Jump to content
Chapala.com Webboard

Crackdown on Golf Carts


Bisbee Gal
 Share

Recommended Posts

I frequently see golf carts only on the cobblestone roads of lower Ajijic.  I don't mind them.  I'm not sure if it's still possible to get plates for them in 2022 but the carts I see passing by do have plates on them.  They are not allowed on the Carterra, so I never see them on Carterra or north of Carterra.

Another new option -- you can also purchase a lightweight pedelec bicycle and use it in the cyclopisto (the nice new bike track Jalisco built between Jocopotec and Chapala).  Just don't use a moped on them.  But pedelecs are fine (normal bicycles with a waterbottle-sized lithium battery and a tiny fist-sized bikewheel motor to boost your pedalling power) -- makes the Cyclopisto a total wonderful breeze of easy pedalling without getting sweaty.  Pedalling uphill is now as easy as pedalling downhill!  Enough battery capacity for about two back-and-fourth trips on the Cyclopisto between Ajijic and Chapala.

Public transit is also very frequent, easy along lakefront (Jocopotec<->Ajijic<->Chapala) and to the big city (Gualajadara).  

I don't own a car here.  I've never needed one.   I don't have a golf cart.

Walk, bus, bike is wonderful here -- though understandable if you have accessibility considerations.

Some pictures of the Ciclopista, the high-end upgraded protected bike trail -- big concrete barrier separating pedestrians/bicycles from cars/vehicles and vice versa -- and upgraded lighting that now makes it rideable at night too (for a return from friend's or bar) -- though make sure you have bike headlights for safety too, especially through some dark intersections.

If you have not been to Ajijic/Chapala since before the pandemic, here are pictures:
https://www.accesslakechapala.com/2020/10/19/lake-chapala-ciclopista-newly-built-in-2020/

While it might not be your bag, the Ciclopista is very impoprtant to us, and influenced our decision to have our new place sufficiently near the Ciclopista for convenience.

IMG_8493-Custom.jpg.e7ae34b92cc11bd9179e2ac59dc1c23e.jpg

IMG_8578-Custom.jpg.0273265b5a514ae428b04fdc5e4c5302.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The big problem with motorized bicycles is speed. They go too darn fast to be safe on the Ciclopista and not fast enough to keep up with traffic on the highway. IF the riders had good sense and drove responsibly - about the same speed as other bicycles - and paid attention to rights of pedestrians, they would be be fine, but alas they don't.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MtnMama said:

The big problem with motorized bicycles is speed. They go too darn fast to be safe on the Ciclopista and not fast enough to keep up with traffic on the highway. IF the riders had good sense and drove responsibly - about the same speed as other bicycles - and paid attention to rights of pedestrians, they would be be fine, but alas they don't.

One big problem with all bicyclists on the path is not calling out or whistling or ringing when passing. Very dangerous.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I pedal with the flow and use my bell when passing pedestrians.  

I haven’t passed any slow cyclists in the last week because I love the leisurely pace.  I don’t max-throttle and most are surprised I’m riding electric sometimes because the lithium battery is hidden inside the ordinary tubular bike frame.  I need the exercise, but I don’t want to be fatigued uphill.

The area need to legislate Canada-style pedelec laws that bile trail battery use can only be 75% assist or thereabouts (you must mandatorily pedal for electric to work). No moped-style operation!  It’s only fair, if allowing plain pedelecs onto Ciclopista.

Worse issue is etiquette between pedestrians and cyclists, something I am more guilty of: Early on, I did as a stupid pedestrian myself, walk on front of a bicycle and caused a small bit of chaos.  I learned my lesson of pedestrian etiquette on the Cicloposta - I’m not perfect.  There is no sidewalk so I understand why the Cicloposta makes a convenient accessible sidewalk for walkers and baby strollers, but it’s better to follow etiquette of not weaving back and forth, and always hug the very edge of either side, looking behind you before crossing the Ciclopista.  Still, mea culpa as firsttimer pedestrian in 2020. Since then I’ve been studiously sticking to very edge if I need to walk a short Ciclopista hop to reach stairs or streets on other side.

In my opinion, a “pedal-mandatory” pedelecs on Ciclopista is well matched to the flow.  It’s those speed-uncapped throttle without pedalling that’s more problematic in speed.  In some jurisdictions, that’s illegal — even bike stores aren’t allowed to sell pedal-optional electric assist in many Canadian cities, but allow pedal-mandatory assist systems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am an e-bike owner but not here.  Most e-bikes that I see riding the ciclopista are *older* folks. IMO, the main problem is NOT e-bike riders but just 'normal' Mexican bike riders... mostly younger.... riding like a bat outa h*ll with little regard for pedestrians. But it is not they that will be 'regulated'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, RickS said:

I am an e-bike owner but not here.  Most e-bikes that I see riding the ciclopista are *older* folks. IMO, the main problem is NOT e-bike riders but just 'normal' Mexican bike riders... mostly younger.... riding like a bat outa h*ll with little regard for pedestrians. But it is not they that will be 'regulated'.

Adding general commentary to readers this thread:

In the part of Canada where I come from, we have to disambiguate the e-bike terminology.  In some jurisdictions, e-bike can refer to those moped-style scooters (electric equivalent of Vespas)    

Just in case any readers in different countries applies different meanings to the terminology "e-bike" as for folks some cities it refers only to mopeds.  So it can be confusing, being this an international forum...

Because of this, I have resorted to using terminology "pedelec" to disambiguate it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My question is: 

Since pedestrians can legally walk on the Malecons or on any street, why not ban pedestrians from using the "bike" path?  How about getting serious about enforcing the rules regarding the Malecons for the safety of pedestrians there?  That would be the bans on bicycles (of any type) and unleashed dogs. Those of us who are "elders" and/ or unsteady on their feet have a serious problem there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, gringal said:

My question is: 

Since pedestrians can legally walk on the Malecons or on any street, why not ban pedestrians from using the "bike" path?  How about getting serious about enforcing the rules regarding the Malecons for the safety of pedestrians there?  That would be the bans on bicycles (of any type) and unleashed dogs. Those of us who are "elders" and/ or unsteady on their feet have a serious problem there.

Hello,

Being someone who ran a petition back in Canada to get a bike trail named after a departed teacher, I had the opportunity to talk to a lot of people about pedestrians vs bicycles vs cars vs etc — both left and right — I had to listen (online, social media, email, web forms, etc) to everyone. (that’s the Canada way, more percentage of population listens to both sides).  It’s impressive the gamut of opinions.  Our hugely-polarized city council voted unamiously (WOW) to accept the petition and rename the trail, and the trail now has trail wayfinding with the teacher’s name (RIP).  This was in part to my diplomatic skills matching left and right side of the political aisle.

Anyway, to chime in about Ciclopista:

We have multiple categories such as “Multi-Use Trails”, which are common in some parts of Canada or USA, as many gringos know probably (different countries call them different things for shared trails) — but here in Mexico there’s a problem that the bike-only areas are much better than the sidewalks.  In some sections of the Ciclopisto, there’s not even a sidewalk!

My personal opinion is: Blame infrastructure more, NOT people if the pdestrians are walking in the ciclopisto.  Some sidewalks don’t exist!  

Cobblestone is great for kids!  But they can be hard on strollers/wheelchairs/etc.  Many of us (our neighbours too) love the cobblestone as we don’t have to be as scared for our dogs and kids when they cross the street because cars don’t race as often here as in Canada residential streets.  So cobblestone is heaven for residential safety, just like Cul-de-Sacs.  I view it perspectively as an accidential Mexican way of keeping things safe for families.  But, it’s also true, that sidewalks can be lacking in these small towns and it’s hell on accessibility.  Such compromises, but I still respect the cobblestone benefits.

The Ciclopista is much needed investment by the province to give additional options.  We have lots of friends in Ajijic but we now live in Chapala.  

We would not have been as quick to purchased our new downtown-Chapala house where we did, if the Ciclopisto did not exist — so it is definitely very true it has had an influence on us.  

So, my stance even as a cyclist, is that pedestrians are OK as long as they stay to the far side.  

That way, pedestrian body language is predictably communicating “Yes, I know this is bike-priority route, and I’m respecting you by walking very close to the edge.”.  The edge-huggers are the polite people defacto telling cyclists “mea culpa”.  

Right now, the bike traffic is not intense enough at the moment to enforce things but well used enough in cooler parts of the day that it justified the cost of the Ciclopisto. That’s the weird goldilocks situation we are in. There’s enough room to share as long as there’s etiquette.

It’s those who weave back and fourth that frustrate me by having to slow down myself — it’s a matter of polite etiquette in a situation of infrastructure duress.

I like the Ciclopisto as a rental car driver too — I’m less fearful of crashing into cyclists on Carterra especially when between the major towns — Anecdotally, any small accidents no longer easily slide into harm’s way of the cyclists, walkers, strollers, and kids.  

Traffic is no worse because of the Ciclopisto (unless you’re looking for lost parking, but that’s just a minor inconvenience to me. The Ciclopisto helps more count of people Lakeside-wide than the small loss of parking it had to expropriate).   So I’m a happy camper driver and a happy camper cyclist.

This probably should be spun off to a separate thread by now, since this dives into general infrastructure balance issues (cyclists, pedestrians, driving, golf carts, etc)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, GDouglas said:

Hello,

Being someone who ran a petition back in Canada to get a bike trail named after a departed teacher, I had the opportunity to talk to a lot of people about pedestrians vs bicycles vs cars vs etc — both left and right — I had to listen (online, social media, email, web forms, etc) to everyone. (that’s the Canada way, more percentage of population listens to both sides).  It’s impressive the gamut of opinions.  Our hugely-polarized city council voted unamiously (WOW) to accept the petition and rename the trail, and the trail now has trail wayfinding with the teacher’s name (RIP).  This was in part to my diplomatic skills matching left and right side of the political aisle.

Anyway, to chime in about Ciclopista:

We have multiple categories such as “Multi-Use Trails”, which are common in some parts of Canada or USA, as many gringos know probably (different countries call them different things for shared trails) — but here in Mexico there’s a problem that the bike-only areas are much better than the sidewalks.  In some sections of the Ciclopisto, there’s not even a sidewalk!

My personal opinion is: Blame infrastructure more, NOT people if the pdestrians are walking in the ciclopisto.  Some sidewalks don’t exist!  

Cobblestone is great for kids!  But they can be hard on strollers/wheelchairs/etc.  Many of us (our neighbours too) love the cobblestone as we don’t have to be as scared for our dogs and kids when they cross the street because cars don’t race as often here as in Canada residential streets.  So cobblestone is heaven for residential safety, just like Cul-de-Sacs.  I view it perspectively as an accidential Mexican way of keeping things safe for families.  But, it’s also true, that sidewalks can be lacking in these small towns and it’s hell on accessibility.  Such compromises, but I still respect the cobblestone benefits.

The Ciclopista is much needed investment by the province to give additional options.  We have lots of friends in Ajijic but we now live in Chapala.  

We would not have been as quick to purchased our new downtown-Chapala house where we did, if the Ciclopisto did not exist — so it is definitely very true it has had an influence on us.  

So, my stance even as a cyclist, is that pedestrians are OK as long as they stay to the far side.  

That way, pedestrian body language is predictably communicating “Yes, I know this is bike-priority route, and I’m respecting you by walking very close to the edge.”.  The edge-huggers are the polite people defacto telling cyclists “mea culpa”.  

Right now, the bike traffic is not intense enough at the moment to enforce things but well used enough in cooler parts of the day that it justified the cost of the Ciclopisto. That’s the weird goldilocks situation we are in. There’s enough room to share as long as there’s etiquette.

It’s those who weave back and fourth that frustrate me by having to slow down myself — it’s a matter of polite etiquette in a situation of infrastructure duress.

I like the Ciclopisto as a rental car driver too — I’m less fearful of crashing into cyclists on Carterra especially when between the major towns — Anecdotally, any small accidents no longer easily slide into harm’s way of the cyclists, walkers, strollers, and kids.  

Traffic is no worse because of the Ciclopisto (unless you’re looking for lost parking, but that’s just a minor inconvenience to me. The Ciclopisto helps more count of people Lakeside-wide than the small loss of parking it had to expropriate).   So I’m a happy camper driver and a happy camper cyclist.

This probably should be spun off to a separate thread by now, since this dives into general infrastructure balance issues (cyclists, pedestrians, driving, golf carts, etc)

Boy have you got to a lot to learn  about living here.

pedro kertesz

chapala flag 001.jpg

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GDouglas said:

Hello,

Being someone who ran a petition back in Canada to get a bike trail named after a departed teacher, I had the opportunity to talk to a lot of people about pedestrians vs bicycles vs cars vs etc — both left and right — I had to listen (online, social media, email, web forms, etc) to everyone. (that’s the Canada way, more percentage of population listens to both sides).  It’s impressive the gamut of opinions.  Our hugely-polarized city council voted unamiously (WOW) to accept the petition and rename the trail, and the trail now has trail wayfinding with the teacher’s name (RIP).  This was in part to my diplomatic skills matching left and right side of the political aisle.

Anyway, to chime in about Ciclopista:

We have multiple categories such as “Multi-Use Trails”, which are common in some parts of Canada or USA, as many gringos know probably (different countries call them different things for shared trails) — but here in Mexico there’s a problem that the bike-only areas are much better than the sidewalks.  In some sections of the Ciclopisto, there’s not even a sidewalk!

My personal opinion is: Blame infrastructure more, NOT people if the pdestrians are walking in the ciclopisto.  Some sidewalks don’t exist!  

Cobblestone is great for kids!  But they can be hard on strollers/wheelchairs/etc.  Many of us (our neighbours too) love the cobblestone as we don’t have to be as scared for our dogs and kids when they cross the street because cars don’t race as often here as in Canada residential streets.  So cobblestone is heaven for residential safety, just like Cul-de-Sacs.  I view it perspectively as an accidential Mexican way of keeping things safe for families.  But, it’s also true, that sidewalks can be lacking in these small towns and it’s hell on accessibility.  Such compromises, but I still respect the cobblestone benefits.

The Ciclopista is much needed investment by the province to give additional options.  We have lots of friends in Ajijic but we now live in Chapala.  

We would not have been as quick to purchased our new downtown-Chapala house where we did, if the Ciclopisto did not exist — so it is definitely very true it has had an influence on us.  

So, my stance even as a cyclist, is that pedestrians are OK as long as they stay to the far side.  

That way, pedestrian body language is predictably communicating “Yes, I know this is bike-priority route, and I’m respecting you by walking very close to the edge.”.  The edge-huggers are the polite people defacto telling cyclists “mea culpa”.  

Right now, the bike traffic is not intense enough at the moment to enforce things but well used enough in cooler parts of the day that it justified the cost of the Ciclopisto. That’s the weird goldilocks situation we are in. There’s enough room to share as long as there’s etiquette.

It’s those who weave back and fourth that frustrate me by having to slow down myself — it’s a matter of polite etiquette in a situation of infrastructure duress.

I like the Ciclopisto as a rental car driver too — I’m less fearful of crashing into cyclists on Carterra especially when between the major towns — Anecdotally, any small accidents no longer easily slide into harm’s way of the cyclists, walkers, strollers, and kids.  

Traffic is no worse because of the Ciclopisto (unless you’re looking for lost parking, but that’s just a minor inconvenience to me. The Ciclopisto helps more count of people Lakeside-wide than the small loss of parking it had to expropriate).   So I’m a happy camper driver and a happy camper cyclist.

This probably should be spun off to a separate thread by now, since this dives into general infrastructure balance issues (cyclists, pedestrians, driving, golf carts, etc)

The Ciclopisto is a done deal, and I do not think many people object to the regulations that are in place as to who or what is allowed on it. If people want to complain about real safety problems here, why not address this??? "We don't need no stinkin' helmets"!!!!

We don't need no stinkin' helmets.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, GDouglas said:

Hello,

Being someone who ran a petition back in Canada to get a bike trail named after a departed teacher, I had the opportunity to talk to a lot of people about pedestrians vs bicycles vs cars vs etc — both left and right — I had to listen (online, social media, email, web forms, etc) to everyone. (that’s the Canada way, more percentage of population listens to both sides).  It’s impressive the gamut of opinions.  Our hugely-polarized city council voted unamiously (WOW) to accept the petition and rename the trail, and the trail now has trail wayfinding with the teacher’s name (RIP).  This was in part to my diplomatic skills matching left and right side of the political aisle.

Anyway, to chime in about Ciclopista:

We have multiple categories such as “Multi-Use Trails”, which are common in some parts of Canada or USA, as many gringos know probably (different countries call them different things for shared trails) — but here in Mexico there’s a problem that the bike-only areas are much better than the sidewalks.  In some sections of the Ciclopisto, there’s not even a sidewalk!

My personal opinion is: Blame infrastructure more, NOT people if the pdestrians are walking in the ciclopisto.  Some sidewalks don’t exist!  

Cobblestone is great for kids!  But they can be hard on strollers/wheelchairs/etc.  Many of us (our neighbours too) love the cobblestone as we don’t have to be as scared for our dogs and kids when they cross the street because cars don’t race as often here as in Canada residential streets.  So cobblestone is heaven for residential safety, just like Cul-de-Sacs.  I view it perspectively as an accidential Mexican way of keeping things safe for families.  But, it’s also true, that sidewalks can be lacking in these small towns and it’s hell on accessibility.  Such compromises, but I still respect the cobblestone benefits.

The Ciclopista is much needed investment by the province to give additional options.  We have lots of friends in Ajijic but we now live in Chapala.  

We would not have been as quick to purchased our new downtown-Chapala house where we did, if the Ciclopisto did not exist — so it is definitely very true it has had an influence on us.  

So, my stance even as a cyclist, is that pedestrians are OK as long as they stay to the far side.  

That way, pedestrian body language is predictably communicating “Yes, I know this is bike-priority route, and I’m respecting you by walking very close to the edge.”.  The edge-huggers are the polite people defacto telling cyclists “mea culpa”.  

Right now, the bike traffic is not intense enough at the moment to enforce things but well used enough in cooler parts of the day that it justified the cost of the Ciclopisto. That’s the weird goldilocks situation we are in. There’s enough room to share as long as there’s etiquette.

It’s those who weave back and fourth that frustrate me by having to slow down myself — it’s a matter of polite etiquette in a situation of infrastructure duress.

I like the Ciclopisto as a rental car driver too — I’m less fearful of crashing into cyclists on Carterra especially when between the major towns — Anecdotally, any small accidents no longer easily slide into harm’s way of the cyclists, walkers, strollers, and kids.  

Traffic is no worse because of the Ciclopisto (unless you’re looking for lost parking, but that’s just a minor inconvenience to me. The Ciclopisto helps more count of people Lakeside-wide than the small loss of parking it had to expropriate).   So I’m a happy camper driver and a happy camper cyclist.

This probably should be spun off to a separate thread by now, since this dives into general infrastructure balance issues (cyclists, pedestrians, driving, golf carts, etc)

GDouglas: I commented on an article about the ( underconstrucion at that time) Cycolopista many years ago, that this development would help a deep sociocultural change Lakeside. Shopping trips to stores, not normally visited  (parking!), wind in your hair, smile on your faces, a group of recognised other smiling faces. Then to restaurants, where you can blow over two beers and not go to jail.

Have you seen any evidence of this cultural change? I would still dream about somewhere warm and clean that I could take a Hobie Cat everyday. I need a lot of expensive operations and joint replacements to get the lasto that point though. Been in bed the last five days - my first ortheoarthopedic attack. Sole of my feet, finger knuckles, much better five days later. But still scary

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, timjwilson said:

I was under the impression that the intent of the path is for pedestrian and bicycles (and horses). Is this incorrect?

Infrastructure’s legal intent, or real-world?

Infrastructure legal intent:
Only in the grid-textured “MULTI-USE” areas where there are signs saying both pedestrians and cyclists.  You can see those at bus stops, and downtown sections for example.  The bike-logo areas, especially outside towns, are technically cyclist only plus a few authorized traffic — by most municipal/provincial road construction manuals of the entire Western World (including Mexico’s government manual), from the road builder design literature.  Sometimes it’s left ambigious in some countries (road construction manual out of sync with laws for certain line-items), but that’s the intent.

Real world:
In practicality, not everyone follows the rules nor the police enforces all rules.  It’s like cars slowly rolling through stop signs — most police here aren’t enforcing that.  Likewise, nobody enforces pedestrian/cyclist separation.  It’s almost insulting there’s no sidewalk in some sections of beautiful Ciclopisto, so this cyclist (me) is forgiving.  

My opinion:
Let pedestrians walk on it but with proper etiquette (stay to side), but mopeds should stay off.   Improved education is needed for better-behaving cars, better-behaving cyclists, and better-behaving pedestrians.  There’s blame all over anyway, including outside factors (infrastructure).   It’s not like we have intense bike traffic like some Europe town anyway.  

Short answer:
I accept a Goldilocks Compromise.

  

5 hours ago, CHILLIN said:

GDouglas: I commented on an article about the ( underconstrucion at that time) Cycolopista many years ago, that this development would help a deep sociocultural change Lakeside. Shopping trips to stores, not normally visited  (parking!), wind in your hair, smile on your faces, a group of recognised other smiling faces. Then to restaurants, where you can blow over two beers and not go to jail.

Have you seen any evidence of this cultural change? I would still dream about somewhere warm and clean that I could take a Hobie Cat everyday. I need a lot of expensive operations and joint replacements to get the lasto that point though. Been in bed the last five days - my first ortheoarthopedic attack. Sole of my feet, finger knuckles, much better five days later. But still scary

First, I’m so sorry about your situation
Get well soon!  Life is short, but at least the weather doesn’t have to pile extra stress on our predicaments here.  The sky is blue, the sun shines, and we’re a lot more insulated from the world’s worries.  In Canada, it’s not fun dying alone in the middle of winter in the middle of a locked-down retirement residence — understandable factors nonwithstanding — so silver lining here.  

Cultural Change is Slow
First, let me be up front that I am somewhat centrist and have to toe the needle between the progressive left and the right.  But even right-wing friends in Kentucky love their cycle tracks along the waterfront, and the Big Four bridge too, beautifully lit in American colors at night with LED lights.  Very scenic.  Likewise, I hobnob with progressives all the time, and respect their way of life.

Here’s a story.  You know cycle-crazy Amsterdam?  

This is Amsterdam 1970 — it took 50 years to grow the cycle craze there:

38621FEE-C567-44D8-86D0-9DBFC9BF3F1F.thumb.jpeg.1a35c45ece22742dd032c441dd2e9320.jpeg

The bottom line is cultural change is slow.

But I’m a perfect example of the Ciclopisto influence.  We bought a house here because of the Ciclopisto.  I love having the Ciclopisto.  Sometimes I ride it everyday and sometimes 2 weeks pass without a ride.  But it influenced our decision to live here.

Multiply me by 50 years.  You get the idea.

Right now, we’re only ~3-4% into the cultural change.  If I drive the Cyclopisto, it’s easy to shake a fist “THEY STOLE MY LANE”.   Trust me, as a longtime driver — I UNDERSTAND YOU.  But, when I get the hell out of my car door, and bother to bicycle, I ride past literally 50 cyclists on some days when riding between Chapala and Ajijic.  Sometimes less.   Sometimes more.  I pay attention.

We have more exercise options, to get healthy — even if it’s just cycling 3 blocks on the Ciclopisto only once a month.   Many of my gringo have grown to appreciate it being thereanyway, even if it’s just an occasional recreational affair.

Remember, London 1666 you were your own insurance.  Fire stations only served homes that were insured.  There was no public-funded police either.  Then fire stations became socialist.  Even Trump capitalists love their socialist fire stations and police stations.   Public education didn’t even exist in 1666 and now it’s part of America society.  

Many of us Canadians just secretly roll our eyes at America’s distortion of the word “socialist” when there is no true capitalist society and there is no true socialist society.  It’s understandable, when certain countries’ school classrooms, televisions, and news teaches strongly distorted definitions.   Even Norway isn’t fully socialist, nor America is fully capitalist.  But both are great functioning economies that are important to the world. But these great American socialist goods were airbrushed away from the socialist definitions in American textbooks.  Even Labour moves of the 19th century (8 hours recreation, 8 hours leisure, 8 hours rest) was a shockingly socialist move, but it’s codified in American law as the 40 hour workweek while removing the word “socialist” from the textbooks of the cause of the 40 hour rule.

This goes for bike infrastructure.  I am pragmatic about goldilocks infrastructure.  

I recognize that 2 years later, more people have been helped by the cycle track than the loss of a few parking spots.  It’s actually saves a lot of time to park quickly on a side street than tons of time hunting for parking.  The fist-shaking on a lost car lane isn’t as strong around here than say, in some cities of Canada and America.  And most elderly who need downtown storefront access gets dropped off by taxi/family/etc.  The equilibrium gets hit rather quickly in the first few years, but it does take decades for cultural changes to flow.

Honestly, I’m not expecting Lakeside to be Amsterdam ever, but it will stay somewhere between “ugh, why is that painted unbarried bike lane wasting my driving road space” and “omg, amsterdam and copenhagen heaven for cyclists”.  I am happy with whatever balances out here now that we have a beautiful Ciclopisto, and hopefully reasonable extensions are done in certain select areas (e.g. one north-south links to malecons to avoid riding over bumpy cobblestone all the time).  Common sense prevails.   

So it all kinda balances out, long-term.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey GDouglas, I was stationed in the Netherlands, just maybe 2 hours north north-east of Amsterdam, and as I remember, there were many many people there riding bikes. And I can't ever remember seeing that many cars jammed on the street like you have in the photo you posted. :)    But maybe, I just don't remember :) 

EDIT I was stationed there in 1965-6   north of Zwolle, near Meppel.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, johanson said:

Hey GDouglas, I was stationed in the Netherlands, just maybe 2 hours north north-east of Amsterdam, and as I remember, there were many many people there riding bikes. And I can't ever remember seeing that many cars jammed on the street like you have in the photo you posted. :)    But maybe, I just don't remember :)  

It depends on what part -- Amsterdam had impressive bike infrastructure then -- but it wasn't as widespread.  

It's like National Capital Commision of Ottawa, Canada that went crazy with bike trails along the Rideau Canal in the 1960s-1970s when the ugly old canal-side railroads were removed, and was all turned into one giant linear park.  So Ottawa was the early bike capital of Canada. 

But people who went downtown bars never saw those bike trails (until the bike lanes arrived 10-20 years ago) -- they weren't used for commuting to work.    Bike infrastructure used to be concentrated along specific axises, rather than gridded all over the place.

Basically the equivalent of Amsterdam's suburbs looked like these one time (It's not those places where servicemembers might go to a bar at night with) --

Few foreigners visits boring suburbs -- that's the areas poorly served by bike infrastructure.  It would be more downtown, or some other area that was more likely well serviced by a few bike lanes.

It's the same "tread the familiar path" behavior (drive the route, bike the route, I see the world differently depending on whether I'm driving the Carterra, or bicycling the Ciclopisto).  

We love driving our familiar routes, visiting familiar bars during shore leave or vacation or whatever, walking familiar routes.  So we often miss quite a lot.  

Relevant on "slow" cultural change, here's a boring Amsterdam suburb far away from downtown, where vacationers/servicemembers rarely visit:

image.thumb.png.4fb5a75646532df2fc1431e8eba11c47.png

image.thumb.png.5b7323df1849669e5a0b7de76b09a352.png

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is a cultural change lakeside but its not toward bicycles, its toward autos.  Every Mexican lakeside feels he should own an automobile.  Number of Mexican's owning autos has grown tremendously in the last few years which has led to traffic jams.  Sure the tapatios and new arrivals have added to the problem but it is the additional home grown drivers who are adding to the traffic problems.  As for the cycle paths more and more people are using them for walking paths.  Every day I see people walking there dogs on them.  It's just a matter of time before a e-bike hits a dog and we will see what happens.  If its a Mexican dog, wellll.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, GDouglas said:

  

To be fair, road flow is much slower on the cobblestones, so people move too slowly south of Ciclopisto to really make helmets a mandatory thing.  But they should be mandatory on the Ciclopisto.  

Culturally I understand both the "Yes helmets" and "No helmets" crowds, whether you're riding a very stable bikeshare bike in slower-moving dedicated trails, or you're riding a motorcycle on 405 in Los Angeles.   Been there, done that.  Harleys are wonderful, but so is a bikeshare bike too.  The leisurely pace on a trail.   

As a centrist myself, it is silly to wave the helmet card to me without sufficient multiple-country university educated context in city planning sciences. 

With the proper education, medical statistics, and carcounter/bikecounter data, below a specific average corridor travel speed -- like a crowded multiuse trail where cyclists can no longer ride fast -- more people are saved by improved health of the lower helmetless friction (the ease of hopping onto a bike with fewer restrictions) than are killed/incapitated by accidents from not having a helmet on.   Because it's so convenient and so few rules to hop onto a bike.  They nerfed their infrastructure so much that it's hard to break the law as a cyclist because the cycle infrastructure was designed to be hard to break the rules (like racing through a red light or stop sign), like the removal of most stop signs for bicyclists -- it's mainly traffic signals for cyclists. 

Practically everybody obeys the signals, because otherwise you get killed by cars, and then sometimes even strong concrete-filled metal bollards raise motorized from the asphalt to block the cars while the bicyclists zoom through in a green lights. 

Those free democratic people over there voted strongly for nerf infrastructure so that it's hard to break rules no matter whether you bike or drive in their downtowns. 

If no stop signs for cyclists to annoyingly accidentally "roll through" -- now law broken.
If no cars can make it through a red light because of concrete bollards that rose from the street -- no law broken.  

Then everybody is safe there and fewer deaths, they nerfed their bike lanes so much that helmets are not needed for cyclists in that zone!   The wonderful wind blowing through the hair, make me want to bicycle more often anyway, and that feeds in itself, more people voting to improve cycle infrastructure.  Death rate falls more from exercise, than from death increase from lack of helmets.  The math checks out for certain Euro nerf infrastructure like that.

Big whoop, if I am cycling there, I don't want to wear a helmet, the law doesn't want me to anyway, bible-thumping the Gospel of Helmet is non-sequitur over there.  I'm not likely to die cycling in that fully protected corridor, unlike a Canadian "mere painted lane". -- in some Europe jursdictions, fewer-per-1000 \%) cyclists die helmetless there than car drivers dying in accidents! -- Looking at the honest unfiltered statistics, it's quite impressive how some jurisdictions nerfed their infra so much. 

(Aside -- It's not like every square inch of the country is like that.  The freeways are still beautiful there.  Some of them better than half of American freeways (Especially when you head towards Germany' Autobahn) -- but they don't cut through downtowns like 1960s North America bulldozing that electorates of the era voted for.  Even though freeways are important for commerce anyway (Trucking goods et al)... they just merely chose to move to different thresholds of how extensive road infrastructure became in urban cores)

Sure, maybe we don't want it in our home city (the "don't take away my car lane" feeling I understand too), but I respect that other city that went ahead anyway.  Or vice versa.  I can respect the different choices the respective free electorates of various countries love.

Even pedestrians respectfully stay out of the way, because of the culture.  Sure, it's okay to not want the infrastructure in an American city, but big gumption kudos to the other cities that have voted their own way, and I respect their democratic freedom on how they made their city to be.  

In those slow corridors that are protected away from cars most just get scruffs when you fall off a bike.  There's a line that exists where the helmet/nohelmet equilibrium exists, depending on which infrastructure you use.   Sure, I will always ride a helmet when riding in an unprotected Canada/America bike lane, or riding a motorcycle on asphalt, but helmets should not be mandatory for bicyclists in pure bike infrastructure of a small European town. 

It's a complex grand compromise of the Rube Goldberg way the world works in different parts of world, and how their free electorate have voted their cities to become. Being world-educated on urbanity of all kinds changes perspectives a lot.  You can tell that in my previous posts.

Countries are educated very different ways about their transportation needs.  I did a lot of business in Los Angeles area back in my day, plus attended extreme air sports events -- which brought me to that area.  So I have my time on good 'ol America freedom.  Yet I totally understand the amazing Amsterdam bike culture too, or the joys of Highway 66 to Las Vegas (done too), and the history of how the impressive 1939's GM Futurama Exhibit (not to be confused with the TV cartoon) at New York World Fair.  It wowed the world on a theoretical American Autobahn system that didn't yet exist (carbon copy of 1955's plan, but pre-war). 

That 1930s world's fair exhibit by General Motors was essentially a very beautiful billion-dollar corporate advertisement, inflation adjusted, by GM to America public and governments -- that directly evolved into the Eisenhower Freeway System that led to the modern freeway systems of North America that is today.  President Eisenhower was quoted as being directly inspired by this very exhibit in 1939.  Transport culture is very different everywhere and shouldn't be colored by political affiliation.  Every country comes from different perspectives of freedoms, often educated to their Joe Q Public in very different ways.  America's freedom is amazing.  Amsterdam's freedom is amazing.   Effective if you could backtrace North America's freeway infrastructure to a single big bang, it was that very 1939 exhibit.

Honestly, from this Canadian point of view, people fight too much over infrastructure changes with political polarization unnecessarily glued to each line-item.  But people hate change, and in some countries, politics happily weaponize that on both ends of the spectrum.  Ah well.  At least, Jalisco managed put some impressive consistency on Ciclopisto versus other infrastructure.

When I'm riding a beautiful Harley or Suzuki in Los Angeles -- helmet always.  (I'll be honest -- often I prefer some more compact ride like Suzuki, but I can certainly respect a Harley.  Blasphemy, I know.)

WHAAAAT!!! I posted a photo of a moto piloted by an adult with 3 kids hanging on all without helmets and suggested that we should be more worried about this than who is on the bike path. I have seen worse even on the highway and also accidents with who knows what outcomes. Who is this guy anyway and all of his extended diatribe on just about any subject here recently??? Here is just a sample from this post:

- more people are saved by improved health of the lower helmetless friction (the ease of hopping onto a bike with fewer restrictions) than are killed/incapitated by accidents from not having a helmet on. 

Then everybody is safe there and fewer deaths, they nerfed their bike lanes so much that helmets are not needed for cyclists in that zone! 

The math checks out for certain Euro nerf infrastructure like that.

Big whoop, if I am cycling there, I don't want to wear a helmet, the law doesn't want me to anyway, bible-thumping the Gospel of Helmet is non-sequitur over there.

Sure, it's okay to not want the infrastructure in an American city, but big gumption kudos to the other cities that have voted their own way, and I respect their democratic freedom on how they made their city to be. 

Yet I totally understand the amazing Amsterdam bike culture too, or the joys of Highway 66 to Las Vegas (done too), and the history of how the impressive 1939's GM Futurama Exhibit (not to be confused with the TV cartoon) at New York World Fair.  It wowed the world on a theoretical American Autobahn system that didn't yet exist (carbon copy of 1955's plan, but pre-war).

That 1930s world's fair exhibit by General Motors was essentially a very beautiful billion-dollar corporate advertisement, inflation adjusted, by GM to America public and governments -- that directly evolved into the Eisenhower Freeway System that led to the modern freeway systems of North America that is today. 

What is Nurf and Nurfed anyway...this hilarious!!! I am really getting worried about the affect of the virus here...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

    

Quote

The Ciclopisto is a done deal, and I do not think many people object to the regulations that are in place as to who or what is allowed on it. If people want to complain about real safety problems here, why not address this??? "We don't need no stinkin' helmets"!!!!

To be fair, road flow is much slower on the cobblestones, so people move too slowly south of Ciclopisto to really make helmets a mandatory thing.  But they should be mandatory on the Ciclopisto.  

Culturally I understand both the "Yes helmets" and "No helmets" crowds, whether you're riding a very stable bikeshare bike in slower-moving dedicated trails, or you're riding a motorcycle on 405 in Los Angeles.   Been there, done that.  Harleys are wonderful, but so is a bikeshare bike too.  The leisurely pace on a trail.   

As a centrist myself, it is silly to wave the helmet card to me without sufficient multiple-country university educated context in city planning sciences. 

With the proper education, medical statistics, and carcounter/bikecounter data, below a specific average corridor travel speed -- like a crowded multiuse trail where cyclists can no longer ride fast -- more people are saved by improved health of the lower helmetless friction (the ease of hopping onto a bike with fewer restrictions) than are killed/incapitated by accidents from not having a helmet on.   Because it's so convenient and so few rules to hop onto a bike.  They nerfed their infrastructure so much that it's hard to break the law as a cyclist because the cycle infrastructure was designed to be hard to break the rules (like racing through a red light or stop sign), like the removal of most stop signs for bicyclists -- it's mainly traffic signals for cyclists. 

Practically everybody obeys the signals, because otherwise you get killed by cars, and then sometimes even strong concrete-filled metal bollards raise motorized from the asphalt to block the cars while the bicyclists zoom through in a green lights. 

Those free democratic people over there voted strongly for nerf infrastructure so that it's hard to break rules no matter whether you bike or drive in their downtowns. 

If no stop signs for cyclists to annoyingly accidentally "roll through" -- now law broken.
If no cars can make it through a red light because of concrete bollards that rose from the street -- no law broken.  

Then everybody is safe there and fewer deaths, they nerfed their bike lanes so much that helmets are not needed for cyclists in that zone!   The wonderful wind blowing through the hair, make me want to bicycle more often anyway, and that feeds in itself, more people voting to improve cycle infrastructure.  Death rate falls more from exercise, than from death increase from lack of helmets.  The math checks out for certain Euro nerf infrastructure like that.

Big whoop, if I am cycling there, I don't want to wear a helmet, the law doesn't want me to anyway, bible-thumping the Gospel of Helmet is non-sequitur over there.  I'm not likely to die cycling in that fully protected corridor, unlike a Canadian "mere painted lane". -- in some Europe jursdictions, fewer-per-1000 \%) cyclists die helmetless there than car drivers dying in accidents! -- Looking at the honest unfiltered statistics, it's quite impressive how some jurisdictions nerfed their infra so much. 

(Aside -- It's not like every square inch of the country is like that.  The freeways are still beautiful there.  Some of them better than half of American freeways (Especially when you head towards Germany' Autobahn) -- but they don't cut through downtowns like 1960s North America bulldozing that electorates of the era voted for.  Even though freeways are important for commerce anyway (Trucking goods et al)... they just merely chose to move to different thresholds of how extensive road infrastructure became in urban cores)

Sure, maybe we don't want it in our home city (the "don't take away my car lane" feeling I understand too), but I respect that other city that went ahead anyway.  Or vice versa.  I can respect the different choices the respective free electorates of various countries love.

Even pedestrians respectfully stay out of the way, because of the culture.  Sure, it's okay to not want the infrastructure in an American city, but big gumption kudos to the other cities that have voted their own way, and I respect their democratic freedom on how they made their city to be.  

In those slow corridors that are protected away from cars most just get scruffs when you fall off a bike.  There's a line that exists where the helmet/nohelmet equilibrium exists, depending on which infrastructure you use.   Sure, I will always ride a helmet when riding in an unprotected Canada/America bike lane, or riding a motorcycle on asphalt, but helmets should not be mandatory for bicyclists in pure bike infrastructure of a small European town. 

It's a complex grand compromise of the Rube Goldberg way the world works in different parts of world, and how their free electorate have voted their cities to become. Being world-educated on urbanity of all kinds changes perspectives a lot.  You can tell that in my previous posts.

Countries are educated very different ways about their transportation needs.  I did a lot of business in Los Angeles area back in my day, plus attended extreme air sports events -- which brought me to that area.  So I have my time on good 'ol America freedom.  Yet I totally understand the amazing Amsterdam bike culture too, or the joys of Highway 66 to Las Vegas (done too), and the history of how the impressive 1939's GM Futurama Exhibit (not to be confused with the TV cartoon) at New York World Fair.  It wowed the world on a theoretical American Autobahn system that didn't yet exist (carbon copy of 1955's plan, but pre-war). 

That 1930s world's fair exhibit by General Motors was essentially a very beautiful billion-dollar corporate advertisement, inflation adjusted, by GM to America public and governments -- that directly evolved into the Eisenhower Freeway System that led to the modern freeway systems of North America that is today.  President Eisenhower was quoted as being directly inspired by this very exhibit in 1939.  Transport culture is very different everywhere and shouldn't be colored by political affiliation.  Every country comes from different perspectives of freedoms, often educated to their Joe Q Public in very different ways.  America's freedom is amazing.  Amsterdam's freedom is amazing.   Effective if you could backtrace North America's freeway infrastructure to a single big bang, it was that very 1939 exhibit.

Honestly, from this Canadian point of view, people fight too much over infrastructure changes with political polarization unnecessarily glued to each line-item.  But people hate change, and in some countries, politics happily weaponize that on both ends of the spectrum.  Ah well.  At least, Jalisco managed put some impressive consistency on Ciclopisto versus other infrastructure.

When I'm riding a beautiful Harley or Suzuki in Los Angeles -- helmet always.  (I'll be honest -- often I prefer some more compact ride like Suzuki, but I can certainly respect a Harley.  Blasphemy, I know.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...