New bike lanes on Trancas | Napa Valley Register

Home » News » Local

New bike lanes on Trancas

Thursday, July 09, 2009

Comment

The city of Napa will construct bike lanes along Trancas Street, giving cyclists a safer connection between Silverado Trail and Soscol Avenue.

Napa will build the bike lanes with a $100,000 state clean air grant administered by the Napa County Transportation and Planning Agency.

There are bike lanes on Soscol and on Silverado, while a trail at the Napa River carries cyclists south into the heart of town./Register

44 comment(s)

reason-ator wrote on Jul 9, 2009 12:14 AM:

" While I agree bike lanes are great, there are shoulders on that section of Tranca, as far as I can remember. I always manged to ride my bike down there with no problem ( except for the bridge over the creek- but it's only one lane wide now and there were two lanes of traffic when I got hit ).

But obviously, the State of California has lots of extra money to grant to projects such as this, even if we have to close the State Parks. "

JustAnotherManicMonday wrote on Jul 9, 2009 7:38 AM:

" 100k to paint some white lines on the road? What am I missing here? What does it take to setup a bike lane? "

sprklsunshine wrote on Jul 9, 2009 8:43 AM:

" It does seem to me that this could have been used somewhere else, like Trancas from 29 to Soscol, where there is NO room to ride a bike. But whatever; no one asked me first. "

commenter wrote on Jul 9, 2009 9:06 AM:

" More bike lanes... why? There are plenty of good working stop signs and traffic signals bike riders are already not "using". "

yessam99 wrote on Jul 9, 2009 9:28 AM:

" Bike lanes are great, but if you don't keep them clean of rocks and other road garbage, they are very unsafe. The bike lanes on Soscol (between Imola and Lincoln St.) are very dangerous. There's street lights out, rocks and garbage in the lanes, not to mention the railroad tracks that have never been maintained. Why can't the City of Napa use the street sweepers for bike lanes instead of only using them to clean the downtown streets? "

amazed wrote on Jul 9, 2009 9:30 AM:

" Now if we can just convince cyclists NOT to ride on roadways without bike lanes or wide shoulders ... like Hagen Road or First Avenue!!! "

reason-ator wrote on Jul 9, 2009 11:19 AM:

" .....and if we could just convince motorists not to drive on roadways unless they have lanes that are specifically designated as "automobiles only". But that would leave out trailers....... "

DannyK wrote on Jul 9, 2009 11:27 AM:

" I agree with " Just Another Manic--": I ride my bike on that road at least 4 times a week. $100K for white lines is rediculous: there's already a bike lane there and plenty of room, you just have to be very carefull crossing the river bridge. Take it slow and easy and as far to the right as possible for the 60'. "

That's Me wrote on Jul 9, 2009 11:35 AM:

" What is this about bicyclists "not 'using'" stop signs and traffic signals? I commute by bicycle, riding 8-20 miles nearly every day of the week, and not only do I observe the signals, I generally see other cyclists doing so as well.

Much more often, I see well-intentioned, but misinformed motorists who insist on stopping for me at an intersection when they are clearly the ones who have the right of way. It would be a lot easier if everyone just obeyed the rules of the road, but from my daily close observation, drivers are not any better at this than cyclists! "

napabicycler wrote on Jul 9, 2009 11:37 AM:

" . . . and if we could just convince motorists to not “shadow” bicyclists, or pass so closely that you can reach out and touch them . . . "

amazed wrote on Jul 9, 2009 12:30 PM:

" Reasonator -- huh? Thought roads were for cars. (Silly rabbit ... ) Are you referring to off-road enthusiasts? "

bonds007 wrote on Jul 9, 2009 12:56 PM:

" amazed: I agree 100%, I drive from Lake Berryessa & back Mon - Fri. I too am AMAZED that there aren't smashed up bicycle riders on a daily basis. There is no room, yet these masochists insist on riding up & down this roadway that has a speed limit of 55 mph! Blind corners abound, I know it's going to happen sometime, I just hope it's not me that hits one. "

reason-ator wrote on Jul 9, 2009 1:05 PM:

" amazed, you have demonstrated EXACTLY what the problem is.

Too mny people think roads are only for cars. There were roads LONG before the automobile was invented. And there were also bicycles long before automobiles were invented.

I am continually confused ( didn't wnat to say "amazed" right now.... ) that so many people have such animosity towards bicycles, and also motorcycles. Cyclists and motorcyclists very seldom kill automobile occupants, and yet the self-entitled owners of the road are the ones who are nearly always the killers ant THEY are the ones with the anger and resentment. Which pretty much illustrated why they are a problem, doesn't it ?

DMV says that bicycles are just as entitled to the roadways that you seem to want to claim as your own. Yes, the bicycles occasionally break the laws, but until car drivers aren't doing the same thing the anger really seems like petty jelously to me. I can't think of any other explanation that is less unflattering.

Please, consider sharing your road with other vehicles. Maybe some people will stay out of hospitals and morgues as a result. Is that an unreasonable expectation or request ?

Or better yet, get on a bike and ride it. You will probably be surprised at how much you've been missing in your 4-wheeled cage. It may even cause you to relax and lose the self-centeredness that makes people drive like they own the road. "

ureluis wrote on Jul 9, 2009 1:07 PM:

" oooooooo i wanna go after there done!!!! sound cool! "

amazed wrote on Jul 9, 2009 1:25 PM:

" (Sigh.) Here we go again. The car-versus-bicycle thing.

1. I have no animosity toward cyclists.
2. I have no problem sharing the road.
3. More people should ride instead of driving.

That being said, put yourself in this position: You're driving at a safe speed on Hagan Road or First Avenue, maybe 30 to 35 mph. You come around a corner, and you encounter a cyclist in your lane. S/he is in your lane because there is approximately 3" of pavement between the fog line and a drainage ditch. Another vehicle is headed toward you in the oncoming lane. It's a swerve-or-skid position that's just not safe for anyone.

I don't drive my car in the park. Please don't ride your bicycle in a traffic lane. "

MAGNUM439 wrote on Jul 9, 2009 2:07 PM:

" Hopefully the money will be spent on this project because I just read that the Mayor wants to spend $100k on improving business for downtown napa. "

ratfqur wrote on Jul 9, 2009 2:52 PM:

" Why is there so much hate from some of these motorists against cyclists? We’re only doing the right thing on so many levels that for some reason they lack the capability to understand that Napa is merely taking part in a new era of global awareness when they make these bike related decisions. Unfortunately we are now in the age of too many consumers consuming as they leave behind tons of pollution in the air while they are clogging up the streets with their big ol’ trucks and SUVs. These vehicles, by the way, are responsible for the shoulders of some of these roads to be in the condition they’re in from the excessive wear and tear. Get a bike. You’d be amazed how much less road rage you’ll have as you get to glide past all the motorists lined up in their hot sweaty cars while the cool breeze wisps around you as you reach the front of the intersection on a bicycle. You’d also be surprised to see that it will take you as long to get anywhere around town as it does in your big oversized ride. And if your ride does not seem oversized to you and you drive a big SUV then perhaps you are. Once you discover that you can now burn some calories and enjoy your existence by just plain being healthy, we’ll have even more healthier and happier people with a lot less traffic and whining. "

amazed wrote on Jul 9, 2009 4:41 PM:

" Ratfqur and Reasonator, all the "anger and resentment" and "road rage" in these comments is coming from cyclists.

I don't want to see anyone get hurt. Not me, not you on your bike, not the guy in the oncoming lane. Ride on roadways that are SAFELY shared by cars and bikes - that's all I'm saying. "

neonapan wrote on Jul 9, 2009 5:00 PM:

" Amazed: Instead of swerving or skidding when you encounter a cyclist with oncoming traffic approaching you might consider slowing down until it is safe to pass.

Often motorists pass uncomfortably close, obviously furious, and I will catch them at the next intersection. I usually wave to point out their folly. Sometimes I'm not so friendly. Unless you drive much faster than you say, there are no turns out there without time to slow down or stop.

The Avenues are amongst the safest streets to cycle on in Napa. I'll see you out there soon.

Some agro motorist interrupts nearly every ride, yelling obscenities, buzzing by too close, intentionally cutting us off, etc. Just a few words of advice: Many cyclists carry mace.

Cyclist are legally entitled to ride in the road. It's fun. You should try it.

SHARE THE ROAD. IT AIN'T YOURS. "

John Richards wrote on Jul 9, 2009 8:01 PM:

" napabicycler wrote: " . . . and if we could just convince motorists to not “shadow” bicyclists, or pass so closely that you can reach out and touch them."

The difference is that most of the cyclists I see on narrow or shoulderless roads appear to be out for recreation rather than necessity. If they want recreation, let them ride the wider roads that have bicycle lanes, instead of endangering themselves and motorists. Last time I checked, the cyclists weren't paying any road taxes, so who has more right to the traffic lanes? "

tangent wrote on Jul 9, 2009 9:06 PM:

" JR: The intent of the cyclist is not an issue in whether bicycles have equal access to roads. Bicycles have equal rights to ride in the middle of the lane if they wish. Also, shoulders are not bicycle lanes.

More right to the roads? Why don't you consult state vehicle code to answer you own question. It's pretty simple. "

reason-ator wrote on Jul 10, 2009 12:44 AM:

" amazed, perhaps I misread your cyclist-friendly welcome inviting cyclists to share your road. I apologize.

JR, I don't know where to start, because I'm not sure if you are intentionally acting like you don't understand, or are serious. But assuming you are right when you have intepreted the intent of the cyclist on the road ( strict transportation vs. recreation, or even something you may not have considered- a combination of the two ), put yourself in their place. If you WERE going to get on a bike and recreate, would you go into the hyperactivity of a city-like setting, with traffic coming from all direction driven by distracted drivers while you can see nothing but buildings ( if you DARE take your eye off of the roadways because you're looking for hazards and threatening vehicles ), or would you prefer to go out into the countryside looking for some idyllic scenery away from the hustle and bustle of city-life ? Who knows what you would do, but I know where I would choose to go if I had a choice.

And your presumption that cyclists aren't paying any road taxes is so short-sighted I have to chuckle to myself every time I think of it. But assuming you are going to use the amount of road taxes paid to determine who has more right to the traffic lanes, let's do so. How many vehicles do you personally pay road taxes on ?

Last time I checked, I pay road taxes on a pick-up truck with commercial plates, a large van, three cars, two trailers, and two motorcycles ? Do you have as much right to use the traffic lanes as I do ? Or doesn't it matter anymore ? "

ratfqur wrote on Jul 10, 2009 8:13 AM:

" JR, I have cars as well as bicycles. I pay road taxes just like everybody else even though I choose to leave the cars in my driveway as much as possible. You would never guess by looking at me that most of the time it is for necessity so you can assume all you want. When the bike lane disappears and turns into a dilapidated shoulder I may have to merge into the road with the aid of my rearview mirror. I don’t just stop and give up because the city didn’t provide a nice clean bike path for me everywhere I go. I have just as much right to the road as any motorist. I can ride both where cars can go as well as where cars can’t go. Why do these facts bother so many motorists? If this means you need to pay more attention when you drive, I’m really sorry. We all have advantages and disadvantages on the road. People need to just accept them and leave the selfishness at home. "

amazed wrote on Jul 10, 2009 9:11 AM:

" Wow, Neonapan, mace? Again, it's the cyclists exhibiting all the road rage here, not motorists.

Sarcasm notwithstanding, Reason-ator, my point remains: Some roads cannot be shared safely. It's not always going to be possible to slow from 35 or 40 mph (a safe speed for motorists on country roads, I think) to zero in order to avoid a cyclist in the traffic lane. But hey, I'm the one in the vehicle, so I'm willing to try. "

ratfqur wrote on Jul 10, 2009 9:41 AM:

" Attention all bike haters. These roads belong to everybody, not only people who would like to make a positive difference, but lazy drivers who waste gas and create bad traffic situations as well. If you see a bike ahead of you in the roadway, give them plenty of room. If you have a clear left lane to merge into, do so. This kind of consideration does not go unnoticed by cyclists. When you clearly have enough room to provide enough space for a bicyclist and you still fly by within reach, we can tell you have issues and we do feel threatened. People are so bold when they are in the safety of their cars. People don’t yell and flip each other off when they are walking down a busy sidewalk or even if they almost collide on bicycles. Usually they act decent and polite towards each other because they aren’t in a safe car where they can roll up the windows and speed away after flipping out. Get on a bike. It might make you a better and more tolerant person towards others. "

sprklsunshine wrote on Jul 10, 2009 11:03 AM:

" And please don’t assume all bicyclists ride in packs of 5 out into the traffic lanes. Or that all bicyclists only want to ride Mt. Veeder and Atlas Peak, and any other road where there isn’t enough room for a car AND a bike. I ride a bike regularly; I don’t ride in a pack, I have a rear-view mirror so I can keep an eye out for cars behind me and scoot over more if I can. And you couldn’t pay me enough to ride Mt. Veeder, Atlas Peak, Butts Canyon, or many of the other roads in Napa that are obviously unsafe for bike riders.

Try to have a little consideration for others in the world around you; it will only make things more pleasant for everyone. "

reason-ator wrote on Jul 10, 2009 11:12 AM:

" anyone remember the Basic Speed LAW ? The one where it says you should drive at a speed that is safe for ALL conditions ?

If you KNOW there may be bicycles on the road, and you KNOW they are legally entitled to be there, and you KNOW they may be around the corner, and you KNOW there may be an oncoming vehicle in the other lane ( as you have admitted can happen with your hypothetical situation ), you are violating the Basic Speed Law if you are driving so fast that you can not safely deal with and avoid all of those obstacles.

As far as the Mace, I have been bullied by people who feel as if their vehicle size will force me to yield, when often there is no where to yield to. I have been followed by a truck full of young kids looking for a fight for no reason. I suspect many motorists lousy attitude ( pleas of innocenece not withstanding ) arise because they feel comfortable and safe in their steel safety cages, while a cyclist is almost naked and vulnerable. Trying to deflect the obvious road rage of motorists and place it on the defenseless cyclists SHOWS why some cyclists feel they need to carry Mace for self-defense. You can try to call it any other thing you want, but most motorists carry a two-ton battering ram with them into road rage battles CONSTANTLY, and to scream about a 12 0z. can as an offensive weapon while guiding a tow-ton projectile into a confrontation is like Goliath claiming David had an unfair advantage. "

amazed wrote on Jul 10, 2009 11:34 AM:

" So all vehicles on all roads should drive at a speed no greater than the average bicycle, because the crystal ball on the dashboard tells us there might be a bicycle around the corner.

Read the basic speed law again. "No person shall drive a vehicle [which you say includes a bicycle, right?] ... at a speed which endangers the safety of persons or property." If a bicycle can't be operated in a traffic lane at a speed which doesn't endanger anyone (including the cyclist), then the cyclist is breaking the law, not the motorist. "

reason-ator wrote on Jul 10, 2009 12:16 PM:

" you know, amazed, look at how you directed this thread.

I made a comment on topic saying I thought bike lanes on Trancas was an ill-advised idea. I'm sure you would have agreed.

You followed up with a hostile, off-topic remark about something completely different. And soon after, you are talking about the hostility of bicycle riders. amazing, and illustrative.

I still can't understand the hostility motorists have towards cyclists, but more and more I am seeing behaviour that convinces me it's realistic. "

amazed wrote on Jul 10, 2009 1:55 PM:

" Sigh. Again.

Reason-ator, I'm totally in favor of bike lanes because they allow cyclists and motorists to share the road safely. That's the point I've tried numerous times to make. (I might, however, question the cost. Seems like this could be done for less than $100,000)

No hostility here, just a common-sense approach to safety. I would think some cyclists would agree.

Love to discuss this further, but I've got to go wash the SUV. "

Praetorian wrote on Jul 10, 2009 6:36 PM:

" This valley is wonderful for bike riding, that's why people come from all over the world to ride here. Not all cyclists care to stay in town around traffic, exhaust fumes and noise. I don't hear anyone complaining about sharing the road with slow moving agricultural vehicles, which take up more room are far more obstructive to line of sight and definitely more dangerous to pass. It's about cultural attitude. Here in this country the car rules the roadways. I have ridden extensively in Spain, France, Germany, Italy and England. I must say for the most part right of way is yielded to cyclists, gracefully. Even in the Swiss Alps. The danger to riding rural roads in this valley is the reluctance of some auto drivers to accept the two wheeled culture. Both horsepower and pedal power. I ride both and it only takes a few resentful pilots to endanger all those who use the roadways. Any vehicle operator should be prepared for a cyclist to be around any corner on any rural road, particularly when the weather is beautiful, AND YIELD THE RIGHT OF WAY. Gracefully. It's just a matter of common sense. "

Praetorian wrote on Jul 10, 2009 7:23 PM:

" I would like to inform anyone who doesn't already know about the Napa County Bicycle Coalition (NCBC): a non-profit whose mission is to make bicycling in Napa County convenient and pleasant. Good article in the most recent NV Marketplace Magazine. More information @ www.NapaBike.org. Cheers! "

antipc wrote on Jul 10, 2009 7:32 PM:

" The wanna be Lance Armstrong's are giving the good guys a bad name. Our country roads were not built for cyclists to share with vehicles. Even France closes their roads to vehicles for the tour.

If cyclists want respect, loose the arrogant attitude & start giving some.

The out-of-town weekend warriors are a serious problem & should be cited by law enforcement with no less vigor than a drunk driver would be. "

Praetorian wrote on Jul 10, 2009 8:36 PM:

" France closes roads for the peloton for short periods of time and in sections. They recognize that the revenues generated by the fans represent a substantial sum for the towns and villages along the route. The free international advertising also draws additional off season visitors and revenue to the area after The Tour. It is a symbiotic relationship.
I lived and trained in New England for a time and had a fateful encounter with an individual that shared many of your views. He, unfortunately as it turns out, learned that courts award judgments against motorists that act on those views. I would caution anyone inclined to such behavior that a moments "inconvenience" is worth
avoiding the liability incurred by their acting out.
I can't cite how many times I've narrowly avoided a collision due to a driver absorbed in a cell phone conversation while operating a vehicle. This is a serious problem that should be cited by law enforcement with the same vigor that a drunk driver would be. Nor can I tell you how many times I have been run into the curb at a right hand turn because a driver was inattentive or in a hurry. Or how about the driver that thinks "it's only a bicycle", a bicycle that happens to be going 20 or 25 sometimes 30mph, speeds ahead to make a right hand turn in front of them. So you might say the knife cuts both ways. "

John Richards wrote on Jul 11, 2009 12:00 AM:

" In spite of the arrogant bleats from the cyclists, the cold hard fact is that the roads are paid for by taxes on motor vehicles and the fuel they use. As such, the motorist has more of a moral right to the use of that road, in spite of what the DMV handbook may say.

Many of the curvy scenic roads around Napa are simply unsafe for cyclists. Additionally, to impede the flow of traffic deliberately is against the law. Why do you suppose they don't allow mopeds on the freeway?

I'm all in favor of bike lanes. Ride your bikes where the bike lanes are. "

reason-ator wrote on Jul 11, 2009 12:59 AM:

" JR, you have ignored the fact that I have paid MORE to use the roads than you have while you bleat ignorantly about arrogant bleating from cyclists. But I'm glad that you feel that I, as a tax-paying motorist, have MORE of a moral right to the use of that road. Thank you.

To reward you for recognizing my GREATER moral right to use the road, I will allow you to share it if you can do so with compassion and concern for your fellow human being.

amazed, sigh again indeed. Your common-sense approach to safety apparently, as you have indicated, includes the need for a crystal ball. If you are going to insist that you can't drive as safely as other people manage to drive every day without a crystal ball, perhaps having a discussion about common sense isn't a discussion you want to have, as it's more important to win a discussion than it is to consider other people's safety. I'm disappointed and saddened.

Really, sharing the road is something that Americans really seem to have a problem with. I don't understand it. The self-entitlement Americans seem to feel because they "own the road" is selfish, considering that other Americans ALSO own the road. "

Praetorian wrote on Jul 11, 2009 10:08 AM:

" That tears it. Unbelievable! What the hell does a MORAL right have to do with the rule of law and the use of a PUBLIC roadway?
This rigid, inflexible, unwilling thinking is the problem here...on both sides. This "problem" is not going to go away. As a matter of fact, for drivers, the situation is going to worsen. I can guarantee that more cyclists are going to hit the roads. Bicycle clubs will be using the roads for training as well as sponsored events such as racing. Eco tourism is on the rise and the Napa Valley is going to be a significant destination. In the course of those events will come money, organization, the lobby and exertion of influence. Then where will the hard cases be? Get educated, be aware and everyone divest yourselves of outdated modes of thinking. Have a little damn consideration for each other. "

Praetorian wrote on Jul 11, 2009 10:54 AM:

" Unbelievable! What does a MORAL right have to do with the rule of law and the use of a PUBLIC roadway?
This rigid, inflexible, unwilling to concede, thinking is the problem here...on both sides. This "problem" is not going to go away. As a matter of fact, for drivers, the situation is going to worsen. I can guarantee that more cyclists are going to hit the roads. Bicycle clubs will be using the roads for training as well as sponsored events such as racing. Eco tourism is on the rise and the Napa Valley is going to be a significant destination. In the course of those events will come money, organization, the lobby and exertion of influence. Then where will those hardliners be? Get educated, be aware and everyone divest yourselves of outdated modes of thinking. Show a little consideration for each other. "

busymom wrote on Jul 11, 2009 11:19 AM:

" Thats me....Who cares how many hours you ride your bike around Napa.I am sick and tired of bike riders running through the stop signs on Terrace and the five way light on Coombsville-Silverado. "

John Richards wrote on Jul 11, 2009 7:42 PM:

" Reason-ator wrote: 'you have ignored the fact that I have paid MORE to use the roads than you have."

How could you possibly know that? Your statement is pure conjecture.

" I'm glad that you feel that I, as a tax-paying motorist, have MORE of a moral right to the use of that road."

More than who else? Your statement is incomplete. You failed to address the fact that morally the bicyclist has no right to that road, paid for by motorists. "

reason-ator wrote on Jul 12, 2009 12:25 AM:

" OK, junior. Since trees aren't allowed to grow near airports by the FAA, people don't go fishing on dry rocks. You therefore have no moral right to assume what is moral or not, because my logic is now faultier than yours. "

Bike To Work wrote on Jul 12, 2009 1:34 PM:

" $100,000 sounds like a lot for restripping the road but it cost $150,000 for about 50 feet of sidewalk by the liquor store on Trancas. Wish we could get sidewalks on Lincoln Ave as well as Coombsville by Silverdo Jr High. We need bike lanes on all of Trancas and other high volume roads. "

5th generation napan wrote on Jul 13, 2009 4:26 PM:

" God its the same old record people.

Yah, I hate bicyclist that ride wide, and run stop signs, I hate cars that dont look, drive to fast, "run stop lights", I hate motorcycles driving between moving cars to pass, I have skate boarders and roller skaters, and in-line skaters that use the street, I hate pedestrians that walk to slow, J walk, that yell and make too much noise, I hate people riding horses on the road, I hate wheel chairs, rabbits, seqways, I hate animals that dont use the crosswalk, I hate the police going to fast to get to an emergency call.

I hate, I hate I hate. Its a broken record people.

What ever happened to I like this activity, be safe be cautious and look out for the other guy, and enjoy life.

Life is too short. Smile at someone and solve a small problem today and it will mushroom into something good. "

amazed wrote on Jul 13, 2009 5:18 PM:

" I'd be interested in hearing from anyone who attended the cyclists' class today. Did they cover cycling on country roads with no defined bike paths? "

Join the conversation

*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login? (requires cookies)
	Forgot Your Password?

Create an account

Comment Guidelines

The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.

What gets your comment posted?

• Staying on topic

• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less

• Avoiding name-calling

• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger

What gets your comment deleted?

• Personal attacks

• Derogatory remarks

• Name-calling of any sort

• Going off-topic

• Hate speech

• Racially-insensitive comments

• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict

• Posting e-mail addresses

• Posting comments of a commercial nature

• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS

• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.

The fine print

- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.

- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.

- Comments may take several hours to be posted.

- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.

- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.

- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.

Search: