ofbikesandbeers:

Oh yeah, I guess I am. Yes, it has been one month since the LA Tour de Fat. The day where I gave up my car and traded it for a new bicycle. If you weren’t there (or still don’t know what I’m always blabbering about) and want to see what went on, check out this video..

I currently have 373 miles on my new bike!  So combined with the miles I put on my other bike (the brat), I’ve pedaled 418 miles since October 8th! 

So humor me while I do some math and see how much $ I save by not spending it on gas.

The estimated MPG for my car was 22 city/33 hwy so…

418 miles /22 miles per gallon = 19 gallons

19 gallons * $3.71 per gallon (price in LB as of yesterday) = $70.49 saved YAY!!!

Now you do your own math…How many miles do you drive in 1 month? 

How much are you spending on gas? 

How many of those miles could you ride your bike instead of driving?

So do you think I miss my car?  Not at all.  As you can see I’m saving money on gas, insurance, maintenance, etc.  Although I was really slacking in maintenance dept. the last year or more, only repairing what absolutely had to be fixed.  It was always a constant worry whether my car would start or not and whether I would have to get it towed to the shop AGAIN!  So that stress and worry has left with the car. 

The biggest change so far being without a car has been consistently biking to work.  I had become accustomed to biking all over Long Beach since where I lived for over 10 years had horrible parking and I wouldn’t want to lose my space or deal with parking wherever I was going - but would still drive to work.  Sure the morning rides to work are a bit brisk biking in 46 degrees lately (I’m not complaining) but it wouldn’t be that much warmer in my car since it had no heater (I refused to spend the money to fix it a few years ago).  Hey it’s Southern California, who needs a heater, right?  Well, no heater meant the only way to “defrost” the windows was to drive with the windows down partway (since they wouldn’t roll down the entire way anymore).  So I actually have better visibility being on my bike.  Plus I generate enough heat that I’m all warmed up half way there..

Ride on!

If you’ve live, work or even travel through City Heights, you may notice something different!

It is my pleasure to report that a pedestrian safety project that a number of community members and City staff have worked on for about a year (???!! does shit really take this long??!) has been implemented!

Last Thursday (September 8th, 2011), about a dozen traffic calming and safety enhancements were made to the dangerous 50th and University Avenue intersection.

before:

after:

Residents and community leaders were able to convince Traffic Engineering that pedestrian crossings should be easier and safer to cross by implementing traffic calming, line-of-sight visibility improvements, high-visibility crosswalks, and other best practices.  Popular, legal crossings should be safe ones.

City of San Diego Traffic Engineers Gary Pence and Biljana Dekic agreed and took this project to the next level by proposing (after conducting a traffic count) to close the low-volume left turn pocket which created a number of conflicts for pedestrians.   In addition,  they were able to find money in their budget to implement cost-effective near-term enhancements.  We thank them graciously for making safety at this intersection a priority.

— marti emerald, 14.09.11.

also: Fixing a City Heights danger zone. sdcitybeat, 31.08.11.

On Thursday morning, not long after city crews left, several men dressed in flowing robes stepped into the new crosswalk to test drivers’ reactions. Some drivers slowed. A woman in a Volkswagen Beetle stopped before the crosswalk, waving a pedestrian across.

Still, Kahir said he didn’t think the crosswalk was enough.

Between signing deliverymen’s clipboards, Kahir said the city should also reduce the speed limit there. It is 35 miles per hour along that stretch of University Avenue, which does not have stop signs, traffic lights or other traffic-calming features. Drivers often exceed that limit, he said.

“It’s still too fast and dangerous for the people,” he said. “Either put stop signs here or change the speed limit.”

A Dangerous City Heights Intersection’s New Crosswalk, voiceofsandiego, 11.09.11.

Now if only they did something about all the trash. I feel like I’m living in a landfill

— a buddy who moved to the hood recently.

Autolib’ argues that not only is car sharing practical—providing a car when you need it, taking it back when you don’t- it will have a noticeable, positive effect on the environment. The program is starting with 3,000 100% electric Bluecars—enough to equal 22,500 privately owned vehicles, by their count.

For now, Autolib’ is in a two month testing period, which means that 60 cars will be available only to select users.

Hopefully, all will go well and Autolib’ will follow in the footsteps of Velib’, and one day residents of cities around the world will have reliable, affordable, and occasional access to a car with a small carbon footprint.

treehugger, 08.10.11.

tales (gripes and maybe some tips) from a Berkeley kid living in San Diego without a car.

part one in a never-ending series (assuming San Diego keeps up current pace with bicycle infrastructure and car-dominant mindset).

1. CAR DRIVERS WHO DON’T USE THEIR TURN SIGNALS

gdmit is it that difficult??! I know it’s annoying even to other drivers. 
USE YOUR F—IN’ TURN SIGNALS before and when you make a turn.
that way, the people behind you know if you should slow down and maybe pass you.

This morning, entering the UCSD Medical Center to the shuttle stop, the car I was behind started turning right into the loop thing WITHOUT signaling. I was on the right side of another car, didn’t have enough room to stop, so went left between the two cars, while the car that was turning was turning hella slow and I think I scraped it and one of my pedal reflectors fell off. I really don’t super remember if I scraped the car or anything, but I must have, or else my pedal reflector wouldn’t have fallen off.

*not my fault! if I scrape your car because you didn’t properly signal and you (and other drivers) not giving me enough room and you do something unexpected.

also, this patient drop-off/pick-up loop and parking lot entrance (left of here is a surface parking lot) is poorly designed. Cars going into this loop, cars going in and out of the left parking lot, trucks making deliveries, buses, cyclists, people crossing the street to get to the building entrance (no crosswalk)..

2. CAR DRIVERS WHO HONK WITHOUT GOOD REASON

Then coming back home just a little while ago, I’m on this fast arterial road that’s actually an overpass thing, so the lanes are a tiny bit narrower, and there couldn’t be bike lanes because there isn’t enough space for them. I’m cycling on the right-ish side anyway, as I should. It’s start of rush-hour, cars on the left lane, and I guess a green light went on and there started to be cars behind me, too. (I didn’t look back.) I’m cycling at a moderately fast pace, almost home. 

A car behind me honks twice. Not in an obviously angry way like “BEEP BEEP BEEEEEEEP”, but also not in a super friendly way either like “beep!” But in a confusing somewhat neutral double-beep. WTF?! I didn’t look back to see what the driver’s deal was, since I’m about to turn right after this overpass anyway. But yeah, like what would you have done? I considered flipping the guy off, but then didn’t. Is this one of those people who’ve never seen a bicyclist before? One of those people who don’t think bikes have a place on the road? ???! Road-ragey but light on the honking? 

*Not my fault if there’re cars on the other lane preventing you from passing me, and that the road wasn’t designed with room for a bike lane. 

Yeah, so someone answer me:
If a driver honks you for no good reason, or for a bad reason (road rage, hating on cyclists, etc.), would you (bicyclist) flip him/her off? What is the appropriate response?  

If you’re under the age of 25, it’s likely that the most expensive product you’ve ever purchased is a car. And by “most expensive”, we’re probably talking an easy 10-15 times the next most expensive thing. If you didn’t need a car, that’s easily a couple hundred extra dollars in your pocket each week after fuel, insurance, registration, and repairs. Now imagine you’re at the poverty line with two kids and you make roughly $430 a week before taxes and the bus starts to become a much more appealing option. Unfortunately in America, unless you live in a small handful of large metropolitan areas, you absolutely need a car to get around.

While some of this isn’t anyone’s fault since America isn’t really as geographically concentrated as, say, Seoul, we have a long history of not giving a shit about properly funding public transit, while throwing billions upon billions at building the public infrastructure necessary to support our $50,000 odes to American independence. On top of this, mass transit, especially rail, is significantly more cost-effective in the long run than building or maintaining more roads. As if you needed any more reasons why the poor tend to stay poor, imagine everyone has a “Being an American” tax of at least $1500 annually no matter their income, and if they didn’t pay it the IRS bolts them to the ground, preventing them from going to work.

11 Ways America is keeping poor people poor. businesspundit, 30.09.11.

Youths like to take cool pictures of their cars and compete with their friends to outspend each other outfitting their inefficient, polluting, money- and resources-hoarding vehicles. 

(Source: captainplanit, via karlfun)

For decades, SANDAG has favored funding more roads and freeway widening to serve sprawl development as the City has grown. Despite a transit emphasis promoted by stakeholders throughout the drafting of the Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2050 RTP/SCS), SANDAG leaders are poised to approve this sprawl-first model of ‘sustainability’ that will set a precedent for the nation and commit the region to 40 more years of the same misguided planning principles. For most of us, that’s a lifetime. We have a chance to seize this opportunity to achieve sustainability goals, but the current Plan will only serve to promote further sprawl and greenhouse gas emissions, perpetuating poor land use and traffic congestion.

Although the very goal of SB 375 is to reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and by extension emissions, San Diego’s 2050 RTP/SCS would actually increase VMT in the region by 50 percent over the next 40 years. By 2050 it will only achieve a 9 percent GHG reduction per capita — if it even reaches the levels mandated by SB 375 at all.

The state attorney general has even sharply criticized the RTP.

The failure of SANDAG to contemplate a plan that will achieve a meaningful shift in realistic sustainability planning runs contrary to the results of multiple public polls and community outcry for an effective integrated light rail/multimodal solution. In response, the Cleveland National Forest Foundation (CNFF), through its Transit San Diego campaign, has submitted an alternate planning model for SANDAG’s consideration. This “50-10 Transit Plan“ commits funding 50 years’ worth of transit infrastructure into the first 10 years of implementation. CNFF has also submitted multiple comment letters promoting transit first and opposing SANDAG’s sprawl-development-friendly plan throughout the planning process.

Prioritizing transit as in the CNFF proposal would finally address the fundamental transportation challenges instead of just doubling down on more cars for another generation. We know that SANDAG’s choices will be felt throughout the region and across the country. Indeed, we’ve already seen the chair of SANDAG lobbying for the rollback of EPA standards in order to accelerate highways throughout Southern California. Before this accelerates further, we have a chance to demand responsible transportation development this Friday — but we need all the help we can get.

calitics, 24.10.11.

Occupy San Diego will definitely be helping out. Come out and join the fight for a better future!—and not a compromised one that has been proven to be unsustainable. 

Occupy San Diego will be marching early in the morning from Civic Center to very closeby SANDAG offices in the Wells Fargo building at 401 B St., suite 800, to attend the 9am Board of Directors meeting and protest against the 2050 Final Regional Transport Plan.

Here is the alternative San Diego transit plan to have 50 years of transportation changes done in 10 years: The 50-10 Transit Plan.

Driving in the middle of the lane actually protects cyclists against the most common motorist-caused crashes: sideswipes, right hooks, left crosses, and drive-outs. 

A bicycle driver’s top safety priority is to ensure he or she can be seen by motorists with whom they might potentially be in conflict, and bicycling in the middle of a lane is one of the most effective ways to do that.  Most overtaking crashes involve a motorist who attempts to squeeze past (illegally) in a lane that is too narrow to share.

This is the width of a typical lane with vehicles drawn to scale. None of the above vehicles are able to give the required 3ft (THREE FEET please!) of passing clearance without changing lanes. A cyclist is far more likely to be sideswiped than run over.

Anywhere in the bike lane a cyclist would be struck by this door. If the handlebar nicked the door, the cyclist would be thrown into the path of passing cars.

This is not a bike lane. It is two feet less than the minimum.

Please read the full post and watch the very informative animation.

cyclingsavvy.org / florida (!!) bicycle association

Aston Martin?? :DD

In some ways, industry downsizing is a do-it-or-else proposition. A federal target of 54.5 m.p.g. by 2025, along with anticipated carbon dioxide emissions rules in Europe, have even deluxe brands scrambling to increase fuel efficiency.

But a question remains: Shy of $6-a-gallon gasoline, are enough Americans willing to spend big bucks on a little car?

Smaller luxury cars, many powered by frugal diesels, have proliferated in Europe. But Americans have rarely seen the point of buying less car, especially when a roomier version can be had for roughly the same price.

nytimes, 13.10.11.

Even big traffic-congested cities in Europe seem a lot friendlier packed with small cars, than any city in America with large sedans and SUVs.