BIKE: Dedicated bike lanes -- a mistake?

[Fred Meredith]

Mike,

It sounds from here as if your accusations are as fuzzy as your 
logic. I did not attack you, Mike, I merely poked accusations at your 
methodology and conclusions. There was nothing about you personally 
in my comments, merely about how you arrived at your conclusions.

On the other hand, your response felt as if it were leaving little 
flecks of foam on my screen.

You are right about one thing and in two different ways. True, the 
type of response I gave your initial premise was not helpful ... to 
your point of view or your side of the argument. That was intentional.

My manner of criticizing your conclusions was also not couched in a 
persuasive and cooperative mode such that it might bring you around 
to holding, or at least acknowledging, another set of conclusions. I 
shouldn't have backed you into a corner where the only option you 
felt available to you was to strike out at me in return. That was not 
productive on my part.

My only excuse is that I tend to not look at things with a somber and 
serious face, especially when they are mostly unsubstantiated 
opinions on both sides. I tend to look for the more bantering side of 
things and that can make some people defensive. Apparently, you are 
one of those people.

I apologize for pushing you beyond your tolerance for jibes and such. 
On the other hand, for me (and possibly others) it WAS helpful. It 
pointed a finger in a specific direction rather than just howling at 
the moon in general. I stand behind my opinion that you are 
substantiating your "conclusions" with more "feelings" than facts.

The Shoal Creek Blvd pilot project is, for now, a done deal and what 
we owe it is a critical eye over some period of time -- a statistical 
examination of how it works out. As far as I know, a comprehensive 
plan for studying the SCB pilot project has not been put forth. Maybe 
we should do that -- examine which parameters might tell us if the 
configuration is "working" or "not working," "safer for cyclists" or 
"not safer for cyclists," "calms traffic" or "does not calm traffic" 
or whatever we would like to get out of the experiment in order to 
make the next project meet the needs of adjacent residents AND all 
who use the roadway for travel.

I have no further interest in harping on what has been done and that 
too was part of my intention when I jumped in the middle of your 
"stuff," Mike. I'm tired of ineffective rhetoric after the fact and 
think that SCB should now serve solely as a source of data to be 
sorted out over time.

So, who should we ask to fund it, gather it, study it, etc.?

Fred (didn't call Mike any names, merely questioned the credibility 
of the "data" behind his conclusions) Meredith


>
>This type of retort isn't helpful at all, Fred. I'm surprised that 
>the person who spends more time here than anyone criticizing others' 
>behavior would stoop to such a low.
>
>I wrote my page about passing distance on Shoal Creek to explain a 
>hypothetical to some people who just weren't "getting it" when we 
>were discussing how EVEN IF the average passing distance is larger 
>with wide curb lanes, bike lanes might STILL BE SAFER. In other 
>words, they assumed that if the average pass was larger, then 
>effectively all passes would be larger (of course this is ludicrous, 
>but it did, in fact, happen).
>
>I used my estimate of passing distance during my own commutes on 
>Shoal Creek - this was honest recollection.
>
>This is, in fact, thinking of the problem using statistics. If you 
>can think of a better term than "statistical thinking", go right 
>ahead.
>
>For those tempted to take Fred's chiding to heart, please note that 
>despite his high-horse, he did not add any content to the 
>discussion. None. Zero. Just attacks on me, including the 
>implication that I was "pulling some of this stuff right out of your 
>... in support of what you have already chosen to believe."
>
>I would love to have an honest discussion about the place of bike 
>lanes versus wide curb lanes versus shared lanes. In fact, one could 
>even have been continued from the very posting Fred found so odious, 
>since I included a heck of a lot of the typical reasoning on the 
>bike lane side in my note. But the person to which I responded was 
>looking for reasons why the "no bike lane guys" thought the way they 
>did, and I provided my opinion on the matter.
>
>- MD


-- 
When in doubt ... ride your bike (or at least write about it).

Fred Meredith
P.O. Box 100 (12702 Lowden Ln for UPS/FedEx)
Manchaca, TX 78652
512/282-1987 (office/home)
512/282-7413 (fax)
512/636-7480 (wireless)
More than you want to know at: http://2merediths.com