Three people died in hit-and-run accidents involving motor vehicles and bicycles over a 45-day span in Houston and that's got those of a sardine-urbanism persuasion up in arms. Because we now have a chronically-angry Houston group angry, we need evidence that we have a war on cycling and the Chronicle has been more than willing to oblige in their unique manner. "Some motorists" they say are waging a "war on cyclists" apparently running around looking for bicyclists to kill. If you take the Apple Dumpling Gang and Dug Begley at their word you could auction off a Houston Cyclists Hunting Permit for far more than the $350,000 that some sap just paid to hunt a Black Rhino.
Already we've had the Apple Dumpling Gang write a love letter to cyclists imploring motorists to "lose the hate" while calling for even the "grumpiest motorist" to be cheered by Critical Mass. I'm sure they're not including the person desperately trying to get to their shift-work job that might be held up by Critical Mass and their "harmless fun" or someone having a medical emergency. I'm sure those "grumpy drivers" might not want to stop and enjoy the parade. How many people might just not be on the roads joyriding on a Friday evening, but actually might be trying to get somewhere important? I see no consideration of those questions.
The Gang also chose to ignore reports of bicyclists hitting cars on the hood if they honked when delayed at a green light, or reports of bicyclists blatantly running red-lights and stopping cars from entering intersections during a green-light because "us taking over the roads for one evening is not too much to ask." Of course, the ideal (espoused by the bicycling community and the Gang) is not to "take over the road" but to "share the road" right? Not if you listen to the rhetoric coming from the bicyclist side of things. Nothing short of owning the road, being given right-of-way in every situation, will ever be enough, and even then they'll demand more. The missing component to a "fix" for Houston's cycling problem is suggesting that there's a problem with the cyclists to begin with.
In his (opinion) column today, Dug Begley, sort of, starts to say there is a problem with bicyclists but stops well short of fully defining it. He also, inadvertently, reveals another problem, specifically, the clueless attitude of Houston's political leadership on this issue. That Mayor Parker feels "inattentive and disabled drivers" to be the sole controlling issue here displays an astonishing amount of ignorance regarding Houston's current cycling culture. Because of this we're given lip-service regarding "complete streets" and a lack of enforcement for an unenforceable "3 foot passage law" which (I've read cyclists say) actually requires drivers provide 6 feet of space.
When you combine all of this Houston is stuck with political leadership that doesn't understand the problem, a media who has clearly chosen sides, a cycling community who is under no pressure to change their ways and Houston motorists who are more uncertain and angrier than ever. Does any of this translate into a "war on cycling"? Of course not, but we're not talking about fixing problems here as much as we are catering to approved special interests and trying to sell newspapers. I don't care which side of the issue you're on, the current state of debate, driven by ChronBlog and City Hall, is not going to solve the problem.
Before I go any further I should state that, despite appearances above, I am NOT anti-cyclist. As a matter of fact I can often be found, out in my suburban neighborhood, pedaling along on my Orient Express to the local store to pick up an item, or riding recreationally on bike-paths in the area. I enjoy riding my bike, especially on days such as we've had recently in Houston, Chamber of Commerce weather makes for a great bike ride. That said, solutions to this problem are going to mean both sides making concessions. To truly "fix" this problem it's going to take a change in dialogue and having both sides agree to some things that they're not going to like.
- First: There is no "war on cyclists". It's time to drop this media and advocacy-group driven drivel once and for all. Yes, tempers are rising in this debate but the reality is they're rising on both sides. Suggesting that motorists are looking high and low for cyclists to maul with their cars is silly. It's just as logical to say that the cyclists are trying to wage a "war on motorists" by restricting their rights to drive where they want without fear of constant harassment by the police and a gang of two-wheeled vigilantes. Ending this bit of childish drivel should be the prequel to fixing this mess. Unfortunately, ChronBlog has historically shown no proclivity, under the editorial helm of Jeff Cohen, to inject sanity in local debates so the suggestion is to just ignore them straight out.
- Second: There needs to be a push for driver education regarding sharing the roads with both pedestrians and bicyclists. In a city where even the Chief of Police ran over a pedestrian (Chief McClelland then received preferential treatment under the law for doing so) it's very clear that people need to be taught about what they're doing in their cars. Instead of calls for "banning cell phones" and "safe passage laws" which are unenforceable, Houston needs to educate its police force on proper enforcement of existing distracted driver laws. It would also be advisable to consider increasing enforcement of existing anti-road rage laws. Angry drivers are dangerous drivers and dangerous driving is illegal. As easy as it is to say: Common sense can go a long way to solving many of the problems.
- Third: Bicycles used for commuting purposes need to be licensed and ensured. Just as a motor vehicle is required to have a license plate, registration and insurance so should bicycles. Plus, if there IS an incident, individual identification is going to be a necessity should a bicyclist break the law. Cyclists should also be insured in the case they are found to be in the wrong and damage is caused. I don't believe that there needs to be a "bicycle driver's license" because existing Texas Driver's licenses should imply an understanding of traffic laws.* I also don’t think that recreational cycling, on bike paths, or children’s bicycles would be subject to the same criteria. On a secondary note, I don’t think underage children should be riding bikes on anything other than residential streets without being accompanies by a bicyclist of driving age who has a driver’s license.
- Fourth: Put an end to Critical Mass, at least in its current format. At this point it's doing more harm than good. Judging from my interactions with members and spokespersons for the group it's not about bicycle awareness but about sticking it to motorists. This not only poisons the well, but it does more harm than good. Moving a recreational ride to Houston's growing expanse of bike trails would alleviate much of the pressure. Yes, you have a right to the road, few are disputing that, and those who are disputing it are just wrong. Houston has spent Millions of dollars trying to provide cycling trails that are safe, expansive and beautiful. You advocated for them, now use them.
- Fifth: The City of Houston needs to work to identify "Prime Bicycling Corridors" and re-engineer them accordingly. While I'm not a fan of "complete streets" for all of Houston I do see windows of opportunity for certain corridors where bicycle and pedestrian traffic is found to be high enough to justify providing individual lanes. The problem, as is usual with Houston Government, is that we're now witnessing Ready! Fire! Aim! logic when it comes to trying to make cycling safer. Cycling corridors should link to the existing bike-trail system, to park systems and touch upon areas where cyclists are most likely to ride. All care and caution should be taken in this study to prevent encroaching on motor-vehicle mobility, because (for the foreseeable future) Houston will remain a car-based city.
- Sixth: Get rid of Mayor Brown's bike "lanes". In most cases they do more harm than good. It's time for Houston to get serious about creating real bike lanes within the areas that bicycle traffic is highest, and end the fallacy that some narrow, poorly maintained areas on the shoulder make Houston a bike-friendly town full of "world-classiness" and other none-such. It doesn't half do that, but it sure sounds good on the campaign trail.
For all of the hue & cry regarding the bicyclists in Houston and their rights to the roads, there are still a lot of false-truths that are allowed to persist because of the proclivities and political-leanings of the leadership and opinion-drives within the city. The idea that "we pay taxes too" is a canard that always dies hard. The "war on cyclists" meme is exciting, and lends a cloak-and-dagger bit of intrigue to the situation but doesn't solve it. Critical Mass running around town banging on car hoods and flipping drivers the bird accomplishes nothing, nor do motorists swerving in front of cyclists or not letting them pass out of spite. Geographically, Houston is huge, there should be enough room for use of transit of all types, provided the planning and execution is done correctly. Given Houston's terrible transit planning track-record however, I've little faith the leadership is going to get it right this time.
*Yes, I understand that this would require a legislative solution at a State level.
