Jump to content
"The Idaho Stop acknowledges the role of momentum and inertia in cycling — it keeps you rolling"
"Making bicycling easier and safer encourages people to choose this eco-friendly method of transportation"
"Because bikes pass through intersections more quickly, the overall flow of traffic improves — that should make motorists happy."
"Reduces the costs to government by eliminating the need to pay for extra sensing equipment to detect bicycles at intersections"
"Cyclists visually “clearing” the intersection before the light turns green reduces the potential for collisions in the intersection"
A few reasons why the Idaho Law Should be adopted across Colorado:
"Cyclists are out in front of traffic. It increases cyclist visibility to motorists, which in turn allows drivers to operate their vehicles more conscientiously"
Please educate yourselves before condemning what has worked really well in other states and even other cities in Colorado. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop http://bikeleague.org/content/bike-law-university-idaho-stop
"NOT a California Stop: Since the Idaho Stop is a legal maneuver, it shouldn’t be confused with the practice of motorist rolling stops, also known as the “California stop.” This practice by a motor vehicle is never in accordance with the law and you will be ticketed or cause a crash."
I am certain mountain biking has not become unpopular.
I don't have their data (not sure they even have it), but I do know that there are many new hotels in the process of being built in Moab (one just completed on main street, I heard two more have broke ground and at least two more are approved or fighting over details on the approval). I have been down there 99% of this late summer, fall and now into winter. There are still bikes riding the trails down here. I have been going to Moab for the past 14 years or so and I can assure you that even with their significant increase in the number of trails they have built, all of their trails are seeing significant use. Eventually I may find time to get that data, but I have to focus put more of my time into my personal stuff right now. There is no doubt in my mind that Steamboat (if it gets out of its own way), will benefit significantly from the trails project. There are many things that those involved could do to improve on what is being done, but what Gary and Tony suggested is not one of them. If anything, the chamber survey (if correct), points to other cycling being down, not the cycling on trails. I am very confident in that. Off the top of my head, MG sees about 150 counts/day and about 85% of those are cyclist. NPR was about 200 counts/day. The stables re-route (not 2A funded) is somewhere in the 100-150 counts/day. Just looking at this summer that is a cost to the city for the construction of about $0.06/count. Some users might go up and down and we don't know the exact number yet. The couple counters that were spot checked had about a 17% under count based on people being too close together or side by side when they pasted the counter. The bigger trail study that takes more than volunteer time to produce should answer all your questions and more once it happens.
Last login: Wednesday, December 21, 2016
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2017 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.
Tablet version |