Anatomy of a to-do
In a brilliant act of sustained provocation, the Post-Gazette has kept the back-and-forth between bicyclists and drivers alive for three weeks running. Since the August 12 story about the appointment of a city bicycle “czar”, it has been nearly impossible to go a day without witnessing an exchange.
Following the publication of this story, the letters to the editors on August 13, 16, and 17 had at least one bicyclist or driver opining on the awfulness of the other.
Sensing blood, the P-G collected anecdotes from frustrated drivers, wrapped some weak reporting around it, and threw it on the front page on August 18 under the headline “When bicyclists break the safety chain, driver complaints mount.”
Predictably, this set off another round of furious letter-writing, some of which were published on August 20, 21, 23, and 25. The paper’s normally conservative page 2 columnist also spent a column supporting the bicyclists’ cause.
There has been ample debate on the topic on the paper’s own discussion form as well as on at least one local blog, which has racked up an impressive 100+ comment count on a post that was just trolling for abuse.
I have little to add to this noise, except to say that I think that both sides are yelling past each other, and that no amount of increased law enforcement, or painted bike lanes, or bicycle licensing fees will change how cars and bikes interact on the city’s streets, in their current state.
That’s not to say things can’t get better. What I would like to see is a fundamental rethinking of the function of the city street.
This story of Hans Monderman, a Dutch traffic engineer is a wonderful study in counter-intuitive approaches to better moderate the role of the automobile in the city.
While redesigning a major thoroughfare in a Dutch village after two children were fatally stuck, Monderman employed psychological tricks, not signs and speed bumps, to calm traffic:
Signs were removed, curbs torn out, and the asphalt replaced with red paving brick, with two gray “gutters” on either side that were slightly curved but usable by cars. As Monderman noted, the road looked only five meters wide, “but had all the possibilities of six.”
The results were striking. Without bumps or flashing warning signs, drivers slowed, so much so that Monderman’s radar gun couldn’t even register their speeds. Rather than clarity and segregation, he had created confusion and ambiguity. Unsure of what space belonged to them, drivers became more accommodating. Rather than give drivers a simple behavioral mandate – say, a speed limit sign or a speed bump – he had, through the new road design, subtly suggested the proper course of action.
Of his approach, Monderman says:
“I don’t want traffic behavior, I want social behavior.”
Better social behavior is something we should all strive to practice. Perhaps as the oil era cedes center stage, we can once again reclaim our urban spaces and infuse them with a humanity that has been missing for far too long.
Now with more stupid
I feel like Bill Murray. Once again, my morning reading of the newspaper brought forth the need to create vitriol:
I have to disagree with the idea that bicyclists on the streets of Pittsburgh are a danger only during bad weather. They are always a danger. Why should a motorist have to ride behind a bicycle traveling at 5 mph until they get the chance to drive into the oncoming lane to pass them?
See “Untested Cyclists,” the fourth letter down for more. It only gets better.
The pot has been stirred over at Bike Pittsburgh. Attending this book talk and signing has also become the thing to do on Friday night.
A busy day ahead
My peaceful morning reading of the newspaper was rocked by this letter to the editor from a Ms. Melanie Hall, a foreman for the City of Pittsburgh Department of Public Works:
[…] It would also be useful if there were a law against people riding bicycles in snow and icy conditions on public streets. They are a major hazard to driving in any weather, but especially in bad weather.
Like I said here, there’s a lot of stupid contained in those two sentences. My cup runneth over with snideness.
Stupid rules
I’m feeling like my civil liberties have been violated today. What follows is an email that I sent to the Pittsburgh Critical Mass mailing list, detailing an unpleasant bike parking situation.
Subject: An inalienable right to rack? [UDPATE]
Last week I posed a question about bicycle parking at the Moorhead Federal building downtown. A security guard had harassed me about parking my bike at the racks because I do not work in the building (I park there and catch a bus at Penn Station). It happened again today, so I decided to call the building manager for some answers.
I didn’t have much luck. According to him, since the rack is on federal property, they have the final say of how it is used. And, apparently, if you’re not working at or visiting the building, you are not welcome to park your bike there.
I expressed surprise at this since I thought a government building was supposed to be a building built to serve the people, but no dice. The building manager said that allowing anyone to park at the rack would take away spaces for those that really need it.
Never mind that in the six months prior to these occurrences, I’ve never seen more than three bikes in the rack at once, even on nice days.
I don’t really know the legality of this guy’s claim, but I’ll just accept it for now. It’s not worth getting worked up over. I’m moving to a different part of town in less than a month anyway, so in the meantime I’ll park somewhere else.
Venting,
Jake Krohn
Like I said, it’s a pretty small issue in the larger scope of things. But I’m sure that George W. Bush and/or the Patriot Act have contributed to it in some way.
This is not progress
Everything about this story of officials in Shanghai banning bikes on major city roads smells rotten. It’s unfortunate that the “growing affluence” experienced by the Chinese has to bring them down the ugly American path of increased personal mobility at the expense of the society and the environment.
Does the increasing dominance of the automobile and the corresponding decrease in the quality of city life in the last 50 years in America provide no lesson to anyone else? To have the experience of history on one’s side and still make the same mistakes is plain ignorance.
There’s so much more left to be said. This isn’t the last time that I’ll speak of this.
