BIKE: Re: SCB modifications and public hearing

[Mike Dahmus]

Stuart Werbner wrote:

> Pretty sad how the critics are trying to fight this -- saying little 
> for 5 years while others worked hard at devising a compromise 
> solution. Then, just as it is being completed, start complaining. 

This is an egregious misrepresentation. This list was full of people (me 
foremost among them) saying a hell of a LOT about how any compromise 
solution was a load of crap, and you know it. The reason is that there 
simply is no way to compromise the competing interests of bicycling and 
both-side parking on this corridor - so the responsible thing to do was 
CHOOSE one or the other, not waste time and money on a compromise which 
was never going to come.

And the fact of the matter is that the original (one-side parking) 
design represented a compromise to begin with. Cyclists gave up 
dooring-free bike lanes on one side (still riding partially in the door 
zone), and parkers gave up one side of the road.

- MD