The Gas Tax Increase Is Coming, The Gas Tax Increase Is Coming

Nextrush Free ^ | 2/2/2018 | Nextrush/Self

[BobL]

Perhaps, but I’m referring to limited access highways, where the vast majority of federal money is spent. So the bike trails that I refer to have nothing to do with the road - it’s just a handout to a bunch of assholes who won’t use an exercise bike (in my opinion).

I could agree on sound walls for new work, but if the highway has been there for a long time, and is only being expanded, then tough - they knew what they were getting when they bought in. No different than buying a house next to a small airport and then DEMANDING that the airport be shut down because of the noise. If locals want sound walls for houses they bought cheap (because of the highway) they can put up the money to have them built.

[Paulie]

Stop all these senseless wars and foreign entanglements, bring our boys home, and redeploy these trillions of dollars and valuable human resources to rebuild the deteriorating infrastructure.

Use Thorium energy.

Problem solved.

High time to send the NeoCon nutjobs to the back of the bus. Or better yet, throw them under the bus.

[sphinx]

if the highway has been there for a long time, and is only being expanded, then tough

We would really have to get into the specifics of a particular project to go further. It's one thing if work is being done on maintenance of existing infrastructure. It's quite another if the character of an existing road is being changed: e.g., a secondary road or city street in an urban area that is being widened and turned into a commuter artery; a rural road in the outer suburbs, now developing, with winding roads being upgraded for high speed commuter traffic that makes them unsuitable for sharing by cyclists or pedestrians.

Areas that are on the fringe of suburban development today should be looking ahead to a time not far distant when they will be rather urban and will want urban amenities like sidewalks and safe bike corridors. A lot of sensible infrastructure can be built at low cost if it is planned from the ground floor onwards.

I live in the city. My pet peeves are stretches of road where the sidewalks were sacrificed years ago to create another traffic lane; limited access, high speed commuter roads with so few crossings that they become real barriers to lateral movement and fracture neighborhoods; and chokepoints that force pedestrians and cyclists onto unsafe roads, or bar access entirely. A bridge or overpass that has no sidewalk or bike lane is a recurring example.

[sphinx]

if the highway has been there for a long time, and is only being expanded, then tough

We would really have to get into the specifics of a particular project to go further. It's one thing if work is being done on maintenance of existing infrastructure. It's quite another if the character of an existing road is being changed: e.g., a secondary road or city street in an urban area that is being widened and turned into a commuter artery; a rural road in the outer suburbs, now developing, with winding roads being upgraded for high speed commuter traffic that makes them unsuitable for sharing by cyclists or pedestrians.

Areas that are on the fringe of suburban development today should be looking ahead to a time not far distant when they will be rather urban and will want urban amenities like sidewalks and safe bike corridors. A lot of sensible infrastructure can be built at low cost if it is planned from the ground floor onwards.

I live in the city. My pet peeves are stretches of road where the sidewalks were sacrificed years ago to create another traffic lane; limited access, high speed commuter roads with so few crossings that they become real barriers to lateral movement and fracture neighborhoods; and chokepoints that force pedestrians and cyclists onto unsafe roads, or bar access entirely. A bridge or overpass that has no sidewalk or bike lane is a recurring example.

[BobL]

True a while ago, but now I’m seeing what were regular traffic lanes in cities turning into bus-only lanes - so I guess it goes both ways.

[sphinx]

I don't have a dog in the cars vs. busses fight. My basic point is that pedestrians should be able to move easily and safely around their own neighborhoods. The first corollary is that sidewalks can and should be designed to accommodate bikes as well. You have to have curb cuts for the wheelchairs, and bikes can piggyback on that. It helps to make the sidewalks wider; this should be part of the design standard in any metro area.

A regular street grid can usually accommodate mixed traffic, as bikes can generally stay on a quiet side street and leave the busier road for the car. The problem arises when roads get turned into limited access, high speed commuter corridors with few crossing points. When that happens they become barriers to non-motorized traffic. Bottom line, people should be able to safely cross the street at virtually every corner in a residential neighborhood. If commuters don't want to wait for traffic lights and pedestrian crossings, suck it up and pay for pedestrian and biking overpasses/underpasses at reasonable intervals.

And again, landscaping and noise abatement are not frills. If the commuter lobby wants to drive an arterial road through other people's neighborhoods, or convert a quiet street into a commuter expressway, the people whose neighborhoods are being degraded should be protected as much as possible. If that makes roads more expensive, so be it.

[BobL]

I won’t argue that, but it is mostly at the local level. I love walking too!