In the video the rider can stay on the seat and reach the ground with the balls
of her feet. Exactly what the writer said in the paper.


   ----- Original Message -----
   From: mel norton
   To: obs
   Sent: Tuesday, November 17, 2009 3:42 PM
   Subject: Re: [ok-bike-society] todays paper



   This may be true a tricycle or while training wheels are on the bike, but
after that.  If kids had a proper 'fit' they may ride the bike: going faster,
more comfort, longer distance, maybe have a good experence and keep riding.
   In this 'how to teach' clip, the feet are't flat on the ground.
   http://www.ibike.org/education/teaching-kids.htm
   mel

   --- On Tue, 11/17/09, jwente49@... <jwente49@...> wrote:

   From: jwente49@... <jwente49@...>
   Subject: Re: [ok-bike-society] todays paper
   To: "obs" <ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com>
   Date: Tuesday, November 17, 2009, 12:11 PM



   Actually, this is proper bike fit for a child learning to ride. Problem is,
parents set the seat height for the child and just forget about it. Kids grow.
Soon their knees are hitting their chins. I see kids clear up into in their
teens are still riding 20" (wheel size) bikes, probably with the seat set where
dad put it when they were 6 or 7, when they should be riding adult-size bikes.

   ---- mel norton <choctawmel@yahoo. com> wrote:

   ============ =
   Story in today's paper about 'bike fit' for kids can't be right.  Maybe this
is why kids ride around with their knees hitting their chin.
   http://newsok. com/search? search=fitting+ bicycles& nav=&search_ what=newsok&
x=15&y=14
   mel

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

   [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

This may be true a tricycle or while training wheels are on the bike, but after
that.  If kids had a proper 'fit' they may ride the bike: going faster, more
comfort, longer distance, maybe have a good experence and keep riding.
In this 'how to teach' clip, the feet are't flat on the ground.
http://www.ibike.org/education/teaching-kids.htm
mel 


--- On Tue, 11/17/09, jwente49@... <jwente49@...> wrote:


From: jwente49@... <jwente49@...>
Subject: Re: [ok-bike-society] todays paper
To: "obs" <ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, November 17, 2009, 12:11 PM


 



Actually, this is proper bike fit for a child learning to ride. Problem is,
parents set the seat height for the child and just forget about it. Kids grow.
Soon their knees are hitting their chins. I see kids clear up into in their
teens are still riding 20" (wheel size) bikes, probably with the seat set where
dad put it when they were 6 or 7, when they should be riding adult-size bikes.

---- mel norton <choctawmel@yahoo. com> wrote:

============ =
Story in today's paper about 'bike fit' for kids can't be right.  Maybe this is
why kids ride around with their knees hitting their chin.
http://newsok. com/search? search=fitting+ bicycles& nav=&search_ what=newsok&
x=15&y=14
mel

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Actually, this is proper bike fit for a child learning to ride. Problem is,
parents set the seat height for the child and just forget about it. Kids grow.
Soon their knees are hitting their chins. I see kids clear up into in their
teens are still riding 20" (wheel size) bikes, probably with the seat set where
dad put it when they were 6 or 7, when they should be riding adult-size bikes.

---- mel norton <choctawmel@...> wrote:

=============
Story in today's paper about 'bike fit' for kids can't be right.  Maybe this is
why kids ride around with their knees hitting their chin.
http://newsok.com/search?search=fitting+bicycles&nav=&search_what=newsok&x=15&y=\
14
mel




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Interesting to say the least in that the author, Chuck Mai is the VP of Pub
Rel for OK AAA

Difficult to separate what appears a bit to be patent lip service (only my
take at this moment) to "quite" beginning bicyclists to hopefully seeing
bicycles (with bicyclists on them) being part of the regular and ordinary
traffic flow in the future
AAA gets the benefit of the doubt from me for now!
On Tue, Nov 17, 2009 at 11:32 AM, mel norton <choctawmel@...> wrote:

>
>
> Story in today's paper about 'bike fit' for kids can't be right.  Maybe
> this is why kids ride around with their knees hitting their chin.
>
>
http://newsok.com/search?search=fitting+bicycles&nav=&search_what=newsok&x=15&y=\
14
> mel
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>



--
Chuck Davis
OK Velo (Okvelo@...)
Tulsa, OK

When ya really bored and/or otherwise want to understand just how cool a
dude I yam, czech the deranged drivel and nonsense below:

http://chucksbikes.blogspot.com/
http://okvelo.blogspot.com/
http://allweighscranky.blogspot.com/


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

This may be a better link:
http://www.newsok.com/article/3418096?searched=fitting%20bicycles&custom_click=s\
earch




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Story in today's paper about 'bike fit' for kids can't be right.  Maybe this is
why kids ride around with their knees hitting their chin.
http://newsok.com/search?search=fitting+bicycles&nav=&search_what=newsok&x=15&y=\
14
mel




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I like that sign also and wood be very much in favor of the legislative
changes that it wood take to make it the "law"

The mandate to use "caution" is all ready the "law"

On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 5:00 PM, mel norton <choctawmel@...> wrote:

>    I always wanted to get a stack of 'Bike Route" signs (with arrows
> pointing in all directions) and nail one on every sign post I ride by.
> This would be a better sign:
>
http://www.sfmta.com/cms/uploadedfiles/dpt/bike/Safety/Chapter%2010_Bicycles%20A\
llowed%20Use%20of%20Full%20Lane.pdf
> mel
>
> --- On *Mon, 11/16/09, chuck davis <dang.chuck@...>* wrote:
>
>
> From: chuck davis <dang.chuck@...>
>
> Subject: Re: [ok-bike-society] Re: OKC bike lanes
> To: "John Wente" <jwente49@...>
> Cc: "Colin J. Zink" <cjzink@...>, ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Monday, November 16, 2009, 12:17 PM
>
>
>    I wish that there might be some "discussion" of the value (real or
> imagined)
> of "Share the Road" signs
>
> From my limited cerebral perspective and experience I struggle see that
> they do anything to say anything about conveying a message and a one way
> one, if any, at that, to motorists
>
> I would like to see every "Share the Road" sign replaced with something
> like, "Caution, Bicyclists On Road", which does impart an implied mandate
>
> There are ramifications for any party not exercising caution and causing
> harm, it's called negligence and is actionable civilly
>
> No one has to share anything that they don't want to; those responsible
> motorists (and there quite a few) out there that do in fact give "us" our
> three (3') feet
> probably don't need the sign!
>
> --
> Chuck Davis
> OK Velo (Okvelo@gmail.
com<http://us.mc654.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=Okvelo%40gmail.com>
> )
> Tulsa, OK
>
> When ya really bored and/or otherwise want to understand just how cool a
> dude I yam, czech the deranged drivel and nonsense below:
>
> http://chucksbikes. blogspot. com/ <http://chucksbikes.blogspot.com/>
> http://okvelo. blogspot. com/ <http://okvelo.blogspot.com/>
> http://allweighscra nky.blogspot. com/<http://allweighscranky.blogspot.com/>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
>
>


--
Chuck Davis
OK Velo (Okvelo@...)
Tulsa, OK

When ya really bored and/or otherwise want to understand just how cool a
dude I yam, czech the deranged drivel and nonsense below:

http://chucksbikes.blogspot.com/
http://okvelo.blogspot.com/
http://allweighscranky.blogspot.com/


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

 I always wanted to get a stack of 'Bike Route" signs (with arrows pointing in
all directions) and nail one on every sign post I ride by.
This would be a better sign:
http://www.sfmta.com/cms/uploadedfiles/dpt/bike/Safety/Chapter%2010_Bicycles%20A\
llowed%20Use%20of%20Full%20Lane.pdf
mel 

--- On Mon, 11/16/09, chuck davis <dang.chuck@...> wrote:


From: chuck davis <dang.chuck@...>
Subject: Re: [ok-bike-society] Re: OKC bike lanes
To: "John Wente" <jwente49@...>
Cc: "Colin J. Zink" <cjzink@...>, ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, November 16, 2009, 12:17 PM


 



I wish that there might be some "discussion" of the value (real or imagined)
of "Share the Road" signs

From my limited cerebral perspective and experience I struggle see that
they do anything to say anything about conveying a message and a one way
one, if any, at that, to motorists

I would like to see every "Share the Road" sign replaced with something
like, "Caution, Bicyclists On Road", which does impart an implied mandate

There are ramifications for any party not exercising caution and causing
harm, it's called negligence and is actionable civilly

No one has to share anything that they don't want to; those responsible
motorists (and there quite a few) out there that do in fact give "us" our
three (3') feet
probably don't need the sign!

--
Chuck Davis
OK Velo (Okvelo@gmail. com)
Tulsa, OK

When ya really bored and/or otherwise want to understand just how cool a
dude I yam, czech the deranged drivel and nonsense below:

http://chucksbikes. blogspot. com/
http://okvelo. blogspot. com/
http://allweighscra nky.blogspot. com/

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I wish that there might be some "discussion" of the value (real or imagined)
of "Share the Road" signs

From my limited cerebral perspective and experience I struggle see that
they do anything to say anything about conveying a message and a one way
one, if any, at that, to motorists

I would like to see every "Share the Road" sign replaced with something
like, "Caution, Bicyclists On Road", which does impart an implied mandate

There are ramifications for any party not exercising caution and causing
harm, it's called negligence and is actionable civilly

No one has to share anything that they don't want to; those responsible
motorists (and there quite a few) out there that do in fact give "us" our
three (3') feet
probably don't need the sign!


--
Chuck Davis
OK Velo (Okvelo@...)
Tulsa, OK

When ya really bored and/or otherwise want to understand just how cool a
dude I yam, czech the deranged drivel and nonsense below:

http://chucksbikes.blogspot.com/
http://okvelo.blogspot.com/
http://allweighscranky.blogspot.com/


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Results of the Post Oak CX race held today in Tulsa are posted at www.braok.org
Thanks to all who participated.
Jack

Jack McNeal
Past President Bicycle Racing Association of Oklahoma.
Coordinator of Permits, Upgrades and Officials.
www.braok.org

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

No, I don't.  It aint in English, nor German.

Moni

On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 9:43 AM, Jim Foreman <jimfore@...> wrote:

>
>
>
>
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/11/14/funny-car-commercial-of-the-day-maybe-conside\
r-taking-the-bus/
>
> PS: Moni will understand it.
>
> Jim
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

http://www.autoblog.com/2009/11/14/funny-car-commercial-of-the-day-maybe-conside\
r-taking-the-bus/

PS: Moni will understand it.

Jim

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

http://www.elevengear.com/trafficmaster.html

--
Moni

I also sit on a committee with the local council of governments (with at least
one other OBS member) so the cyclists voice can be heard there as well.
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-----Original Message-----
From: Roger Welch <rdwelch@...>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 09:31:08
To: Greg Ouren<greg@...>
Cc: <ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [ok-bike-society] Re: OKC bike lanes

Greg,

During the last OBS meeting I agreed to insert myself into the process. I
have contacted Lanc Gross of the Planning Committee and will take input from
the OBS if I am allowed to be part of the committee.

Roger Welch
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Greg Ouren <greg@...> wrote:

> Maybe a group of volunteers from OBS could be formed that can go to and
> possibly voice concerns at different functions etc. As a group there should
> always be someone available to attend and report.
>
>
>
>    Greg B Ouren
>
>  Marketer of Real Estate
>
>         405.755.9052
>
> greg@...
>
>    www.2potatoes.com
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Visit the OBS web site at www.oklahomabicyclesociety.com
> ----------------------------------
> NOTICE: To remove yourself from this list, send a blank message to:
>   ok-bike-society-unsubscribe@...! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

That is great
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-----Original Message-----
From:  <jwente49@...>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 10:13:22
To: <mattjacobs29@...>; <ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com>; 'Colin J.
Zink'<cjzink@...>
Subject: Re: [ok-bike-society] Re: OKC bike lanes

I agree, Matt. However, it is difficult to find out when the planning meetings
are held. Also, in the past, they have mostly been held on Tuesday mornings. I
have a full time job and can't take off for stuff like this.

An OBS member (a retired engineer) has volunteered to try to find out when the
planning meetings will occur and attend these meetings to voice concerns and
make recommendations about cycling-related issues.


---- mattjacobs29@... wrote:

=============
I think it would be beneficial for everyone who has an opinion on this topic,
regardless of what side you are on, to find the next planning meeting and voice
your opinion. OKC is currently updating their comprehensive plan and would
definitely benefit from these opinions.  Just my two cents...thanks.
Matt
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-----Original Message-----
From: "John Wente" <jwente49@...>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:47:03
To: 'Colin J. Zink'<cjzink@...>; <ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [ok-bike-society] Re: OKC bike lanes

One of the things OKC is planning to do is just designate some streets as
bike routes by installing "Bike Route" and "Share the Road" signs. While I
have no problem with this on quiet residential streets (although I really
don't see the need for the signs-all quiet residential streets are "bike
routes" to me), some of the roads they have chosen do not seem like safe
bike routes to me. For example, Mustang Rd. between Reno Ave. and SH 92 (SW
74th). This is a 4-lane highway with speed limits of 55 in places and
traffic going much faster. I used to ride this stretch for a while after it
became a 4-lane, but after several "close encounters", I swore off that
route. The motorists on that highway are not accustomed to seeing cyclists
and many seem offended that a cyclist is on "their road". I'd wager you
couldn't find one motorist in 10,000 that is aware of the 3-foot passing
law, and those that might be aware of it would be just as likely to pass too
close just to make their point that you (the cyclist) don't belong on "their
road". I would also be inclined to say that cycling on Mustang Rd is a
hazard to traffic. Most of the time, both lanes are occupied, so cars have
to slow down and try to change lanes. That always causes problems and
incites the drives against the cyclists.



I hope OKC will heed the advice of experienced cyclists and alter some of
their plans for these bike routes. Knowledgeable, experienced cyclists will
avoid the dangerous routes, but inexperienced cyclists or those from out of
town or new to the area will assume a designated bike route is safe. A
recipe for disaster.



   _____

From: ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Colin J. Zink
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 7:19 PM
To: ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [ok-bike-society] Re: OKC bike lanes





Hi Brian.

I re-read my initial post, and it sounded a little like a personal attack -
sorry, no offense meant.

I've been thinking about this issue, and I think that neither of our two
extremes (you - no bike lanes, me - all bike lanes) provide a good solution.
I think a combination approach is needed. In downtown areas and very urban
settings, where traffic is 30mph and below, I agree that bicycle integration
is the appropriate solution. Motor vehicles are slow enough that a cyclist
can perform about the same as a car, so sharing lanes is appropriate. OKC
is so spread out, however, that to get from one part of the city to another
requires traveling on streets that have faster traffic. On these roadways
there needs to be a bicycle lane or extra-wide shoulder to get the cyclist
away from the fast-moving traffic. If there is parking along these faster
roadways then there needs to be a change from traditional bike lanes (bike
lanes on the far side of the parked cars, a divided sidewalk to allow
bicycle traffic, an alternate bike path, removing the parking altogether, or
some other solution, on a case-by-case basis). Now we just need to get the
urban planners and city council to see thing this way!

On another issue:

Your two examples of bicycle tragedies both sound like cyclist error to me.
I know that's going to be unpopular on this forum, but hear me out. If you
are taking your bike on the roadways, you will always lose to a car -
ALWAYS. It's brings to mind the epitaph I heard years ago - "He was right,
dead right, as he sped along. But he's just as dead as if he'd been wrong".
Not to make light of this situation, but we've all seen how cocky some
cyclists are in traffic (ignoring stop signs, whizzing through crosswalks,
not wearing helmets, etc). As for your examples, the bike that left the
bike lane to go INTO the traffic lane - the cyclist should been aware enough
of their surroundings to not veer in front of a bus! As for the cars that
passed the bikes in the bike lane, then turned - it should have been the
bikes that slowed, so as not to run into the car. They may have had the
legal right, but you can see how well it turned out. The bike lane is there
as a courtesy - that doesn't mean the cyclist is invincible or above fault!
Before someone accuses me of pointing fingers, I'm coming from a 'been
there, done that' perspective - the stop sign I decided to run in November
of 2004 got me hit by a car going 50mph, seven bone fractures, a month-long
coma, and five months of rehab before I could get back on a bike! Since
then I've been a much more defensive cyclist on the roadway - so I know it
can be done!

Ride safe, everyone.

Colin

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Greg,

During the last OBS meeting I agreed to insert myself into the process. I
have contacted Lanc Gross of the Planning Committee and will take input from
the OBS if I am allowed to be part of the committee.

Roger Welch
On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Greg Ouren <greg@...> wrote:

> Maybe a group of volunteers from OBS could be formed that can go to and
> possibly voice concerns at different functions etc. As a group there should
> always be someone available to attend and report.
>
>
>
>    Greg B Ouren
>
>  Marketer of Real Estate
>
>         405.755.9052
>
> greg@...
>
>    www.2potatoes.com
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Visit the OBS web site at www.oklahomabicyclesociety.com
> ----------------------------------
> NOTICE: To remove yourself from this list, send a blank message to:
>   ok-bike-society-unsubscribe@...! Groups Links
>
>
>
>


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Maybe a group of volunteers from OBS could be formed that can go to and
possibly voice concerns at different functions etc. As a group there should
always be someone available to attend and report.



     Greg B Ouren

  Marketer of Real Estate

          405.755.9052

greg@...

     www.2potatoes.com





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I agree, Matt. However, it is difficult to find out when the planning meetings
are held. Also, in the past, they have mostly been held on Tuesday mornings. I
have a full time job and can't take off for stuff like this.

An OBS member (a retired engineer) has volunteered to try to find out when the
planning meetings will occur and attend these meetings to voice concerns and
make recommendations about cycling-related issues.


---- mattjacobs29@... wrote:

=============
I think it would be beneficial for everyone who has an opinion on this topic,
regardless of what side you are on, to find the next planning meeting and voice
your opinion. OKC is currently updating their comprehensive plan and would
definitely benefit from these opinions.  Just my two cents...thanks.
Matt
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-----Original Message-----
From: "John Wente" <jwente49@...>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:47:03
To: 'Colin J. Zink'<cjzink@...>; <ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [ok-bike-society] Re: OKC bike lanes

One of the things OKC is planning to do is just designate some streets as
bike routes by installing "Bike Route" and "Share the Road" signs. While I
have no problem with this on quiet residential streets (although I really
don't see the need for the signs-all quiet residential streets are "bike
routes" to me), some of the roads they have chosen do not seem like safe
bike routes to me. For example, Mustang Rd. between Reno Ave. and SH 92 (SW
74th). This is a 4-lane highway with speed limits of 55 in places and
traffic going much faster. I used to ride this stretch for a while after it
became a 4-lane, but after several "close encounters", I swore off that
route. The motorists on that highway are not accustomed to seeing cyclists
and many seem offended that a cyclist is on "their road". I'd wager you
couldn't find one motorist in 10,000 that is aware of the 3-foot passing
law, and those that might be aware of it would be just as likely to pass too
close just to make their point that you (the cyclist) don't belong on "their
road". I would also be inclined to say that cycling on Mustang Rd is a
hazard to traffic. Most of the time, both lanes are occupied, so cars have
to slow down and try to change lanes. That always causes problems and
incites the drives against the cyclists.



I hope OKC will heed the advice of experienced cyclists and alter some of
their plans for these bike routes. Knowledgeable, experienced cyclists will
avoid the dangerous routes, but inexperienced cyclists or those from out of
town or new to the area will assume a designated bike route is safe. A
recipe for disaster.



   _____

From: ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Colin J. Zink
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 7:19 PM
To: ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [ok-bike-society] Re: OKC bike lanes





Hi Brian.

I re-read my initial post, and it sounded a little like a personal attack -
sorry, no offense meant.

I've been thinking about this issue, and I think that neither of our two
extremes (you - no bike lanes, me - all bike lanes) provide a good solution.
I think a combination approach is needed. In downtown areas and very urban
settings, where traffic is 30mph and below, I agree that bicycle integration
is the appropriate solution. Motor vehicles are slow enough that a cyclist
can perform about the same as a car, so sharing lanes is appropriate. OKC
is so spread out, however, that to get from one part of the city to another
requires traveling on streets that have faster traffic. On these roadways
there needs to be a bicycle lane or extra-wide shoulder to get the cyclist
away from the fast-moving traffic. If there is parking along these faster
roadways then there needs to be a change from traditional bike lanes (bike
lanes on the far side of the parked cars, a divided sidewalk to allow
bicycle traffic, an alternate bike path, removing the parking altogether, or
some other solution, on a case-by-case basis). Now we just need to get the
urban planners and city council to see thing this way!

On another issue:

Your two examples of bicycle tragedies both sound like cyclist error to me.
I know that's going to be unpopular on this forum, but hear me out. If you
are taking your bike on the roadways, you will always lose to a car -
ALWAYS. It's brings to mind the epitaph I heard years ago - "He was right,
dead right, as he sped along. But he's just as dead as if he'd been wrong".
Not to make light of this situation, but we've all seen how cocky some
cyclists are in traffic (ignoring stop signs, whizzing through crosswalks,
not wearing helmets, etc). As for your examples, the bike that left the
bike lane to go INTO the traffic lane - the cyclist should been aware enough
of their surroundings to not veer in front of a bus! As for the cars that
passed the bikes in the bike lane, then turned - it should have been the
bikes that slowed, so as not to run into the car. They may have had the
legal right, but you can see how well it turned out. The bike lane is there
as a courtesy - that doesn't mean the cyclist is invincible or above fault!
Before someone accuses me of pointing fingers, I'm coming from a 'been
there, done that' perspective - the stop sign I decided to run in November
of 2004 got me hit by a car going 50mph, seven bone fractures, a month-long
coma, and five months of rehab before I could get back on a bike! Since
then I've been a much more defensive cyclist on the roadway - so I know it
can be done!

Ride safe, everyone.

Colin

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I think it would be beneficial for everyone who has an opinion on this topic,
regardless of what side you are on, to find the next planning meeting and voice
your opinion. OKC is currently updating their comprehensive plan and would
definitely benefit from these opinions.  Just my two cents...thanks.
Matt
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-----Original Message-----
From: "John Wente" <jwente49@...>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:47:03
To: 'Colin J. Zink'<cjzink@...>; <ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: RE: [ok-bike-society] Re: OKC bike lanes

One of the things OKC is planning to do is just designate some streets as
bike routes by installing "Bike Route" and "Share the Road" signs. While I
have no problem with this on quiet residential streets (although I really
don't see the need for the signs-all quiet residential streets are "bike
routes" to me), some of the roads they have chosen do not seem like safe
bike routes to me. For example, Mustang Rd. between Reno Ave. and SH 92 (SW
74th). This is a 4-lane highway with speed limits of 55 in places and
traffic going much faster. I used to ride this stretch for a while after it
became a 4-lane, but after several "close encounters", I swore off that
route. The motorists on that highway are not accustomed to seeing cyclists
and many seem offended that a cyclist is on "their road". I'd wager you
couldn't find one motorist in 10,000 that is aware of the 3-foot passing
law, and those that might be aware of it would be just as likely to pass too
close just to make their point that you (the cyclist) don't belong on "their
road". I would also be inclined to say that cycling on Mustang Rd is a
hazard to traffic. Most of the time, both lanes are occupied, so cars have
to slow down and try to change lanes. That always causes problems and
incites the drives against the cyclists.



I hope OKC will heed the advice of experienced cyclists and alter some of
their plans for these bike routes. Knowledgeable, experienced cyclists will
avoid the dangerous routes, but inexperienced cyclists or those from out of
town or new to the area will assume a designated bike route is safe. A
recipe for disaster.



   _____

From: ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Colin J. Zink
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 7:19 PM
To: ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [ok-bike-society] Re: OKC bike lanes





Hi Brian.

I re-read my initial post, and it sounded a little like a personal attack -
sorry, no offense meant.

I've been thinking about this issue, and I think that neither of our two
extremes (you - no bike lanes, me - all bike lanes) provide a good solution.
I think a combination approach is needed. In downtown areas and very urban
settings, where traffic is 30mph and below, I agree that bicycle integration
is the appropriate solution. Motor vehicles are slow enough that a cyclist
can perform about the same as a car, so sharing lanes is appropriate. OKC
is so spread out, however, that to get from one part of the city to another
requires traveling on streets that have faster traffic. On these roadways
there needs to be a bicycle lane or extra-wide shoulder to get the cyclist
away from the fast-moving traffic. If there is parking along these faster
roadways then there needs to be a change from traditional bike lanes (bike
lanes on the far side of the parked cars, a divided sidewalk to allow
bicycle traffic, an alternate bike path, removing the parking altogether, or
some other solution, on a case-by-case basis). Now we just need to get the
urban planners and city council to see thing this way!

On another issue:

Your two examples of bicycle tragedies both sound like cyclist error to me.
I know that's going to be unpopular on this forum, but hear me out. If you
are taking your bike on the roadways, you will always lose to a car -
ALWAYS. It's brings to mind the epitaph I heard years ago - "He was right,
dead right, as he sped along. But he's just as dead as if he'd been wrong".
Not to make light of this situation, but we've all seen how cocky some
cyclists are in traffic (ignoring stop signs, whizzing through crosswalks,
not wearing helmets, etc). As for your examples, the bike that left the
bike lane to go INTO the traffic lane - the cyclist should been aware enough
of their surroundings to not veer in front of a bus! As for the cars that
passed the bikes in the bike lane, then turned - it should have been the
bikes that slowed, so as not to run into the car. They may have had the
legal right, but you can see how well it turned out. The bike lane is there
as a courtesy - that doesn't mean the cyclist is invincible or above fault!
Before someone accuses me of pointing fingers, I'm coming from a 'been
there, done that' perspective - the stop sign I decided to run in November
of 2004 got me hit by a car going 50mph, seven bone fractures, a month-long
coma, and five months of rehab before I could get back on a bike! Since
then I've been a much more defensive cyclist on the roadway - so I know it
can be done!

Ride safe, everyone.

Colin

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

One of the things OKC is planning to do is just designate some streets as
bike routes by installing "Bike Route" and "Share the Road" signs. While I
have no problem with this on quiet residential streets (although I really
don't see the need for the signs-all quiet residential streets are "bike
routes" to me), some of the roads they have chosen do not seem like safe
bike routes to me. For example, Mustang Rd. between Reno Ave. and SH 92 (SW
74th). This is a 4-lane highway with speed limits of 55 in places and
traffic going much faster. I used to ride this stretch for a while after it
became a 4-lane, but after several "close encounters", I swore off that
route. The motorists on that highway are not accustomed to seeing cyclists
and many seem offended that a cyclist is on "their road". I'd wager you
couldn't find one motorist in 10,000 that is aware of the 3-foot passing
law, and those that might be aware of it would be just as likely to pass too
close just to make their point that you (the cyclist) don't belong on "their
road". I would also be inclined to say that cycling on Mustang Rd is a
hazard to traffic. Most of the time, both lanes are occupied, so cars have
to slow down and try to change lanes. That always causes problems and
incites the drives against the cyclists.



I hope OKC will heed the advice of experienced cyclists and alter some of
their plans for these bike routes. Knowledgeable, experienced cyclists will
avoid the dangerous routes, but inexperienced cyclists or those from out of
town or new to the area will assume a designated bike route is safe. A
recipe for disaster.



   _____

From: ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Colin J. Zink
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 7:19 PM
To: ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [ok-bike-society] Re: OKC bike lanes





Hi Brian.

I re-read my initial post, and it sounded a little like a personal attack -
sorry, no offense meant.

I've been thinking about this issue, and I think that neither of our two
extremes (you - no bike lanes, me - all bike lanes) provide a good solution.
I think a combination approach is needed. In downtown areas and very urban
settings, where traffic is 30mph and below, I agree that bicycle integration
is the appropriate solution. Motor vehicles are slow enough that a cyclist
can perform about the same as a car, so sharing lanes is appropriate. OKC
is so spread out, however, that to get from one part of the city to another
requires traveling on streets that have faster traffic. On these roadways
there needs to be a bicycle lane or extra-wide shoulder to get the cyclist
away from the fast-moving traffic. If there is parking along these faster
roadways then there needs to be a change from traditional bike lanes (bike
lanes on the far side of the parked cars, a divided sidewalk to allow
bicycle traffic, an alternate bike path, removing the parking altogether, or
some other solution, on a case-by-case basis). Now we just need to get the
urban planners and city council to see thing this way!

On another issue:

Your two examples of bicycle tragedies both sound like cyclist error to me.
I know that's going to be unpopular on this forum, but hear me out. If you
are taking your bike on the roadways, you will always lose to a car -
ALWAYS. It's brings to mind the epitaph I heard years ago - "He was right,
dead right, as he sped along. But he's just as dead as if he'd been wrong".
Not to make light of this situation, but we've all seen how cocky some
cyclists are in traffic (ignoring stop signs, whizzing through crosswalks,
not wearing helmets, etc). As for your examples, the bike that left the
bike lane to go INTO the traffic lane - the cyclist should been aware enough
of their surroundings to not veer in front of a bus! As for the cars that
passed the bikes in the bike lane, then turned - it should have been the
bikes that slowed, so as not to run into the car. They may have had the
legal right, but you can see how well it turned out. The bike lane is there
as a courtesy - that doesn't mean the cyclist is invincible or above fault!
Before someone accuses me of pointing fingers, I'm coming from a 'been
there, done that' perspective - the stop sign I decided to run in November
of 2004 got me hit by a car going 50mph, seven bone fractures, a month-long
coma, and five months of rehab before I could get back on a bike! Since
then I've been a much more defensive cyclist on the roadway - so I know it
can be done!

Ride safe, everyone.

Colin

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Brian.



I re-read my initial post, and it sounded a little like a personal attack -
sorry, no offense meant.



I've been thinking about this issue, and I think that neither of our two
extremes (you - no bike lanes, me - all bike lanes) provide a good solution.
I think a combination approach is needed.  In downtown areas and very urban
settings, where traffic is 30mph and below, I agree that bicycle integration
is the appropriate solution.  Motor vehicles are slow enough that a cyclist
can perform about the same as a car, so sharing lanes is appropriate.  OKC
is so spread out, however, that to get from one part of the city to another
requires traveling on streets that have faster traffic.  On these roadways
there needs to be a bicycle lane or extra-wide shoulder to get the cyclist
away from the fast-moving traffic.  If there is parking along these faster
roadways then there needs to be a change from traditional bike lanes (bike
lanes on the far side of the parked cars, a divided sidewalk to allow
bicycle traffic, an alternate bike path, removing the parking altogether, or
some other solution, on a case-by-case basis).  Now we just need to get the
urban planners and city council to see thing this way!





On another issue:

Your two examples of bicycle tragedies both sound like cyclist error to me.
I know that's going to be unpopular on this forum, but hear me out.  If you
are taking your bike on the roadways, you will always lose to a car -
ALWAYS.  It's brings to mind the epitaph I heard years ago - "He was right,
dead right, as he sped along.  But he's just as dead as if he'd been wrong".
Not to make light of this situation, but we've all seen how cocky some
cyclists are in traffic (ignoring stop signs, whizzing through crosswalks,
not wearing helmets, etc).  As for your examples, the bike that left the
bike lane to go INTO the traffic lane - the cyclist should been aware enough
of their surroundings to not veer in front of a bus!  As for the cars that
passed the bikes in the bike lane, then turned - it should have been the
bikes that slowed, so as not to run into the car.  They may have had the
legal right, but you can see how well it turned out.  The bike lane is there
as a courtesy - that doesn't mean the cyclist is invincible or above fault!
Before someone accuses me of pointing fingers, I'm coming from a 'been
there, done that' perspective - the stop sign I decided to run in November
of 2004 got me hit by a car going 50mph, seven bone fractures, a month-long
coma, and five months of rehab before I could get back on a bike!  Since
then I've been a much more defensive cyclist on the roadway - so I know it
can be done!



Ride safe, everyone.



Colin



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Lucy;

     T-shirts are a great thing, I love them. I must because I have a quilt
made of cycling T-shirts and a couple drawers full of them. There was a new
T-shirt every year back when the OBS was having a Grand Tours and another
one for the Streak. They were given out so often for bicycle events that
they became known as T-shirt rides. There are even Fred Kamp Day T-shirts.
See them in bunches in this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPSCO3Jmy6k

     Having been responsible for having at least two dozen T-shirts made over
the years, I found that USA T-Shirts on South Meridian was by far the best
people to work with in Oklahoma City. I'm sure there are other good places
but I always got what I wanted at a good price and delivered on time by
them. They also have a great art department that will help you with the
design.
     So, Lucy, I relinquish the title of OBS T-shirt guy (girl) to you. Come
up with a design and price, then spread the word via the Pathfinder, e-mail
list and word of mouth at rides and meetings. What the heck, everyone needs
at least one more T-shirt.

Jim Foreman

----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Harris" <alexharris@...>
Subject: [ok-bike-society] We should have t-shirts like these for OBS


Does anybody know someone who is a screen printer? Do we have an obs
t-shirt? Ive only seen jerseys, I know some of you want another t-shirt like
you want a hole in your head but, maybe we would have enough people for a
small order.??

Lucy

Does anybody know someone who is a screen printer?  Do we have an obs t-shirt? 
Ive only seen jerseys, I know some of you want another t-shirt like you want a
hole in your head but, maybe we would have enough people for a small order.??
 
Lucy

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

The way to make that happen, Lucy, is to take the bull by the horns and
"just do it".



   _____

From: ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com
[mailto:ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of alexharris@...
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 7:14 AM
To: ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [ok-bike-society] We should have t-shirts like these for OBS





http://bicyclecolo.
<http://bicyclecolo.org/product/bicycle-colorado-road-bike-womens-i-bike-col
orado-350.htm>
org/product/bicycle-colorado-road-bike-womens-i-bike-colorado-350.htm
If this link dosen't work they are "I bike colorado" shirts with a road bike
instead of the word bike( of course ours would say oklahoma:)
Lucy





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Hi Colin,

Feel free to read any of the links I posted and come to an informed decision on
your own.  I appreciate the distinction between correlation and causation.  You
may be missing a crucial point, though.  If we install bad facilities and more
people use them, more accidents will result.

When Dana Laird in Cambridge, Massachusetts, swerved out of a bike lane to avoid
a car door that opened in front of her, she was hit by a city bus.  The
Transportation Research Board had mistakenly stated that there was plenty of
room for cyclists riding in the middle of the bike lane to avoid car doors from
parallel parked vehicles.  John Allan pointed out that their math was incorrect.
Cyclists riding anywhere in the Cambridge bike lanes could not avoid car doors
except by leaving the bike lane.  This is a design defect.  It correlates,
statistically, with increased conflicts between motorists and cyclists.  But the
facility itself promotes bad lane positioning, reinforced by laws that require
riding in the bike lane (like the mandatory bike lane laws that OKC has). 
Therefore, the bike lane was a direct causal factor.

In Portland last year, two cyclists were killed in bike lanes by cars who passed
them and then turned in front of them.  This is a well-known motorist
misbehavior, reinforced by Oregon law (which states that motorists may not merge
into the bike lane), and aggravated by bad lane-positioning required by the bike
lane (use of which is mandatory in Portland, as it is in OKC).  Therefore, the
bike lane was a causal factor.

When cyclists are integrated into traffic (obeying the rules for all vehicles
and operating predictably), they are more visible and experience less real
conflict with motorists.  They are given more passing space and are less likely
to initiate left-turns from the far right-hand side of the roadway, a top 3 bad
behavior that bike lanes are known to encourage.  Without education, many
cyclists will not integrate or obey the laws.  But when the law and facilities
misdirect, almost all will not integrate, so the risks are augmented instead of
reduced.

I recognize that the argument against bike lanes is unpopular, emotionally
unwelcome, and even counter-intuitive.  But Oklahoma has some of the worst
educated drivers in the nation, and it has NO education for cyclists.  So saying
that we should expect higher standards and work toward improving road user
knowledge, attitude, and skills isn't silly.  It just hasn't been tried.  The
idea that we can engineer a facilities solution for ignorant drivers and even
more ignorant cyclists IS silly, if you'll forgive my using that word.  The OKC
solution isn't just imperfect--insofar as it depends on bike lanes, it's not a
solution at all.  There is a lot of promise in the on-street integrated route
solution, so long as cyclists REMAIN integrated into traffic and are educated to
operate according to the traffic rules for all vehicles.  If OKC focuses on
education, ditches its bike lanes and scraps its mandatory bike lane laws, it
will have made serious progress in becoming truly bicycling friendly.

I hope we can work toward a real solution, not a placebo.

Sincerely,

Brian D. Potter

--- In ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com, "Colin J. Zink" <cjzink@...> wrote:
>
> I'm no expert - just a guy who likes to ride bikes.  But I don't think
> you're taking into account the increased number of cyclists that these bike
> friendly cities have, so it is no wonder that they have more 'motor vehicle
> vs. bike' accidents - you're mixing causation with correlation (just because
> two things happen at the same time, that doesn't mean they're related).
>
>
>
> I agree that the OKC system isn't perfect, but your solution of 'people need
> to drive cars better' is pretty silly.  Hopefully no one important believes
> that you're speaking for the cyclist community.
>
>
>
>
>
> Colin
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>

Lynn, thanks for posting.  There is only one showing, 7:00pm.  I hope to see
some of you there.
Esther

http://bicyclecolo.org/product/bicycle-colorado-road-bike-womens-i-bike-colorado\
-350.htm
If this link dosen't work they are "I bike colorado" shirts with a road bike
instead of the word bike( of course ours would say oklahoma:)
Lucy

Was in Lead one year.  Took my forest map and found a good spot to watch. 
Crazy! 
mel

--- On Tue, 11/10/09, bookertaylor@... <bookertaylor@...> wrote:


From: bookertaylor@... <bookertaylor@...>
Subject: Re: [ok-bike-society] One Night Bike Movie Event
To: "Lynn Key" <lynnkey@...>, "OBS" <ok-bike-society@yahoogroups.com>
Date: Tuesday, November 10, 2009, 2:58 PM


 



Great movie, it was here a few weeks ago and several of us attended the showing.
Tickets were 12.50 several weeks ago. Great movie, worth the price. Lots of
bicycles. Sandra
------------ -- Original message from Lynn Key <lynnkey@yahoo. com>:
------------ --

This was sent to me by a friend of mine. It looks as though it will be fun and
interesting.

It's a one-time only movie event about the Leadville Trail 100 - a documentary
on a grueling bike race. It's even got Lance in it.
Don't know how much tickets are but it's being advertised as showing at Quail
Springs AMC on Thursday Nov. 12 ONLY.

http://www.ncm. com/Fathom/ Sports/RaceAcros sTheSkyENC. aspx

RIDE ON!!!
Lynn"Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity."
- Lord Charles Beresford

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]











[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

I agree, movie was outstanding, definitely worth the $12.50. JayW

Sent from my iPod

On Nov 10, 2009, at 2:58 PM, bookertaylor@... wrote:

Great movie, it was here a few weeks ago and several of us attended the showing.
Tickets were 12.50 several weeks ago. Great movie, worth the price. Lots of
bicycles. Sandra
-------------- Original message from Lynn Key <lynnkey@...>:
--------------

This was sent to me by a friend of mine. It looks as though it will be fun and
interesting.

It's a one-time only movie event about the Leadville Trail 100 - a documentary
on a grueling bike race. It's even got Lance in it.
Don't know how much tickets are but it's being advertised as showing at Quail
Springs AMC on Thursday Nov. 12 ONLY.

http://www.ncm.com/Fathom/Sports/RaceAcrossTheSkyENC.aspx

RIDE ON!!!
Lynn"Whoever invented the bicycle deserves the thanks of humanity."
- Lord Charles Beresford

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]







[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]