Fit City

By Ethan Love

May 18, 2011 1:12 PM | Link to this

I’m a cyclist that rides Great Norther very regularly. I try to be as courteous to walkers and runners by following the rules of the road as best I can. If there is a runner or walker in the bike lane, I take over the adjacent full lane and give them wide berth. I think there is room for both here, everyone just needs to be patient and courteous.

By rg

May 18, 2011 1:39 PM | Link to this

1 quibble with your article:

“And remember, if the two-way lanes hadn’t been installed for bicycles, the entire road would be used for motor vehicle travel lanes. “

No, if there weren’t bike lanes, the road would still be a road for people to get where they are going, not for exclusive motor vehicle use.

By Cassidy

May 19, 2011 9:33 AM | Link to this

Despite not being familiar with this part of Austin (Long Live South Austin), a theme is forming with respect to the motorist/cyclists/runners/walkers issue. Why is that a majority of Austinites identify with being Christian, Muslim, Hindu, atheists, etc…which all teach, in one form or another, to respect your community, yet a percentage of Austinites do not give the same level of respect to our community as we give to a person, place or thing in our inner circle? Why is the respect you give a stranger less than the respect your give a person in your inner circle? Would you not save a stranger’s life simply because she or he was a stranger? Of course you wouldn’t; however, one easily chooses to decrease the value of a complete stranger in Austin day in and day out by not giving the most basic level of respect one is easily able to give. We are a community, we are Austinites, and we are humans. Do not be a Sunday worshiper, be a seven day Austinite. Increase the respect you give your fellow Austinite, whether she or he is riding a bike, driving a car, running with a dog, or walking with a stroller.

By Victor

May 19, 2011 10:31 AM | Link to this

I used to live in the neighborhood one house away from GN. My daughter’s best friend at the time shared a back yard fence with us. Should they have walked all the way to Shoal Creek to get to each other’s houses? This seems absurd, requiring about 5 times as much walking.

Bicycles have the right of way in the bike lanes with respect to automobiles. Unless someone can demonstrate otherwise, pedestrians have the right of way with respect to bikes and cars if there is no sidewalk (which there isn’t).

The alternative to walking along GN in the bike lane is not Shoal Creek. It’s walking in the vehicular lane. Better to use the bike lane.

By Cycledestrian

May 19, 2011 10:39 AM | Link to this

I live in the immediate neighborhood. The sidewalks on Shoal Creek only accomodate half of my meandering walks through the neighborhood. I respect the bikelanes when I have to use them and hop up on the curb to give right of way…minding to avoid poison ivy or uneven ground. The bicyclists on Shoal Creek are a constant source of worry for me. On Great Northern to a lesser extent. On Shoal Creek it is virtually impossible to give the 3’ berth to cyclists mandated. An unscientific guesstimate of the cyclists that observe the stop signs and other rules of the road on Shoal Creek comes in at a paltry 25%. Even calm, conscientious motorists become angered when bicyclists fail to signal that Left turn they want to take while blowing through a stop sign. For everyone’s safety, everyone must follow the rules of the roads.

By chris

May 19, 2011 2:04 PM | Link to this

Victor, This is what the Texas transportation code says: § 552.006. USE OF SIDEWALK. (a) A pedestrian may not walk along and on a roadway if an adjacent sidewalk is provided and is accessible to the pedestrian. (b) If a sidewalk is not provided, a pedestrian walking along and on a highway shall if possible walk on: (1) the left side of the roadway; or
(2) the shoulder of the highway facing oncoming traffic.

But, I think most are missing the bigger point here. Without those bike lanes, there would not be a nice, motor vehicle free, area for pedestrians along GN. The street would just be striped with wider travel lanes and there wouldn’t be near as many pedestrians using on the west side of GN. I would think, out of common courtesy, that pedestrians would be mindful of cyclists while in the bike lane. Cyclists obviously have to watch out for the pedestrians also.

By Jay

May 19, 2011 2:34 PM | Link to this

I ride Great Northern several times a week, see regular walkers, etc. I don’t see what the big deal is. Car traffic is low enough that I can usually give the walker decent space. As long as they aren’t swaying all over the place, we’re all good.

Cars are the real problem. They drive too fast down GN. They take the turn from Foster to Great Northern too fast, often driving in the bike lane.

And I’m real tired of hearing about bikes not stopping for signs, lights, etc. Slowing down to 1mph is slow enough to wait our turn, let cars get through, etc. I think those who say 75% of cyclists run signs and lights mean that they don’t put a foot down on the road. A cyclist staying clipped in and slowing down to an “almost stop” is still more of a stop than I see 95% of the cars doing. I have yet to see any cyclist run a stop sign or red light in way of an unsafe manner. I have also had plenty of cars tailgate me and pass in an unsafe manner when I do stop all the way at lights and signs. They don’t want to wait for a cyclist to get up to speed. You can’t have it both ways.

Finally - why can’t the city put up Yellow signs telling cars they need to stay 3 ft away from cyclists? How are cars supposed to know this rule, unless they love reading the DMV manual? 3ft signs are MUCH needed, so cars know the rules.

By Tom Paterson

May 19, 2011 9:46 PM | Link to this

GN isn’t a through street, and there are no sidewalks. The people who walk on GN are mostly locals out walking their kids or dogs, and it’s their neighborhood.

What I don’t get is the reports of cyclists “shaving” pedestrians and other cyclists. What’s up with one downtrodden, marginalized etc. etc. transportation sub group abusing their own, or, even worse, people on the next step down the food chain?

If you’re passing someone, call out “On your left (please)” in a decent tone of voice, well before you start to actually pass. Give them lots of room, and go on. What’s so hard about that?

By Jack

May 19, 2011 10:21 PM | Link to this

“Designed for cycling” is a relative term. I’m sure the GN “bike lane” was designed for cycling in a sense, but any good traffic engineer will tell you that a two-way bike lane on one side of a street is among the worst types of cycling facilities. GN’s bike lanes should never have been set up that way.

Riding that lane in either direction is far less safe than riding in the traffic lane in the correct direction and I encourage cyclists to do so—both to be a predictable bicycling part of traffic around the motor traffic and to avoid conflicts with pedestrians. I have done so regularly and have never had a traffic conflict as a result.

www.bikexprt.com/streetsmarts/usa/index.htm is a pretty good start.

By jack

May 19, 2011 10:23 PM | Link to this

“Designed for cycling” is a relative term. I’m sure the GN “bike lane” was designed for cycling in a sense, but any good traffic engineer will tell you that a two-way bike lane on one side of a street is among the worst types of cycling facilities. GN’s bike lanes should never have been set up that way.

Riding that lane in either direction is far less safe than riding in the traffic lane in the correct direction and I encourage cyclists to do so—both to be a predictable bicycling part of traffic around the motor traffic and to avoid conflicts with pedestrians. I have done so regularly and have never had a traffic conflict as a result.

By jack

May 19, 2011 10:32 PM | Link to this

“Designed for cycling” is a relative term. I’m sure the GN “bike lane” was designed for cycling in a sense, but any good traffic engineer will tell you that a two-way bike lane on one side of a street is among the worst types of cycling facilities. GN’s bike lanes should never have been set up that way.

Riding that lane in either direction is far less safe than riding in the traffic lane in the correct direction and I encourage cyclists to do so—both to be a predictable bicycling part of traffic around the motor traffic and to avoid conflicts with pedestrians. I have done so regularly and have never had a traffic conflict as a result.

By tired of this

May 19, 2011 10:48 PM | Link to this

1) BIcyclists get a 3’ berth IF there is NO bike lane. Ride IN the bike lane instead of weaving ON the line. You’re doing this to yourselves.

2) Bicyclists on both GN and shoal creek ignore the bike lanes and ride in the traffic lanes VERY FREQUENTLY. Even (stupidly enough) in the wrong direction on GN into oncomming traffic. (and I’m not talking about cyclists crossing the road to safely take the turns at the ends)GN is striped very narrowly for auto traffic and twists in places. Keep this in mind when you’re riding ON the line instead of in the lane, or riding (illegally) two-abreast while yakking with your training partner, weaving in and out of the bike lane and ignoring traffic. I see this every single day.

1. some bicyclists do NOT stop at stop signs. They don’t slow down. They don’t stop pedaling, and sometimes they don’t even look. Ms Annick will tell you that the poor cyclists have to keep their heart rates up. well it certainly has that effect on motorists that have to stand on their brakes to avoid the bicyclist who couldn’t be bothered to obey the stop sign.

2. Ms. Annick will also tell you that those evil school children should not be using the bike lane - they should be walking in the six foot tall weeds and poison ivy, or possibly on the railroad tracks, or walk an extra half mile over to shoal creek and back on the other end - because those poor bicyclists have to keep their heart rates up, and couldn’t possibly use the bike lane on shoal creek for that.

By Pam LeBlanc

May 20, 2011 10:33 AM | Link to this

Couple of things here. First, I’m pretty sure this is a workable situation. I’m just pointing out to runners that since they are running or walking in a bike lane, they should pay attention and be alert for coming cyclists. Many cyclists use that long stretch of bike lane as a training stretch, since there are no stops on it. Also, might be good if pedestrians turned down their music while running or walking in the bike lane. There are sidewalks along part of Great Northern, between the school and the pedestrian bridge. And finally, that’s not officially a bike lane on Shoal Creek. Cars can park there; that makes it hazardous at times for cyclists. Pam LeBlanc

By Suzanne

May 20, 2011 11:00 AM | Link to this

Wow. If the objective of this article was to fan the flames of contempt between pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists, you succeeded.

I will continue to use Great Northern bike lanes to walk in until A) a sidewalk is installed or B) both motorists AND cyclists stop breaking the law and drive/ride more cautiously and respectfully toward everyone who shares public roads.

By Pam LeBlanc

May 20, 2011 11:08 AM | Link to this

Hi Suzanne, I’m not trying to fan the flames, just encourage pedestrians and cyclists to pay attention so we can all coexist on that stretch of heavily used road. Pedestrians need to be aware that if they walk/run in a bike lane, they are in a cycling thoroughfare and should keep alert. That’s all! Pam LeBlanc

By Suzanne

May 20, 2011 11:47 AM | Link to this

Hi Pam.

The reason I find the article in its entirety inflammatory is that about 99% of cyclists I see break the law CONSTANTLY. It is so common that when I see a law-abiding cyclist it actually makes me gasp in disbelief. More often than not these folks are dressed as if they are commuting and not parking their SUVs on Foster and then zipping around the neighborhood pretending to be in the Tour de France.

Aside from that, I am still uncertain about the accuracy of your statement “The cyclist has right of way.” I don’t infer that from Annick Beaudet statements. More that it would be prudent for pedestrians to watch out. I sent an email to Annick Beaudet to inquire and will continue to dig to find out what the LAW is regarding this.

By Pam

May 20, 2011 5:44 PM | Link to this

I walk the loop around Shoal Creek and Great Northern daily and live on it as well. During the past month, I have seen a bicyclist zoom out from the Great Northern retention pond without looking or stopping and get hit by a car, I’ve been yelled at by a cyclist for walking in “his” lane, I’ve had to jump out of the way of five bikes riding on the sidewalk on Shoal Creek and heard a bicyclist yell “F- you old man” at a car when it had the temerity to honk at him for riding in the middle of Shoal Creek Boulevard. I have watched countless bicyclists zoom through the stop sign at White Rock and Bullard. There is just some wierd attitude among a sizeable minority of bikers that makes it unpleasant to be around them. It’s sort of a persecution complex turned inside out - “cars don’t care if they cut me off, so I’ll just cut them off first” kind of thing. It gets old fast.

By Sandra

May 21, 2011 11:02 AM | Link to this

Hi, I live in the neighborhood too and I frequently walk the GN/Shoal Creek Loop.On a beautiful weekend morning, GN can get pretty dicey. Running groups, biking groups, kids, pets, meanderers…

I have long thought that GN should be closed to MOTOR VEHICLES on Saturday and Sunday mornings. I’d be willing to drive SC instead to create a safe, enjoyable stretch for walking, running and biking.

By Sheila

May 21, 2011 10:07 PM | Link to this

I am a cyclist, live in the hood, and use GN regularly. I too do not understand the big deal. I’ve been riding GN for years and as another poster mentioned, there is usually low enough car traffic to give wide berth to peds on the route. I am glad I live in a neighborhood where so many of my neighbors get out and and walk, run, bike…. The only problem I have ever had on GN has been the cars constantly drifting into the bike lane. But, that problem is even worse on Shoal Creek so pick your poison. I appreciate Pam L’s point of view. Everyone just turn down the ipods, put down the phones and just pay attention. s

By Neighborhood FIRST!!

May 22, 2011 1:26 PM | Link to this

I’ve lived and walked in the neighborhood for more than 20 years. The lane on GN USED to be designated for pedestrians/bikers. There weren’t as many bikers back then and the ones who were out, were much kinder.

There is not a sidewalk north of the Far West crossover - more than half a mile - and bikers/walkers/mom’s with strollers used to get along and share the lane without rudeness. Since designating the lane for bikers only, I’ve seen more and more bikers refusing to use the lane and instead blocking car traffic on the road. The lane is a solid double yellow stripe which I always thought was illegal to cross to get around the bikers.

I try to walk on the edge of the biking lane but have been shaved MANY times by arrogant bikers riding too fast for a neighbor with many children. This is a neighborhood FIRST! It makes me sad to see the bikers cause so much anger in such a wonderful, active neighborhood where children have always gotten out and walked and ridden their bikes. It’s becoming more unsafe all the time and I’m sad to say that your article probably just made it worse! Bikers need to go train someplace else.

By Neighborhood FIRST!!

May 22, 2011 1:36 PM | Link to this

I’ve lived and walked in the neighborhood for more than 20 years. The lane on GN USED to be designated for pedestrians/bikers. There weren’t as many bikers back then and the ones who were out, were much kinder.

There is not a sidewalk north of the Far West crossover - more than half a mile - and bikers/walkers/mom’s with strollers used to get along and share the lane without rudeness. Since designating the lane for bikers only, I’ve seen more and more bikers refusing to use the lane and instead blocking car traffic on the road. The lane is a solid double yellow stripe which I always thought was illegal to cross to get around the bikers.

I try to walk on the edge of the biking lane but have been shaved MANY times by arrogant bikers riding too fast for a neighbor with many children. This is a neighborhood FIRST! It makes me sad to see the bikers cause so much anger in such a wonderful, active neighborhood where children have always gotten out and walked and ridden their bikes. It’s becoming more unsafe all the time and I’m sad to say that your article probably just made it worse! Bikers need to go train someplace else.

By pam leblanc

May 22, 2011 1:55 PM | Link to this

Hi Neighborhood First, I’m all for dual use. I run and bike that stretch regularly. I also believe that because the lane is designated a bike lane, walkers and runners should be prepared to encounter cyclists there.. It’s very frustrating as a regular bike commuter to be continually called rude for using a facility that was designed for bicycles. I’m not condoning rude behavior by the cyclists, but we’recertainly not doing anything wrong by biking in a bike lane. I suspect that the cyclists you’ve seen who don’t use the bike lane and instead take the traffic lane are trying to avoid pedestrians in the bike lane. It seems that many posters here don’t want cyclists in the bike lanes but also don’t want them in the road. That doesn’t seem very inclusive to me. One final note - the street belongs to and is paid for by all the city’s taxpayers, not just the ones who live in this neighborhood. We all have a right to use it, and I believe if we all make an effort, we can do so safely. Let’s make an effort!

By Joe Doyle

May 23, 2011 8:40 PM | Link to this

I grew up in Chicago, training on my bike along the lakeshore. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve seen a jogger or rollerblader turn into a cyclist by not looking first. It’s just not safe.

What’s more, the bike lanes are just simply crazy. If you are headed north and need to avoid a slower-moving exercise enthusiast, you need to head right into oncoming traffic. This is about as safe as playing Russian Roulette with a full revolver.

I feel the lanes should not be on one side of the road, but rather on both. And, I think they should be multi-purpose (as long as people realize they need to look over their shoulder before making a move).