Improving Rights of Cyclists on our Roadways

Running out of parking space in cities is a problem that city planners
around the world have met with much more creative planning than leveling
neighborhoods and paving. Have any of the state or Lansing city planners
looked at how other world-class cities have resolved their parking
problems? Has any research been done on ways to reduce the number of cars
in the downtown area to eliminate the need to keep building more parking
facilities? I saw no mention in the "State suggests more pavement to ease
parking" front-page article (published July 27, 2000) that there has been any attempt to address the
root problem: the growing number of people who insist on using personal
cars for commuting, often 1 person per car. I believe that more downtown
employees would be willing to adjust their commuting methods IF the state
and other downtown employers were willing to invest their $ in other
creative more productive ways.

You can be sure that many more people would be willing to bicycle, run,
skate, walk or take the bus to work if: employers were willing to build
(or retrofit existing restrooms) locker-rooms with showers; provide safe,
sheltered bicycle storage facilities in convenient locations; the state
offered tax breaks for non-auto commuters or car poolers equivalent to the
$ saved by the state in road repairs/maintenance; employers offered
monetary or material incentives for miles traveled via non-auto means or
for car pooling; law enforcement agencies were to strengthen the rights
and protection of non-motorized commuters to EXCEED those of
automobiles. While the former concepts may be revolutionary they are
mostly self-explanatory and should be relatively easy to implement;
however, let me expand on that last idea as I believe it holds the key to
encouraging more people to commute via non-motorized means.

Currently the motorized vehicle is king of the road mainly due to its size
and speed; however, is that the fairest or even correct rationale for
granting power and priority on a public right-of-way? I'd like to point
out that on lakes and other bodies of water it is NOT the power boats that
have the right of way. It is the weaker vessel, the sailboats and other
watercraft that propel themselves under their own power that get the most
respect and courtesy of motorized watercraft. I believe the basis for
this law of the waterways is founded on the fact that a sailboat, canoe or
row-boat is obivously at the mercy of its surroundings and requires
significant effort (or Mother Nature) to move along or change course,
whereas a pilot of a motorboat simply has to shift his steering wheel or
adjust his gas throttle to change course or avoid a collision.

I contend that the same relationship between motorized and self-propelled means of
motion is identical on our road-ways, yet the weaker vessels have no
right-of-way and no additional protection from motorized vehicles, at
least in Michigan. Many automobile drivers not only refuse to slow down for
even a few seconds or to slightly alter their path in order to give safe
passage to a non-motorized commuter they often blare their horns, shout profane
demands to get off the roadway or drive within shaving distances in a show
of brute power.

While this notion of stronger protection for weaker vessels of the
roadways may seem crazy, there are some examples in the USA to consider. In Los
Angeles pedestrians have the right to walk across streets wherever they
want and automobiles are required to give them safe passage. In most
countries bicyclists are accorded much more respect via wide bike lanes,
etc. Those cities and their policies could be further examined for help in
adapting our own roadway laws to encourage many more people to get out of
their cars and into other modes of transportation.

The city-wide bonus for promoting non-motorized commuting would be less
congestion on our roadways, lower road repair bills, fewer fatalities/
injuries from auto-auto accidents, a healthier workforce (which in turn
reduces employer's insurance premiums and costs related to lost
productivity due to sickness/ heart disease), lower air pollution, and
finally, preservation of the natural and historic beauty of Greater
Lansing.

Tim Potter