BIKE: Mostly Well-Done AusChron Article on SCB (Bury the Hatchet)

[Michael Bluejay]

I'm responding because I'm not sure what I'm saying is repetition.

First, even if you think SCB doesn't need bike lanes, not only do many  
cyclists disagree, but among the non-cycling public, the #1 reason they  
cite consistently for not biking is that "it's too dangerous", and the  
#1 thing they would make it safer is "more bike lanes".  To me, this  
alone is a reason to get bike lanes onto public roadways.  If we want  
to encourage cycling, this is the reality we're dealing with.

Second, Shoal Creek *already had* bike lanes, but they were filled with  
cars.  If SCB didn't have bike lanes to begin with I agree, it's less  
likely that people would have been looking for a "solution".  But since  
bike lanes were already there, and filled with cars, that is a  
*massive* problem that needed fixing.  Those lanes told everybody,  
"This is all cyclists ever deserve, a lane that's supposedly for bikes  
but that can be pre-empted by any number of motorists, any time, 24/7."  
  I'm tired of this kind of second-class accommodation on the road.  I  
do believe it's this kind of second-class attitude towards cycling  
which is part of the reason why most at-fault motorists who injure  
cyclists face little to no penalties.

Finally, bike lanes or no, parking on one side of the street would have  
given cyclists more roadspace so cars wouldn't pass so closely.  Maybe  
that's not "necessary", but it's certainly a laudable goal.

-MBJ-


On Jan 15, 2005, at 3:19 PM, Thorne wrote:

> <<Why push for a [SCB] solution that . . . >>
>
> Solution to what?  I wish you guys would give it a rest already, and I  
> mean
> that in the best spirit of
> brotherly-let's-enjoy-our-riding-and-spread-the-cycling-bug-to-the- 
> heatherns-love.
>
>
> The main source of the "Shoal Creek Debacle," as near as I can tell,  
> if you
> can forgive the perspective*, is that someone thought bike lanes on  
> the street
> would be a good idea.  I've been riding on SCB since the early 1990s.   
> It's
> always** been a pleasant, safe place to ride singly or in groups and a  
> bike
> lane or two, with or without parking, wouldn't improve it.  There's no  
> problem
> to solve on SCB, which is why for so many years so many people have  
> been
> coming to SCB to cycle, rather than avoiding it.
>
> Years ago, and it must have been around 2000, if faulty memory serves  
> and
> considering what bike I think was riding on SCB at the time, I signed  
> some
> kind of petition to help the organizers of some bike lane effort for  
> SCB.
> Even then, I asked the guy asking for my signature, "what for? SCB is  
> fine
> riding like it is."  I signed my name in the spirit of helping out  
> those
> brothers and sisters making the honest effort to do cycling a good  
> turn.  I've
> regretted that signature ever since.
>
> *If you can't forgive that, and want to respond, reply, or vent,  
> please spare
> the list your vitriol/wisdom, though.  I'm not certain that the list  
> will
> benefit from the repetition.
>
> **Always, that is, except for when it had that crazy zig-zaggy park  
> here but
> not there move left now but now move back right bike lane system  
> painted on
> it.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Get on or off this list here:  http://BicycleAustin.info/list
>