Fighting the Good Fight

One would think that not much in this world could be more benign than my hobbies of bike commuting and gardening.  Particularly regarding bike commuting, I obviously keep one car off the road and that car's associated pollution and congestion.

But, taking a depressing read through our local weekly newspaper makes me realize that biking is far from benign, at least when it comes to discussing addition of bike lanes.

Connie from Thousand Oaks:

"Every day, I observe bicyclists violating both rules for vehicles and pedestrians as they seem to want the rights of both simultaneously and the responsibilities of neither."

"If Thousand Oaks insists on continuing to add bicycle lanes, then they must also enforce traditional rules of the road for bicyclists and ticket them for: riding on sidewalks, riding in pedestrian walkways, riding against the light, failing to stop, riding the wrong direction in bike lanes, etc., etc.

All actions I see bicyclists do on a daily basis throughout Thousand Oaks.

No one wants an accident, and I have had enough heartstopping near misses that I drive in terror of bicyclists in this town."

"Daily basis"? "Drive in terror"?  Really? 

Rick from Thousand Oaks

"Look at the other bike lanes that already exist within the city, where many times these bike riders are four to five abreast riding on the auto section of the road (outside the path) and causing cars to swerve to miss them.

Also, many are not stopping at stop signs or red lights. Many think they do not have to abide by the traffic laws.

I have had several near collisions with some of these riders because they were not paying any attention to the other traffic around them."

Although I'm glad Rick isn't terrified of cyclists like Connie, I am wondering how he is having so many near collisions in a town where only .9% of commute trips are being made by cyclists (I discuss the dearth of bike commuters in a previous blog post.)

There are more letters objecting to bike lanes, but just one more from Michael from Thousand Oaks

"It’s my guess that this push for a bike lane on Lynn Road is being spurred on by elitists in the cycling community who are putting their own selfish interests ahead of public safety and/or have politicians and commissioners in their pockets."

Whew...that's me, the selfish elitist with politicians in my pocket.

All of this is being generated by the City's recent initiatives to take state and federal money to build additional bike lanes.  Something that is not only objectionable to readers, but is actually objectionable to the newspaper itself:

"But some critics see the indiscriminate creation of bike lanes as increasing the likelihood of an accident by encouraging cyclists to ride next to traffic on fast-moving streets rather than off-road or in more residential areas.

There are studies that support this opinion as well.

We think the key here is for the city to create bike lanes in moderation—where they’re really needed—not on every stretch of road that becomes available or every time funding is offered.

Similar to solar panels, bike lanes look great on paper and are popular among politicians looking to add “environmentally conscious” to their resume, but in practice they aren’t always the best option. For solar, the problem is often cost; for bike lanes, it’s the stress they cause drivers."

If anything is indiscriminate, it's this newspapers' inclusion of unnamed studies and a solar panel comparison in an article about transportation planning.

I did respond to the editorial, incidentally:

(One final note, the paper actually shortened and, I believe, dumbed down my response...I hate how the first paragraph, in particular, reads.)