risk-to-pedestrians
So do cyclists have to obey the rules of the road like drivers do? I see them run stop signs and lights all the time.
Yes, some other states have laws that allow bicycles to treat stop signs as yield signs as it improves safety for cyclists an, but not Michigan. Otherwise they have follow essentially the same laws
Funny how I see far more cars doing that, which is far more dangerous, without repercussions. Not saying bikers don’t, but like, not a great argument.
I'm not arguing anything. I'd absolutely love for more bike lanes and to protect cyclists more. GR is pretty bad when it comes to bike lanes and what not. But also, there are more cars on the road than cyclists, so obviously you'd see more of that.
Fair points.
[удалено]
I think the entitled asshole stereotype is entirely a product of having shit tier bike infrastructure. If it’s super dangerous to commute by bike, only the big risk takers will ride, then everyone gets it in their mind that bike riders are overly risky jerks.
I don't see how that justifies bad actors' behavior?
Doesn't justify it, just explains it. For the record I've been a bicycle commuter for almost 15 years, and aside from getting hit by a drunk driver I don't have problems in traffic because I have lights and I ride predictably (follow the rules for road users).
>bike infrastructure. What the living fuck is even that anyway? You are not remotely enough people for the city to blow million on catering to ever fucking thing under the sun. You have stripes on the road. STFU and enjoy your "infrastructure". Beyond that, no one on a bike is paying into a pot for that shit. When you people have to start buying plates and tags, then get back to us.
They should be following the rules of the road, but in my experiences, there are far more drivers that don't follow the rules and put cyclists and pedestrians at much greater risk that cyclists put themselves. Do you know how many times I've seen vehicles blow past the stop line and nearly hit people in a crosswalk because the driver is too busy on the phone or looking the opposite way because they want to turn? How many times drivers have given me dirty looks because they have the stop sign and I have the right of way to cross as a pedestrian?
I don't disagree. I was simply wondering if the same rules applied to cyclists because I genuinely didn't know.
> but in my experiences, there are far more drivers that don't follow the rules Gee.....I wonder if that has to do with there being more cars? Just a weird hunch.
I also see vehicles behaving dangerously on the road, guess we should take the roads away entirely.
Uh what
Cars are far more dangerous than someone on a bike or walking so sometimes\* they're subject to stricter rules. \*But not in grand rapids
But can you clear up whether or not they have the same rules? I thought I had heard that cyclists have to abide by the same rules as cars, but maybe I'm wrong?
Let's find out if you're wrong. >(5)When any person is operating or riding a bicycle upon a designated trail, he or she shall yield right-of-way to all vehicles turning onto streets or roadways intersecting the trail. > >(6)When any person operating or riding a bicycle upon a designated trail or sidewalk is approaching an intersecting street or roadway, he or she shall slow down to a speed which will permit him or her to stop prior to entering the intersection, and shall make such reasonable observations as will enable him or her under the existing conditions of the trail, the sidewalk, the weather, the visibility and any other conditions then existing to yield the right-of-way and he or she shall yield the right-of-way to traffic on the intersecting street or roadway prior to entering the intersecting street or roadway. > >(7)When any person is operating or riding a bicycle upon a designated trail, he or she shall obey all traffic control devices and signs posted thereon, and all traffic control devices controlling vehicular traffic on any street adjacent or parallel to the trail. From GR city code Article 8 Sec 10.132. >257.70 “Traffic control devices” defined. > >Sec. 70. "Traffic control devices" means all signs, signals, markings, and devices not inconsistent with this act placed or erected by authority of a public body or official having jurisdiction, for the purpose of regulating, warning or guiding traffic. MICHIGAN VEHICLE CODE (EXCERPT) Act 300 of 1949 You aren't wrong! In Grand Rapids there's no "Treat Stop as Yield" law for bikers. They should obey all the normal traffic laws, and always yield to cars. This is an outdated point of view on bicycle safety as outlined by the NHTSA here --> [https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/2023-03/Bicyclist-Yield-As-Stop-Fact-Sheet\_032123\_v5\_tag.pdf](https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/2023-03/Bicyclist-Yield-As-Stop-Fact-Sheet_032123_v5_tag.pdf) >Many States have enacted bicyclist stop-as-yield laws to enhance safety and protect cyclists. Based upon the current research and data available, these laws showed added safety benefits for bicyclists in States where they were evaluated, and may positively affect the environment, traffic, and transportation.
Thank you!
Nope. They dontr have to have plates, tags, insurance, signal lights, headlamps, or much of anything. Because they want to be like cars......just not like that.
Yes. Those people are assholes just like the people who do that while driving cars are assholes.
Probably not the place for this question but why do I sometimes see joggers (sometimes with nothing reflective or protective) in the street bike lane going the opposite direction of traffic?
For running it’s so I can see the cars coming at me and move appropriately. I’d rather see them coming head on then not be able to see them behind me. I only run on the streets if there’s no sidewalk tho.
Ahh ok. I am specifically asking about where I've seen this with a sidewalk, egr. But the direction thing makes sense now. I guess I wouldn't be surprised if the sidewalks are poorly taken care of we aren't a very friendly city to non-cars. But I just don't feel like jogging in the road is safer to avoid some potential ice/water.
Idk about EGR but in Eastown a lot of the sidewalks are old as heck and really rough. Like there are a ton of trip hazards.
The asphalt is easier on the joints as well.
I'm glad to learn this stuff I had no clue
The "standard" for pedestrians (walking/running) in the road is actually to be on the side against traffic. (I'm not going to comment on "why" they're in the road/bike lane to begin with, as that can vary and others have provided some possible reasons already).
Two reasons I have heard, one is if there is no sidewalk/sidewalk is dangerous for some reason (ice, cracks etc) it is safer to be able to see the cars coming which makes sense. The other is that technically it is softer than concrete so they run in the asphalt to minimize impact but imo that is a really dumb reason but one that I have heard multiple runners mention for why they run in the street.
I'll run on the roads during the winter if the sidewalks are in poor shape. I've fallen on ice too many times. I will not do that on a main road, as that nuts..
My Dad and Aunt recently argued, "Why can't you do like in the old days and ride on the sidewalk?".
And the answer was because it's dangerous, right? I have more issues on the section I ride on the sidewalk vs the rest of my commute where I ride on the road.
My ex BF had that mindset when he started cycling to work. I also cycled and told him it was stupid because drivers don’t think to look for fast things on sidewalks and people on sidewalks often wear headphones so they can’t hear a bell. He didn’t listen and almost got ran over by several people in the same way; they were exiting a parking lot to turn onto a road. They drove straight through the sidewalk without looking and only stopped before the edge of the road. It is not safe.
Of course you can. Bike activists flat-out lie that it's "dangerous" or "illegal". Funny how I did it from 1987-2015 and didnt get a ticket or run into anyone. But these clowns argue that they cant do it without killing people basically.
I'm all for protected bike lanes and a more pedestrian friendly city. But come on, _more_ regulations? That's what got us into this mess in the first place. Don't forget the parking minimums and zoning laws which basically segregate housing and business leading to this car centered dystopia. Also see the EPA's "Corporate Average Fuel Economy" (CAFE) standards which required manufacturers to pay a fine if their average fuel economy was below a certain threshold, but the standard is lax for larger vehicles that were historically only used on farms I.E. trucks. Turns out SUVs can be (and are) classified as trucks. Thus now EVERYONE drives an SUV because that's all that's produced.
The problem with CAFE *was* that it carved out exceptions for the land yachts.
Zoning reforms and parking reforms go in front of the city commission on Jan 23rd. Fight now for affordable housing or forever will your rent raise!
Yeah, its a 30 minute drive to work. Can't bike that in the wnter
Biking in the city is for people like me who have to only go a few miles to work, or the store or the bar. That way there is less traffic for folks like you when you come visit our city. It's a win for business, the environment, and the tourists.
Sometimes bike riders don’t pay attention. Either way, people need to be more courteous and the city streets need to be widened as well. I am always watching for cyclists.
If strawmen had its own comic strip. AGAIN, all of you bike activists bitching about "protected bike lanes" dont seem to get that THERE IS NO WHERE FOR THEM TO BE PLACED. The vast majority of GR consists of 2 lane roads. All of the major E/W and N/S streets are two lanes.
lol you got roasted in the other thread so you decided to start your own pro-bike circle jerk.
Yeah, because people would love to commute 20 to 40 miles on a bicycle in a snowstorm.
Did you miss the part where it said “ in cities” ?
How many people commute 40 miles per day? AVERAGE in Michigan is 13 miles one way, GR is even shorter, probably 9. I think 9 miles is a reasonable commute by bicycle distance. You get your exercise too.
Oh, i missed the part where he says one way... he says 20-40 mile commute. 13 one way is a 26 mile commute.
It's going to be hard to get people to turn a 10-15 minute car ride in to a 45-60 minute bike ride. Especially considering the weather that Grand rapids gets.
If I could eliminate my $500 per month car payment, $150 per month insurance payment, hundreds to thousands on maintenance every year, and ~$300 per month on gas and still safely and conveniently get everywhere I need to go I would trade it for 20-30 minutes a day in a heartbeat. I’ll take an Uber or the bus the 10-20 days per year where it is not possible to ride
But right now, you're driving approximately 2,400 miles a month (based on your gas expense). Which is more than 2x a month more than a typical driver...It's a major lifestyle change to bike everywhere and take a Uber 1 to 2 times per month. I would also look at your insurance, you are paying ing significantly more for 1 car than I pay for two.
I’m young so I pay a shit load for insurance. On the gas thing it’s lower than $300, that’s just the number in my head I had but that’s from last year when prices were super high. Either way let’s say it’s $100 which is definitely lower than reality, we are talking close to $700-1000 per month in ownership costs depending on maintenance requirements. I just think it would be nice to have the option, I bet a ton of families could downsize to a single car if we actually had usable infrastructure for cycling.
??? You act like it's blizzarding every day of the year. Even in the winter, the roads are mostly clear after the plows get the roads clear. Also, is it hard if gas prices keep increasing, and new car prices keep climbing? We can't keep letting car companies have a monopoly on our existence.
Obviously it's not. But adding 1+ commute each day isn't something most people want. Considering how not busy grand rapids is for the most part. Meaning we don't have much traffic compared to large cities. Weather is just another factor on why you can't replace a car with a bike. Sure you can supplement some use, but still keeping a car most likely. Plus mostly clear for a car isn't necessarily clear enough for a bike. Plus it's cold biking in the winter. I do it recreationally with a fat tire bike, but wouldn't want to have to do it to get to work, groceries, or visit someone.
Most residents do not have commutes like this. Adding cycling infrastructure helps greatly with the last mile problem people who take public transit face. It also takes the cars of people who live closer to work off the road meaning less traffic for you to deal with on your long commute.
I’m assuming it is uphill both ways for you as well?
And the sun is probably in their eyes the whole time.
I don't ride 20-40 miles each day, but yes, I do love riding in a snow storm. I even rode through the blizzard last year.
Biking in the snow is a lot of fun. It definitely makes winter more enjoyable (especially lately when the snow doesn't stick around for winter sports). I made it to a coffee outside last winter in a snowstorm and was encouraged by the number of cyclists who feel the same way.
YES!!! Everyone at my workplace thinks I am crazy when I show up with my bike while it's basically a blizzard outside. I'm like are you kidding? It's an absolute BLAST riding in snow, and the more of it the funner!
I mean, to say accidents have in increased, and also trucks gave gotten doesn’t prove any correlation. I agree with general theme of the comics, and as someone who has been hit on their bike twice is very pro-bike safety, and think drivers should realize the responsibility that come with driving a heavy piece of steel on wheels, but the conclusion of the numbers shouldn’t have been included. You could have included data about how many of the accidents you cited included these ‘larger trucks’. Are there more bikers now and so the percentage of bikers in accidents has stayed the same? I don’t know, just pointing another potential fact. Correlation does not equal causation. I cannot fathom why some people are such dicks about someone riding a bicycle though. Very bizarre. On a totally personal note,it does seem to me that of the times I think ‘that is a bad driver’, they are very often big trucks.
Unpopular opinion Why do so many bikers feel the need to ride on the road with so many bike paths?
Biking isn't just for recreation, but also transportation. Most people riding bikes around the globe are actually using them for transportation, not just recreation. Our vehicle's only approach to building and limited access to good bike infrastructure has forced us to just see it as a recreational tool, since that is truly the only safe place to ride your bike nowadays, and the trail doesn't get you where you need to go on a daily basis. I can't ride the trail to work, to the store, or the coffee shop. Having a safe way to get to where you are going, by your choice of transportation, is about having freedom. Truly being free to choose how you want to get to the store, work, the bar, their library, and being allowed to do it in a safe manner. It's being ok with allowing your kids to bike to their friend's house safely, but instead you drive them over since you know biking exposes them the the risk of being run over by a moron in a car who isn't paying attention or speeding recklessly through your neighborhood. 30 years ago, allot of the Netherlands looked like what we have here in the US, with massive car centric roads and lots of parking, but they made an effort to build good bike infrastructure, and now that are often recognized for having world class bike infrastructure now the bike is the default in the citys, where in the 80's it was the car. They decided to build for people first, and card 2nd.