Council Approves Pfluger Bridge Extension

No, you're actually dealing with someone who would like to see many more cycling options available in Austin. Sadly, like most fragmented groups who want something, they have a large contingent that want their cake and to eat it too. I'm not sure why some cyclists are above the rules of the road (I'm talking about the ones who interpret "share the road" as "my bike and I have all of the rights and I can do whatever I want")

I have more respect for the girl who crossed the intersection of 5th and Lamar from the NE corner to the SE corner while eastbound 5th had a green light than I do the spandex brigade who roll through red lights and give cars who have the right away dirty looks and scream "share the road" simply because she was obviously clueless.

Then again, from what I see (even when riding my bike) the spandex brigade doesn't really have much of a clue either. If they did, they would understand how important perception is to getting people who aren't part of their cycling world to vote for things that would make traffic better for everyone.

Whenever I see that "Cyclists don't obey the law" boilerplate, I know I'm dealing with a Glen Beck acolyte who has memorized one talking point in the bikes-vs-cars debate and just spits it back regardless of relevance. I've learned to ignore them.

This article is about improving bicycle mobility in Central Austin. Whether cyclists stop at all stop lights is immaterial. Riding on glorified sidewalks is not the answer, because of cars that pull out over the crosswalks, almost into traffic, forcing you to stop or try to ride around the front (very dangerous) or back (less dangerous but a pain) of each car at each driveway or side street.

Grape Ape, you make a lot of unwarranted assumptions there - I'm notorious in the bike community for being the guy who yells at cyclists to obey red lights and stop signs.

As for this facility, again, "sidewalks for bikes" are NOT safe - not even as safe as a VERY unsafe road (Lamar).

I agree with Mike on the premise that this is just more of a cluster, but with that said, he actually hits the nail on the head (maybe with not realizing it) when he said "...cyclists who knew what they were doing." The problem is that 9 out of 10 people I see on bikes in that area each and every day have no clue what they should be doing. I stand by my original statement from years ago, "If you want rights, obey the lights" - My true belief is that they approve these types of projects based on the "needs" of the recreational rider who wants to zip around the trail and go to Zilker, not for those who commute. In this scenario I'm not complaining so much about the people who ignore basic traffic laws on bikes, but those who don't even know there are traffic laws regarding bikes. If you look at this in terms of "How can we get people who live in this area to the Hike and Bike safely and out of the way of traffic?" It makes a lot of sense. They are basically creating sidewalks for bikes away from main roads.

Shawn, the problem with the new facility is that it will be LAB Deux - sidewalk riding, some stop signs where you never get right-of-way; some yields where you are unlikely to ever get right-of-way.

Riding on Lamar sucks, but it was safe for transportation cyclists who knew what they were doing. The only way to be safe on a sidewalk-like facility like the LAB or the 'trail' extending from this bridge is to slow down to pedestrian speeds or come to a complete stop at each and every driveway and intersection, which eventually makes the process so much of a drag that people either stop riding, or just run through the lights/signs/driveways (at which point they're less safe than they were on Lamar).

What I don't understand about the bridge extension is that it just dumps cyclists onto Town Lake Drive, right in front of the Berlin Wall (aka Gables). There are still a steep hill & RR tracks between you and 5th St.

The only way to link up to 5th (having attempted to negotiate that maelstrom recently) is to ride up a narrow sidewalk along N. Lamar under the tracks, with traffic whistling past at 45 mph. How is that improving the commute for downtown cyclists or people like me just trying to ride from S. Lamar to Whole Foods/N. Lamar? It's a waste of time.

Part of the plan is to add a bike trail through the Gables apartments that would go under the railroad tracks and connect to Third Street east of Lamar. See the first link in the post for a map and here for a short description:

http://www.ci.austin.tx.us/council_meetings/item_attachments.cfm?meetingid=201&itemid=12000&item=12

Maybe not great, but certainly better than riding the Lamar sidewalk (or riding in traffic on Lamar like Mike would) or jumping the tracks west of Lamar (like I do now).

CryinLion, you misunderstood me - the extension now underway is the clusterfuck. It'll be dropping cyclists down into a scenario where they are basically sidewalk riders - which is bad news. The original NW arm that would have rejoined Lamar near 5th would have had one bad transition point but otherwise would have been a good facility for transportation cyclists.

I agree that the bridge as it currently stands is a clusterfuck for cyclists, but the extension should provide better lake access for the condo-dwelling ilk along 5th/6th and in the warehouse district, and drum up business downtown.

However, as someone (relatively) new to town, I wish they'd pour some money into that squirrely section of the shoal creek path that starts at 5th street.

The bridge's original purpose, before Seaholm fucked it up, was to be an alternative for transportation cyclists using the Lamar bridge. This bridge fails that metric completely, dumping cyclists into a warren of stop signs, yield signs, and sidewalk riding that, well, pretty much matches the debacle of the Lance Armstrong Stopway.

In neither case should cyclists feel safer on that facility - on Lamar (or 5th/6th), you always have the right-of-way or will get it if you wait for the light to change; 2-way stops at driveways, street intersections, and the like will never provide the same certainty, and are markedly less safe.