| |
Main
Date: 11 Sep 2006 10:30:43
From: Reid Priedhorsky
Subject: Misguided column in St. Paul Pioneer Press -- please help with response
|
Hi folks,
The following article appeared today in the St. Paul Pioneer Press:
http://www.twincities.com/mld/pioneerpress/news/local/15489346.htm?source=yahoodist&content=twc_news
It made me extremely cranky, because it accepts without question the
notion that bicyclists do not belong on the roads and should not share
space with cars. (The general premise of the article is praising an effort
in St. Paul to build a huge trails infrastructure.)
I'm planning to write a letter to the editor.
I'm sure this sort of article has come up in the past. Do any of you have
ideas on how to respond, or pointers to responses to previous similar
articles?
Thanks very much,
Reid
|
|
| |
Date: 11 Sep 2006 12:02:14
From: brink
Subject: Re: Misguided column in St. Paul Pioneer Press -- please help with response
|
"Reid Priedhorsky" <reid@reidster.net > wrote in message
news:pan.2006.09.11.15.30.40.70511@reidster.net...
> Hi folks,
>
> The following article appeared today in the St. Paul Pioneer Press:
>
> http://www.twincities.com/mld/pioneerpress/news/local/15489346.htm?source=yahoodist&content=twc_news
>
> It made me extremely cranky, because it accepts without question the
> notion that bicyclists do not belong on the roads and should not share
> space with cars. (The general premise of the article is praising an effort
> in St. Paul to build a huge trails infrastructure.)
>
> I'm planning to write a letter to the editor.
>
> I'm sure this sort of article has come up in the past. Do any of you have
> ideas on how to respond, or pointers to responses to previous similar
> articles?
>
> Thanks very much,
>
> Reid
Reid,
It seems to me perhaps you're overstating the "misguided" article's belief
that cyclists do not belong on roads. I really don't see that written -- or
even implied -- anywhere in there.
I'm assuming you're from the Twin Cities yourself, so I don't need to tell
you how progressive the area is. It seems to me that the article is
extolling the benefits of expanding the Twin Cities' already excellent
network of bike trails. I don't live in MN but I've used those trails
before and they really are a wonderful network that would be excellent for
commuters or anyone who wants to move around the cities and suburbs. Most
of the trails I rode on in the western suburbs and western Mpls were grade
separated and very direct routes since they were built on old railroad right
of way.
I just don't see the "threat" you're seeing here. Help me out. What
specifically about the article implied to you that cyclists don't belong on
the roads?
brink
|
| | |
Date: 11 Sep 2006 19:43:49
From: Reid Priedhorsky
Subject: Re: Misguided column in St. Paul Pioneer Press -- please help with response
|
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 12:02:14 -0700, brink wrote:
>
> "Reid Priedhorsky" <reid@reidster.net> wrote ...
>>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> The following article appeared today in the St. Paul Pioneer Press:
>>
>> http://www.twincities.com/mld/pioneerpress/news/local/15489346.htm?source=yahoodist&content=twc_news
>>
>> It made me extremely cranky, because it accepts without question the
>> notion that bicyclists do not belong on the roads and should not share
>> space with cars. (The general premise of the article is praising an effort
>> in St. Paul to build a huge trails infrastructure.)
>
> Reid,
>
> It seems to me perhaps you're overstating the "misguided" article's belief
> that cyclists do not belong on roads. I really don't see that written -- or
> even implied -- anywhere in there.
>
> I'm assuming you're from the Twin Cities yourself, so I don't need to tell
> you how progressive the area is. It seems to me that the article is
> extolling the benefits of expanding the Twin Cities' already excellent
> network of bike trails. I don't live in MN but I've used those trails
> before and they really are a wonderful network that would be excellent for
> commuters or anyone who wants to move around the cities and suburbs. Most
> of the trails I rode on in the western suburbs and western Mpls were grade
> separated and very direct routes since they were built on old railroad right
> of way.
>
> I just don't see the "threat" you're seeing here. Help me out. What
> specifically about the article implied to you that cyclists don't belong on
> the roads?
Hi brink,
Thanks for your thoughtful reply.
On a more careful re-reading this evening, I'm not as cranky; I suppose
that my attitude could be downgraded from "extremely cranky" to
"irritated".
I suppose the root of my beef is a the beginning of the section "Adding
Convenience": "And that's the point -- connectivity. Once a series of
interconnected projects is completed, cyclists will be able to ... ",
followed by a variety of transportation tasks, including the unqualified
"Travel from the University of Minnesota to the Capitol", which is no
problem now even without millions of dollars of new infrastructure.
Connectivity in this city is already excellent.
The threat I see in the Twin Cities is being killed by kindness. I do live
in Minneapolis, and this area is wonderful for bicycling (notwithstanding
the weather, of course). Driver attitudes are good and most roads are
plenty bikeable. Trunk trails such as the Midtown Greenway are fabulous,
and I'm thrilled that Phase 3 of that trail just opened. However, the
metro, especially some of the suburbs, is also filled with roadside trails
that can, like roadside trails nearly everywhere, accurately be described
as hazardous failures.
Laypeople here think, on the whole, the bicycling is great, and they want
to help bicyclists. The best way they can think of to help is to build
new infrastructure. But once the trails are there, most people expect us
to use them, even if they are crummy. That's the threat I see -- the quite
tolerant attitude changing to covert or overt hostility to bicyclists
because we don't use crappy trails that they paid a lot of tax dollars for.
I also wonder about the cost-effectiveness of the infrastructure. Is it
placed with great care, located where it has been determined, by detailed
observation and study of bicyclists, to fill the gaps that real bicyclists
going real places need filled? I'm not privy to this planning, but I
strongly suspect that this is not the kind of analysis that is done.
Take care,
Reid
|
| | |
Date: 11 Sep 2006 16:36:51
From: fastone
Subject: Re: Misguided column in St. Paul Pioneer Press -- please help with
|
brink wrote:
> "Reid Priedhorsky" <reid@reidster.net> wrote in message
> news:pan.2006.09.11.15.30.40.70511@reidster.net...
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> The following article appeared today in the St. Paul Pioneer Press:
>>
>> http://www.twincities.com/mld/pioneerpress/news/local/15489346.htm?source=yahoodist&content=twc_news
>>
>> It made me extremely cranky, because it accepts without question the
>> notion that bicyclists do not belong on the roads and should not share
>> space with cars. (The general premise of the article is praising an effort
>> in St. Paul to build a huge trails infrastructure.)
>>
>> I'm planning to write a letter to the editor.
>>
>> I'm sure this sort of article has come up in the past. Do any of you have
>> ideas on how to respond, or pointers to responses to previous similar
>> articles?
>>
>> Thanks very much,
>>
>> Reid
>
> Reid,
>
> It seems to me perhaps you're overstating the "misguided" article's belief
> that cyclists do not belong on roads. I really don't see that written -- or
> even implied -- anywhere in there.
>
> I'm assuming you're from the Twin Cities yourself, so I don't need to tell
> you how progressive the area is. It seems to me that the article is
> extolling the benefits of expanding the Twin Cities' already excellent
> network of bike trails. I don't live in MN but I've used those trails
> before and they really are a wonderful network that would be excellent for
> commuters or anyone who wants to move around the cities and suburbs. Most
> of the trails I rode on in the western suburbs and western Mpls were grade
> separated and very direct routes since they were built on old railroad right
> of way.
>
> I just don't see the "threat" you're seeing here. Help me out. What
> specifically about the article implied to you that cyclists don't belong on
> the roads?
>
> brink
>
>
I too fail to see anything in the article that suggests bicyclists don't
have a right to share the road. But if we are going to insist that
motorists respect that right we, as cyclists, must be willing to subject
ourselves to the traffic laws. It is far too common an occurrence for
cyclists to run red lights, to weave in between cars in traffic jams,
and sundry other examples of dangerous and illegal behavior.
|
|
