-
Emma 01/23/2010 7:14:00 PM
I live in Arlington and I've always wanted to be able to ride my bike from my house to school, about 5 miles. I'd always been afraid to do so, just because Arlington traffic is just as horrible as Dallas traffic. I was just sick and tired of paying over $100 to park a mile away from where my first class was, and to fight for a parking space, negotiate lunchtime traffic, etc.
Around that time this article was published and I read it, as well as all the comments. Richard kept offering to everyone to take a Traffic Skills class with BikeDFW. I didn't want to jump in to bicycle commuting unprepared (and frankly, terrified), so I signed up. I cannot begin to express how great that class is. I learned how to safely ride my bike in traffic, without endangering myself or others. I feel confident that I can go anywhere on my bike now. I was skeptical before I became educated. But I see that education really is key to promoting bike transportation in DFW. Also, taking the class has improved my driving skills as well. I'm much more aware of what is going on around me, and take care to keep a closer eye out for cyclists and pedestrians.
One other thing: I noticed that Pecan Street through the UTA campus in Arlington now has what the city likes to call a "bike lane". And just as others have mentioned, it is now, not even a couple of months old, filled with road debris, garbage and drains. Totally unsafe to ride in. I will NOT be using this lane.
I strongly encourage anyone with any doubt about the safety of vehicular cycling to please contact BikeDFW and sign up for a class. We can ALL share the road safely and have great rides and drives.
-
Michael Keel 12/07/2009 10:50:00 PM
Thanks for researching this article and talking a bit about something that is rarely talked about in the press in a positive manner - Bicycles in the traffic plan.
As a commuting and hobby cyclist since 1974, I have pedaled a few miles in Dallas. I have also talked with a lot of bicycle people during that time, as well as driven a car a lot on public roadways.
Mr Summer actually had a rather smart idea. Get cyclists to use the current system in place. That would add no costs to the taxpayers and get more utilization of an already existing system. No municipality that I know of has: funds available to buy more right of way; an abundance of empty traffic lanes that can be designated lanes for bike lanes; or funds for educating motorists and cyclists on how to use these new bike lanes within the current traffic laws. So if the money is not there for those facilities within the current structure, it would seem to be the wisest plan of action is to encourage people to use the existing system. Using the plan of Mr. Summer, if more cyclists started using the roadways and their numbers grew, then we might actually have sufficient user load to encourage the development of bike facilities/lanes. Just some thoughts to ponder for all of those who claim that "the roads are unsafe" and that they are being "forced" to share the road with cars. Personally, I think that the roads are excellent facilities for us all to use, whether in our cars, trucks or driving our bikes.
Finally, you said something to the affect that Mr Summer was responsible for removing the only bike lane in Dallas. If you were referring to the Mockingbird Bridge at White Rock Lake, that was not a bike lane. It was the route chosen for the White Rock Lake Trail by teh Dallas Parks & Recreation Department in coonjunction with Dallas DOT. The pedestrians were supposed to share the elevated sidewalk on the bridge (travelling both east and west) and the cyclists were supposed to share the "split lane", also travelling both east and west. As this alignment had always been unsafe and flew in the face of both law and reason, it was allowed to remain in place until the bridge across the northern portion of the lake was completed. Once the bridge was in place, the trail was removed. I have continued to travel on Mockingbird Lane as I ride at White Rock Lake, each time without any incident.
My suggestion to all cyclists has been and will be the same. Get out there and ride. Share the road. It is not anywhere near as dangerous as many claim. Don't take my word for it. Learn how to use the roadways safely and get out there so that you can see for yourself.
-
Kimberly 12/07/2009 4:36:00 PM
We wrote more about Kalhammer and infrastructure plans here:
http://blogs.dallasobserver.com/unfairpark/2009/12/cover_story_bike_blog.php
-
Zack 12/05/2009 8:01:00 PM
Can we just forget about PM summer and get some infrastructure now? Facism has no place in cycling.
-
Matt 12/04/2009 9:31:00 PM
"Too many drivers feel like stepping on their brake for a slower vehicle (motorized or not) is too big of an imposition. They want to be able to drive any speed without interruption. They don't care about anyone outside their "four walls"."
Drivers SHOULD be able to drive at any speed without interruption (reasonably... 5-10 over). That, my dim-witted friend, is the definition of "Smooth Flow of Traffic".
That's why the left lane is the "passing lane". That's why, if you're going less than, or at the speed limit, your ass belongs in the far right lane!
You're a selfish prick of a driver to assume that you can delay other drivers who simply want to go faster than you.
You're sitting there calling people selfish, yet YOU'RE the one that's in everyone's way!
Unbelievable.
-
Matt 12/04/2009 9:23:00 PM
"Matt from McKinney, you are dead wrong. Geez, heaven forbid someone have to use their brake pedal because someone else isn't as rushed. I am not legally required to drive 40 in 40 mph zone. Period. I can drive 30 or 35. It's my SUV. Go around me. Unless there is a minimum speed posted, I do not have to drive at or above the speed limit. People like you are the problem. It is not MY responsibility as a driver to go as fast as YOU want me to go."
I'll bet you get a lot of middle fingers.
Stop wasting everyone's time.
It's more selfish of you to believe that you can hold up traffic than it is for me to expect you not to.
I'll bet you're that asshole that drives 50 mph in the left lane on the tollway, aren't you Grandpa?
-
Rob D'Amico 12/03/2009 6:49:00 PM
Egad. Great article. I'm a vehicular cyclist and have even helped craft a plan for our organization--a plan that is going nowhere, because people think it's crazy--to put bikes in the middle of the lane. See http://www.lobv.org/bikezone.html
That said, I think it's completely stupid to fight against using a variety of facilities that lots of cyclists clamor for. One thing we successfully worked for here in Austin was sharrows (now in a pilot project) that aren't technically based on current standards...in other words, we make sure the sharrows are stuck smack dab in the middle of the lane instead of the minimum amount of feet required from the right curb/parallel parking. We recognized that this facility could be used to bolster vehicular cycling instead of "just" getting riders out of door zones.
And heck, even though I take the lane all around town, I usually ride on a sidewalk for one little block on a fast-paced auto commuter stretch that goes up a hill where the crest is in the blinding morning sun of winter. I may be fearless and educated in riding, but I'm not stupid.
We're also interested in "booster lanes," bike lanes that actually give cyclists the advantage of passing heavily congested roads...although this idea has it's challenges.
-
Casie Pierce 12/03/2009 6:35:00 AM
This argument is so stupid. So people are afraid of learning new tricks? We don't go around creating new safety corridors for people walking to and from their cars in the parking lots at North Park because some people got mugged. No, we educate. We don't stop driving our cars because they can get broken into. No, we educate. How many women take personal safety cases and learn Jujitsu to avoid being attacked? Not everybody believes in the victim mentality. So, cyclists are all victims to the big, bad, mean old car drivers of the road and instead of learning something new, we choose to act like cry-babies?
Also, I'd like to point out that in Texas, streetcars have the right-of-way. We have some streetcars in Dallas that always get sideswiped and hot and people are always trying to pass on the right, only to stop abruptly in the left lane to turn left, completely oblivious to the fact that a 40-ton streetcar doesn't have ABS brakes. These idiots are always the first to jump out of their cars and yell that they were rear-ended and demand to see driver's licenses (um, streetcars aren't motor vehicles) and insurance (again, streetcars aren't motor vehicles) and they cow to sue, etc., etc., etc. Fact is, the streetcars could legally run amok along McKinney Avenue and hit as many cars as they want and they'd still have the right-of-way. People in cars are just brainless twits.
So yes, cyclists need to get together and "take the lane".
-
William Gruff 12/03/2009 12:19:00 AM
As to "keeping pace with traffic", I would say that there are times where keeping pace with traffic is not enough for the fools who feel that the traffic laws do not apply to them as they navigate through traffic at speeds well over the speed limit. And there are far too many of them out there.
Too many drivers feel like stepping on their brake for a slower vehicle (motorized or not) is too big of an imposition. They want to be able to drive any speed without interruption. They don't care about anyone outside their "four walls".
This whole issue of bikes vs. cars is a great example of how shitty our society is. Really.
Is tapping your brakes to slow down for a few seconds really THAT big of a deal?
I really hope we get another gas price hike. C'mon $6/gallon!
-
William Gruff 12/03/2009 12:00:00 AM
Matt from McKinney, you are dead wrong. Geez, heaven forbid someone have to use their brake pedal because someone else isn't as rushed. I am not legally required to drive 40 in 40 mph zone. Period. I can drive 30 or 35. It's my SUV. Go around me. Unless there is a minimum speed posted, I do not have to drive at or above the speed limit. People like you are the problem. It is not MY responsibility as a driver to go as fast as YOU want me to go.
The problem is the number of drivers who totally get bent out of shape because someone is moving slower than they are. If people exhibited the same behavior in a grocery store as they do on the roads, there would be fist fights and gun battles at Whole Foods. Drivers rarely show any courtesy.
You can't use your turn signal in Dallas - someone behind you will speed up to make sure you don't get in front of them. They pull up into pedestrian lanes at stop lights. Too many drivers are inconsiderate and dangerous. I say this as a driver.
As to cycling, I do think that common sense is an important component. Might not be a good idea to ride your bike on Northwest Highway, for example.
On the other hand, if I'm riding down a multi-lane road at 25mph+ and the speed limit is 35mph or even 40, the complaints of drivers should fall on deaf ears. If a driver can't handle that, then they shouldn't be behind the wheel.
-
Greg 12/02/2009 8:20:00 PM
Back in 1998 I lived in Seattle for a summer during college and had my first experience with bicycle commuting. Seattle built bike lanes leading into the city (painted lines to separate cyclists from traffic) and left cyclists to ride in traffic once they arrived downtown. Perhaps this has changed in the 11 years since I lived there, but at the time it seemed to work very well. Cyclists integrated with traffic when necessary but had their own lane on the
busier roads were it was necessary to provide a bit more guidance. I do not think it is necessary to build a barrier between cars and cyclists, but educating everyone about traffic laws, taking a lane (or the right-hand third of a vehicle lane) and such would go a long way to helping keep everyone safe and traffic flowing smoothly.
-
Boris Badonov 12/02/2009 1:45:00 PM
Amen, Kristian.
-
Sam M. 12/02/2009 1:37:00 PM
Lots of talk, but it all ignores a far larger issue. I'll pluck out a quote of Roberts' to make my point:
"My angle was more about what kind of street do I want," Roberts says. "It wasn't so much as wanting bicyclists but that I want to have the street that was active and alive and engaged, like you have in Manhattan, Copenhagen, with vendors out on the streets, people out of their cars, walking."
Getting to that point takes much more than bike policy... it requires city design that favors neighborhoods and mass transit. Dallas has no interest in either of those things--except for funneling transit riders into the zones that developers consider most prized--proving that the city has been in the pocket of developers and road-building interests for decades of awful, awful policy.
Dallas would hate for people to give up their cars and survive on bikes, buses, and car-share rental programs. That'd promote smaller-scale businesses! That'd spread jobs with an upspring of smaller shops that cater to newfound communities that wouldn't necessarily hop in the cars to get to Kroger! Oh, what an insufferable idea of Dallas. Forget that. Let's keep driving a million miles a day to jobs and shops spread around the metroplex, everything sectioned off by poverty and suburbia.
Jason gets it -- a city that bikes is a city that fosters community, mostly out of necessity. Now's the time. The economy sucks, and our carbon footprints are growing. But bike lanes are just a small start (though I'm happy to call them essential, because it only takes one smack of a car into your bike tire to change your life). Jason, if you really want to affect the change you speak of, run for city council or even goddamned mayor. Wrest control from the distant, policy-choking cloud of silence that has choked Dallas' city council and mayor's office for so long.
Right now, I'm charmed to live in a city that just elected a forthright, people-first advocate for mayor, a guy who gets the big-picture issues about making his city more livable. And I know that Dallas is smart enough to pull off the same thing.
-
Warren 12/02/2009 4:44:00 AM
The world is not black or white, it is shades of gray. Any bicycle transportation / recreation system has to include on street bicycling, but it can also have trails and bike lanes if designed properly, and put in places where there is room.
Education is critical for all road users. BikeDFW (www.bikedfw.org) locally offers the League of American Bicyclists courses, and will have some new offerings after the first of the year. EVERYONE reading this can learn something and be safer and more confident, and have more fun! Try it!
-
Stan Howes 12/01/2009 9:08:00 PM
As someone who lives full time on the road...on a motorcycle pulling a camper...I know all too well the need for people in 4-wheeled vehicles to be aware of bikes whether motorcycles or bicycles. One of the first things motorcycle riders need to learn is to "protect your lane".
I can't tell you how many times people in cars and trucks have tried passing me without getting fully into the passing lane and use half my lane instead. Best way to stop that is to ride in the left hand side of the lane.
Ultimately, however, it's important to remember that no matter who's at fault in an accident...no matter what kind of bike you ride,everyone is bigger than you are. Dead won't do anyone any good.
Stan Howes
-
Matt 12/01/2009 7:52:00 PM
William Gruff (#45) says:
"It's not the Critical mass "douchebags" getting run over. It's often law-abiding cyclists. The ones who run stop signs don't get hit - far too often, it's the ones riding responsibly, and just get caught in the wrong place at the wrong time, at the hands of irresponsible drivers. It's like the drunk drivers who survive head-on collisions, but kill a family of 4 in the other car. It makes no sense."
You miss the point.
I myself never said anything about cyclists running stop signs. That's irrelevant to my point, which is that bicycles slow down traffic when they 'take a lane'.
If the road is full of cyclists (in every lane) blocking automobile traffic, like Critical Mass, that's a problem! You're gonna get run over doing stupid shit like that, and I don't pity you.
It's not okay for the road to be completely overtaken by bicycles in any situation.
William Gruff (#45) also says:
"As to cars being "expected" to go "at least" the speed limit...well, that's another example of the aggressive mentality in this town. Attitudes need to change. We need to drive as if our children are in the car in front of them. The speed limit is NOT A GUIDELINE. It is not a recommended speed. It is a limit to how fast you can legally drive. How hard is that for drivers to learn?"
I'm sorry dude, but if you go less than the speed limit on any roadway, in any vehicle,YOU'RE IN THE WAY. I can see going less than the speed limit in the right lane, MAYBE... but even that is pushing it.
Only inconsiderate drivers travel less than the speed limit. You'll get run off the road doing that in a CAR! Forget about a bike!
This isn't a game! If you're on a bike, you obviously aren't in a hurry. You have no business in a busy street where the speed limit is more than maybe 30 mph!
Busy roadways are NOT a venue for cyclists, unless they have special lanes of their own (like HOV).
Boris (# 50) said it best:
"The bottom line is that people must use common sense when riding a bicycle in traffic. The cyclists who advocate taking the lane and go 25 mph slower than surrounding traffic don't exhibit any common sense."
-
Jason H 12/01/2009 7:01:00 PM
If you think a teenager, senior, or any person who is not a regular rider, is going to be able to take their cruiser or mountain bike on Garland Road (especially between Buckner and Peavy) you are absolutely out of your mind.
I think overall the major disconnect in this debate is that some of the serious road cyclists can't seem to grasp that the general biking population are not watt cranking roadies with $2800 carbon bikes. They are rather out of shape awkward beasts lumbering on non-perfomance bicycles. They are intimidated (rightly so!) to ride on local streets and don't want to take the time and spend the money on classes and education. They would end up being roadkill. Pure and Simple. If a road cyclists wants to rip it up on Garland or Irving Blvd, fine. However don't expect to win over the general population who would love to use their bikes more, but don't want to get killed pedaling to drug store or market.
-
Richard Wharton 12/01/2009 4:25:00 PM
It won't be solved by paint or by barriers or by barricades. The discussion here is mostly about cyclists using roads for utility purposes, not recreational cyclists riding in packs, nor in parks. Go ask 'toothpick guy' on the Katy Trail about his OCD as he travels north, and south. North, and South. North, and South. Every. Single. Day.
Multilane roads are actually better in some cases. I routinely ride ON Garland Road and Irving Boulevard, for example. Cyclists are less likely to slow traffic down when faster vehicles can pass. That's called integration. Take a single lane road, and narrow it further with a bike lane, and you've got pissed off neighbors, as well as a more risky situation for the cyclist. Want to get rid of parking? Tell that to a neighborhood with no garages or decent driveways and watch the fur fly.
Most of you are posting from outside the City of Dallas. You don't, and won't, pay taxes on the bonds that will be put up for pay for this stuff. Has there ever been a discussion about a 'Suburb Tax'? Perhaps we should get Schutze to revive some of his stories about who pays for DART, and who gets more out of it - us? or them? Dallas itself has a pretty transient population. Just like the Bridge and the Tollroad - you've got outside influences putting the burden of cost on the folks of one city, while others take advantage of it and get charged little in return.
Group cycling is not utility cycling. It's either recreation, or it's a parade. If you have a problem with groups of cyclists (fairly rare in Dallas City Limits), contact the clubs or bike shops.
Don't turn this in to an argument about personalities. That's missing the point. The point is that it'll be your taxes, and your streets, and your liberties, that will be affected by this plan, and the City of Dallas should not implement it without articles and opinions like yours being voiced. Directly. I hope Kallhammer is reading this, but I hope even more that he's reaching out to more than one enclave.
Max, if you're NERVOUS about cycling in the city, may I suggest that you take a ride with some different clubs, or individuals, or groups, and then maybe call up Preston Tyree, director of education at the League of American Bicyclists, and ask him how hard it would be to implement one class for you and the City Council, and maybe the Mayor? Just make him promise not to wear a freakin' suit, or a tracksuit, for the weekend.
The real story is about the costs of investing in engineered solutions, versus the cost of investing in smarter cyclists. Don't miss the point. Perpetual, Persistent, and Productive education programs exist, and they cost pennies on the Benjamin. I love trails - they have their place. Lanes are also viable in certain locations, but we already have a right to the roads of Dallas, there are already cyclists using them, and the quickest way to get more cyclists out there is an educational, empowering, anti-fear campaign, instead of a proverbial "Boston Dig" program that will cost millions to build, millions to maintain, and won't necessarily improve anything.
One more way to get cyclists out? Get a mondo university in a heavily mixed urban setting. That's what Portland and Boulder have. That's what ASU and AU are about. That's what Atlanta has, etc. Us? Well, we have SMU, and they have a few commuter profs, and a small but excited bike club, but that's about it. Of course, UNT's campus in Dallas, is, where again? And UTD barely has a decade of student housing that remains inadequate. And, it's in Richardson.
Oh - and to date, none of you. NONE of you, have contacted me to go for a ride or take a class. I got a bite in Allen, though. I find that truly sad.
-
Boris Badonov 12/01/2009 12:44:00 PM
Re: Comment 45 - Mr. Gruff, you are exactly right about everything you noted in your comment except one thing: you must keep pace with traffic. That is one of the first things they taught me in drivers' ed. Apparently, people like Summer forgot this little tidbit.
The bottom line is that people must use common sense when riding a bicycle in traffic. The cyclists who advocate taking the lane and go 25 mph slower than surrounding traffic don't exhibit any common sense.
-
Oscar 12/01/2009 5:41:00 AM
Ken, yeah...Mr. Summer's position is just too 'all or nothing.' The more I think about this actually
being the reason Dallas has no bike lanes, the more incredulous I find this story and the more angry it makes me. Surely, this belongs in
the the 'truth can be stranger than fiction' category. I, myself am in LOVE with cycling. It is a great passion of
mine. I own 6 bikes, all in perfect working condition (not just sitting there with deflated tires, mind you) but even
I see the utter stupidity and stuborness with Mr. Summer's approach. Of course we need friggin' bike lanes! duh! They paid this guy!?
-
Ken Duble 12/01/2009 4:16:00 AM
Summer reminds me of NRA gun zealots. So many people are trying to negotiate a place for bikes and cars to coexist in harmony. Fanatical views about asserting one's rights get in the way of trying to negotiate reasonable compromises to protect the safety of sensible people.
-
Oscar 12/01/2009 12:04:00 AM
Correction, I only agree with what Matt said in post #41, Not post #43, however, yeah...Even though, we are entitled to ride on a road with a 45mph speed limit, as a cyclist, you should excersie good judgment to determine if that road is safe based on the differences in speed and if motorists are expecting to see you on, for example: Northwest Hwy. So again, choosing a good road is key.
-
Oscar 11/30/2009 11:54:00 PM
I moved back to Dallas from the Los Angeles area a couple of months ago. While there I picked up competitive road cycling with commuting to work being a fortunate by-product. LA has a lot of bike paths, but they can be somewhat scattered. Regardless, and contrary to popular belief LA is suprisingly good city to cycle in. I believe you should always research for the best routes, but with a little planning, for example, I could bike from Pasadena to Santa Monica (25 miles) and feel like I was not in danger, not an anyoance and not impeding traffic. As soon as I came to Dallas, however, it was obvious how NOT conducive to cycling it was. I feel I should add that I can go pretty fast too. I can average around 27mph for a 40K tt, so I'm a fairly strong rider. When I moved here I had my heart set on being able to find a route from Garland to White Rock Lake (It's not that far on the map and would have made a great Saturday morning route.) I gave up that hope though. There's no way I'm ridding my bike on Garland Ave or Northwest Highway. I'll race in a pack elbow to elbow with a bunch of other crazy cyclists, but not those roads. And Matt from McKinney (post #43): I agree with EVERYTHING you wrote. Motorists here really ARE jerks. Also, California had the no cell phone while driving law. After having lived in a place with such a law, I cannot tell begin to tell you how good a law it is, for everyone, not just cyclists. Regarding Mr. Summer endorsing ONLY vehicular cycling, he has good intentions, but that alone will not work. Based on my experience commutting to work for several years in LA, I think the best solution is a combination of bike lanes and choosing a bike friendly street. Lastly, one silver linning: I now ride a lot to the North of Rowlett, what we call 'country.' There is NO shoulder, but I ride as far to the right as reasonable. So far, people have passed me at very safe distances, at times even going into the other lane...I'm happy with 3 feet!
-
William Gruff 11/30/2009 11:14:00 PM
It's not the Critical mass "douchebags" getting run over. It's often law-abiding cyclists. The ones who run stop signs don't get hit - far too often, it's the ones riding responsibly, and just get caught in the wrong place at the wrong time, at the hands of irresponsible drivers. It's like the drunk drivers who survive head-on collisions, but kill a family of 4 in the other car. It makes no sense.
I find it amazing that people think cyclists don't deserve access to the roads because some of them run stop signs. I see DOZENS of drivers EVERY DAY who break the law in one way or another: rolling thru stop signs, speed, fail to use turn signals, tailgate, etc.
As to cars being "expected" to go "at least" the speed limit...well, that's another example of the aggressive mentality in this town. Attitudes need to change. We need to drive as if our children are in the car in front of them. The speed limit is NOT A GUIDELINE. It is not a recommended speed. It is a limit to how fast you can legally drive. How hard is that for drivers to learn?
Man, people suck.
grumble grumble grumble
-
Dorothy Zarbo 11/30/2009 10:19:00 PM
There are no dividing factors between cyclists & motorists at any age. If anything, think about the child learning to ride a bike for family outings. Think of that same child the first time they learn to drive. Both are rights of passage in our society.
I sure do appreciate your enthusiasm for wanting cyclists to be safe. I often said, I'd commute daily if streets were safer. Trails are wonderful but not practical for commuting. Sharing the streets with vehicle traffic needs both cyclists & motorists better educated to share the roads.
Bike lanes are usually unkept & become hazards for the cyclist. Bike lanes collect trash & debris from the road. They fall victim to disrepair. Just look at the shoulder of any roads around the Metroplex. Motorists will be less likely to yield-right-of-way to cyclists as slow-moving-vehicles. There will still be intersections to cross that bike lanes will not be directive for the flow-of-traffic. Mainly, bike lanes provide a false feeling of security without the knowledge for responsibility that goes with this privilege of being out on our roads besides motorist. Cyclists will eventually become limited as to where & how they can travel. Motorists will remain confused & frustrated. Bike lanes are just marks on a road. They mean nothing without an understanding of traffic rules for slow moving vehicles.
It has been a known fact, once commuting/recreational cyclist learn to share the road, they become better motorists.The same goes in reverse for a motorist. Besides, it is cheaper to use the roads we have & educate everyone. Nothing disturbs me more than a cyclist not following the rules of the road. Myself, & a lot of others, are out there as cyclists & motorists on our roads. I've been in other cities where sharing is actually enjoyable. This can happen in Dallas through education, not cycling lanes. Simply, bike lanes are costly, not well maintained, limiting, & unnecessary for a well educated public.
Learn road safety & teach our future leaders - our children & grand children. You don't need to be a cyclist to take advantage of the educational opportunities in our Metroplex. Check out these web sites for a well rounded commuting/recreational - bicycle/motorist education:
www.bikeleague.org
www.bikedfw.org
www.onlinebikecoach.com
www.jccdallas.org
Dallas is a great place to live, raise a family & retire. It hurts to be known as living in "Dallas - The Worst Place to Ride for Cyclists." We can turn this around for the positive.
-
Matt 11/30/2009 10:02:00 PM
See, the whole argument that Forrester and Summer bring to the table is "Bicycle lanes are segregation, and cyclists aren't second class citizens."
Well, it's not that cyclists are second class citizens, it's that bicycles are second class vehicles.
A car is expected to go AT LEAST the speed limit. So, how much sense does it make for a car to just chill out behind a 20 mph bike on a 45 mph roadway when there's no way to pass them? None.
Vehicular Cyclists don't want 'equal' treatment as motorists, they want special treatment. They want to travel 20-30 mph at the expense of the vast majority of citizens (motorists).
They don't care about your right to go the speed limit, just their right to be in your way.
That's why so many of these Critical Mass douchebags get ran over� because they think they're more important than you, and it's obvious.
-
Louise 11/30/2009 9:02:00 PM
We had bicycle lanes in my home town back east and they were great. The car drivers stayed out of them and we cyclists stayed out of the path of the cars. Mutual coexistance.
Now I am frequently brought to a crawl by the herds of self-centered cyclists who hang out in Las Colinas out by the Exxon building. They have no regard for anyone but themselves, often blocking all three lanes.
Out of this experience, I have to say that I definitely oppose "vehicular cycling".
-
Matt 11/30/2009 8:35:00 PM
As I sit here and read this enormous discussion about cycling in Dallas, I can't help but laugh to myself.
Some folks here have brought this up before, but I'll bring it up again because it's integral to this discussion: DALLAS AREA CITIZENS CANNOT DRIVE.
I can't even drive around my suburb (McKinney) without getting all riled up over the blatant disregard motorists have for the rules of the road.
Motorists in DFW have zero respect for other motorists, let alone cyclists.
Until that changes, cycle segregation is the way to go. You can 'educate' all you want, however it's really the drivers' education (or lack thereof) that needs work.
You want to ride in traffic? You wanna be a bad ass? Go for it. But don't expect nasty Dallas soccer moms in their SUVs to think of you as anything more than an interruption to their cell phone conversation.
-
Michael Brown 11/30/2009 4:48:00 PM
I just re-read the October article and this grabbed me:
The existence of this type of opposition did not surprise Hunt. Apparently, on her travels in other cities, she had been warned there would be opposition. "When I talked to the folks in Portland and Seattle, I said, 'How did you work to bring everyone together?' Of course you can't make everyone happy, but the point that they made is, you create options for everybody. And you make sure that you don't force people who are road warriors to ride in the bike lanes."
Hunt even saw the merit of their main point, which was that education would alleviate the majority's fear of riding with cars. "I think they bring an important voice to the conversation," said Hunt. "When they say it's important to educate cyclists and it's important to educate drivers. I absolutely agree with that. Education is an important component...But at the same time, it's important for us to expand options."
Hunt insists that every city that has added bike lanes has seen a dramatic increase in cyclists: "And that's what we want to see. It's for environmental reasons, for health reasons, for infastructure reasons."
***********************************
Sounds reasonable. We need to all get involved to make sure it stays reasonable.
Cheers again
-
Michael Brown 11/30/2009 4:33:00 PM
Great discussion. I could have summed up by stating that my fear is that in a place like Dallas (where the drivers are ultra-aggressive towards any vehicle moving slower than they are), the bike-lane mentality could lead to a "bike-lane only" reality, where riding on streets that have no bike lanes is prohibited. I think Dallas is goofy enough to do something like that eventually. Maybe I'm just being crazy.
As was mentioned easlier, a PSA campaign would also be a great idea. I'd like to see that happen as well.
I just don't want to see bike lanes promoted as the cure for the problems facing cyclists. It is going to take a mix of solutions. Ulitmately, I hope that we don't limit our involvement to message boards and we all actually get involved enough to help make those solutions a reality.
Cheers
-
Pick 11/30/2009 7:47:00 AM
You people live in Dallas. It sucks because of stuff like this and always will. Go postal or deal.
Really, you're waiting for your politicians to fix 70+ years of bad planning?
-
Dmitriy Shnayder 11/30/2009 2:46:00 AM
This was a nice article, but I would like to know more about the upcoming bike plan changes. Is a preview of the new plan available on the web?
I have ridden both on trails and on streets in Dallas, and my opinion is that the more lanes of traffic there are (the higher the speed limit) the more dangerous a street is for bicyclists. Not all streets are equally safe to ride.
A previous comment claimed that all bicyclists disobey traffic laws. This is not true, although I often see bicyclists who ignore stop signs. Any education campaign for bicyclists will need to include a section on obeying the laws.
-
Chris 11/29/2009 8:33:00 PM
Several years ago at a community meeting sponsored by then Council Member Veletta Lill, I had the chance to ask questions and, later in the meeting, visit one-on-one with P.M. Summers.
Regardless of whether you advocate mixing bicycles with traffic or segregating them, I can assure you that the author's implications are correct in this regard: P.M. Summers was a rude and pompous ass in his conversation with me. I only asked a few questions about the locations of the designated "biking streets" and advocated for expanding the system. But this man talked to me, a friendly 50+ yo businessman, like I was a two year old girl.
So, perhaps his lack of people skills was part of his demise. I, for one, do not mourn his reassignment. Perhaps a change of personality is what's needed to make progress for bikers in Dallas.
I have this to offer: At the time, Summers had designated Lemmon Ave as the bicycle connection route between East Dallas and the Uptown/Oaklawn area. Lemmon Avenue.
I understand the position that bicycles should mix with traffic. But has anyone counted the lanes of traffic at Lemmon over Central Expressway? Ten. Ten lanes of traffic, including U-turns, left turns, right turns and drivers blasting through red lights at full speed while chatting away on their cell phones. There should be red light cameras for every signal on that bridge.
Anyone who believes Lemmon over Central is a remotely safe area to ride a bicycle, whether mixed with traffic or in yet another separate lane is demented. I drive it at least twice a day and have witnessed countless accidents there. It's not even that safe for autos, let alone bicycles.
Hall Street would be a much better path. A shorter connection to the Katy Trail, only two lanes of traffic on Hall, with only six lanes (including U-turn lanes) over Central, it carries much less traffic.
One thing that is indisputable: A bicyclist has to be SEEN before he/she can be SAFE in traffic. And these days, with drivers distracted by cell phones, GPS, and all the old traditional distractions like putting on make-up and eating cheeseburgers, being SEEN in a ten lane madhouse of traffic is less likely.
That summer evening years ago, P.M. Summers lost all support from me, due to his extraordinary condescending attitude. Maybe he'll learn something from his reassignment.
-
Bob 11/29/2009 7:02:00 PM
I believe there are merits to both education (awareness for drivers even more so than bikers), and infrastructure. Having both, in my opinion, increases safety more than either solution by itself. But this means an AGGRESSIVE, ONGOING, awareness education campaign (similar to the "Buckle up" seat belt laws) to be effective.
Where there are physically separated lanes, I would use them, and my wife and children would feel more comfortable using them (more riders on the road). Where the trails end, I believe taking the lane makes a biker more visible and POSSIBLY safer, depending on the traffic levels and riding conditions.
The most important factor for safety though, is having LOTS of bike riders being seen and noticed on Dallas roads on a frequent basis. With lots of riders, and lots of awareness training, Dallas drivers will SLOWLY learn to share the road in a safer manner, leading to more riders, leading to even more awareness, .... We will need to create this positive feedback loop in order to create a long term safer biking solution. To get there though, we have to find ways to create and fund budgets to address both infrastructure and awareness education training.
-
Jason H 11/29/2009 12:16:00 AM
While I personally prefer riding in the street, and ride for fitness, I must side with the bike lane camp on this topic. If you are going to promote cycling in a city like this, then a sense of security for the cyclist is going to trump any amount of education you can pass onto a driver or a cyclist himself.
For as much as Dallas wants to be seen as a world class city, it's always going to have the mentality of a ham-fisted jacka*s. The vehicular cyclist is living in the fool's paradise if think they are going to make all the drivers of Dallas roads wise up to the fact that a bicycle is considered a vehicle.
-
Kristian 11/28/2009 9:03:00 AM
Jeanne,
*i fully concede that Mr. Summers did do some good things in office. It's his ceaseless bashing and tactless dismissal of anyone who wants to experience for themselves anything other than hardcore vehicular cycling that sadly eclipses his accomplishments and turns what should be a discussion of useful city planning into a rancorous debate that hinges on his questionable ideology. He himself views his efforts on Katy Trail like some kind of Frankenstein monster he created, so how can we credit him for something that he disavows? For someone who worked serving the public, his casual use of name calling and character generalizations of constituents that don't see eye to eye with him is pretty lame. I become annoyed to think of what we might have today had we had a more open and option minded person in his post. And throughout their dealings, Jason Roberts has maintained the gentleman's game, even when he wasn't receiving the same courtesy from Mr. Summer.
Also, this education argument seems to rest on the Forresters having some bulwark of sage wisdom. dudes, it's not rocket science. act like a car. i get it. wer'e talking about conditions. being an "educated" swimmer might allow you to understand riptides and undertows and avoid drowning, but it's not going to keep a shark from biting your legs off. sometimes i want to get to the store in a less sharky environment. why is that so hard to understand?
* i wrote a comment which appeared posted and then disappeared. i rewrote it here, so it might appear twice depending on how the site decides to roll.
-
Kristian 11/28/2009 8:21:00 AM
and for the record, i love riding in the street. i take my place on the road and follow the rules, and i enjoy it in general. but there is a range of conditions, and at the more extreme end, you can't expect EVERYONE to adapt. there are whole areas of this city i won't touch, because i don't need the aneurism. catch me on a reasonable stretch, and i'm there, doing everything a Forrester would do, but i will never be so hardcore that i can ride EVERYWHERE. i admit it. no class, or lecture, rulebook, or strict cycling ethos is going to change that. and there are times, that some humans enjoy, like say a date, where i'm not gonna be spandexed out, riding with PM and his homies from Preston to downtown. I'm gonna be wanting to stroll with my lady to Angelika on bikes, with normal clothes on, and don't want friday night to be Death Race 2000 with a drunk in a hummer on my backside.
-
Jeanne Patterson 11/28/2009 5:22:00 AM
Kristian,
PM wrote grants that got trails funded in Dallas. His efforts on that front more than covered his paycheck and have greatly benefited Dallas. Funding is the biggest issue facing bicycle advocates. I chaired the Texas Bicycle Coalition for 6 years - I know first hand how hard it is to get things done! Considering the funding limitation he faced with the City of Dallas - he's done a great job. Trails cost approximately 1/2 million dollars a mile... bike lanes not much less... with city budgets falling short do you think anything will really be done? Education is a inexpensive solution that works.
-
Ken Duble 11/28/2009 4:23:00 AM
The thinking of guys like Summer is reactionary. So, the answer to rude, aggressive motorists is to be a rude, selfish cyclist! To Summer and his ilk, cycling is all about asserting their rights. Sure, more young and middle-aged men are getting on their bikes, but they're ignoring the bigger picture. Getting more people on their bikes is about reaching families, particularly children and women, and this involves making cyclists feel safe.
Count me squarely in the camp that cyclists should assert their rights on the road. This doesn't mean, however, that one is blind to the effect road design has in encouraging the very auto-centric culture that has come to threaten cycling. Cycling is most popular in countries like the Netherlands and Demark, where curbs segregate cyclists from both pedestrians and autos.
Furthermore, we're asking the wrong question about stop signs and signal lights. The experience of the UK and other nations is that eliminating stop signs and signal lights in favor of traffic circles results in fewer traffic accidents, not more. Not only do stop signs and traffic signals discourage cycling, but the stopping and subsequent acceleration results in more hydrocarbons reduced air quality. In the future, let's focus our studies on places with higher rates of cycling than Dallas, and see what they're doing right.
-
Rooster 11/28/2009 3:09:00 AM
Cycling?
Trying to care...
Trying to care...
Nope...
Not feeling it.
-
Kristian 11/28/2009 2:06:00 AM
quoted:"It�s a sad day for Dallas to see someone (PM Summer) who�s worked so hard to make Dallas a better place for cyclists vilified for promoting what I personally believe to be sound reasoning concerning bike lanes."
I don't think it's particularly sad. he drew a salary for 15 years with a charge to make Dallas a more bike friendly city, and his approach has been refuted as a failure by the reality on the street. and his ridiculous dismissal of "neo-urban hipsters and their brewpubs" or whatever he was blathering on about, in service of denigrating Portland (yeah, that shithole), shows how out of touch he is. those people he's talking about, those people are called "young people", and they work and live in this city like anyone else. This man's entire existence and his abysmal blog are dedicated to his prejudiced evangelism, and he lost his former position rightfully and to the benefit of everyone who bikes in Dallas.
-
Jeanne Patterson 11/28/2009 1:18:00 AM
It�s a sad day for Dallas to see someone (PM Summer) who�s worked so hard to make Dallas a better place for cyclists vilified for promoting what I personally believe to be sound reasoning concerning bike lanes. I�ve been to a number of those cities cited as examples of good examples of how bike lanes work � and I haven�t been impressed. Most cyclists I saw were either on sidewalks or riding the roads. And in New York City � pedestrians were constantly wondering into the marked lanes. I can�t help but question the increase number of cyclists these cities cite after installing lanes because to do otherwise would really question the wisdom of spending the dollars.
-
William Neumann 11/27/2009 11:34:00 PM
Richard, I don't plan on signing up for a class because
a: I already know how to ride in traffic and am comfortable doing so. I have been doing it for many years, and I'm not going to waste time and money that can be better used elsewhere on something I already know.
b: Reread what I've said. I never said education isn't good or useful, or that it wouldn't help an uninformed cyclist. What I did day is that it's not the best route to get more people (particularly new cyclists) out riding.
Bottom line is, I feel that the *combination* of knowing how to ride properly and a quality complete streets style infrastructure offers the best riding experience.
-
Opus the Poet 11/27/2009 10:32:00 PM
I have been riding a bicycle since the LBJ administration, on the street/highway as a vehicle. I used to commute 15 miles across N. Dallas every night (I took the bus part way on the way in during the day). Most of the time I had no problems, because Dallas and Richardson cops would patrol my commute route and ticket/arrest drivers driving aggressively around me. As one cop put it, I'm an idiot magnet. I would just be riding along obeying the law (TX VC 551 for those so inclined to use Google) and drivers would go stupid when they saw me, cumulating with the guy that swore at me from the other side of a median, hung a u-ey at the end of the block, then proceeded to run me down at 65 MPH, unfortunately by which time I was in Garland where at the time they didn't care about cyclists.
The only gripe/question I have about bike lanes, is what do the people do when the bike lanes end? Unless they are taught vehicular cycling they have no idea of what to do, which is one of the reasons I see so many salmon cyclists, and cyclists that don't obey traffic controls, because TX public and private schools don't teach traffic safety any more. In a way that's an improvement because back when they were teaching bike riding they told the kids to ride against traffic, contrary to the law.
-
Richard Wharton 11/27/2009 9:34:00 PM
William, why don't you just sign up for a class and take it, and then make your decision as to whether it'll make a difference or not? I really have to wonder about your sincerity if you won't even spend a day trying something out. Let's meet some time in my neighborhood and practice some drills with cut up tennis balls. That's what Kimberly did, and I think it helped.
And "Take it" - some guy named Geoff Johnston, whom I've never met, is a funny guy with a left-turn only sense of humor. Oh, Geoff - the photo? Taken at a GoldSprint event. Pretty fun time. Wanna race?
-
jz 11/27/2009 4:29:00 PM
Dallas bicycle friendly? Tell that to the police officer who couldn't even be bothered to get out of his cruiser while he wrote me a ticket for not wearing my bicycle helmet.
Really, officer? A ticket for not wearing my bicycle helmet? People in this town drive like being a careless aggressive jerk is required behavior, but the police are worried about me and my helmet. Dallas is not friendly, much less bike-friendly.
-
Take it! 11/27/2009 6:14:00 AM
Take the lane, Bitches! http://thehangingbrain.wordpress.com/2009/10/13/guest-columnist-vehicular-cyclist-warton-richards/
-
Richard Wharton 11/27/2009 3:44:00 AM
William, you write this from Plano. Plano is not Dallas. Plano has a bike plan coordinator. I know her. I taught her. The citizens of Plano have their own ideas about what works and what doesn't. You don't pay for my bonds, I don't pay for yours... And any way you look at it, wouldn't you rather have an educated cyclist in a bike lane, than an uneducated one? What would an uneducated bicyclist do when she was 'doored'? What would an uneducated bicyclist do to avoid debris in a bike lane, which is where the glass from broken bottles will go, which is where the leaves and clippings from landscapers is going to go, etc.?
I'm not anti bike lane. I'm anti misinformation, and fear propogation. More time on the bike leads to greater confidence. More confidence leads to greater numbers of cyclists. More cyclists leads to greater acceptance in the mix. All without the expensive solution. And believe me - education is by far the cheapest part of any of the solutions that should be presented. That it has been ignored for so long says more about the smugness of the culture of cyclists, as well as the push by DOT's to keep cyclists out of the mix.
You're promoting segregation, and I wonder how much better segregation is, based on our culture's not-too-distant history. You also slam me about the costs of education. Um, $30-$60 one time only, for a weekend (or less) of skills, drills, chalktalk and practice? Go price out a bike lane. In fact, ask the author of this article for a quote. Then, if you want to pay it, I'll let you levy the tax on yourself. It's not a burden I want, when I already have the freedom to ride on the streets as-is. I challenge you to put the burden of education on your own back, volunteer, get certified, and go train as many cyclists as you can, with your own marketing campaign, in the City of Plano. Mike and BikeDFW can probably help you along the way.
Enjoy your rights, or be satisfied with less freedom. Me? I'm going to set a goal to teach 100 adults in Bike Ed next year. What are your goals?
-
Leecee 11/27/2009 2:36:00 AM
Cyclists in Dallas annoy me -- especially in Far North Dallas -- because they do not obey stop signs or other rules of the road, but expect me to treat them with out-of-the-way respect.
-
Michael Brown 11/26/2009 6:07:00 PM
One thing I find interesting is that my wife and I face many of the issues confronting cyclists every day as we drive our 50cc scooters to and from work. Impatient, aggressive drivers obviously being "impeded" by our presence on Turtle Creek, where the road is 3 lanes each way and the speed limit is 30 mph (and we are driving at or just above the speed limit). So when I hear the "complaints" of drivers, it is sometimes hard to take them seriously. But I recognize that there are times where they have a valid point (just not nearly as often as they think).
As an experienced cyclist, I feel safest when I take the lane and act like a vehicle, just like on my scooter. I am of the opinion that is the safest way to ride. Granted, I do not ride in a manner that would *legally* impede traffic, but I am also of the belief that it is not my responsibility as a driver, rider, or cyclist to accomodate impatient drivers who want to break the law by driving 45-50 in a 30mph zone.
As a cyclist, I can see some good points from both sides of this issue in regards to bike lanes. However...although I can see the point of accomodating "new" cyclists, let's not fool ourselves. That strip of paint marking a bike lane is not some magical force field that will keep people safe. In October, a couple in San Antonio was killed as they were riding on the shoulder...though the shoulder was several feet wide, the white paint strip failed to protect them from the driver who was not paying attention to the road.
They do mention using some sort of cement barrier or border...that might help, except that the barrier will not exist in intersections, where a vast number of city cyclists are killed, often because the driver was not paying attention.
One reason for my opposition to lanes (besides the false sense of security) is that in practice, it limits where cyclists can ride. Additionally, where bike lanes exist, they are frequently filled with debris, trash,, glass, etc., forcing you to (unexpectedly) go into the street. Sometimes people WALK in them. Furthermore, the presence of lanes in some streets results in a false expectation among drivers that there will be no cyclists on streets without such lanes.
My biggest concern that it will only be a matter of time before the powers-that-be limit *all* cycling to designated paths only. Is this the future that these new bike advocates want?
The best way to address this issue is through EDUCATION. Educate drivers AND cyclists. It's cheaper. Safer. Far more efficient and practical.
I'm not advocating cycling on I-35. I'm advocating safe and responsible cycling and driving. Education is the key. Bike lanes alone will not solve this problem - it will only make things worse. Bike lanes are a typical government "feel-good" solution that will neither feel good nor be a solution.
-
Mark McDonald 11/26/2009 6:06:00 PM
I'm not a cyclist, but I appreciate them. I've spent time in Europe and Asia, where there are massive numbers of cyclists. I'm aware that just as there are avid cyclists, there are motorists who angrily detest cyclists. There is one reason for this: Generally, cyclists don't obey traffic laws. I heard one person state that they had never seen a cyclist stop at a stop sign, unless they had children with them. A friend and I were driving in a residential area discussing cycling. He has two sons, one an avid cyclist, the other dislikes cyclists. We had to slam on our brakes to avoid a man in full Tour de France gear, riding an expensive bike, talking on a cell phone as he ran a stop sign. Since no one was killed, it was actually a funny moment. A few bad ones give everybody a bad name. A friend who works in a county government in Oregon says that county commisioners don't like cyclists because they don't pay road taxes. I hope the warring cycle factions can work out their differences so the people who will need to use their bicycles won't be placed in jeopardy.
-
William Neumann 11/26/2009 5:26:00 PM
Ah, Richard, I knew you'd be all over this article before long.
Yes, more education for cyclists and drivers would be great, but it still won't solve the problem. You take someone out for a nice ride around McKinney and Turtle Creek (not exactly the worst of rides, I might add. 400 cars in 45 minutes.. oh no! Hows about taking them up, say Preston in Plano during high traffic to get your 400 cars in 5 minutes), and things are nice and they start to feel good, but then a few days or weeks later, and some assjack tosses a good scare into them and then what? A number of people just put the bike away for good. Are you going to offer a lifetime warranty plan for your education ride and go out to take them on refresher/reassurance rides? And how many people are you going to do this for? The Metroplex is a big honkin' city, how many educators would you need to adequately serve it?
The problem is, many, many people won't feel comfortable on a bike until many more people are on bikes. And time and again, experience and research has shown, that the best way to get those numbers up (particularly for female cyclists) is via infrastructure, not offering education (the infrastructure is there for you without you having to actively seek it out -- if it's done right).
And you keep rambling on about the costs of adding the infrastructure, but you ignore the costs of education. Last time you went on about costs on the DMN website, your numbers showed that for the cost of educating the drivers and cyclists of the metroplex, we could have *thousands* of miles of bike lanes, wide outside lanes, sharrows, bike boxes, etc. Saying A is better than B because B is so expensive is useless without also discussing the costs of A (as well as the benefits of both and maintenance costs, etc.).
And I'm not dismissing vehicularism. It's got some very good points and lessons to be learned. I use the principles all the time on my commutes and pleasure rides. But you, Summer, Forester, etc. tend to treat it as a religion, something not to be deviated from. You all seem to treat it as not just a solution, but as a path to that solution as well, if only the uneducated heathens out there would just convert en masse already.
Sadly that's never been shown to be a viable path to increasing ridership, whereas the infrastructure/complete streets model has been shown to workin numerous locations: Portland, Davis, Minneapolis, Albuquerque, and so on. Get the rider numbers up, get cycling awareness up, and then the further education can really pay off as an added bonus.
-
Richard Wharton 11/26/2009 4:20:00 PM
I need to comment about the title of the article. It's completely misleading and untrue. PM Summer has NEVER advocated playing in traffic or on the streets of Dallas - look instead at some of the previous photo exposes, on this blog, of events sponsored by the BFOC. Halloween rides, Tweed Rides, things like that. Sure, they're fun, but look carefully at the photographs and see if you can see order or integration. It's a Critical Mass ride, no matter what costumes the riders are wearing. Are they fun? Absolutely, but they don't further the efforts of integration and acceptance of cyclists in the transportation mix. I'm not against having fun on your bike. I am against playing in traffic, as is PM Summer. Re-Title it to something more accurate, and that will tell the public even more.
-
Steve A 11/26/2009 4:06:00 PM
Richard speaks the truth. It's much easier to ride around Dallas than lots of places I ride, as I discovered when Richard made good on his offer to help teach me. The toughest thing for me to learn was how to avoid the joggers on the Katy Trail...
-
Dave Siciliano 11/26/2009 3:57:00 PM
Excellent article and good points being raised. I have to agree with each party to some degree. I go on 30 to 40 miles rides a few times a week and find staying far right challenging. Where there are bike lanes, I try to ride in them, but have found in places like Destin, FL, there are so many casual tourists in them doing unpredictable things, I get back on the street. Where they are not crowded with walkers and tourists, I try to ride in them.
Bike paths in Dallas are really nothing but some designated streets: no preference is given to a biker in any manner I have discovered. Just an awareness thing.
When riding on a street that does not have a bike path (most streets in Dallas) I do not ride all the way to the right, but do get out enough for the driver of a car to have to 'deal' with me rather than blow by me without noticing. Most streets I ride on are wide enough where a driver can still go around within the right lane, but I found if I stay far right there are obstacles to deal with and cars blow by very close. I've had drivers pass and immediately stop and turn right in front of me--I hit the car. The driver said she never saw me. I've been run into upcoming parked cars--lots of other stories. I don't try to block traffic, but do get out far enough for a driver to have to see me and go around me a bit.
I believe Lance Armstrong makes the same points in his book.
It's all about balance. We all need to use the roads. I try to stay on secondary streets which are wider and am able to do that where I am, but I do want to be where a driver sees me and realizes them must move a bit to pass.
We can talk about where to be at redlights where a biker doesn't block the right turn after stop drivers another time
Have a great ride.
Dave
-
bob 11/26/2009 3:56:00 PM
My experience of trying to bike on the streets in the metroplex is;
1) riding on the kelly blvd overpass crossing george bush 6:00PM Sunday night, I was going 20mph, & the guy behind me got right on my tail & leaned on his horn.
2) The texas instruments bicycle commuting coordinator told me to stop riding on a designated dallas city bike route (complete with little blue signs of pegasus on a bike) because too many commuting employees had been run over.
Almost nobody walks in this town either. If we just had complete sidewalks, & they changed the law to allow cyclists to treat red lights as stop signs, & stop signs as yield signs, that is probably as good as you can get.
Oh yeah, & hey Carrollton, how about a bike path over the hill behind the Lowes on Trinity Mills so the greenbelt connects to DART rail? It's what, 300ft?
-
Richard Wharton 11/26/2009 3:55:00 PM
I would also add that the City Council should try riding their bikes to work for a MONTH, before coming to any conclusions. One day is an adventure. One week is an experience. One month is the development of a habit.
-
Richard Wharton 11/26/2009 3:52:00 PM
I'll make this offer to anyone out there in the City of Dallas. I personally took the author of this article out for an afternoon of basic bike skills, drills, and education, and in the end, we completed a short, 45 minute ride in and around the Turtle Creek and McKinney Avenue area. This was in high traffic on a weekday. We were passed by over 400 cars, and not once, NOT ONCE were we ever honked at or harassed. We did it by following fundamental rules and acting like traffic. There was even one point where the author lost her water bottle in a high traffic zone. We calmly pulled over TO THE LEFT at W. Village, and when conditions permitted, I was able to retrieve said bottle intact. We did not need bike lanes, we did not need segregated facilities. We used knowledge, confidence, and common sense to control our bikes and get to where we were going.
Read the article carefully, and think about the costs of installation, maintenance, and increased risk involved with infrastructure segregation. I have lived and ridden in some of the 'best' cities in the world to ride a bike, and I chose Dallas as my center of operations for a lot of reasons, but mostly because it already IS a great place to ride a bike. You just have to know what you're doing. Education is by far the cheapest, most appropriate way to change behavior, and I will offer myself as an example and an educator, to anyone willing to approach this issue with a more open mind.
Bike lanes do NOT enhance the 'rideability' of every city and every street, nor do paths like the Katy and Santa Fe. Those two concrete examples are PARKS, not PATHS. They have their place in the mix, but the city, including the CITY COUNCIL AND MAYOR, who insist on riding with just ONE FACTION of cyclists promoting change, need to go out and see more of the city from the perspective of two wheels, hopefully after a weekend of Urban Cycling 101, offered by several local instructors, not just myself. Kallhammer has done the majority of cyclists in this city a disservice by not reaching out to the numerous other clubs and cycling organizations that deserve a role in this plan.
We don't walk around town with our heads looking up or ducking down as we perpetually fear the next airplane or helicopter to fall out of the sky. We drive around town with the expectation that other drivers are adequately educated on the general road rules of keeping their wheels between the stripes that designate lanes. Yet we see a cyclist, either on the road or on the sidewalk, or worse, riding the wrong way on a sidewalk, and we flip out or panic and create laws and infrastructure. Education, perpetual, systemic, and persistent, resolves a TON of the issues and mitigates the fears brought up by well-intentioned people in this article. But segregation is a serious step backwards.
All this in a period where deficits and debt from municipal to national scales have never been more feared.
I won't preach about right or wrong, but I will once again offer myself as an advocate for education, and if ANYONE is curious about what WON'T happen when they ride their bikes in and around the City of Dallas, I URGE you to contact either me or BikeDFW.com, and go take a class. Education, regardless of infrastructure, is a critical, missing piece, and was minimally discussed in this article. Please give it a more appropriate position in your thoughts and plans as we embark down this road.
I sincerely hope the politicians are listening and reading, because there are many, many cyclists and potential cyclists who are being misled and ignored.
-
Boris Badonov 11/26/2009 2:53:00 PM
The problem with Mr. Summers position on bicycles in traffic is that it ignores a fundamental traffic law: Vehicles in traffic must keep up with the flow of traffic, and not impede it.
Cyclists who 'take the lane' are a danger to others on the road, and to themselves. Not to mention it shows an astounding lack of intelligence to take the lane on a six-lane road in heavy traffic flipping people off.
Until cyclists recognize that they do impede traffic with their narcissistic view of their place in traffic, they can expect to receive the same disdain that Mr. Summers complains of.
-
Hipster for PM 11/26/2009 7:12:00 AM
Vaporize automobiles with magic paint!
Who is this Kalhammer dude? Did he refuse to be interviewed?
-
CFoo 11/26/2009 7:06:00 AM
Good article.
-
Michael 11/25/2009 11:50:00 PM
Thank god for people like Jason Roberts!
