You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
It seems that today the City of Austin has decided to secure space for cars at the expense of bicyclists. The NBB, in the making for years, has been seriously affected by the decision of city officials to surrender to the opposition of a minuscule group of republican donors. They might spin the issue as they want; reality is that after some phone calls Public Works decided to abandon years of work, and in so doing has given a huge blow to the cause of alternative transportation.
It will take years to put Austin back into the track of sensible development for the people.
Offline
LOBV Release: http://lobv.org/docs/LOBV_NuecesAbandon.pdf
Offline
A perusal of the staff recommendations indicates that they actually recommend several enhancements in support of bicycling on both Nueces and on Rio Grande. I fail to see why those improvements should be considered as negatives.
LOBV doesn't get every aspect desired, but the changes are better than nothing at all.
Offline
You're failing to think of unintended consequences. The changes proposed for Rio Grande and Nueces make both of them more, not less, attractive to through motorists.
Offline
Sorry, but I can't conclude that changes that might make those streets more attractive to through motorists make a problem for bicyclists. There's the "share the road" concept. Bicyclists and motorized vehicles use those roads now and will continue to use them upon project completion. Again, I fail to consider that a negative.
Offline
Rick, that's fine for normal facilities - this is supposed to be a signature facility; and the whole point of a bicycle boulevard is that it puts through automobile traffic at the bottom of the priority list.
One common definition:
"A bicycle boulevard is a shared roadway which has been optimized for bicycle traffic. In contrast with other shared roadways, bicycle boulevards discourage cut-through motor vehicle traffic, but typically allow local motor vehicle traffic. They are designed to give priority to cyclists as through-going traffic"
In this case, removing stop signs on Nueces and/or Rio Grande will drastically increase their utility for 'cut-through' motor vehicle traffic (such as me - when I drive home from work; quite often having to get off Mopac at Cesar Chavez, then wind through downtown and West Campus - I can tell you with certainty I'll be using one or both of these roads instead of Lavaca on a regular basis if these changes happen).
Offline
Thanks Mike, and it's not just the preference/priority issue either, although that plays into the following:
The vision for Nueces was bikes taking the lane in most instances with slower traffic. Let's say you're with a group of friends riding to the Bat Fest at Town Lake and you're riding together down the right lane at 14th Street. A car comes up behind you. With the original vision, the car would know you're clearly expected to be where you are. With the COA plan, the car honks and tells you to get out the f---ing way and you belong in the bike lane. Or let's say you decide to ride in the bike lane, and you spend most of the trip single file, yelling to your friends.
Then you get to the sharrows and merge into traffic, but your one friend, Sarah, is very inexperienced and the car traffic behind her is freaking her out, so she ignores the sharrow and moves right and gets doored by a driver parked on the street. Sarah is OK, but bruised, and the driver yells at her for not looking out when he's trying to open his door.
The point of this is not to diss bike lanes or sharrows. Both work well in many instances and would be an improvement on most streets. It's just to reiterate that this one street was supposed to be different, to allow that preference to bikes that makes the ride safe, accessible and enjoyable....instead of being pushed to the side.
And quite frankly, it's also a 'big deal' because there's just not good argument for not doing what was envisioned in the first place. Without a good argument, COA is simply bolstering the idea that if you want to kill projects that are significant for bicycles, just cause a ruckus and scream "auto capacity" and the bikes lose.
Some people have criticized me and note that the opposition has a right to their say against the bike boulevard and that they are stakeholders because they have property on the street. Well, sure, they have a right to their "say," but their "say" should say something that actually makes sense in determining whether to proceed with the project.
Last edited by damicoaustin (2010-04-08 10:26:27)
Offline
It's an issue of the culture. Trying to change the car culture is one hell of a task.
Hopefully this plan can overall, support cycling downtown. We may not be getting families with young kids to ride on these roads, but I think we'll still see more cyclists riding them, and be an improvement for the average cyclist.
I myself have kind of switched over to going south through downtown on Guadalupe because it's much faster. But when I do so, mixing with cars, I know there aren't many other cyclists who would prefer to do the same. Going north, I will likely take either Nueces or Rio Grande since it's slower uphill.
Is there another road within the city that would be much more likely to support a full bike boulevard? Something purely residential?
Offline
Take a look at this Nueces Bike Boulevard poll: http://www.kvue.com/news/Making-Austin- … 40402.html (right side of page)
Offline
In a different discussion group, Amy Babbit wrote:
"The biggest threat to successful bicycle projects in Austin (and also to on-street pedestrian project, such as crosswalks and stop lights) is death by traffic study. Traffic studies are always based on a prediction of increasing motor traffic. Such studies are always going to show that the cars need all the available space, can't afford to slow down, and so on.
The most useful thing to do, it seems to me, is to get the city to make decisions based on values, on goals, and not on traffic counts. (It always seems sad, too, that so much money is squandered on unnecessary traffic studies.) The traffic study is done in order to make the decision to water down the project seem scientific, objective, and inevitable. You can't argue with the machine.... See More
The traffic study approach means that there is never a serious attempt to reduce car use in Austin. There's no other way to get cleaner air, safer and more pleasant streets, fewer health problems, more autonomy for children, old people, disabled people, and people without cars, more upward mobility for poor people and homeless people, and more green space all over the city, except by reducing car use in Austin. But traffic studies always assume that people are not going to drive cars less. As long as every decision is made by traffic study, the city has effectively decided in advance not to reduce car use.
And no matter what is planned, it can always be destroyed by a traffic study.
We need to get the city to change the way it makes decisions about transportation projects. Otherwise, every single planned on-street project will be watered down and changed for the worse."
Any similarity with the Nueces Bicycle Boulevard, albeit unintentional, it is inescapable. Of course, history always succeed in repeating itself and in no teaching any lesson for the students who do not want to see.
None so blind as those who will not see, says the proverb. There you go.
Offline
Which discussion group was that on?
Offline
I sincerely apologize to Amy, I spelled her name wrongly.
It is Babich. Really sorry.
Offline
Good news for all those who have been saying the boulevard was actually good for businesses:
http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/local/City … -bike-blvd
Let's hope City Council reads this and move beyond the point of view of the scared property owners, and actually help them.
Last edited by bizikletari (2010-04-22 08:39:25)
Offline
The opposition still opposed:
http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase … id:1018954
Offline
Now that bike month is almost gone and the City Council will soon enough hear the last presentation of the Staff Recommendation for the boulevard I want to remind the bicycle community of the LOBV position on Nueces Street as presented in its web site:
"The League of Bicycling Voters supports the staff's recommendations for improvements to Rio Grande Street.
And we still support the original vision and plans for a Nueces Bike Boulevard that uses significant traffic calming to achieve a safe corridor for moving bicyclists of all ages and experience levels to key downtown destinations.
A Nueces Bike Boulevard should be a signature bicycle facility that will serve as a foundation for a network of improvements that encourage bicycling and its benefits, which will help Austin achieve its goals for mobility, climate change, environmental protection and health. A Nueces Bike Boulevard should be a shining example of our commitment to achieving greater balance in our transportation modes and celebrating Austin's efforts to be a world-class bicycle city. The proposed improvements on Nueces St. in the staff recommendation do not yet reflect that vision.
We have accrued the explicit support of 2000 Austinites for a Nueces Bike Boulevard, and these people are following this process to see that adequate bicycle facilities are implemented on Nueces Street."
Offline
Calling all bike advocates who still believe in the vision of a true bike boulevard on Nueces. Did you know that the City Council presentation that bizikletari refers to is a "briefing" and therefore does not include an opportunity for public comment or a council vote?
Do you want a voice in this $675,000 project that abandons the original vision and changes the Bicycle Master Plan? Would you like to hear our elected officials opinion on the project and have a chance to hear the rationale behind their vote?
Visit: http://damicoaustin.com/bicycle/ and email the mayor and council.
Tell them: "The bicycle community wants a voice in the bike boulevard plans. Change the June 10 agenda item to allow public comment and a council vote!"
Offline
Now that bike month is almost gone and the City Council will soon enough hear the last presentation of the Staff Recommendation for the boulevard I want to remind the bicycle community of the LOBV position on Nueces Street as presented in its web site:
"The League of Bicycling Voters supports the staff's recommendations for improvements to Rio Grande Street."
... of course, that's not the LOBV's position on Nueces Street. It's their position on Rio Grande Street.
And I have to wonder why they took this position like this. At the very least, I'd expect another sentence about how they're disappointed with the staff's
recommendations for Nueces.
Out of curiosity, does anybody who actually bikes on Nueces on a regular basis think that bike lanes on Nueces as they exist in the current version of the plan make any sense whatsoever?
Offline
Doug,
That's a opening sentence—I'd say a preamble—for the following text.
You asked:
"Out of curiosity, does anybody who actually bikes on Nueces on a regular basis think that bike lanes on Nueces as they exist in the current version of the plan make any sense whatsoever?"
It seems staff thinks that way, I imagine that's why they propose that. I happen to disagree, I still think that a full fledged boulevard on Nueces St. is the reasonable proposal.
You may want to write them—or city council—if you think their proposal is ill advised.
Offline
FYI... council item has now been postponed to June 24. Maybe they'll push it even further into the Sargasso sea of summer.
Offline
Out of curiosity, does anybody who actually bikes on Nueces on a regular basis think that bike lanes on Nueces as they exist in the current version of the plan make any sense whatsoever?
No, Nueces is fine just the way it is. But someone should educate the lady in the Camry who crossed Nueces right in front of me this morning causing me to swerve to avoid T-Boning it. I'm sure she just plain didn't see me coming.
Offline
ATTENTION EVERYONE: Staff Briefing to City Council on the Bicycle Boulevard has again been moved; now it is back to June 10th.
http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/publicworks/ … -input.htm
Call or write your Council Members to ask staff to stop boncing the dates back and forth and open the floor to democracy.
http://austinontwowheels.org/2010/06/07 … -from-you/
Offline
Back to the future,
"The City Council has requested that the Downtown Bicycle Boulevard Briefing be moved from this week to the June 24, 2010 City Council meeting at 10:30 AM at City Hall. Please contact Annick Beaudet (512) 974-6505 with any questions. More info here: http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/publicworks/bicycle.htm .
Annick C. Beaudet, AICP
Program Consultant - Planning
Neighborhood Connectivity Division
Department of Public Works
City of Austin"
Offline
Pages: 1
[ Generated in 0.016 seconds, 7 queries executed - Memory usage: 601.21 KiB (Peak: 633.14 KiB) ]