Hey, there! Log in / Register
DCR to bicyclists: Don't expect perfection on bike paths after snowstorms - or just move
By adamg on Sun, 02/16/2014 - 10:14am
A bicyclist's request that DCR ensure its bike paths are plowed and salted to bare pavement within a couple days after a large snowstorm has DCR officals saying enough's enough: Bicyclists with "poor judgement and unrealistic expectations" who can't find other ways to get around in the days after a snowstorm should consider moving to a warmer city.
UHub was forwarded a series of e-mail messages over three days between and about one bicyclist and DCR staffers, on the condition we excise names. It started with e-mail on Feb. 11 from somebody who rides to work on the Southwest Corridor:
The condition of the Southwest Corridor Bike Path today is absolutely unacceptable. From Boylston St. near the Stony Brook T-Station to New Washington Street, at the end of the Corridor near the Forest Hills T-Station, the path was nearly completely covered in ice. This path is the only safe route to take, and for it to be covered in ice two days after minimal snowfall is detrimental to Boston's cyclists who rely on safe travel to get to and from work every day. The path should either be plowed to the pavement or de-icing techniques should be employed.
A DCR staffer responded:
Thanks for your email. The Southwest Corridor Park bike path location was originally plowed down to the pavement, but there has been some melting and refreezing and current temperatures are not conducive to more melting, even if treated. While we do treat some high-priority crosswalks (such as at schools and T stations) with salt, we do not treat all the pathways and sidewalks throughout DCR (including on the Southwest Corridor) as this can have a detrimental effect on landscaping.
Unless you have appropriate winter bike tires that can handle normal winter weather conditions on these paths, we recommend you use alternate forms of transportations at this time of year for your own safety.
The bicyclist replied:
Thank you for your response.
I find much of your response difficult to believe. I checked the bike path every day since the storms and did not see it plowed to the pavement once. There was always a layer of snow ontop of the pavement. If this were indeed a result of melting and freezing, then why is this only effecting this bike path, and not area sidewalks as well?
Also, you mention that salt is not used because of effects on landscaping, but there are many other deicing materials which can be used in its place. To ignore these options shows to me that bike paths are a low priority, even though the Corridor is a "level 1 priority."
Please have plow operators pay more attention to how much snow they are plowing. I understand that patches of ice in certain vulnerable areas are inevitable and part of "normal winter weather conditions." For an entire section of the path to have no visible pavement, however, indicates a lack of care on the part of DCR to properly prepare the path for the winter as the State and local governments do for all other modes of transportation.
Respectfully,
At that point, the staffer forwarded the exchange to higher ups and asked how to respond. One replied:
I thought your response was a appropriate. I have a couple points to add.
A narrow linear path bordered by turf and vegetation (which is covered by snow) doesn't thaw as quickly as a sidewalk abutting a roadway. Even if we did repeatedly apply salt or chemically treat pedestrian routes, thaw and refreezing would continue to be a problem during periods of extended sub freezing weather conditions. This is why our current standard does not call for pedestrian routes to be completely free of snow pack and ice. We do not have the resources to meet that standard.
This past Saturday I walked section 3 of the Corridor from Forest Hills to the Stony Brook MBTA station and while some of the paths were covered in snow pack they were all safely passable for pedestrians - even pedestrians pushing child strollers. A tremendous effort goes into clearing the SWC pathways and our staff should be complimented for their efforts.
Then another even higher higher up forwarded this to staffers:
Hi All,
We should all be stating as a policy that DCR has no responsibility or intent of providing "safe" winter biking opportunities on any of our linear paths or sidewalks. This is impossible! Any path or walk where we do snow removal is strictly to provide reasonable continued passage for pedestrians. If anyone wants to bike our paths in winter they should assume variable and dangerous conditions, and know they are doing it at there own risk.
Frankly, I am tired of our dedicated team wasting valuable time addressing the less than .05% of all cyclists who choose to bike after a snow/ice event. Sometimes during winter in Boston you can safely bike, and I do it when it is dry and safe. This is not one of those winters! We should not spend time debating cyclists with poor judgement and unrealistic expectations, and stick with [the staffer]'s recommendation that they find other transportation. If someone is completely depending on a bike for year-round transportation, they are living in the wrong city.
Feel free to forward this to those complaining.
Neighborhoods:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Perfectly said, Sally,
perfectly said.
"Long running attack on cyclists?"
Are you kidding? You're claiming a DCR conspiracy against cyclists? Good Lord.
DCR is hack-ridden and unresponsive to current user needs. Most state agencies are.
But claiming active attacks against bikers is a whole different kettle of fish.
Please provide specific examples of said attacks or citations documenting such.
Thanks.
How about the lawsuits?
For quite some time the MDC and DCR decided that the Longfellow Bridge was a limited access highway.
They got taken to court and lost multiple times.
Then there was the redesign of an intersection in Newton where the community wanted cycling and pedestrian accommodations and got arrogant shit thrown at them by an imperious jerk who told them they could walk and bike elsewhere because he wanted 5 lanes of car traffic.
Then there is there war on pedestrians - eliminating most Memorial Drive crosswalks and tangling with MIT over it ... and a bunch of kids getting hit because they wouldn't clear their property, etc.
Plenty of examples of official declarations such as this one here ... what planet or city have you been living in that you missed all this?
Hey Adam, let's enforce the name-calling ban
UH is quick to admonish anyone he calls Swirly names but she seems to get carte blanche. Not the first insulting name I've seen her use.
Can we get some consistency?
Thanks, and keep up the good work.
DCR Brilliance
Really, the DCR response was nearly perfect. By calling out cyclists, they guaranteed a ground swell of public support for not doing their job.
Why not take your own advice?
They're not the only ones who need to shut up and stop whining
DCR can't even be bothered to
DCR can't even be bothered to shovel crosswalks and curb cuts at intersections they control. It's night and day between city of Boston controlled property and DCR's. The city's is always cleared within a day or two and the state's is an impassable mound of snow and ice FOR THE ENTIRE WINTER.
Honestly...
You are not going to like this argument. But my sense that even with cleared paths, I'm not sure it would raise bike usage enough to justify the cost of continual salt and sanding the sidewalks. It is costly to keep things salted.
This is similar to the argument Seattle used when they experimented with using "No Salt". They followed a policy to only "pack down snow" and sand. It failed because of unpopularity and hills was not navigable with cars. But when it comes to pedestrians to pedestrians with baby strollers, it worked well enough.
And it is also true that DCR paths tend to be around vegetation and stuff that salt tend to hurt (Seattle also made this argument, but this sounds more true when most paths of DCR is around parks, ponds, and rivers). They also made that argument and that also pass some measurement of a real point.
It is also true DCR is not known as an agency of competency. But claim they are lazy doesn't necessarily mean salting DCR paths is not environmentally harmful. Nor they are not telling the truth in a time of year of multiple snow storms and really cold temperatures, there's not that many bikers to justify salting the sidewalk at the level of keep it clear during thawing and re-freezing.
To keep the bike paths and
To keep the bike paths and sidewalks snow-free to the psycho standards that the loony conspiracy theorist Swilly grrl and others demand would require someone to walk every single inch of these paths on a daily basis until the last drop of snow melts in the spring. Oops, was that a pin I just heard drop? Because it certainly wasn't the sound of Swilly whining to her elected officials demanding they raise her taxes and increase the snow removal budgets.
Do you do anything here but troll and make personal attacks?
If so I've never seen it.
You can't see...
... what isn't there.
The world is waiting
Don't you have some space savers to count, dear?
We're too busy counting the personal attacks you make
You are up to about 10 attacks in this piece alone, with absolutely zero content added to the thread. As you are math challenged, that represents 10/0 - an incalculable ratio of abusive stupidity to contribution to the discussion.
Your paranoid conspiracy mania knows no bounds
You keep a running count of the number of and what type of comments I make on U-Hub? And you call ME the stalker. You must be a barrel of laughs at home.
Project, Much?
But I was only talking about this particular act of your stalking.
Ctrl+F type in tenfortyseven and it gives a count.
You do realize that it is a classic stalker behavior to pull the "you caught me so YOU must be the stalker", right?
Also, notice that I am not the only one who has noticed this stalking behavior? And that you are the one replying to my comments first? The pattern is obvious.
Sorry Vladimir
But we have this thing here called The First Ammendment. I can express my opinion. I disagree with you and have the gall to call you on your b.s and you go all pit bull on me. Too bad. Suck it up. Grow up. Grow a pair. Quit the whining. Get out of the kitchen if you can't stand the heat. How many more ways do I have to say it?
You're the one who has chosen to do a search for everything I have ever said here and you call Me the stalker. It would be quite comical if it weren't so damn sad. I am done with this thread, swilly. Peace. :-)
I'm a year round commuter
I've been a year round commuter for the past 10 years. I work in the bike industry. Do what they do in the midwest and invest in the appropriate equipment and you can safely and easily commute year round. The DCR is in the right, though they could have handled it more professionally.
Everything these days then to
Everything these days then to give PR replies that rarely ever give much information and barely answers the question posed. This is probably an example of why most things outside of a small shop give such frustrating responses. DCR being an agency with tendency to be known about 20 years behind, I have to wonder if this reflects communication before PR became as formalized. Their response was harsh, but they actually spoke more than just saying "Thank you for contacting DCR! We're sorry you were not finding the sidewalks salted to your needs. We're using the most within the resources at our disposal and environmental considerations. We'll review our policies as the situation changes."
For those of you keeping score at home...
The Department of Families and Children is indirectly culpable for the likely death of at least one child, and has 500-plus known felons on it's books.
Annie Dookhan cooked the books on thousands of pieces of criminal evidence, compromising the resultant court proceedings and likely costing the Commonwealth tens of millions of dollars. And generating an equal number of get out of jail free cards.
There's that little matter of the metro-west compounding lab that, under state regulation and inspection, killed about 40 people.
The state ACA site is a 70 million dollar (and counting) trainwreck.
I think that the state, and our lame duck (thank God for that at least) governor have bigger issues to deal with than clearing the recent Global Warming from bicycle paths.
All heads of the same hydra
You really think this extreme level of arrogance and lack of professionalism in all these situations is unrelated to a larger problem with patronage hiring in state government?
If so, there's a bridge for sale I'd like to show you.
There is no conspiracy,
There is no conspiracy, sweetheart.
Just because it is "they way things have always been"
Doesn't mean that it 1) isn't wrong and 2) isn't a conspiracy.
How many MA politicians have been nailed for corruption recently? How many of their appointments have been pushed out over personal spending and cronyism scandals?
Well, that explains the Alewife Greenway
Arlington, at least, plows most of their share of the Minuteman trail to bare pavement within a reasonable amount of time after the end of the snow. (I wish they would do the footbridge, too, or at least the footpath beside it, even though that's uncomfortably close to highway-speed cars; it's not really wide enough for anyone with accessibility issues. But I do understand you can't really take a Bobcat on a wooden bridge.) Compare that to DCR's nonexistent "maintenance" of the Alewife Greenway path in winter - I can see why people who'd normally use that path to get to the Minuteman just give up. Last I saw on Friday, the snow on that path was over my knees, and it intersects hilariously with the well-maintained Minuteman.
Perhaps the problem is in DCR's name: "Department of Conservation and *Recreation*." Clearly, their paths are only to be used for "recreation," not by actual people wanting to go actual places. I guess I'm not visiting friends in Medford, then; I could walk or bike over if DCR would plow the Alewife Greenway path. The other option is to spend an hour and a half connecting between three sets of buses.
Recreation, not Transportation
DCR should be focused on conservation and recreation, not transportation. Roads and bridges they control should have all been turned over to the DOT long ago.
Mark is right, here (omg)
It's utterly ridiculous that an incompetent agency like DCR is in charge of any transportation infrastructure at all. If bridges hadn't been wrested from their grasp, one of them would have collapsed. They shouldn't have any jurisdiction over any other road or bike path either.
MassDOT should be in charge of all transportation infrastructure in the state. That includes bike paths. They do not need the idiots at DCR undercutting them as they maintain our infrastructure.
I'm also appalled at the anti bike and anti pedestrian bigotry that is becoming routine at uhub. This site is turning into the Herald.
Storrow drive was originally built as a recreational road. But if DCR treated Storrow the way they treat the SW corridor, the outcry from suburban drivers would be deafening. Because that road has become a highway, even while DCR pretends it's a "parkway."
Storrow isn't even usable by most emergency vehicles, but there is no end of whining from drivers when it is not cleared promptly.
Perhaps DCR would have more money for their real mission if they weren't doing highway maintenance. Either Storrow should be treated as a "recreational road" or DCR should have nothing to do with it.
Storrow, all the "parkways" and the bike commuter paths should all be moved into MassDOT. Period.
Matthew...
Matthew... I need to ask your basis on calling on you're appalled at the anti-bike- anti-pedestrian with the word bigot that probably does not help. Because most bike threads tend to be 100+ comments, but most comments are on the bike's side.
This is the one recent thread that seems by the thumbs and by the comments that siding with DCR - myself included. Not all the comments have been civil, but ignoring the name calling, there's reasoned arguments here. Not just knee-jerk reactions where the words are spoken motivated at just being anti-bike anti-pedestrian. I think my arguments is written well enough though cinamngrl probably disagrees. I find Sally arguments says it better. I find no qualms with Dvdoff. Anon Kyle started off the first comment sounding civil enough and reasonable enough. Another anon at 10:29 am gave a short response that doesn't add much but nothing necessarily hostile either, plus registered commenter anonism chiming with a co-sign comment.
That's quite a number of commentators (and myself) your blanket statement basically blanket everyone. If you do respond, you may say you only meant the anon's chiming with words "haha cyclist are whiny douchebags." And to be fair, I must agree it is not helping to the civility of this thread. But the lack of differentiation irks me, especially since from my understanding, most bike threads are on the bike's side. This is the one thread that seeming to go the other way, and I think it is because this is one of the times where there's a reasonable reason: It's been a hard winter people and it seems they may have good reasons some of the narrow bike paths with many along parkland, rivers, and ponds are not plowed and salt to the level of the roads unless you want to reenact the Roman salting Carthage so nothing grows again (I know it's a myth and overdramatic, but I find it fitting to illustrate they might have a good reason).
Also for the rest of the post, I agree just fine. MassDOT should handle the roads and bridges. Storrow drive should be phased out completely with major effort to move the traffic to the Pike. James and Helen Storrow, knowing their history regarding its construction in the first place, would finally be allowed to rest peacefully. I have no qualms with that part, but I don't appreciate the implication of the one sentence used in this post where the sentiment of many anons and pseudonym commentators have voiced in agreement with DCR and your line implied it is wrong because of being bigots.
It's quite simple really
There is a double-standard.
A citizen asked for a _____ way to be cleared. If you fill in the blank with "motor" then this is a non-story, nobody makes a comment, it's business as usual. DCR would never respond that way to a request to clear the parkways. But if you fill in the blank with "bike" it spawns super-vitriol from not only the bike-hating, city-loathing Herald set, but also negative comments from those supposedly friendly to bike riding. And the extremely inappropriate response from DCR upper management.
Someone made a request that the bike paths be treated with equal care and respect as the old MDC parkways receive every winter. Citizens have every right to make that request, just as they have every right to request clearing of the parkways. Go back and re-read the emails. There is nothing wrong with them until the last one. On both sides, the tone is respectful, although firm, until the last email from upper management -- that one was out of line.
Drivers regularly get upset when Storrow Drive does not get cleared rapidly enough. I see it on twitter, for instance. Nobody chastises them for being "unreasonable" or "selfish" for complaining. Nobody tells them "move to a warmer city." Actually, DCR typically apologizes and tries to send out plows ASAP.
But when someone asks for the bike paths to be cleared as well (days after the storm even) it spawns a large thread of name-calling and some kind of thinly veiled class hatred. Why? Just because someone gets to work in a different way from you doesn't mean they lose their right to ask public agencies to do their job.
And that goes for the so-called "bike sympathizers" in this thread too. There are a bunch of comments from those who like to ride bikes but don't do so in the winter. I'm like that too. I don't even own a bike, so without Hubway, I don't have a choice really. But that doesn't mean that questioning DCR is banned. It doesn't mean that someone isn't allowed to ask for the bike paths to be cleared, or to point out that DCR is being less than honest and forthright. It doesn't mean that someone deserves to receive that kind of facetious response from public servants.
Also, to clarify, there are many reasons for DCR to be divested of all transportation infrastructure. Snow clearance is just one of many maintenance issues they fail.
Okay, Let Me Try to Fit That Concisely to my Original Question
Okay, my original post asked "Did you just call everyone expressing some level of understanding to DCR bigots?" With all the implications especially to dismiss all arguments because of said bigotry.
It turn long from that short question because I needed to give a supporting paragraphs of posters making arguments that I found reasonable while DCR-sympathetic, explain my motivation to ask while listing one example reason, and a final paragraph address the rest of your post that I had no issue.
Your short response for your appallment is seeing a double standard. And I have to agree I would not imagine DCR giving the same response to cars. I'm not necessarily against "unprofessional" responses because I value speaking straight of what they really think. But I do see a bad sign as it likely show a dangerous bias.
You separated the "Herald group" from the 'bike sympathizers", but still including the "bike sympathizers" (and I presume this includes me) as still applicable. So going from your first post, it is still applying "bigotry". That's not a light word. And while you frame that cyclist don't have equal right to express complaint as drivers, I have to ask what about the arguments mentioned here? A lot got lost between the vitriolic attacks, but some rational points was raised: Salt on paths along rivers/vegetation is bad idea so they choose only plowing to be walkable and apparently baby-carriage-able, analysis to invest in de-icing paths may be prohibitively costly, or the multiple posts by Sally pointing out the paths are plowed but removing the last inch (which usually requires salt). I hope you don't find that all to be bigotry. I find those posts to be civil and written with thought. I'm sure in a different context - like pretty much every other bike post on UHub - the respond would be different. And that's my problem with your word of bigotry. Because how does those posts is non-sensible? And I believe you aim to be sensible despite disagreements.
Even the post you probably dislike the most of "I just ride the T" which I can see you interpret that as cyclist can't question DCR, I'm sure they do no mean that at all. But I'm have to leave this separate as this probably require a debate between bike paths and roads during the winter. So I just follow the above paragraph.
Pleasure Vehicles Only
Storrow Drive had a sign on it for a very long time that declared it "For Pleasure Vehicles Only"
So why the hell does it get plowed? "Pleasure Vehicles" sounds like recreation to me!
Interesting
Does the DCR also plow the roads that cut through the Blue Hills? The ones with the gates on them and time restrictions?
It would seem that those are for recreational use, too.
If so, that would undermine the argument that their roads and paths are for recreation, not transportation.
This thread is following this pattern
This seems to be making a run at breaking the 100 comments. While I'll get rebuked that there's more. I can't help but notice most posts are two main commentators angry at DCR policy and everyone else saying roughly concurring with DCR though not necessarily signaling they like them. But I can't also help the humourness of the two main voices name can be combine to a breakfast commerical.
"Cinnamn and Swirl 'grls' versus the world"**
**This is not say I'm bashing bikes. There's other threads that obviously says differently. So many times threads everyone voice they they want Markk ignored. I'm just find it funny this one developed with only two major voices saying DCR should salt have names seeming fitting to each other. It find it amusing.
Sorry for being late to the game
Common sense is prevailing just fine without me this time.
your reading comprehension is as poor as my spelling
my comment was about the fact that this unnamed DCR official is not following the spirit and possibly the letter of their policies. These emails don't demonstrate any fact based reasoning on which priorities they should follow for snow removal. I acknowledged that bicyclists are not prioritized and shouldn't necessarily be the highest priority.
It seems to me that there a lot of places that DCR isn't serving properly and disabled people can't choose something else.
and "grls" aren't against the world, we are half of it. The real interesting parallel is your argument. My opinion shouldn't count because i represent a statistically insignificant number? do you work for the DCR?
You sound like a great time.
Someone with an innate ability to reason and determine the appropriate time to push an issue and when to hold back. Also, it's possible but unlikely that there is someone on the internet with a better sense of humor or a more self deprecating manner.
Right
Because the only purpose for women in your mind is that they be a great time? To be self-depricating?
Now go ask your mommy for another hot pocket.
Slow your roll, Susan B.
My comment was gender neutral. And yes, I think not taking oneself so seriously and being able to step back and assess the level of hysteria and vitriol in one's tone is a key part of being an effective communicator. And a good person. You know, someone with whomever others enjoy spending time.
Thanks for calling me a sexist though. :)
Which anon are you?
Again?
Get a consistent log in if you don't want to be misclassified.
That's a red herring.
Nothing in my original post was sexist. Yet you grabbed your jump to conclusions mat and started hopping on the sexist portion. Don't shift gears now and claim your response was somehow based on another anon's posting history. Just admit you were wrong about my post. We can high five and/or shake hands when everyone meets up to watch cybah buy Stephen Fox a beer.
I'm guessing no one is
I'm guessing no one is suggesting Swilly is or has ever been a great time.
Aww...
thx
You comments - ignoring the
You comments - ignoring the one related to attacking anons and the anon's stance of DCR - was structure in disapproval of their policy.
Perhaps instead of criticizing my reading comprehension, you should better stucture your post. I believe the post you are criticizing my comprehension had this paragraph structure:
1. Bike analysis
2. Bike analysis
3. DCR don't know how to shovel
4. Bike policy
The way it is structure, especially with your one sentence "Impassible bike paths artificially reduce bicyclists" make it very easy to interpret your post as saying "DCR is keeping cyclist down and we out outrage for health and show our numbers are artificially suppressed" than analyzing their thought process for bikes than shifting the topic to state they are terrible at doing their job.
---
Also, I think it was reasonably clear that "grl" was structured as a pun by the fact that both you and Swirrly spelled girl in that form. Not girls are fighting the world. Hell, "the world" is a play on the fact most of the comments in this post seem to be going the other direction. Which is become even more amusing since UHub tend to side with bike causes more, but it seems this is not one of those cases. Perhaps I should criticize your comprehension.
grammar analysis, grammar analysis, grump grump, darn it!
I disagree that we grls are alone on one side. I think that you can't win an argument by isolating your opposition.
I agree there's more than
I agree there's more than just two of you. A few more joined the conversation now versus the time of writing when it still roughly 52 comments. Even at 52, I did noted there was one anon voice similar anger at DCR. There is also the one anon Commentator "Huge Feminist" saying NYC keep everything clear.
Just at the time, it was Swirlly and you (though a good number of the post was more about attacking an anon on the basis the anon had no name, but that still give the impression of voicing with Swirrly than your comment telling me you were trying to give an analysis of DCR's probably thought process). It is a funny and amusing coincidence that two most visible voices happens to have the name Cinnamn and Swirrl for the first half while the second half both followed the "grl" spelling convention. The former fits to a breakfast cereal. The latter was just amusing at how likely both have the same style.
I'm not trying to isolate you or Swirrly, that's an ad hominem at appealing to popularity. I just wanted to point it out because it does amuse me. I must admit I agree with DCR reasoning, regardless of the final email's tone, I think they have some reasoning for their policy that plowing to the ground have issues.
I still don't think you pay attention to what you are reading
There is a big disconnect between the people that created the corridor and the people that maintain the SW Corridor. The bike path was important to the people that made the park but people that work there don't feel the same way. I think that is why they got so defensive when the bicyclist accused them of being dishonest.
Honestly, this work doesn't get done by magic. you can't prioritize everything. It would be nice if the DCR did at least the minimum and clear the sidewalks on the borders, and all paths to stations and other utilities. I get a ticket if I don't keep my sidewalk clear of ice. A person should be able to push a wheel chair down the sidewalk. These people work full time by the way. Eventually all paths should be clear. Its not like the city that hires plows for each snow event. DCR owns their equipment and even if the bike path is last on the list, there is no excuse for refusing it. Get creative if you have to. The trial court community service crews do snow removal.
maybe bike riders don't deserve any consideration. But this DCR official should not treat any of the people that pay his salary in this insulting manner.
you are really not paying attention if you think that Swirrl and I have the same style. but then maybe all women sound alike to you.
PS
Swirl, I hope you know that i distinguish your style from mine as a compliment
I recognize now that you are
I recognize now that you are leaving an opening to possibility that they genuinely not clearing the paths to "Bike riding standard" because the cost might be too great versus the number served. Swirrly might not appreciate this claim, but significantly less cyclist does ride during the winter than the rest of the year. I can't bring stats up, but I back this with a rhetorical point check out Critical Mass in the last few months versus September or May (as a special clause, this claim can lead me to eating crow, it been a while since the days I used to go every month, perhaps it has changed). I should again note that salting paths that goes along vegetation, rivers, and ponds could be part of their "costs" too.
Originally, as I point out in the previous comment describing the structure of your post. I should mention the other string of comments attacking anon whose stance was not favorably to bikes, give a different impression.
---
Finally, and again, when I said "style", I am pointing it the funny coincidence when two largest voices (or what it looked like) both have their first half of the name fitting to each other enough to create a breakfast cereal pun. Meanwhile the latter half both spell "girl" in similar style. Not posting or rhetorical style. But the way both spelled girl. Granted, Swirrly spell her with 2 r's and your just 1 r, but both dropping are similar enough to go "what are the odds?"
Also, I do not appreciate your semi-implicit accusation of sexism by your line "maybe all women sound alike to you". Again, the root observation if the spell of "girl". But regardless, I do not appreciate your indirect claim.
I don't think that you are sexist.
I observe that you don't know much about women or least don't observe them well. I don't take any notice of my rank in your eyes for better or worse You presume quite a bit. save your pretentious indignation.
Are you serious?
You said "but then maybe all women sound alike to you". That's a common argument to say to someone they are being sexist because the person is evaluating a person by a broad category (like women) than as an individual.
What is this, the hostile version of Seinfeld? You never heard of a news article or some person use that to state such a person is being a sexist? Even so, it's not pretentious to read it that way. Even the latest sentence look like some kind of "gas-lighting" but I'm not even going to write about that.
your resentment sounds fake
your resentment sounds fake to me. whether by carelessness or manipulative (endless) paragraphs that don't seem to apply to original article you keep trying to stuff swirl and i into the same hot pocket. I criticize you for your poor reasoning and attractiion to your own voice. i don't think you are sexist.
Reponse
Okay... I'm going to try to respond as clear as possible by responding line by line.
My sentences was earnestly. You wrote "maybe all women sound alike to you", a commonly used line to tell someone is being sexist, so I responded in kind.
First, I will state I will conclude by "original article" that you mean the News Post.
That said, I have repeated multiple times that explaining this. At the time of my comment at 1:02pm yesterday. Swirly was on the offensive, attacking DCR with many commenter disagreeing with her. You were attacking one anon commenter who (uncivilly) agree with DCR then entered into a comment discussion about anons, along with a post that I interpret also strongly disagree with DCR (see my post at 2:41pm Sun for why I interpret it that way). Thus by the multiple posts, who both responding to multiple critical posts, I found it ironic of the chances of two commenter who both have names punnable to each other in two different ways on the offensive at the same time on the same topic.
In short, irony. I wanted to point out irony. Is this clear now? That my point never stuffing you both into the same hot pocket, but to point out the punnable names?
For the "don't seem to apply to orginal article". Yes, this doesn't apply. This is a tangent, like the series of comments about anons post was a tangent. Some parts written like my post at 7:48pm Sun did shift to that topic (which much was agree after understanding you meant to analyze a possible thought process than attack DCR), but much of these multiple posts is trying to explain the irony while addressing your lines.
And I responded that I see your intention now and expressed agreement. Though saying "your reasoning is off" is less divisive than saying "poor reasoning".
These has not been my most concise posts. I can agree that to that. But I am having trouble trying to be shorter without risking more misunderstandings. It also doesn't help that I have to keep repeating my explanation of the ironic pun while you keep saying I'm trying to pair you two up like a hot pocket.
Great, then we can move on from that part.
When a group of people are so
When a group of people are so similar that an outsider cannot tell them apart, it is because that person is so unfamiliar with that group they can't see the things that tell them apart. This is ignorance. Such a person can be offensive because it may imply that you think this group is too unimportant to pay attention. but it is not meant as sexism or any other ism. you seem feel this way about all other voices. It is not a compliment, but it wasn't meant as a compliment.
Okay...
So you explained your definition. While not false, I can't necessarily agree because de facto usage tend to mean that implication. But why are we still discussing about this we are agreeing to what you really meant.
I believe the original start of this thing was that you believed I was basing my pairing of you and Swirrly because you both were women. And like I said above multiple times, it was because of the double punnable names combined with some situational timing. Do you still have a problem somehow? Or have we found some level of agreement between understanding my original (Subject name: "This thread is following this pattern") post's intention of to point out the ironic pun and my new understanding your "low priority" post was an analysis?
I honestly think that a
I honestly think that a person can be stupid and offensive without being a sexist. Could you please look up an explanation of puns? they aren't funny even when used properly
careful...
... the good folks on uhub tend to take our puns very very seriously. it's about the only thing that breaks up the never-ending bike threads, space saver discussions, and long winded explanations of the necessity of the stenographic records of various public meetings.
Get a room, you two
EOM
Motorcyclists have more sense
So, how many motorcyclists do you see out riding in winter, let alone during or after snow storms? Do they go complaining to government that the roads are not clear enough to safely ride? No. they're not retaaads. They choose another form of transportation!
PS snow and studded tires are also available for motorcycles, but riders don't have a need to play X-games on public roads.
Even with the roads clear
there's still a risk of black ice in the winter. My husband hung up his motorcycle jacket once the temps regularly dipped under freezing, after a scary accident years ago involving black ice on a warm November day where the temps plummeted below freezing the minute the sun went down. He stopped winter riding, because he realized the extra time/money required to take the T December through mid-March paled in comparison to the risk of a massive accident due to ice.
Motorcycling is far more
Motorcycling is far more dangerous than biking in the winter. Its not comparible.
Depends
A light weight dirt bike with knobby/studded tires is more apropos than a crotch rocket on summer tires. Much like how you choose your bicycles, not trying to use the road bike for mountain trails. Yet, we don't see so much of the Roxbury teens on dirt bikes and ATVs on winter streets...
I actually saw one leaving my
I actually saw one leaving my neighbor's house last night around 10 pm going the wrong way down a one way street with no lights on.
This may sound petty, but my
This may sound petty, but my nephew is retarded, and knowing him has made me rethink my casual use of that word as an insult. Please consider doing the same, as it undermines your otherwise convincing argument.
My belated two cents
As a dedicated cyclist and one who's always happy to advocate for city biking, safer streets, etc--I think this cyclist needs to STFU. This has been a tough winter for all of us--pedestrians, cyclists, space savers--I mean drivers (KIDDING!!) and to demand perfect biking conditions on the bike paths is just plain ridiculous. I've been really impressed actually by how the DCR has maintained the paths--they get plowed quickly and well from what I've seen--but the ice and snow this winter has made it tough to bike safely, especially at night. No reason why this guy can't suck it up like the rest of us and take the T, the bus, walk, or ride in the street if he must. Maybe he could even find time to help shovel for some elderly neighbors or widen the sidewalk paths so that people with walkers or wheelchairs might be able to get outside safely.
Btw, I hate it that people here are saying "these bicyclists" because honestly--I can't imagine that there's more than a couple of whiny, entitled jerks making these kind of demands. They do not speak for most of us.
Winter, am I right
I don't bike, but I did run a DCR maintained area (Truman Parkway) this winter and have done so in past winters. I have to say that I can depend on them to have decent enough pathways. Not pavement bare all the time, and I've dealt with ice, but they're flat. I can't say that for private property owners. That's a crapshoot that sometimes ends with me on the street.
It's winter time. The DCR (and Boston Parks, I'll add from my last trip to Franklin Park) keeps pathways up to a grade I call "Canadian sidewalk," not bare, but passable.
Like some bikers have posted already, it's winter. Act accordingly.
DCR's Response
I am sorry but I don't agree with DCR's response. This complaint is similar to the one I made a few years ago about the path out at Deer Island. This is a very popular path in all sorts of weather. It had not been plowed. When I made an inquiry the response was we don't have the money/time/energy/etc to deal with this. Wait for spring! I don't subscribe to letting these people off the hook that easy. They have very adequate salaries. They can direct resources as needed. Let to their own devices they will always take the easy way out unless someone is watching them.
The paths ARE plowed.
Just the way my sidewalk "is" shoveled--after the past couple of weeks it still looks like crap, with a few inches of solid ragged ice underneath. Most of the sidewalks in my neighborhood look the same or worse and I'll tell you right now, the DCR paths look about ten times better. But have we been cycling on them this week? No. Too much black ice and ragged patches that are hard to see at night. Attacking the DCR over this is ridiculous.
Precisely
I gripe about my neighbours' sidewalk clearing skills, but there is a difference between clean and shoveled even in my anal retentive shoveling world.
I was going to note earlier, when I drive along the SWC path, I note the quality of the paths (to get an idea of overall quality of snow removal). Last Tuesday, they didn't look too bad.
The snow is driving me nuts, but I deal. The complaining cyclist should deal, too.
DCR
bravo dcr , for an awesome and funny response. The bike path sucks , and peole should stop using it as a security blanket. even if i had the option of the bike path being on my commute , plowed or not , i would not use it. The same people bitching about this , are also the same people who whine and complain about people not riding a bike the way they would ride a bike. get bent.
Well this escalated quickly..
Well this escalated quickly...
Anyway I use the Charles River Paths to get to work (it is actually to take a train north a couple stops, usually with my bike on board). I can take transit for free since I have a commuter rail pass. There is no cost to me yet for the most part I still prefer to be out on the bike. In some cases I need to go to meetings in the community I work, which has very good commuter rail connection but very limited bus access. I have meetings around town and while I try to schedule them around storms that does not always work, so I need the bike to get out to them. Back to my point, DCR paths along the river on the Boston side have actually been pretty good. I think there was one day with packed snow where studded tires would have helped but since 60% of my commute is on road it does not make sense for me to have them. In this case where I expected the paths to be a bit of a mess I left 10 min earlier then normal and rode a bit slower made it fine.
I have noticed a couple trouble spots and patches here and there and it is a bit of a mess outside the old Spaulding Hospital since they don't clear the direct bike/ped route (though they did for the storm last week..) but overall it is bare pavement in many places. So good job on the Charles River paths, however the bike/ped bridges are a mess. They are almost unusable by anybody walking or biking let alone disabled. If they want to make the clearing of the paths useful, DCR has got to clear the bridges. I don't mind walking the bike too much but it was nearly impossible to do that for many of the storms so far and then of course it freezes up. (I almost want to bring a shovel along with me since I know they won't be cleared in the morning nor in the afternoon, but I have not figured out an easy way to strap one on the bike yet, still working on it though...)
I am also in agreement with the commenter above who mentioned that these should all be under the control of MassDOT, New Balance can still pay for the clearing of the paths (I believe this is what they do) but MassDOT has the equipment and the personnel to do this much more efficiently than DCR. This has been a very snowy winter and taking the T is not an option for many, it is for me an I use it on the day of a storm and sometimes the day after. After that I expect to be able to be on the bike and be able to get where I need to go. Cycling may be recreation for some, and that's great, but for many it is transportation, some their only option. The buses are packed enough and there is no more highway capacity, Boston and DCR need to take path clearing seriously, I find they get a B/B- for the Charles River Paths and an F for the bridges, but I am glad that they do get them cleared (and salted actually too sometimes) but I know they can do a better job. Condescending tones, hatred, superiority, and entitlement are not needed, budgets are tight, but cycling, disabled access, and running/walking need to be treated as legitimate forms of transport at the agency level, that does not happen much at the moment. We can do better.
I find it interesting...
...that when cyclists have a complaint about something, they usually try to state their case as level headed as possible (and yes, some come off as whiny and entitled...that's just human nature). But drivers almost always, without fail, get nasty and spiteful right off the bat. What's the deal with that? Are you all so disgruntled sitting in hours of traffic everyday that you feel the need to attack people who are trying to pick a healthier option while helping to reduce the number of vehicles on city streets? Watch, I'm sure someone will reply to this with something nasty.
No one side is fully right or wrong?
Bona fides: I bike from JP from Spring to Fall and use the SW Corridor. Even walk my dog along the corridor which I don't ideally like because it is a bike lane. But some of the bike lanes have actually been better than the sidewalks. I also get annoyed with people who use the pedestrian path for a bike lane as well but that is another issue.
I sympathize with the original complaint. Biking all winter is very desirable. It's good for the biker and is good for everyone else. Each biker is one less rider on the T or one less car on the roads. Given the condition of both, especially in winter, any reduction in use of either is a benefit to all.
Yet the person complaining also comes across with a self-righteous indignation that sets up a conflict. Relying on words such as absolutely unacceptable is going to elicit defensiveness. Honey not vinegar is needed. Sometimes when a stonewall is set up vinegar is appropriate. if you can't persuade with the sweetness of honey then persuade with the stench of vinegar. Plus from my experience with city and state officials persuasion too often eventually requires a dose of vinegar to get folks moving. But at least starting with gentle persuasion sets a positive tone to the discussion.
On the other hand if the legislature is not funding the DCR sufficiently (which seems a motif in state government) then their hands are tied. If the DCR has enough funds then ups and higher ups are not being honest. But the responses concerning ice reforming can't be disputed. Thaw and freeze is life in wintery Boston.
The highest up however made a big mistake of not turning the issue someone else who was not looking to stoke the fire of conflict. That person sounds like he or she has a "We don't care, we don't have to care" attitude. The .05% figure declares an us versus them attitude. Then to say go ahead and share what was written in the final email suggests that the writer is a bad leader.
This might be another example however of a government that can't fulfill its function simply because there is not enough money and resources for government to fulfill its function. We want government to police, protect and prosecute, maintain infrastructure, build new infrastructure, provide mass and commuter transportation, manage people who can't manage themselves and educate from childhood to adulthood. I am no fan of privatizing the common good. In fact I believe that as individuals we have gone to far with privatizing the world around us treating public places as though they are extensions of living rooms. But I also realize that there are limits to government and, that even if the limits are not reached then if the resources and money is not provided then government can not do the job it's asked to do.
I do admire people who bike in the winter in spite of so much snow. That takes commitment and it is not easy. They deserve respect not derision.
MassHealth eating the money
I recall the Governor saying that 1/3rd of the state budget goes to health care. That likely includes state workers and Mass Health et al. Meanwhile budgets for DCR, DCF and others bear pain to pay for it. Patrick doesn't want to go public that Mass Health is costing the state far more than projected while Obama is fighting for it nation wide. So, other agencies suffer budget cuts in silence. Even if MassDOT takes over DCR roads, its not like they have lots of money either - very few of needed projects get funded any given year. Its going to take leadership and a Legislature with backbone to take on fundamental problems in state government with solutions that won't be politically popular any more than what the federal budget balancing study group proposed. Until then, expect more decrepitude and things falling through the cracks.
Bill and Hillary Clinton failed at restraining drug and medical company profits, but that and more is what it takes to contain health care costs. Government has the group buying power to do it, if allowed.
Share the road is best
Motorists perform two useful functions for cyclists (after motor powered vehicles plow or clear and salt):
A. Traffic volumes help break up ice and melt snow/ice.
B. Air from moving vehicles blows snow, sand, and debris off the roadway.
With only bicycles and pedestrians, that traffic isn't enough to clear the roadway alone. Hence, bike tracks and bike paths will always be more challenging in climates with snow and ice. Those wanting to bicycle year-round might be happier someplace warmer than Boston. The extra effort to clear bike paths in winter serves far fewer people per dollar spent than clearing roadways. If those "thousands" of winter cyclists want to take up a collection and help fund DCR, go for it. It might be cheaper to take the T on bad days instead.
Clear and to the point ,
Clear and to the point , thanks.
Here's a different take on
Here's a different take on this issue. According to the DCR, they only clear the paths in the Southwest Corridor Park to a level that is "safely passable for pedestrians - even pedestrians pushing child strollers." I find this curious, since the paths in the Southwest Corridor Park from Forest Hills to Ruggles forbid pedestrians, at least in the northbound direction. I frequently run from Hyde Park in to Back Bay station, so I really only experience the SWC in a northbound direction. At every major access point, signs point cyclists to the park's paths and pedestrians out of the park to the sidewalks along the surrounding streets. This annoys the heck out of me when I'm running, and I would usually never side with the city's cyclists, but this seems like a major inconsistency in the DCR's position here.
signs:
http://bostonbiker.org/files/2012/08/IMG_20120820_093056.jpg
http://www.universalhub.com/images/2008/swskeletor.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-2OaISKOsQ9s/T5cSlBE0yVI/AAAAAAAABK0/PWCpZibKDB...
I assume they're responsible
I assume they're responsible for clearing the sidewalks that abut their parks as well as the paths within the parks.
Safety
I believe that the rational for having a separate bike path is based on a theory that where there are no pedestrians there can be no bikes running into pedestrians. What annoys me is when someone doesn't respect the designation. This can be a problem during rush hour when there are enough bikes that there are backups at intersections waiting for the light to turn. That however is to me a sign of great success that there are so many people biking. But it is dicey for joggers, pedestrians and parents with strollers.
As far as I know no pedestrian has been hit by a biker on the bike path. If someone was hit the biker would most likely be held legally responsible. But just as crossing the highway is being irresponsible where safety is concerned so is a person putting him or herself in harm's way when walking or running on a bike path.
South of Green (starting at Williams) the pedestrian and bike paths are two separate paved paths. It's a bit convoluted because for one block the bike path is on the Washington Street side. But at McBride the paths switch so that the bike path is on the Washington Street side. Considering that there are lot of dog walkers there I wish that folks would stick to the path designated for bikes. That of course also provides protection to runners by having their own path there as well as the sidewalks prior to that block.
While I was googling around
While I was googling around for pictures of the no pedestrians signs in use between Green St and Ruggles, I stumbled across a student blog. It appears to collect class projects from a traffic calming/urban studies type class. Anyway, I thought this particular kid captured the reality of the Southwest Corridor Park pretty well. Separating bikes from both cars and pedestrians is vital for everyone's safety. Unfortunately for the SWC, pedestrians naturally seek out paths furthest from vehicle traffic, bringing them into conflict with bikes.
http://calmstreetsboston.blogspot.com/2012/04/dual-paths-on-south-west-c...
This biker agrees with DCR
I'm a pretty avid bike commuter, but I gotta side with the DCR here...it's winter, folks. Snow and ice are part of the deal. The teeny little bike path that 4 people a day use can't (and, frankly, shouldn't) get the same attention as the roads. You wanna be a gnarly year-round cyclist? Then stop whining and just be gnarly! Biking in shitty conditions is how you earn your 'cred.
4 people a day?
I see 4 people at the stop light queue at Jackson Square Station every day at 5:15 alone. And maybe more people would actually use the path if it was reliably cleared.
DCR made it clear: they're not in the transportation business. The SWC is a commuter path, not a leisure path. Hand it over to MassDOT, along with the 'park'ways. Time to trim the DCR fat.
Somerville and Cambridge plow their bike path
the one that goes from Cedar St in Somerville, through Davis Square, to Alewife. They're not perfect, but they're trying and DCR isn't.
Also, Arlington and Lexington have been trying to clear their sections of the Minuteman Bikeway.
I'm going to point this out one more time.
They DO plow the paths. This is *not* about the DCR failing to plow. They do a good job of clearing the paths very quickly after snowstorms but not, apparently, to the ice-free, bare-pavement standards that some cyclists would like (and surely apply to their own sidewalks when shoveling).
No,the ability of DCR to actually clear paths is not the problem
No, no, no, no, no. This is not what it's about. The problem has nothing to do with any actual reasonableness or ability of DCR to actually clear the path. The problem is that the final response from the DCR official was completely dismissive and insulting to bicycle commuters as a whole group.
I was OK with the whole exchange until the DCR higher-up started with the 0.05% (complerely incorrect, made-up statistic), told us we were unnecessary risk-takers, and told us to move to another city (as if that's even an option for all but the wealthiest people!)
Also, I think this doesn't get pointed out nearly enough --is true how short-sighted and ignorant people are to think that driving a car at deadly speeds in winter conditions is somehow safer than riding a bike at low speeds on a properly-maintained, protected bike path (or even an improperly-maintained one with the right tires). I've always maintained that I feel safer on my bike than in my car, even on the icy Mem Drive path (with my studded bike tires). Try walking on that path without YakTrax on your shoes, or in a wheelchair without studded tires - now that's unsafe, but still not as unsafe as crashing your car at 70mph!
Crosswalks, Bus Stops and sidewalks
After the last few snows, I tried to cross many streets in the Crosswalks, and the other end of the crosswalk was not shoveled by someone.. So I have to
walk in the street. Same thing getting off the bus at a bus stop. When the bus lets you out, you get let out in a snowbank or an ice rink, as the bus stops are not shoveled or they are a block of ice. When I get off the train, I have to walk in the street because no one shovels their sidewalks. Lets start a movement to make everything safer for pedestrians to get around after a snowstorm!
MBTA responsible for clearing bus stops
Takes them a really long time to clear the thousands of bus stops after storms. A whole 'nother discussion!
I'm pretty fed up with
I'm pretty fed up with entitled cyclists bitching constantly. The city needs to enforce a system of licensing and taxing to contribute to the maintenance of bike lanes and pedestrian safety.
Aside from this, my wife is blind and has not been able to leave the house for the last few weeks because of the lack of cleared sidewalks this entire winter. I have been contacting the city about this and they have just flat ignored it. No response what so ever. For a cyclist to even get a response that was well thought out and measured for an almost non issue, it is insulting. His bike path wasn't completely cleared? Boo fucking hoo, there were many other options for christ sake.
If the city can't enforce sidewalk shoveling regulations, but can still spend this much time responding to entitled assholes like this, fuck them.
Appropriate?
We've been over this before. In Massachusetts, a large portion of the funds for maintaining roads come from the general fund so we are all paying for them - cyclists, motorists, bus riders, T riders and pedestrians. Please don't turn this into another one of those ignorant "cyclists don't pay their way" arguments.; they do, just like everyone else.
"Well thought out" and "measured"? Really? So belittling is appropriate? So I can only assume that had you received a response that belittled you and told you to move elsewhere that you would have been happier than you are now.
I think a lot of you missed the point here
You expect sidewalks to be cleared for safety. You expect roads to be cleared for safety. Cyclists, runners, and people who WALK to work expect the corridor path to be cleared for safety. Not entirely - it's understandable that that isn't possible there any more than it is anywhere else during this kind of weather. But having entire portions covered in a large amount of snow and ice isn't ok any more than it's ok on any other highly trafficked routes.
Not sure if anyone noticed, but even the sidewalk along the southwest corridor this last time around was impassible - worse than the path itself, in fact. So even people on foot were stuck moving onto the path, which while incredibly icy was at least relatively flat.
A lot of people do rely on their bikes to get to work. And yes, the number does drop in winter, but you know what? more people would still be out there, riding in to work if they knew the path would be acceptably cleared. It's no the DCR's main priority - ok, fine. Tend to the sidewalks first, whatever. But then tackle the path and actually clear it off. We deserve a safe route to work too.
If the DCR doesn't think
If the DCR doesn't think their bike paths need to be bikeable in the winter, then they need to accommodate bicycles in the road.
Come on kids! Can we make it to 200?
I would love to see that. I mean, I have never met our illustrious webmaster in person, but I would not be surprised at all to find out he owns a large white cat that he strokes lovingly as he gazes into his monitor/chessboard/arena and watches with glee as a simple subject thrown into the ring can get so many people to act as if they've just ended a Saturday night at my Grandparent's card table.
You know the ones, where invariably one of my aunts would end up not speaking to another of my aunts until the next holiday dinner?
200!
I'm just unspeakably proud.
Bait
I know Adam keeps a list of stories he knows will be good 'bait' stories to get people to comment.
Here's a few...
Murders,... nah (unless a handgun is involved, then it turns into a gun debate)
Bikes/Bikers/HatredOfBikers
Gun-Something
A Bank Opening Up
Space Savers
Politics
Transit Related - Either the T, New Projects, Existing Projects, Lack of Service (or no service), Delays, Sleeping Employees. (this is a large category)
Neighborhood Associations
Whole Foods doing something
Anything else I am missing?
A few things......
Citizens connect complaints.
Boston media host makes dumb statement.
And to add to the MBTA related thread:
-Photo of riders doing something rude
How about
the reporting of crime in neighborhoods the two majors could give two shits about.
If the biker community
If the biker community expects the DCR to maintain all of these paths, sidewalks, etc. in a faster and more efficient manner, (daily maintenance or at least observance) maybe they can start chipping in. Possibly a tax? Specifically earmarked for this purpose? (Just a suggestion, don't kill me)
DCR has already expressed that the expectations are unrealistic. Also, some of the paths are being used for transportation in these conditions and have rarely been used for this purpose in the past, so they have not been a priority. DCR isn't doing so bad, compared to some of the other state run depts.
I am more concerned about the girl I saw walking with a baby carriage in the dark, up Quincy St. cars were not even giving her much room, very scary.
Residential area, but we (Boston and most surrounding suburbs) have a serious snow removal problem. Oh, and we're getting more snow! Don't know where we are going to put it.
You should use your local politicians. Made a call to a state rep once: "Castle Island is completely clear of snow 6 hours after a blizzard and PJP II is still covered days after a few inches of snow." PJP has been cleared in reasonable time ever since.
Dear Lmo.....
Bikers are people who already pay taxes that subsidize roads that vehicles use, therefore no further taxes are needed.
Sincerely,
Uhub bike people.
Do those taxes subsidize the
Do those taxes subsidize the ridiculous expectations some people have for the snow removal of bike paths? (That have clearly never been a priority before ) like I said it was a suggestion.
Yes they should subsidize that.....
Because we have the right to get to work the same way car drivers do.
We want equal services!!!!!!
( and no, nothing we say or do is ridiculous.)
Thanks again,
The Uhub bike people.
I leave the city for a long weekend
And totally missed the biggest cyclist thread on UHub this year?!
My two cents, sometimes the winter is going to dump some snow on the area and public works, for all the massive effort they put into clearing our roads and sidewalks, are not going to be able to hit every spot after every storm. Thats when I take the T. Simple enough.
Glad to see that bike threads have taken the #1 spot on UHub back from those damn space savers.
Bombogenesis
Who knew that talking about snow and biking together would cause a 200 reply outbreak?
We're not really asking for equivalent treatment here...
1) More people would bike if the paths were better cleared, so the statistical argument for not doing it is moot. Many people in city and state government understand this but it is often lost on non-planning-oriented folks.
2) Contrary to what a lot of the commenters here seem to think, It's not like we're even asking for treatment equivalent to what the major arterial roads get. A lot of people here have been saying things like "you can't expect to be able to bike safetly in a snow storm" (no shit) but really it would be nice if it were passable even two weeks later. Most "non-hardcore" bicyclists are not going to bike on a day when it's blizzarding out, but then again most people won't drive on those days either. But they should be able to get to work via the bikeway a day or two later when the roads are mostly cleared.
And as others here have pointed out (and I can vouch for this as well), the DCR often does an equally poor job plowing and salting their sidewalks as well. The sidewalk on Lamartine Street in JP along side the Southwest Corridor park had large snow banks obstructing the walkway (where plow drivers had obviously just pushed the snow toward the middle of the block and left it there) and were basically sheets of ice two days later because of the total lack of salt treatment.
Pages