Councilwoman Angela Hunt Doubles Down on Criticism of Dallas' Half-Assed Bike Plan

Thumbnail image for angelahuntbike.jpg
Angela Hunt
Last week, as a City Council discussion of the don't-throw-stuff-at-cyclists ordinance degenerated into a litany of members' pet peeves about cyclists (we're looking at you, Sandy Greyson), Angela Hunt became visibly frustrated. Hunt, who rides a bike herself and has been the council's most vocal critic of City Hall's hesitant implementation of the 2011 bike plan, told her colleagues that the current half-hearted embrace of cycling, with its shared bike lanes and cosmetic tweaks to city rules, is doomed to failure. It's time to take "big people steps," she said.

Yesterday, on her blog, Hunt doubled down on her critique of the city's cycling policies and detailed some suggestions for how Dallas can become more bike-friendly.

There are several things that need to happen. For starters, she said, the city can repeal its mandatory helmet law. She cited a recent New York Times op-ed arguing that those rules discourage cycling.

Next comes a higher hurdle, since it will require actual money. Hunt proposes building 10 miles of bike lanes per year over the next decade -- not the half-assed sharrows that now crisscross downtown, but bike-only lanes that are physically separated from other traffic. And these shouldn't simply be plunked down on whatever isolated stretch of road happens to be convenient. They should be carefully planned to connect with other bicyclie infrastructure, like trails and other bike lanes, so riders can actually get from point A to point B.

All reasonable solutions, and ones Hunt thinks are achievable given proper focus.

We can go all-in on bike infrastructure and get it done. We can dramatically increase bike ridership in our city. We've seen what can Dallas can do when it sets its heart on Big Ideas. That's why Dallas' remarkably meek approach to bike infrastructure is so frustrating. We pride ourselves for taking on extravagant, bold initiatives -- the Calatrava Bridge, a park over a freeway, a city-owned convention center hotel, a massive toll road in a floodway. Let's apply that same laser-like focus to making Dallas the best bicycling city in the country.

Unfortunately, Dallas' laser-like focus seems reserved for shiny, expensive monuments like the ones Hunt lists, not pragmatic infrastructure projects. No big-name philanthropist is going to dump money into the project -- the Margaret Hunt Hill Memorial Buffered Bike Lane, anyone? -- and there's no need in the project for some world-famous architect. So bike infrastructure will continue to simmer on the back burner until, as Hunt predicts, the city will declare its efforts a failure, paint over the sharrows, and go back to driving.


Sponsor Content

My Voice Nation Help
68 comments
sidewalkastro
sidewalkastro

For all those against separate bike paths, you don't have to use them. I will, I know the dangers of riding in traffic. I rode motorcycles for years and had many close calls. At least on motorcycles you are going with the traffic flow, but it is still dangerous. I would like to ride to work without worrying that I might be turn into road kill along the way. I believe many more people would ride their bike if they did have to worry about that too. Not everyone is young with quick reflexes to dodge traffic. Why should cars hog all the transportation money. I want a choice. I would like to see cleaner air in Dallas. It's the worst in the state now. Why does Dallas continue to be so ASS BACKWARD in so many areas. Dallas used to be the can do city. Now it's not, unless its building giant harp bridges to nowhere for developers. 

sidewalkastro
sidewalkastro

Dallas should do like Austin did last week. They brought in the experts from the Netherlands. The Dutch have been developing bike infrastructure for decades. They got tired of their kids becoming road kill and started to do something about it. City of Austin has a facebook page on this. http://www.facebook.com/CityOfAustinBicycleProgram

Here is a good reason to have separate bike paths. http://gas2.org/2012/10/25/study-separated-bike-lanes-reduce-injury-by-90/

To hell with share the road. I rode motorcycles for years and it's not safe out there and more so for bicycles.

sandracrenshaw
sandracrenshaw

Can someone comment on the public safety hazrds of  dedicated bike lanes on Camp Wisdom Road six lane divided that has more hils and humps that we cannot drive under or at 40 miles an hour without riding our brakes. If we take our foot off the brakes in a car, we will go to speeds up to 47 miles an hour in the 40 mile zone.  At some points we can't even see the cars traveling west, will we be able to see the bikers. google 1900 lk of e Camp Wisdom and comment. The city is proposing bike trails on this street for UNT.  

norman44
norman44

I'm sorry - but helmet laws are a good thing.  If you haven't been in a neurology clinic where people are being treated who have closed head and other traumatic brain injuries - I strongly urge you to go.  The societal cost of head injuries is staggering.  You don't have to be struck by a car, just falling off the bike and hitting concrete can do it.  http://www.cdc.gov/traumaticbraininjury/pdf/blue_book.pdf

McPhail
McPhail

BikeFriendly? the government of this city? I literally had to go to court today for bicycling without a helmet. The city of Dallas bike code outlaws taking both feet off your pedals, which is necessary to stop for traffic. They have ARRESTED citizens for nothing more than bicycling helmetless and fought all the way to  the Texas Supreme Court to defend their choice to do so. #crazy 

whareagle
whareagle

Still don't understand why Eric Nicholson or any other reporters won't sign up for a Cycling Savvy class or a Traffic Skills 101 course. Angela hasn't accepted an invitation to take the course, either. Ride your bike in Dallas for a day, and it's a STUNT. Ride it for a week, and it's an ADVENTURE. Ride around town for a month, and it's... .mundane. No need for anything.

 

This is a political game she's playing, complete with Jason Roberts and his minions, to get elected next go-round. Bike lanes are nothing more than products of a cargo cult; an enormously expensive way to attempt social engineering. Try the cheap stuff first, folks. Educate, and Enforce. THEN attempt engineering. The claim that education has already been attempted is a LIE. It hasn't. Attempts to fund it (a fraction of the cost of infrastructure), were declined. Look at the record. 

Other
Other

Well, there is only so much money and bike lanes (as any road construction) are expensive.Choose between a bike lane or increased Library times/resources, etc...

Sorry, even though I like to ride a bike, there are more important things to use our "laser focus" on than bike lanes. 

Don_in_FortWorth
Don_in_FortWorth

Bike lanes teach bad rules:

* bikes are different

* bikes don't belong on real roads

* cars rule the world

 

Cities should merely plan certain streets as preferred for bikes, four-laners where it's easy to pass bikes.  Separate roads and designated lanes are stupid and expensive.

Chick-Fil-A-She-O
Chick-Fil-A-She-O

Dallas, more specifically the culturally and politically corrosive Dallasites, will embrace 'bike-friendliness' when white Republican monkeys come flying out of John Wiley Price's arse.

Myrna.Minkoff-Katz
Myrna.Minkoff-Katz topcommenter

One of these days your Myrna is going to be injured by one of those reckless Jimmy John's delivery cyclists.  They need to get off the damn sidewalks!

whareagle
whareagle

 @sandracrenshaw From the looks of it, you've got a divided road, 2 lanes each side, and curbs. It's concrete. Put up some "BMUFL, Change Lanes to Pass" and "Share the Road" signs, and host a course at UNT for cyclists, teaching them to RIDE MORE LEFT on the narrow lanes. That way, they're picked up by passing motorists about 2 seconds earlier, and since it's a low-traffic multi-lane road, they'll.... change lanes and pass. Problem solved, and you can now put money in to sidewalks for pedestrians, since the ped/cyclist ratio is about 100:1, and that's where priorities should be placed....

scottindallas
scottindallas topcommenter

 @sandracrenshaw sounds like they're needed there.  I don't get your point.  The road is dangerous, that seems exactly where dedicated bike lanes would be a minimal accommodation. 

TheCredibleHulk
TheCredibleHulk topcommenter

 @norman44 Then we should enact helmet laws for clumsy people with a tendency to fall over. Falls are far and away the largest category represented in your study. Why are you focused like a laser on vehicles and ignoring the elephant in the room?

 

Also societal costs as opposed to what?

scottindallas
scottindallas topcommenter

 @norman44 actually, for many bike accidents, a helmet is of no aid.  If you endo, and hit the top of your head, a helmet might prevent an abrasion, but not the vertebrae fracture.

looptwelve
looptwelve

 @norman44 In August, I was hospitalized for nine days after getting in a scooter accident without a helmet. I know that scooters and bicycles are separate vehicles that differ by about 20 MPH, but you will never convince me that wearing a helmet will not decrease a risk of head injury. Don't let riding without a helmet be your $60,000 uninsured mistake.

nofootdown
nofootdown

 @keithGranada no, taking both feet off your pedals isn't necessary to stop.  you can actually come to a complete stop without taking either foot off the pedals.  stop being stupid and put on a helmet.

oakclifftownie
oakclifftownie

 @keithGranada Have you sighed an Organ donor card ? :)

BTW I doubt you would find the same Vigilance for such minor infractions of the Dallas bike code on the streets of Western Oak Cliff ..

kduble
kduble

 @whareagle This is a cultural divide. We've talked about it before. I commute to work daily by bike. I've done so for a long time. What's different is I realize everything isn't about me and about people like you.

 

My perspective is of someone who has traveled widely and lived in other countries. I've seen what can happen when cycling becomes a part of the broader culture. Sure, the status quo works for you, and it works for me. But it doesn't work for senior citizens, for kids, or for families.

 

You're saying people like us can get around safely by bike now if we just know the rules. I agree, so far as it goes, but this thing is bigger than you and me. It's about complete streets, mixed use development, live-work lifestyles; it's about where we can go as a people and what we can become as a culture.

 

You're right, yet you're myopic. Angela Hunt gets it. The Europeans get it. Other large U.S. cities are starting to get it, too. As usual, Dallas is bringing up the rear on this thing.

jerikjonsson
jerikjonsson

 @whareagle I can mainstream with the best of them.  I biked down Skillman the other day, and that's not a route for the faint of heart.  People who are already comfortable on their bikes as real transport just don't need as much in the way of resources or public education campaigns as everyone else.  But other cities have seen increases in ridership resulting from dedicated bike lanes, and that's one of Angela's points.  People are less likely to take up biking if they don't have at least some dedicated bike routes.  She's not talking about putting a separated bike lane on every block of surface street in the city.  She's talking about a reasonable system of routes that are inviting to the new rider.  It's a hybrid approach, and I think it makes sense.

 

Here's another reason why: corporate relocations.  You used to do corporate relos by having the c-levels down to a convention at your convention center and having the Mayor and business leaders schmooze them and have realtors show them the Park Cities and Southlake.  Then the big guys made the call and the move happened.  Now, convention business is shrinking every year, and all these potential relos have to worry about recruiting and retention if they pick Dallas.  One thing they're looking at is livability, and right or wrong, bike lanes give the perception of livability.

theslowpath
theslowpath

 @whareagle Ignoring everything else, Angela won't be pursuing re-election. She's term limited. I think somewhere I read that she doesn't plan to run for another office any time soon, though that might always change. 

roo_ster
roo_ster

 @Other True.  Which is one reason bike lanes are a dumb idea and getting out and using the existing infrastructure is the best approach.  Also, spend a little more time designing the roadways to be safer for all users: autos, bikes, and pedestrians.  A few too many intersections out there where all involved risk life & limb to cross.

kduble
kduble

 @Other Wrong. You know how, if a rug isn't firmly attached to the floor, it rumples up when you slide on it? That's what cars and trucks do to asphalt. Look at the asphalt in front of a stop light. What do you see?

 

Accommodating cyclists isn't a public expense. It's a savings. Infrastructure for cycling is much cheaper to maintain.

cheeseburger
cheeseburger

 @Don_in_FortWorth 

Here's what Dallas drivers already believe:

 

* bikes are different

 

* bikes don't belong on real roads

 

* cars rule the world

CraigT42
CraigT42

 @Don_in_FortWorth Whether they are stupid or not depends on your goal.  if your goal is to make it easier for the 3% of the population on bicycles then it is stupid.  If your goal is to convert drivers to cyclists it makes more sense.  of course you will never succeed in that 2nd goal in such a spread out urban area with Texas weather.

cheeseburger
cheeseburger

 @Myrna.Minkoff-Katz Between people like you wanting to get bikes off the sidewalk and into the street, and they typical Dallas driver who wants them to get off the street and onto the sidewalk, what's a cyclist to do?  Maybe just assume everyone else can fuck off?

primi_timpano
primi_timpano topcommenter

@Myrna.Minkoff-Katz Use a cane, insert in spokes. I would get there are some JJ delivery cyclists complaining about you.

TheCredibleHulk
TheCredibleHulk topcommenter

 @nofootdown  @keithGranada Uh-huh. We've all seen you wobbly twits precariously perched atop your overpriced racing bikes at stoplights, scaring the crap out of motorists, nearly falling into their automobiles as you struggle mightily to not have to put that foot down.

 

So cool.

whareagle
whareagle

 @kduble So... let me get this straight. You claim I'm myopic, yet you're claiming that we can't increase ridership in this city without massive infrastructure improvements. No matter how you cut it, creating something out of limited available space on the roads today, is going to cost something, the cost of which can be debated. Heck, even my favorite "Bicycles May Use Full Lane" signs will cost money, even though they educate everyone. 

 

Yet, right now, anyone willing to take the risk can ride their bike anywhere, any time, for any reason. The 'infrastructure' is already there. Roads were built to transport people and goods, not motorists over cyclists, or any order, for that matter. It may inconvenience someone, but if you choose your lane position, choose your road (multi-lane roads are actually better for traffic to flow around cyclists who control their lane), choose the time you want to travel, and the direction, and then DRIVE YOUR BIKE like you would DRIVE your car......... very little will happen. Now, if, like Angela, you suffer anxiety about these roads and traffic conditions, well, then reason stands that you would find someone to help you better understand how to drive your bike, not demand that taxpayers segregate you from said traffic, just so you and a few others can 'feel' safer. We're already getting stats about incidents in towns with 'infrastructure' improvements, and people are dying on their bikes. 

 

Education is far quicker to implement, far easier to implement, has lasting effects, and is incredibly cheap when compared to the plans Angela and the "BF"ers are promoting. You really feel that you can't throw a leg over a bike without government assistance? Who's myopic now?

 

Buy $100k in BMUFL signs, install them all over, throw a few Sharrows up here and there, and engage in a public awareness campaign that will actually require LESS goverment (isn't that sort of the mantra in this election year? "WE WANT LESS GOVERNMENT except when it's some pet project we really want to foist on everyone!"), will employ people who actually RIDE their bikes on a regular basis, and will result in better, smarter cyclists, and a general population. 

 

Driver's ed classes take about, what, 15 hours? 25? Flight schools solo their pilots in about, what, the same, 25, maybe 40 hours? Cycling Savvy is a 9 hour course. It costs $90, which is a fraction of what you'd pay for driver's ed or flight school. Why NOT take a class, and then report on it for the DO? That's what I don't understand - you "journalists" aren't using the skeptical eye on a municipal program that the city claims to want to implement. 

 

Don't even get me started on the claims for health and environmental benefits. Total myth.

kduble
kduble

I'm not terribly concerned what other people believe, because I can't change other people. I can only change me.

ScottsMerkin
ScottsMerkin topcommenter

 @cheeseburger  @Myrna.Minkoff-Katz "Maybe just assume everyone else can fuck off?"

 

thats what they already do, and they show it by breaking every law in the book when riding downtown

scottindallas
scottindallas topcommenter

 @whareagle  @kduble they need to accommodate as well.  I waited till the road opened up, and could see clearly ahead, and passed a couple of different single riders, leaving them a full half lane, and I was going, the speed limit on my pass.  They hollered something or another.  A more impetuous person might have reacted. 

whareagle
whareagle

 @kduble Okay then, here's a challenge. Get a friend, a non-commuter who might be interested in trying, and we'll loan them my 8-speed bike with a power meter, front basket, and two panniers. I'll loan them a Garmin 705, and teach them how to upload it to a trainingpeaks account. I'll pay for that person to go through a CyclingSavvy class, we'll give them a u-bar lock, and send them on their way. They can choose when and where they want to ride, so long as they upload and keep a summary diary of their trips and reasons why. 

 

We'll look at energy expenditure, distance traveled, use REI's iphone app to figure out lbs of Co2 not used, see how much money they may have 'saved' by not driving, and then you can report on it. 

 

Cycling in Dallas is REALLY easy. You just have to know how to do it, and infrastructure will actually complicate at needless expense. I could live anywhere in the US. I've lived in Boise, and have ridden repeatedly in Seattle. I have a friend who was legally riding in the bike lane in Bed, Oregon, when he was hit by a left-cross, following a shielded pass by another car (basically, the turning motorist was unable to see the cyclist until she had committed to the turn - another example where a bike lane almost killed someone, when if they'd just been behind the motorist in front, in their place in the queue, the turning motorist would have waited for the cyclist to pass, because said cyclist would have been visible). I have 20 years of experience in the US and in Europe, and hate to say it, but your paradigm is wrong, and you refuse to see it any other way. 

 

Go ride your bike, safely, legally, with confidence and competence, and nothing will happen. Quit selling FEAR. 

kduble
kduble

@whareagle

Cycling can be vigorous exercise. It’s true some people push harder than others. A lot of people would otherwise have totally sedentary lifestyles sitting at a desk. It beats doing nothing.

 

I don’t find comparing a Townie to a bike useful, as I don’t know what a Townie is.

 

I carry an ordinary knapsack for commuting. It’s good for sticking stuff into.I didn’t buy it for cycle commuting, however. I already had it. This time of year I ride home with clothing I had on in the morning. I spent a little money on accessories, but it wasn’t that much, and it was all up-front. I haven’t spent any since.

 

Will cycling make a dent in what you call “the diabesity index”? One would hope so, but it’s really all about choices.

 

I’m not even sure people in Amsterdam pay higher taxes, when one considers our taxes at all levels, federal, state, county, municipal, school, hospital district, etc.  But even if they do, though, it’s because of cycling.

 

As for the Katy Trail, this is abandoned rail right-of-way. Nobody was deprived of anything.

 

I don’t buy the cost argument, either. Jim Schutze has written on this. Accommodating cycling needn’t cost anything. It’s simply a matter of designing streets differently, that’s all. If anything, if we could ever succeed in getting more people on bikes, we’d spend less on street maintenance, not more.

 

You say we don’t have the urban density, but you also say you don’t support it. Perhaps that’s why we’re slow to get it. But it isn’t because of a lack of good policies. Rather, it’s because policies we’ve had are actually bad.

 

I also don’t buy the weather argument. Nobody has ideal weather, except perhaps tropical islanders. I don’t the weather is less conducive to cycling in Dallas than it is anyplace else.

 

DART is another topic. Save it for another time.

cheeseburger
cheeseburger

 @scottindallas  Now I get your attitude towards cyclists.  You live near White Rock Lake.  It's no wonder with all the morons who ride around there.  Don't confuse them with people who responsibly commute by bicycle in other parts of the city.

whareagle
whareagle

 @kduble Actually, I do have something to say about the health and environmental benefits.

 

I've gone so far as to put a power meter on my townie and measured commutes and energy expenditure. The fact is that, honestly, bicycles are so efficient, that they don't really require much work, unless you're willing to pick up speed and press down harder. Most people in this country aren't that fit, and don't really want to be. They don't realize that pedaling a bike is WORK, and that WORK is measured in KiloJoules. You can take a bike, pedal one pedal stroke (maybe 1kj), and coast for 15-60 seconds, depending on load, slope, and other friction parameters. I think the HPV association calculates regular bikes at something like 92% efficiency. Call a Townie 85%, just for argument's sake.  But then, you realize that you have to haul stuff, so you go out and maybe buy a Surly Big Dummy, or a bigger backpack, etc. Sounds like fun, but you're quickly spending more money on something that's ideally supposed to save you money, and you're burning more kilojoules just to overcome the weight of your loads plus body and bike. Eventually, you start to realize, hey, maybe I'll just take the car. Ride your damned fixie, and it's even less practical to schlepp stuff. It may be cheap, but even neural intellect has its' limits on value, and when you go over the bars some day and crush your macbook when your butt lands on it, then where are you?

 

You can add 10,000 cyclists to the mix of traffic every single day in Dallas, and it won't make a dent in the AQI, or the diabesity index. Look at who is cycling, at the demographics. The money is better spent helping get people to choose, maybe walking, over driving, to the corner market. If they choose the bike, they're not burning enough kilojoules at <12mph, and if they do pick up and try to haul something significant, they probably don't have the fitness to travel far, or frequently. Add some hills to the mix, and you've got another barrier. 

 

I applaud your choices to commute by bike, and to encourage others to commute by bike, but the simple fact of the matter is that we don't have the urban density, we don't have the destinations, we don't have that 'ideal' climate, and we don't have the demographic mix. To argue for any of those things is to go down a path that will enflame more than the KitKat crowd.

 

Educate, Enforce, Encourage, Evaluate, and then Engineer.

 

I refuse to pay Amsterdam's taxes, I refuse to live at that level of urban density, I refuse to limit myself to the roughly 1-7k of travel per day at low recreational speeds, and I refuse to let the government attempt to segregate me to a bike lane or segregated path that they will take no responsibility to keep clear of debris or pedestrians once it's installed. Remember - the KATY FREAKING TRAIL was built using TRANSPORTATION DOLLARS, yet now CYCLISTS are considered the interlopers. I refuse to screw up neighborhoods that need on-street parking for motorists. 

 

You've drunk too much Euro-Lib Kool-Aid, and while I lean left on as many issues as possible, I won't let you and Angela and Jason and Max K and that noob come in and attempt to social engineer cycling in to the mix. It'll be expensive as hell, and you'll end up doing what every other family in the city does when taxes get too high. You'll MOVE. There is no suburb tax. Read up on Schutze's arguments about the DART rail and who is paying and who is freeloading. This is the same argument about the Dallas Bike Plan. You're coming up with what will essentially be a $100m program, if not more, for a fraction of a fraction of the population, and once it's built, you're relegating all cyclists to that segregated area, sans education. BMUFL signs are the best, smartest answer, but because they require thought, you Paint-and-Pather's dislike them to the point that you'll actually push something through that won't work, isn't necessary, and will have costs beyond your time in your 20's. When you mature, you'll understand it better. 

 

Until then, enjoy the ride. Dallas is a great place to ride your bike, and  you don't need (nor should you want your liberty oppressed by) bike lanes and segregated pathways to ride here. Amen.

kduble
kduble

 @scottindallas  I've always been a curb cyclist. Even when driving my car on the highway, I'll pull over to the shoulder to allow a car to pass. Your issue isn't with me.

kduble
kduble

 @scottindallas  You must be addressing whareagle's post. This doesn't apply to anything I've written.

kduble
kduble

 @whareagle I'm not saying we can't increase ridership in this city without massive infrastructure improvements. Cycling is increasing anyway. I'm saying we can substantially increase ridership over time by bringing cycling into the traffic mix through better design.

 

As road space is limited, we need to use it differently. We need to accommodate pedestrians first, cyclists second and cars third, just the opposite of what we're been doing. It's time to get yourself a passport, get out of the Dallas bubble and see how things are done in other places.

 

I'm glad you're cycling on the roads, as am I. But until your parents, your grandparents and your kids are doing the same, we haven't moved the culture.

 

You write "Roads were built to transport people and goods, not motorists over cyclists," yet the reality is the opposite of what you say. Our entire system postwar system is designed to circulate cars on freeways between homes to businesses. It's not that cyclists were a minor consideration or even an after thought. They weren't considered at all.

 

The more government vs less government is a red herring. So long as government has a monopoly on building roads, we the people will direct it how to do this.

 

The reason you won't discuss health and environmental benefits is because you have nothing to say.

 

Once again, this is two different arguments. Yours is that cyclists can adapt to streets designed for cars. Mine is to design streets for everyone.

whareagle
whareagle

 @scottindallas  @kduble Sorry you had two bad experiences, but it shows that all road users need more education, and let's not forget the oldest rule of the road.... First come, first served. So pick another route, or realize that there will be cyclists ahead of you, and your right to the road includes accommodating everyone else on it who is using it in a lawful way. That's just the way it works, and has since... the Roman empire? Earlier? I can't remember when road rules were codified, but if you'll drop the rhetoric and take a CyclingSavvy class, they include that in the first 10 minutes. 

scottindallas
scottindallas topcommenter

 @whareagle  @kduble accommodate goes both ways.  I, nor should anyone be relegated to following a cyclist around the lake.  I waited and passed as I would any car, when the road straightened and I could pass with a full 1/2 lane spacing.  I got cursed twice for that.  I was tempted to stop, get out and let the cyclist try to pass me, on my feet. 

whareagle
whareagle

 @scottindallas  @kduble er, nope. Not me, though that road could be redesigned and widened. Oh, and that speed limit? It's a MAX limit. There is no MIN limit. Sorry, bad argument. Accommodate.

scottindallas
scottindallas topcommenter

 @whareagle  @kduble You're one of those jackasses that goes 18 on W. Lawther, and then get mad when a car, going 25, the speed limit, passes you with a half a lane space.  Guess what, cars pass cars with only half a lane space.  It's ludicrous to expect a wider cushion than cars get.  And, if you can't do the speed limit, get off the road, where possible. 

kduble
kduble

 @CraigT42  I cycle year round. It isn't so much of a problem in the summer because it's rarely hotter than 80 degrees when I leave out in the morning. Sure, I'm stinky when I ride back in the afternoon, but I'm bound for the shower then.

 

I don't commute a terribly long distance, but that's the point, isn't it? Cycling is about a different lifestyle. It's not about people with car-centered lifestyles and long commutes getting up one day and suddenly deciding they want to start commuting by bike.

CraigT42
CraigT42

 @cheeseburger You and I have different definitions of hot.  When i am considering 18+ miles of physical activity then anything 80 or above is hot.  But beyond the weather is still the sprawl.  Even on  nice cool 60 degree day I am not going to be in any shape to visit with clients after an 18 mile bike ride. I don't see my employer volunteering to put in showers and a locker room either.

Look, go ahead and cycle. I am glad that 0.4% of y'all have the jobs and commutes that allow it. I will even support the expenditures for bike lanes and trails.  But to think that you will convert any significant portion of the population is a bit naive. And copping an attitude while on the bike sharing the road with cars and trucks is suicidal and stupid. There is right, there is wrong, and there is the way things are.

cheeseburger
cheeseburger

 @CraigT42 I used to think the same way, but it's really only hot in the morning a couple of months a year, (afternoon is hot 4 or 5 months a year).  The rest of the year is cool to pleasant.  And we do have some distances to cover, but they are FLAT distances.  Look at the ridership in places like San Francisco where they have crazy hills to climb.  I'll take long and flat over short and steep any day.  Plus, think of the rain and cold in the places that have high ridership.  

 

It's not weather or geography.  It's cultural.  The culture can be changed.

CraigT42
CraigT42

 @cheeseburger a lot more is a very subjective term.  2000 is a lot more than 645 but is a city of 800,000 it is not even a percentage point.

Don't get me wrong.  I am not anti cycling.  I would love to be able to take a bike to work, and I truly miss the days when my work commute was North-South instead of East-West and I was able to take a DART train to work every day.  But there is no way to make cycling practical for a significant portion of the population in TX sprawl or in TX heat.  Wishing won't make it so.

cheeseburger
cheeseburger

 @CraigT42  @cheeseburger They are actually seeing a large increase in ridership already.  Getting an accurate count is something that the city of Fort Worth is currently trying to do, but all accounts are that there's a lot more bikes on the road than there used to be.

CraigT42
CraigT42

 @cheeseburger  Not really.  In fact it appears I grossly overestimated when I called Cyclists 2% of commuters

 

From Bike Ft Worth's web page.

"

Bike Fort Worth’s primary goals are:

Increasing bicycling in Fort Worth.  Double the rate of cycling for all trip purposes and triple the bicycle commuter rate from 0.2% (approx. 645 daily commuters) at present to 0.6% (approx. 2,000 daily commuters) by the year 2020.

ScottsMerkin
ScottsMerkin topcommenter

 @kduble no they all dont, but those who dont get tickets.  And in downtown most do

CraigT42
CraigT42

 @cheeseburger    I can.  As I have said I support the concept of cycling.  But because one guy in a car did something you don't like you don't get to treat every car like some jerk "Cager" and ride by your own rules.  That is no different from me intentionally crowding you because some other cyclist just cut me off when he ran the stop sign. 

When you do, and it turns out poorly for you that is called karma (or possibly "car"ma)

ScottsMerkin
ScottsMerkin topcommenter

 @cheeseburger  @Myrna.Minkoff-Katz I do, I wasnt hostile toward them until they were constantly breaking the law right in front of me.  So maybe look in the mirror and see who brought on the hostility 

Now Trending

Dallas Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

General

Loading...