The last few days Iβve been biking to work β from 42nd and Colfax to Franklin
and Lyndale. Bryant is a βbike boulevard,β but I donβt use it south of Lake
Street β preferring Colfax, but sometimes going down the sidewalk to Bryant at
Lake if there is no gap in traffic (there often is) when I get to Lake.
Recently, I have been on quite a few Route 4 busses south of Lake Street that
are slowed down by bikers on Bryant β sometimes the busses pass them β
sometimes we just roll along at 10 miles an hour β or less if itβs a slow biker
going uphill -- hoping someone will get on or off, so the bikers will get a
little lead.
The result of my own commuting strategy and route is that even during rush hour
I only see a few cars on Colfax, or Bryant and Aldrich North of Lake Street.
Itβ seems to me that my βone offβ approach is the best solution to
accommodating both bikes and cars in Minneapolis. We have a street grid system
that lends itself to this β and I think we need to redirect our planning to
build on the βone offβ principle, rather than continuing with the βcomplete
streetsβ principle.
Iβve read all the posts on this thread, and am following what seem to be the
results emerging from the βcomplete streetsβ approach. My fear at this point
is that we are heading towards a βroad rageβ incident where a biker will be
seriously injured or killed. I am VERY sorry to say this. OF COURSE, road
rage cannot be justified.
I canβt agree with Mark Andersonβs suggestion to hold down the horn. Itβs
almost certainly legal, and in many cases it might have the effect of prompting
bikers to pull to the side and let traffic pass. It might work, or have no bad
consequence, 999 times, but the 1,000th time might be a disaster, and might
result in someone being killed. It seems to me that this approach really
amounts to a kind of βescalationβ of what appears to be a growing conflict
between cars and bikes. We need to do as much as possible to de-escalate this
conflict.
Transportation systems are of course designed. One of the things we havenβt
come to grips with as a society, is that they are designed in the context of
our KNOWLEDGE that about 40,000 Americans are killed by them each year, with
many more injured. One consequence of this is that a cost-benefit mentality
emerges, in which both businesses and government weigh the cost-benefit of
killing people.
As a moral question, I canβt see ANY other conclusion than that the
transportation system of ANY industrial system is fundamentally immoral. We do
not have EITHER an individual right, or a collective right, acting as WE THE
PEOPLE, to plan to randomly kill people. But that is exactly what we do. Of
course, all of my own Transit Revolution work is intended to make the entire
transportation system much safer. But we need to keep in mind the fact that
our whole industrial way of thinking is fundamentally immoral. And of courseβ¦
people have families, they need to eat, theyβre in a hurry,β¦ the transportation
system is part of a society that WE THE PEOPLE have allowed to become the way
it is.
I go down Fourth Street frequently, and see the bike lane, sometimes used by
people on skateboards. I personally canβt understand why anyone would use it.
And of course, someone DESIGNED this!β¦ a bike lane squeezed in the middle of
two opposing traffic lanes.
Soβ¦ what do we do? I think we need to rethink the βcomplete streetsβ idea.
Well intentioned though it may be, it is based on the idea of mixing in fragile
bikes bikers with a lot of fast moving vehicles, often driven by distracted
drivers. My question, very simply, is this β in taking this βcomplete streetsβ
approach, are we, collectively, deliberately planning a system that we KNOW
will result in killing bikers? I think we are⦠but we immediately go back to
the point that ALL our transportation and transit systems do the same thing.
Our whole approach, and our whole mindset, is based on a utilitarian principle
of βthe greatest goodβ¦β and a cost-benefit calculus for randomly killing
people. I am personally not a utilitarian β it seems to me that whole system
sprung up as a consequence of industrialization.
And, of course, we live in a dangerous world⦠we need to have a strong economy
to defend ourselves, and, etc.
Iβm working on plans to develop a βone offβ system of designated bike βside
streetsβ that will make it practical for bikers to simply avoid driving on busy
streets. Whatever else may be said, I think this approach has one clear
advantage, it can be designed according to an absolute priority: do NOT kill or
injure people.
BobAgain
East Lake Harriet Farmstead