BIKE: Re: SCB modifications and public hearing

[Patrick Goetz]

stgetr wrote:
 > I received a copy of your note urging cyclists to attend the May 11
 > hearing on SCB.  I think that is a very good idea, but don't share your
 > strong feelings against the SCB changes.  In fact, I have ridden SCB
 > several times since it was finished (for a total of probably 4-5 hours),
 > and think it is a surprising success.
<snip>
> now that SCB is finished, I think the design is a very good 
> solution to the problem of cycling on a through street in a quiet 
> residential neighborhood.  Note, BTW, that the islands are NOT intended 
> to slow traffic down; they are intended to keep motorists from trying to 
> drive in the bike/parking lane.  Motorist speed is reduced because of 
> the quite narrow lane striping, and in my experience it has been 
> successful.  Where there were occasional drivers at 45-50 mph in the 
> past,  most motorists now seem to be doing 25-30 mph.
>  

Well, I have every intention of being civil at the scheduled hearings, 
but don't agree that the design is a very good solution and will hazard 
a guess that most other cyclists don't, either.  When I mentioned the 
opinion voiced in the message above to some other cyclists, their 
attitude ranged from shocked disbelief to vituperative irritation.  But 
then, as Fred Meredith would have it, perhaps I just associate with the 
wrong kind of people.

Traffic calming?  No way.  I drove the street myself and enjoyed the 
Monte Carlo turns protected by the extra wide shoulders, which is what 
the former bike lane is now officially called -- an enhanced shoulder. 
ASHTO safety standards disallow any other designation, as the city 
doesn't want to be held liable for the inevitable tragedies which will 
result from this monstrosity.  If this, btw, doesn't tell you everything 
you need to know about the situation, then I'd be willing to sell you 
the Congress Ave. bridge at a bargain price any day this week -- cash 
only, of course.  50mph?  I probably hit 60 without even trying.  The 
narrow lane striping doesn't do a damn thing if there are huge shoulders 
on either side -- good god, man, it's just paint -- nothing more.  Take 
it from me, an occasional and hence rusty driver.  If I think this 
street is perfectly safe at 60mph, then you can bet that other motorists 
are getting the same impression (for me the motorist, that is -- not 
bicyclists, pedestrians, dogs, cats, squirrels, or opossums).

Keeping motorists from driving in the bike lane?  Another joke.  I 
personally observed several people driving on the shoulder and merging 
back to the left when encountering a bike crasher.  I followed an 
enormous Ford Excursion that drove almost the entire length of the 
street 4 feet into the shoulder.  These barriers serve 2 purposes and 2 
purposes only.  1.)  Create a protected parking lane for SCB residents. 
  The city spent $300,000 so that each homeowner on SCB could enjoy 3 or 
4 additional free parking spaces in the public right of way.  At the 
very least, they need to be taxed for this convenience.  2.) Force 
bicyclists using the enhanced shoulder off their line and directly into 
the path of traffic.  If you happen to live on SCB, then you might agree 
that 1) is great, but feel free to discuss the merits of 2) with, for 
example, the likes of Fred Meredith or someone else whose opinion you trust.

The only safe option for a bicyclist riding this street now is to stay 
in or near the line dividing the lane from the shoulder at all times. 
Because of the new narrower lanes, this will result in bicyclists either 
getting mirrored, hit from the back, or irritating overtaking motorists. 
  None of these seem like profoundly positive consequences.

What time of day did you ride SCB?  Any road is good at 5am on Sunday 
morning.  Perhaps if you tried biking SCB at 5-6pm on a weekday your 
impression of the situation might have been different.  One of the UTC 
commissioners told me last week that he used to lead a weekly weekend 
group ride for novice cyclists in his profession along SCB, but now 
considers the street to be too dangerous for this activity and is 
looking for an alternative place to ride.  This, my friend, is what 
matters; not the opinion of John Forrester, or the ACA board, or any 
other elevated dignitary or group thereof.  What matters is what the 
cyclist on the street thinks, and save for your message and Eric 
Anderson's give it a chance message, I haven't heard anything good about 
the SCB debacle.  Most people think the bike lanes have just been 
unceremoniously removed in the interest of creating more street parking, 
and I would say that their "uninformed" opinion isn't that far from the 
truth.  Perhaps more enthusiasts will emerge in the coming weeks, but 
I'm not holding my breath for this.