What I find utterly flabbergasting is that the TeaParty movement has latched onto the Hike and Bike plan, and decided that they want to kill it. Arlington already has the dubious distinction of being the largest city in the world without any form of public transportation. The TeaPartiers want to make certain that we, as cyclists know that when we ride in a vehicular fashion, we are doing so at our own risk (as if we did not know that already). For some reason they have decided that, contrary to any REAL research, bike facilities cause traffic congestion, and decreases in property values [head-scratching]. Sure, some of the run down buildings, such as one that is owned by one of the major opponents, would not benefit from the fact that a cyclist has time to realize that his building is in a rather dilapidated condition, whereas a car-driver whizzes by at 50 mph (where the speed limit is 35 or 40) and it is hard to see the TRUE condition of the property. This might cause that property to adjust to its actual value…which might end up with it being valued at lower than what he believes it might be worth…so in essence, yes, that it would cause his property to lose value…but this example is far from the norm.

In a survey released in April, the National Association of Realtors show that there are that 77% look for abundant Hike and Bike facilities (on street and off street trails and lanes), and 50% want to see improvements to public transportation options. NAR Survey Results

Another study, released June 20, 2011, from the Political Economic Research Institute (PERI) at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, shows that dollar for dollar, spending on hike and bike infrastructure is about 46% more efficient at creating jobs than projects with no bike and walk infrastructure. PERI Study

(a) An operator passing another vehicle:
(1) shall pass to the left of the other vehicle at a safe distance; and
(2) may not move back to the right side of the roadway until safely clear of the passed vehicle.”

“Sec. 545.401. RECKLESS DRIVING; OFFENSE.

(a) A person commits an offense if the person drives a vehicle in willful or wanton disregard for the safety of persons or property.” (f)(g)

“Sec. 545.103. SAFELY TURNING

An operator may not turn the vehicle to enter a private road or driveway, otherwise turn the vehicle from a direct course, or move right or left on a roadway unless movement can be made safely.” (e)

“Sec. 545.418. OPENING VEHICLE DOORS.

A person may not:
(1) open the door of a motor vehicle on the side available to moving traffic, unless the door may be opened in reasonable safety without interfering with the movement of other traffic.”

“Sec. 545.060. DRIVING ON ROADWAY LANED FOR TRAFFIC.

(a) An operator on a roadway divided into two or more clearly marked lanes for traffic:
(1) shall drive as nearly as practical entirely within a single lane.” (b.1)

“Sec. 545.152. VEHICLE TURNING LEFT.

To turn left at an intersection or into an alley or private road or driveway, an operator shall yield the right-of-way to a vehicle that is approaching from the opposite direction and that is in the intersection or in such proximity to the intersection as to be an immediate hazard.” (d)

Bike lanes are not the answer, at least they are not the complete answer. There are situations where bike lanes are the best option. Off the top of my head I cannot think of any of those situations, but I am sure that they exist.
MUPS or off the road bike trails are not the complete answer. The exorbinant cost to build and maintain a totally seperate infrastructure for cyclists is mind blowing. Of course, it would never go to where I need to go…but that is another story.

At some point; hopefully later rather than sooner, I will be forced to amputate the entire lower portion of my right leg. Basically the salvage bought me time. However, due to the extensive injuries, and the compromised cardiovascular system, as my vessels begin to harden with age, the lost bloodflow will result in an “extremity that is no longer viable”. All of this because one person either, thought she could make it around me, felt that she had more right to the road than I did, or did not see me. I cannot even begin to say what she was thinking, but I do not for an instant believe that she did not see me. I honestly believe that she underestimated my speed. Even though I was doing within 2 mph of the speed limit, her frame of reference was such that it might have been difficult to judge the speed of an approaching motorcycle (or bicycle), and since there were no other vehicles for her to frame against, she thought she had time to get out and past in front of me. This is instead of waiting an additional 2 seconds for me to pass. I am in no way implying that our collision was a malicious act. I do not believe that she would have stayed on site if that had been the case.

Yep, I wandered a bit off topic here.

As I was sitting at a red stoplight (two lanes going in my direction of travel, one was turn only (left), and the other lane was straight and right turn). A car pulled up behind me and honked. I waved “hello” over my shoulder. He honked again, and again I waved. Wash, rinse and repeat, until I turned around and looked at him. It was a car with 4 high school kids in it. The front seat passenger climbs out the window, and sitting on the edge of the door starts yelling at me. After about 15 seconds, I give him a “your number one” salute, and turn around. The light turned a couple of seconds later, I continued on my way, and the schoolers turned right. I however, was pissed. There is no way that he would have reacted like that to a car sitting at the light. He would have simply sat, like the good little sheeple that he was, and waited for the light to change. The fact that becasue I was on a bike I for some reason have less of a right to the road than he does simply chaps my backside.

There seriously needs to be some further driver’s education on what the laws are and how a motorist is supposed to behave around other vehicles. Bicycles included.