BIKE: Re: SCB modifications and public hearing

[kristen theiler]

I'm quite amazed that anyone who has biked the new and
improved SCB would state it's a success. I have a few
friends who aren't very into biking (a 10 mile round
trip once a week is their norm) who initially told me
they thought the new striping was going to be a good
thing. After riding it once I got calls from each of
them asking what the curb extensions were and telling
me how much they disliked the new road. These guys
rarely ride. SCB is on my commuting route and what
used to be one of my favorite stretches is now one of
my least. And that sucks. If motorists understood the
reasons cyclists felt it necessary and safer to ride
close to the stripe, perhaps this could work. The fact
is, motorists who are not also cyclists think we
should be as close to the curb as possible and not
interfering with them. Putting myself in a motorist's
shoes, this makes sense b/c I'm sure most of them
don't know about dooring, about how this multi-use
lane isn't a bike lane, etc. As much as we know what's
safe, they take it as us being ignorant a$$holes in
funny clothes who get in their way when we have lots
of room to move over and they have these small driving
lanes. I have also witnessed numerous motorists
driving partially in the multi-use lane. Very rarely
do I experience them going extremely fast, but the
meadering into the multi-use lane is quite bothersome
to me.

--- Patrick Goetz <pgoetz> wrote:

> 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.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Get on or off this list here: 
> http://BicycleAustin.info/list
> 


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com