BIKE: Fwd: Curb Island Meeting @ Gullett

[Lane Wimberley]

Bike folks,

Below is the report that I sent my neighborhood email list (Rosedale)
regarding last night's meeting about the Shoal Creek redesign project.

The meeting was about the closest thing that I've seen to a good old
fashioned tar-and-feather.  While I confess that it was hard not to
take at least a little perverse pleasure at watching some of the
responsible parties get raked over the coals (Gandy said he'd never
felt so much like a pinata), the crowd (mostly Allandale folks, I
believe) was fairly unruly and, frankly, quite rude and disrespectful.
 I imagine that the children that eat lunch in the Gullett school
cafeteria where the meeting was held have better manners than were on
display last night.  Fairly embarrassing, really.  And, it was
particularly unfortunate that the city staff had to bear the brunt of
it.  Their biggest failing was allowing the neighborhood contingent to
hold sway over engineers and other staff during the design process, so
maybe they deserved some of it, I suppose.

I was a little surprised not to see many bike folks there (at least,
that I know), but there were still ample cyclists expressing opinions.

Anyway, here's how I saw it.

-Lane

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Lane Wimberley <bikelane>
Date: May 12, 2005 2:55 PM
Subject: Re: Curb Island Meeting @ Gullett
To: wgvh2 <wgvh2>


Hi Bill.  I attended last night's meeting at Gullett.  Here's a quick, mostly
factual, run-down.

The city was represented by Sondra Creighton (Director, Public Works),
Debra Dibble (Project Mgt., Public Works), Keri Juarez (Project Mgt.,
Public Works), Alan Hughes (Transportation, Public Works), Colly
Kreidler (Bike/Ped program coordinator), Julie Strong (Public Works),
and possibly Joe Ramos (Project Mgt., Public Works), although I didn't
see him and/or he didn't speak.

Paul Nagy of Allandale, and the neighborhood resident who was arguably
in closest contact with the city through the multi-year process, was
there, as was Charles Gandy of Livable Community Consulting, who was
hired under the pilot program budget as a design consultant.  It was
Mr. Gandy's design, with a few minor tweaks, that we now see on SCB.

There was an attendance sign-up sheet.  The meeting was not video
taped, although minutes were taken.  It was standing room-only, and
not much at that.  My impression was that attendance was weighted
mostly toward Allandale residents, although I could be wrong, and I'm
sure there were several Rosedale folks there.

Austin News 8 was there, as was a reporter from the Austin Chronicle.

Perhaps the most interesting and relevant, if not surprising, piece of
information presented was the result of the traffic (speed) study.
Traffic engineer Alan Hughes reported that, after analyzing traffic at
several spots along SCB both before (immediately, I believe; ie, when
there were no stripes at all on the pavement save the center double
yellow line) and after the construction, the data showed that there
was a very small slowing of car speeds, something like .2 mph or so.
This was judged to be negligible by the city.  Hence, I think to the
extent that the design was intended to calm traffic by reducing
speeds, it has failed.

Colly Kreidler reported that early results of a video study of driver
and cyclist behavior (so-called "conflict monitoring") showed nothing
of interest.  I personally found this a little surprising, as my own
anecdotal observations have been that there are some behavioral
problems, like driving into the bike lane or over the double yellow
line, close calls, honking, aggressivity, etc.

There was a fair bit of background given to make clear how this came
about.  Of particular interest was the role of the City Council.
Evidently, there is an ordinance on the books that stipulates that,
when streets are re-paved, if a bike lane is to be (possibly re-)
striped on that street, parking shall be prohibited in the bike lane
to provide for obstacle-free, channelized bike traffic.

Subsequently, due to neighborhood opposition to removal of any parking
on SCB, the city council passed a resolution that a consensus-based,
neighborhood-involved pilot design project would be funded to the tune
of $500K.  The end result is the design we see implemented on SCB.

An important distinction of the current design is that, while SCB
remains an important corridor in the city's bike route plan (ie, it is
still an official bike route), the striped lanes are NOT bike lanes.
They are (more or less) officially shared bike/parking lanes.  The
distinction is important (if arguably ludicrous), as parking is still
officially not allowed in bike lanes on re-paved/re-surfaced streets
in Austin.

I believe the current plan is to continue to monitor the street for
another year or so (I think...?) before making any decisions about
major changes.  It is a pilot project, and so the city made it clear
that it is not set in stone -- things can change.  But, this is, of
course, subject to budgetary constraints.  Personally, given the
latter, I have a hard time believing that the city will be willing to
devote major resources to make any dramatic changes to SCB anytime
soon.  There was mention of making a few small changes, like possibly
removing one of the curb extensions that they feel might be
problemmatic.

There was a lengthy question and answer session.  The majority of the
neighbors who spoke were vociferously averse to the design as it
exists now, particularly to the curb extensions.  The exchange was
quite unruly at times, and frankly rude (I feel safe in assuming that,
had the meeting taken place in Rosedale, it would have been far more
polite, respectful and cordial ;-), but presumably this reflects the
strong feelings that the neighborhood has developed about this design.

Some residents complained that cyclists ride on or very close to the white
stripe separating the driving lane from the parking lane, which they felt was
more dangerous now that the car lanes are narrower.  While this may be true,
this is expected behavior for cyclists trying to avoid obstacles in the parking
lane where they are expected to ride.

There were a number of residents who were upset that they had not been
informed that these changes were underway.  I was a little amazed that
anyone living in Austin, let alone in our neighborhoods, could not
know that this had been going on for over five years.

There was the usual confusion about how drivers should regard cyclists
on the road, replete with lengthy complaints about cyclist behavior in
general, met with the usual applause.  There was also an apparent
mis-understanding about why the curb extensions exist.  (They exist
for two discernable purposes -- to calm traffic by narrowing the
perceived width of the corridor; and, to dissuade drivers from driving
in the parking lane.)

Cyclists who spoke also did not like the curb extensions.  The main
reason given, as I recall now, was visibility -- the curb extensions could
be difficult to see.

The overwhelming sentiment of the neighbors was a demand for the city
to remove the curb extensions.

There was some mention of an on-going working group in which
neighborhood volunteers could participate, with the goal of working
with the city toward a resolution on -- and, presumably, an
improvement to -- SCB.  Anyone interested in participating should
contact Paul Nagy (who listens on this list, I believe).

There was also mention by Ms. Creighton that the city will attempt to
set up a web site or other internet resource that the neighborhood
could use to keep informed on progress (mainly, findings of the
on-going studies), and possibly to communicate with the city.

As for some of my own observations, I found two things rather ironic.
First, while people seem to hate the curb extensions, ostensibly
because they force cyclists into the "car lane," no mention was made
of the fact that actually, it is the parked cars that are more
effective barriers to cyclists.  Whereas there are fully four feet of
space that a cyclist can easily use to negotiate the curb extension,
there is typically zero space, especially accounting for the "door
zone," to pass cars parked in what is effectively exclusively a
parking lane, and cyclists are forced fully into the adjacent travel
lane.

Second, the majority of the anger and frustration, by far, seemed to
stem from the fact that the current design has not effectively
channelized car and bike traffic, with the result that people fear
dangerous car-bike interactions in a confused space.  But, this
confused space is an unavoidable feature of the current design, which
arose primarily out of a neighborhood demand that absolutely no
on-street parking be removed from Shoal Creek Blvd.

The lesson here is, if you're going to channelize traffic, you can't
put obstacles in the channels.

Now, I did note that the folks that complained loudest about on-street
parking removal were either not present last night, or didn't speak.
Some of the people who spoke last night even mentioned that perhaps a
better solution would be to remove at least some of the on-street
parking.  <sigh> Where were these people during the past five years
while this design was being negotiated?

Going forward, I see only two possibilities for improvements.  If we
decide that channelization of car and bike traffic is valuable and
worth-while, then we need to remove parking from properly implemented
bike lanes.  This would mean either removing parking from both sides
of the street, or some form of one-side-only parking, as was featured
in several of the alternatives explored during the redesign process.

If channelization is deemed unnecessary or undesirable, then I believe
on-street parking can be left alone, but the parking lane stripes
should be removed, leaving cars and bikes to share wide lanes --
basically, what we had prior to the current implementation.

Unfortunately, I feel the city will be disinclined to follow either of
these paths anytime soon -- assuming that no one is killed or
seriously injured on SCB in it's current state.  The budget isn't
there, and even if it were, the city might think twice about risking
making further mistakes on SCB and suffering the ire of the neighbors.

Hope this is helpful.

-Lane Wimberley
4810 Shoal Creek Blvd.


On 5/12/05, wgvh2 <wgvh2> wrote:
> I was NOT able to attend the Curb Island Meeting @ Gullett, last nite.
>
> Could someone who did attend fill us all in on details of what
> happened?
>
> It would be good to know who represented the City at the meeting and
> what was discussed and what resolution if any was reached.
>
> Thanks,
> Bill Van
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
> Has someone you know been affected by illness or disease?
> Network for Good is THE place to support health awareness efforts!
> http://us.click.yahoo.com/OCfFmA/UOnJAA/E2hLAA/VaTolB/TM
> --------------------------------------------------------------------~->
>
> Rosedale Neighborhood website:  http://rosedale-na.org/
> RNA ads mailing list:  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rosedale_ads/
> To unsubscribe:
> * send email to rosedale-unsubscribe from the address by
> which you are subscribed, OR
> * unsubscribe via the mailing list webpage at
> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rosedale/, OR
> * send a request to the moderators at rosedale-owner
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
> <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
>     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/rosedale/
>
> <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>     rosedale-unsubscribe
>
> <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
>     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>
>

--
"Every time I see an adult on a bicycle, I no longer despair for the
human race."
- HG Wells


-- 
"Every time I see an adult on a bicycle, I no longer despair for the
human race."
- HG Wells