Red alert on the Drag

dougmc · 2013-10-28 22:57:13

I don't spend much time there at 8am. What was it like before this change at 8am? I imagine that if it's so horrible now that it probably wasn't so great before either.

m1ek · 2013-10-29 10:59:05

dougmc wrote:

I don't spend much time there at 8am. What was it like before this change at 8am? I imagine that if it's so horrible now that it probably wasn't so great before either.

It was fine before. Pedestrians didn't stand in the bike lane because they had to go past a row of parked cars just to get to it; it was clear that the bike lane was part of the street and not the sidewalk.

Cars parking were a pain before - and people exiting parked cars are a pain now; that's pretty much a wash.

Intersections were a small pain before - and a much bigger pain now.

But as far as pedestrians being in the bike lane, I can't remember EVER seeing one in the years I've been driving down this corridor in the morning rush. I bet there's been one or two but the fact that I can't remember one is telling.

So far I've gone down the corridor about 20 times since the facility was finished (to its present condition) - I don't drive this way every day but do about a third of the time; and every single time there have been at least 1 pedestrian standing (not moving) in the bike lane at some point between 24th and 21st (for some reason south of 21st doesn't seem to be a problem so far). There have been at least a few pedestrians crossing that bike lane without looking backwards for cyclists on every trip. On bad mornings, there's far more of both; with an eastbound cyclist stopped blocking the whole bike lane for good measure.

Again, this has to do with the mass movement of pedestrians from west to east in the morning rush. You guys who keep saying this isn't so bad because there's only one or two guys in the way when you go through at noon aren't getting it.

McChris · 2013-10-29 17:29:40

Mike, I generally agree with your criticism of the cycletrack on SB Guadalupe, but your assertion that "Pedestrians didn't stand in the bike lane because they had to go past a row of parked cars just to get to it; it was clear that the bike lane was part of the street and not the sidewalk." is somewhat untrue. At the West Mall crossing, there was no car parking in the very broad crosswalk area, although the buses did stop there. At the corners of 21st and 24th, there was also space clear of cars between the street corners and the bike lanes. It was certainly more clear that the bike lane was part of the roadway and pedestrians generally didn't walk out into the roadway until the walk signal went on.

Re:Undergrads losing their sense of space while on smartphones. This is just an annoying problem all over the campus area. It's just as annoying for campus pedestrians like me and motorists. I imagine UTPD will start paying attention once a kid is mugged or assaulted when they're spaced out on their phone.

There's all kinds of bad roadway behavior on the Drag and in West Campus. My office is now in West Campus, and I hear colleagues complain about kids ignoring the signals entirely and walking into the roadway. I'm pretty fastidious about my walking between there and campus proper, but a day doesn't go by when I have to be assertive with a motorist refusing to yield the crosswalk.

One thing cyclists do that's really annoying for me as a pedestrian is running the red light at the West Mall crossing and at the four-way reds on Dean Keeton. It's usually fixiebros flying through those lights and weaving through pedestrians at speed. It can be a little spooky, and I find it aggravating since it doesn't put a good public face on cycling.

I think the facility is designed poorly in a variety of ways. At the bus stop in front of the Co-op, if you're exiting from the rear door (like you're supposed to) you have to turn left to exit the island. For busy buses like the 1s and 3, there is invariably a wad of people trying to board the bus, so riders are stuck in a tight crowd on the island. The island is oriented in the other direction at 21st Street, which is just confusing. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that CapMetro didn't think through how riders would get off the island.

Anyway, I don't think this facility was a good idea. In the near term, I think the painted-in pedestrian islands at the West Mall and 21st St should be taken out since sidewalk congestion at those spots wasn't all that bad to begin with.

AusTexMurf · 2013-10-31 00:18:47

Changing Lanes: Austin’s Cycle Tracks
http://bikeaustin.org/education/changin … le-tracks/
http://bikeaustin.org/wp-content/upload … 00x750.png

What Are Cycle Tracks?
Cycle tracks, also called “green lanes,” are separated bicycle facilities that run alongside a roadway. Unlike regular bike lanes, cycle tracks are typically separated from auto traffic by a physical barrier, such as parked cars, bollards, a landscaped buffer, or a curb.
Why Is The City Of Austin Building Them?
A 2013 study shows that over half of Austinites are interested in bicycling to get around Austin, but are concerned about mixing with high-speed motor vehicle traffic. For these people, a line of paint on the street isn’t enough to get them onto a bike. These protected bikeways make bicycling along major streets comfortable and convenient for people of all ages and abilities, and encourage more people to ride bikes. Austin is one of the fastest growing cities in the country. Our major corridors can no longer fit more cars during peak commute times, so our city is improving mobility through transit, walking, and bicycling. However, with only 2% of work commute trips by bicycle, Austin is nowhere near reaching the full potential of bicycling.
Comfortable, All Ages and Abilities Bikeway Network
The City of Austin is taking steps to build an all-ages-and-abilities bikeway network connecting Austin via quiet neighborhood streets, via urban trails, and on major streets via “cycle tracks.” An all-ages-and-abilities bikeway network will allow more people to ride safely and comfortably from home to work, shop, and play. Convenient and seamless bikeway connections to bus and rail stations will expand Austin’s mobility options even further, making bicycling an everyday part of the lives of even more Austinites. Look for existing and upcoming cycle tracks on Rio Grande Street in West Campus, 4th Street next to the Convention Center, 3rd Street across downtown, Bluebonnet Lane, Barton Springs Road next to the Palmer Event Center, Pedernales Street, Mueller Boulevard, Berkman Drive, and Guadalupe Street next to UT at Austin.

Last edited by AusTexMurf (2013-10-31 00:19:54)

AusTexMurf · 2013-10-31 09:28:21

m1ek wrote:

The claim that cyclists interested in actually getting somewhere with some speed can just take the lane as before is naive. Just as I was honked at frequently for taking the lane on SCB after the bike lane was turned into that shared monstrosity, so will people be honked at (or worse) on Guadalupe for taking the lane. The (or worse) is because the investment of public dollars into a cycling facility is far more obvious here than there; and motorists' ire will be proportionally worse.
I fully expect eventual trouble with the police telling cyclists they MUST use the cycletrack - it's as far right as practicable, after all.

Naive, hardly. Do it everyday. Experienced, I would say.
And I won't be preoccupied by what you or other drivers might or might not be thinking when I am actively cycling in these busy areas used by autos, busses, cyclists and pedestrians. Other than anticipating others' moves in the traffic flow, based on patterns observed. My focus will be on moving through, quickly and safely in these dense multi-use areas. Been cycling in this town for more than 20 years. And pedicabbing for 10. Spent LOTS of time in lanes playing in traffic, operating in dense pedestrian/cycling zones such as ut football games, ACL, halloween, SXSW, etc.. And cycling in san antonio, houston, dallas/ft. worth, new orleans, baton rouge, memphis, san francisco, washington d.c., and other places much less bike friendly than austin in that time.

Remember, this is guadalupe.
We should discourage motorists from flying through this zone in their autos everyday.
Just not what we want for our community, especially around UT.

Let them honk, then !
Woohoo.
Maybe we need a big sign on the drag, maybe permanent installation around the new cycle track ?

"Honk, If You Love Bikes !"

If I hear you honking as you drive on Guadalupe, mike, I will be sure to smile and wave to you...
See you downtown, mr. brown, if auto traffic is backed up and nasty, I'll be there before you.

Last edited by AusTexMurf (2013-11-01 20:28:01)

AusTexMurf · 2013-11-01 17:49:53

Leads me back to what you pointed out early on, m1ek.
The original post and the criticism of the facility, by you, is quite illegitimate.
Because...

Which is really the largest traffic problem on guadalupe or many other central austin streets ?

The developing design of the cycle track (bike facilities in general), cyclists operating in the lane, capmetro rapid and their design, the busses themselves, pedestrians, or autos (oftentimes single occupant) ???
Obvious answer,
AUTOS.
You are part of the biggest problem on guadalupe.
The pedestrians belong, clearly.
The busses belong certainly. One of the only public transportation options available here, however flawed. Moves quite a few bodies.
Good on all the folks riding their bikes, where they choose to ride them, excepting sidewalks.
Autos are just an existing hazard, hopefully lessening in this picture, which we all have to work around.
The drag would be much nicer without them.

This street and others in central austin,
need to continue in their auto diets.
For so many reasons.

However, the discussion and criticism of this bicycle facility have stirred at least a little interest.
And possibly to facilitate faster improvements to the cycle track and the different types of intersections, markings, and signage ?

Last edited by AusTexMurf (2013-11-01 21:49:33)

dougmc · 2013-11-02 00:20:24

AusTexMurf wrote:

Which is really the largest traffic problem on guadalupe or many other central austin streets?

Well, the obvious answer is ... traffic.

Picking the largest portion of that traffic and putting it in all caps -- AUTOS -- doesn't really do anything to help the situation. We know there's more people in cars than on foot or bicycle in most of the city. You seem to think that the answer to the (or a problem) is getting them out of their autos, but what if they like it the way things are? The motorists greatly outnumber the cyclists, and they generally see themselves more as motorists than pedestrians even if they do have to get out of their car and walk from time to time.

You are part of the biggest problem on guadalupe.
The pedestrians belong, clearly.
The busses belong certainly. One of the only public transportation options available here, however flawed. Moves quite a few bodies.
Good on all the folks riding their bikes, where they choose to ride them, excepting sidewalks.
Autos are just an existing hazard, hopefully lessening in this picture, which we all have to work around.

And yet the autos belong as well, just as clearly. The roads were clearly made mostly with them in mind, with some thought generally given to pedestrians and cyclists as well.

Actually, I would argue that on the drag, in front of the co-op -- there's more pedestrians than autos. So does that mean that PEDESTRIANS are the largest traffic problem there, and should be curbed somehow? I wouldn't say yes to the first part, but not the second part, but that seems to be where your logic is going.

And really, as flawed as Capital Metro itself may be with regard to the rest of the city ... the UT shuttle service works pretty well. I'm not really saying that Capital Metro made it right -- the shuttle service was good before they took it over too -- but it's not something that's difficult to get right -- after all, serving a dense area like UT is a lot easier than serving an entire city.

The drag would be much nicer without them.

"This job would be great if it wasn't for the frickin' customers!"

This street and others in central austin,
need to continue in their auto diets.
For so many reasons.

Not quite a haiku, but sort of looks like one at first.

Jack · 2013-11-04 14:37:30

AusTexMurf wrote:

Which is really the largest traffic problem on guadalupe or many other central austin streets ?

Perhaps you are heading toward suggesting that Guadalupe from Dean Keeton to MLK should be a "bicycle boulevard?"

AusTexMurf · 2013-11-04 14:41:16

Jack wrote:

AusTexMurf wrote:
Which is really the largest traffic problem on guadalupe or many other central austin streets ?
Perhaps you are heading toward suggesting that Guadalupe from Dean Keeton to MLK should be a "bicycle boulevard?"

Excellent idea, would love to see it happen.
Bicycles, pedestrians, anything but autos, would be nice.
But, the making it happen, the agreement, will be a tough sell.
Ask m1ek.

And, to respond to doug...
Should have used the word 'transportation' in place of 'traffic'.

Last edited by AusTexMurf (2013-11-05 04:11:29)

btrettel · 2013-11-04 20:35:50

I have mixed feelings about this cycle track. While on one hand, I do like that it makes cycling more attractive, I think parts are bad. The conflicts with pedestrians are one thing, but I suspect they'll die down at least a bit as folks get used to the cycle track.

Especially bad is the transition near MLK from the far right to the center. I think it's only a matter of time before a distracted driver kills a cyclist there. I'm thinking when I plan to go farther south on Guadalupe, I'll take the lane the entire time to avoid that transition entirely. I'm not sure what the best way to improve this section is if the cycle track must stay there, but I do think it can be improved.

Another issue is that the cycle track seems to make cycling on it a little too attractive. I've seen several cyclists going the wrong way there. Anyone else notice this? Here's a video of one of them. I stopped to talk to another. They said the distance was so short that it seemed most convenient. I asked them why they didn't walk if the distance was short, and they didn't really give me an answer.

rich00 · 2013-11-05 12:03:05

btrettel wrote:

Especially bad is the transition near MLK from the far right to the center. I think it's only a matter of time before a distracted driver kills a cyclist there. I'm thinking when I plan to go farther south on Guadalupe, I'll take the lane the entire time to avoid that transition entirely. I'm not sure what the best way to improve this section is if the cycle track must stay there, but I do think it can be improved.

I mentioned this problem at the BAC meeting when we were discussing this project over the summer. My concern was dismissed by everyone vocal enough.

It is indeed dangerous. Drivers will not yield to cyclists there because they designed the road striping to allow seamless easy flow of auto traffic to the right turn lane. It happens all the time at Dean Keaton/35. Green paint means nothing to many drivers.

Watch your back and ride as if you are invisible.

Jack · 2013-11-05 13:20:26

rich00 wrote:

btrettel wrote:
Especially bad is the transition near MLK from the far right to the center. *** I'm not sure what the best way to improve this section is if the cycle track must stay there, but I do think it can be improved. [also, wrongway cycling]

I mentioned this problem at the BAC meeting when we were discussing this project over the summer. My concern was dismissed by everyone vocal enough.
It is indeed dangerous. Drivers will not yield to cyclists there because they designed the road striping to allow seamless easy flow of auto traffic to the right turn lane. It happens all the time at Dean Keaton/35. Green paint means nothing to many drivers.
Watch your back and ride as if you are invisible.

Cycle track riding is a way to make bicyclists invisible, effectively. The foreseeable side effect of contraflow riders in the "safer" tracks is one more example of how wrong-headed the idea is--too many intersections to make something like that safe to a degree comparable to what was already on that street. I have little confidence that it could be improved enough to put it into the 'good idea' zone.

MichaelBluejay · 2013-11-05 13:35:22

rich00 wrote:

Drivers will not yield to cyclists there because they designed the road striping to allow seamless easy flow of auto traffic to the right turn lane. It happens all the time at Dean Keaton/35. Green paint means nothing to many drivers.

Bingo. Drivers frequently don't yield to me at Dean Keaton/35, despite the green paint and signage. And two different drivers *accelerating* when my wife tried to cross was the final straw for her, and why she won't bike any more.

Jack · 2013-11-05 16:17:53

MichaelBluejay wrote:

rich00 wrote:
Drivers will not yield to cyclists there because they designed the road striping to allow seamless easy flow of auto traffic to the right turn lane. It happens all the time at Dean Keaton/35. Green paint means nothing to many drivers.
Bingo. Drivers frequently don't yield to me at Dean Keaton/35, despite the green paint and signage. And two different drivers *accelerating* when my wife tried to cross was the final straw for her, and why she won't bike any more.

It is true there (as it will be on Guadalupe) that the paint won't help much, if any. For the DK/35 underpass (both directions) I have found it better to move left slightly out of the bike lane, travel in a straight line, and avoid by some distance the green paint. I've never had a car pass me too close for comfort doing it that way. The painted 'facility' defies normal traffic movements which leads to wrong decisions for cyclists and motorists alike. It was better before the paint was done (I lived on French Pl. and LaFayette in 3 different places over the span of a dozen years) and also lived north of 38-1/2. Rode that underpass often.

rich00 · 2013-11-06 12:43:27

MichaelBluejay wrote:

rich00 wrote:
Drivers will not yield to cyclists there because they designed the road striping to allow seamless easy flow of auto traffic to the right turn lane. It happens all the time at Dean Keaton/35. Green paint means nothing to many drivers.
Bingo. Drivers frequently don't yield to me at Dean Keaton/35, despite the green paint and signage. And two different drivers *accelerating* when my wife tried to cross was the final straw for her, and why she won't bike any more.

I'm not surprised that location was the last straw for her. My gf won't even ride Dean Keaton because of those spots where traffic crosses at the green paint. She uses Manor rd and Clyde Littlefield to and from UT.

I am sorry to hear about your wife's close calls and understand your family's decision.

m1ek · 2013-11-06 15:53:31

I'm surprised anybody ever rides Dean Keaton under I-35 (and I rarely see anybody doing it). Seemed like a bad design the day it went in many years ago, and Manor is so much more civilized, and not that far away.

Jack · 2013-11-07 17:03:23

Of course, it depends on where one is going from/to. As nice as the Manor crossing is, it would be far out of the way in a lot of cases.
The trouble is, the striping manufactures conflicts that were naturally avoided before the striping went in. The novice cyclist the striping is designed to accommodate is going to be unaware of when/why the route painted is not the best route to avoid conflicts.

rich00 · 2013-11-11 01:15:07

I personally like using Dean Keaton because outside of the green lane parts, it's a great ride, and no wait (underpass). I do see lots of cyclists using it.

But there are design issues with the lane striping.

Manor rd is so-so at the I35 light, and is not bike friendly on that straight. Overall, cars seem use to it, having a bike in the sharrows during the day. Someday that section will be rebuilt with proper bike facilities, I would hope.

AusTexMurf · 2013-11-12 07:49:37

Issues & Eggs: The Economic Case for Investing in Bicycle Infrastructure
Tuesday, November 12, 2013
Join the Downtown Austin Alliance and the City of Austin to hear from two distinguished guests how promotion of bicycling can be more than a way to improve the efficiency of a transportation network.
Jon Orcutt, Policy Director for the New York City Department of Transportation, will discuss how bike lanes and other bicycle infrastructure can fit into an economic development strategy. He will also talk about the economic returns of bike share programs and protected bikeways.
Roger Geller, Bicycle Coordinator for the City of Portland, will discuss Portland’s bicycle-friendly business districts and how Portland’s bicycle policies benefit the city economically.
The topic is especially relevant as we gear up for a December launch of Austin’s bike share system, and as the City’s Public Works Department’s begins updating the City’s bicycle master plan to create a network of facilities to accommodate cyclists of all ages and abilities.
Date: Tuesday, November 12
Time: Breakfast: 7:30 am – 8 am; Program: 8 am – 9 am
Location: Austin City Hall – City Council Chambers
Cost: Free

http://www.downtownaustin.com/events/32 … astructure

Jack · 2013-11-12 15:30:30

I just went by the new cycle track to view it now that the green paint is down. I have one more complaint about the design that was not obvious to me since I last viewed it: the green cycle track in several places has the space in the door zone for passenger doors. Not only must a rider be aware that parked cars hide you from right turning autos, be ready to dodge the people crossing the street, boarding the bus, or getting to or from their parked cars, the rider also must be constantly ready to stop in case of a door opening. The only possible escape would be to move to the right. To the right is a curb. Either it has a design speed of maybe 5 mph or it is relying on super-curb-hopping skills on the part of the novice users. At least with a door zone bike lane as we usually see them (viz. Dean Keeton approaching Guadalupe), a rider can safely stay to the left of the doors.

AusTexMurf · 2013-11-12 22:24:09

Perhaps we should encourage the development of apartment complexes similar to these in the Guadalupe/Drag/West Campus area.
And swap on street auto parking for bike corrals.
Help us deal with the current parking lot also known as Guadalupe.

http://bikeportland.org/2013/11/06/newe … nups-96728

New bike-friendly 'micro-apartments': 200 square feet and no car parking
Posted by Michael Andersen (News Editor) on November 6th, 2013 at 10:10 am
microapartments
A rendering of the new micro-apartment building
permitted for Northwest Thurman near 23rd.
The tiny house movement for apartment dwellers has arrived.

Think 200 to 300 square feet, and a kitchen shared with five similar units.

It's a new milestone for the Portland area's off-the-charts rental shortage, the third-tightest in the nation in the third quarter of 2013. And it might also be the key to a new model for apartment living that's designed to deliver relatively affordable rents for tiny units in highly desirable neighborhoods.....

Last edited by AusTexMurf (2013-11-12 22:28:13)

rich00 · 2013-11-16 16:23:57

I rode it today, it's busy at UT with the game. I'm starting to sour a bit on it. I think that peds will not learn to stay off the green paint unless we have a steady stream of bikes on it, as the norm.

I know there are signs that say yield to peds where the curb cuts are, but what about the rest of the area? Is that technically the law for the cycletrack, that bikes yield to peds the entire length?

I think there should be sharrows in the right travel lane. A reminder to drivers that we belong there too.

dougmc · 2013-11-17 21:03:55

rich00 wrote:

I know there are signs that say yield to peds where the curb cuts are, but what about the rest of the area? Is that technically the law for the cycletrack, that bikes yield to peds the entire length?

I don't think the city or state laws really say either way, at least not in a clear and unambiguous way.

The relevant laws would seem to be these --

552.006. USE OF SIDEWALK. (a) A pedestrian may not walk along and on a roadway if an adjacent sidewalk is provided and is accessible to the pedestrian.
(b) If a sidewalk is not provided, a pedestrian walking along and on a highway shall if possible walk on:
(1) the left side of the roadway; or
(2) the shoulder of the highway facing oncoming traffic.
(c) The operator of a vehicle emerging from or entering an alley, building, or private road or driveway shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian approaching on a sidewalk extending across the alley, building entrance or exit, road, or driveway.

552.005. CROSSING AT POINT OTHER THAN CROSSWALK.
(a) A pedestrian shall yield the right-of-way to a vehicle on the highway if crossing a roadway at a place:
(1) other than in a marked crosswalk or in an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection; or
(2) where a pedestrian tunnel or overhead pedestrian crossing has been provided.
(b) Between adjacent intersections at which traffic control signals are in operation, a pedestrian may cross only in a marked crosswalk.
(c) A pedestrian may cross a roadway intersection diagonally only if and in the manner authorized by a traffic control device.

... and one bit of missing information here is that traditional bike lanes are part of the roadway, so pedestrians are to stay out of them if there's a sidewalk available. What's not entirely clear is if this separated cycle track is also part of the roadway or not for purposes of this statute -- and if it is part of the roadway, then everybody who gets out of their car and crosses the cycle track to the sidewalk is violating 552.005b unless they walk along the parked cars to the nearest crosswalk, which would be a silly thing for them to have to do. That said, having it be part of the roadway does make the most sense, even if the requirement that pedestrians walk to the crosswalk rather than just cross it is silly.

And even if a pedestrian should not legally be walking on the road, I'd say a cyclist or driver still has a duty to yield to them, especially if it is to avoid a collision. That said, if there is a collision, I'm not sure how blame would be assigned.

I think there should be sharrows in the right travel lane. A reminder to drivers that we belong there too.

By this reasoning, every lane on every road should have a sharrow with few exceptions.

The city seems to only use them in situations where there was a bike lane and it has ended, or in a very few cases where there isn't and wasn't a bike lane but they still have heavy bicycle traffic. I don't recall ever seeing a sharrow next to a bike lane, though I think I remember one one-way road downtown with two sharrows -- in both the left and right lanes.

Jack · 2013-11-18 14:06:35

rich00 wrote:

I rode it today, it's busy at UT with the game. I'm starting to sour a bit on it. I think that peds will not learn to stay off the green paint unless we have a steady stream of bikes on it, as the norm.
I know there are signs that say yield to peds where the curb cuts are, but what about the rest of the area? Is that technically the law for the cycletrack, that bikes yield to peds the entire length?
I think there should be sharrows in the right travel lane. A reminder to drivers that we belong there too.

What looks good on paper doesn't trump human nature (peds will not learn) or traffic dynamics (even the novice would have been truly safer in the street as Guad was before the new facility was installed).

http://www.governing.com/columns/eco-en … -them.html "Bicycling in Holland, where such a system is in place, is an amazing experience. Cyclists there ride in heavy traffic, commuting to work, carrying groceries and children, secure that the drivers are looking out after them. Holland also has plenty of bike lanes, but it’s not the bike lanes that keep cyclists safe. The car and truck drivers are held legally responsible for the potential consequences of their vehicles. It’s appropriate too that if a cyclist in Holland strikes and hurts a pedestrian, the cyclist is presumed to be at fault." That together with widespready cycling safety education in the schools, not green paint or 'protected lanes,' is why the European cyclist is safer than the American.

Last edited by Jack (2013-11-19 12:30:15)

bizikletari · 2013-11-18 14:47:28

rich00 wrote:

Is that technically the law for the cycletrack, that bikes yield to peds the entire length?

Bikes must yield to cars coming out from driveways on the LAB, to pedestrians standing on the green bike lane on Guadalupe and to squirrels on the capitol grounds. But yes, we are a bike-friendly city.
Aramaic is also incomprehensible to me.

Bicycle Austin forum

#76 2013-10-28 22:57:13

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#77 2013-10-29 10:59:05

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#78 2013-10-29 17:29:40

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#79 2013-10-31 00:18:47

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#80 2013-10-31 09:28:21

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#81 2013-11-01 17:49:53

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#82 2013-11-02 00:20:24

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#83 2013-11-04 14:37:30

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#84 2013-11-04 14:41:16

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#85 2013-11-04 20:35:50

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#86 2013-11-05 12:03:05

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#87 2013-11-05 13:20:26

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#88 2013-11-05 13:35:22

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#89 2013-11-05 16:17:53

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#90 2013-11-06 12:43:27

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#91 2013-11-06 15:53:31

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#92 2013-11-07 17:03:23

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#93 2013-11-11 01:15:07

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#94 2013-11-12 07:49:37

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#95 2013-11-12 15:30:30

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#96 2013-11-12 22:24:09

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#97 2013-11-16 16:23:57

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#98 2013-11-17 21:03:55

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#99 2013-11-18 14:06:35

Re: Red alert on the Drag

#100 2013-11-18 14:47:28

Re: Red alert on the Drag

Board footer