Three Rights Make a Left

I encounter one particular intersection on my commute that makes me nervous enough that I go pedestrian to avoid it. Here's a Street View of it:

View Larger Map

It's a left turn from Southbound Quivera to Eastbound 87th. While it looks manageable here, it's not so friendly when I hit it just after 5:00 PM on my commute home. There are two lanes of left-turn traffic and after the turn vehiculars make mad lane changes to get to the lane they need to hop on I-35 north or south.

The CommuteOrlando Blog offers some alternative left-turn options that might just work for me in this situation. Here is a flash from the blog that does a good job illustrating some of the options:

The Box Turn might be a good option, except that would put me at the head of the pack for the Eastbound traffic, and I think that would really piss off some drivers. The Jug-Handle Turn would take me another block in the wrong direction, but it's an accepted maneuver at my u-turn point, as you can see by the road sign:

View Larger Map

I do like the three-rights-to-make-a-left option, too. I may experiment with these and see which one leaves me feeling the safest without eating up too much commute time in the process.

Renegade the Middle

I'm getting fed up with cars passing too close to me.

I try to be very accommodating to cars on the road. I hug the right curb like Kansas law tells me to do, and I signal my turns so they're not surprised by a sudden change of direction on my part.

Most of the time, drivers pass me with at least half a lane's width between us, but sometimes, drivers pass so close that I could reach out and polish their windshield as they pass.

It's very unnerving, and I've noticed it happens at one particular spot of my commute more than any other.

There is a stretch of Blackfish Parkway in Lenexa that has random occurrences of a median, which makes the lanes very tight. I'm talking Kegle tight.


View Larger Map

No matter how far to the right I ride, some yahoo wants to pass me here. Typically, the driver just needs to pace me for about 50 yards where the road opens back up and he can pass me safely.

But no, they really need to save 30 seconds and risk my life in the process, so I end up riding the gutter and holding back my urge to kick their passenger door.

This morning I decided to use a different strategy. Where the road has no median, I ride to the right like a good citizen. As I approach the median zone, I totally hog the lane. Right down the middle, I tell ya.

As soon as the median ends, I scoot to the right to let my vehicular kin pass. So far, it works like a charm!

Grocery Gettin'

I read somewhere yesterday that a good number of car trips are less than two miles in distance. Whether that's true or not, it was in my mind when I got home yesterday and the Missus mentioned that we needed a few basics from the grocery store.

I offered to take on the task by bike. My son followed up with an offer to ride with me (on the fastback), so after getting down my non-commuting mid-1990's model Trek mountain bike, airing up the tires, and attaching the fastback we were on our way.

I have fond memories of that Trek mountain bike. But now that I've been spoiled by my well-fitted Trek commuter, I find the mountain bike terribly uncomfortable. Alas, I cannot use the fastback with the commuter due to the bike rack.

So that got me thinking about how I really need another bike. Something that serves as a grocery-getter. A bucket bike, perhaps? I've seen this model on the 'net:

... but at $3k, it's a bit much. At $1200, this one is more my speed:

Tax the Cyclists!

In the forums on bicycletimesmag.com, I came across a very interesting Canadian op ed. The gist is the author is miffed because cyclists don't have to pay taxes in the form of licensing, tags, and the other soft costs that come along with car ownership. We could also mention gas taxes, personal property taxes, and disposal fees for oil and tires where appropriate.

On one hand, it makes sense. If we want infrastructure specifically for or friendly to cyclists, why shouldn't we help pay for these improvements? And why can just anyone purchase a bike and take to the roads without any formal certification? Lord knows I see enough cyclists running stop signs and passing dangerously close on MUTs to lead me to believe they have no idea what they're doing.

But on the other hand, it doesn't make sense at all.

Here deep in the suburbs of O.P., KS, everyone pays for infrastructure, not just car drivers. Just merely living in JoCo is enough to necessitate your participation in chipping in, and I'm fine with that. It's the same thing with schools. We have four kids in our JoCostead. And while not one of them attend public schools, we still help fund the schools in our district through our taxes. It's the same with the elderly couple with no school-aged kids next door. In some ways, it's like the poll tax the UK had; you exist so you pay. In this sense, cyclists do pay for infrastructure.

Some infrastructure comes from fuel tax. Gas is a bit higher in Kansas compared to Missouri, but our roads are also much nicer. But saying that a cyclist uses the same roads and should therefore pay a fuel tax is absurd. When I drive a car to work, my car gets roughly 30 miles per gallon. If I drove our family minivan it'd be more like 20 MPG, maybe even less. If I drove the van to work instead of the car I'd pay more in fuel taxes. That makes sense because the van is larger so it does more damage to the roads than my commuter car, and in some circles you might argue it does more damage to the environment as well.

When I ride the bike, my efficiency ranges from 200 to 600 miles per gallon equivalent, depending on who is calculating. But that's not actual gasoline consumed, mind you. It's more like spaghetti or burritos consumed. Plus, the actual damage to the roads is practically nil because the bike is so light weight. There seems to be no logical way to charge cyclists a fuel-equivalent tax. Perhaps I should pay a burrito tax?

Now that we're staring down the loaded barrel of socialized medicine, one could argue that cyclists should pay fewer taxes! Think about it. Minimal if any environmental damage is done on a bike, including noise pollution. This means less carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide, plus no hearing damage due to annoying loud bass-heavy stereos or exhaust pipes. And let's not forget the health benefits of actually riding a bike like weight loss and increased cardio-pulmonary efficiency. Shouldn't we be rewarded for this?

That might not fly. What about licensing requirements? Would anyone argue that having a license to drive a car is a bad thing? I sure wouldn't. In fact, with a teenager in the house I think we should be stricter with who we let behind the wheel.

I'm not sure when or why we started requiring drivers to be certified, but I support it. For automobiles, not for bicycles. To put it simply, automobiles are killing machines. I know, even a ball-point pen in the wrong hands is a killing machine, but cars are about the most deadly device out there. And since our roads are clogged with them it's prudent that we regulate who can and cannot get behind the wheel. It seriously pains me to say that, but it's true. Bicycles, however, don't come with the inherent danger. If the streets are clogged with bikes and a collision ensues, I feel pretty good about the survival rate.

I'm not sold on the idea of taxes for cyclists, and I'm more convinced that cyclists deserve a tax break rather than additional tax burden. I think the person who wrote the op-ed piece is simply annoyed because she sees cyclists as annoyances.

There was a time that I used to agree with that point of view.

It Itches

I haven't ridden since Friday and I'm itching to get on the saddle.

It's just been one of those weeks; multiple trips to the dentist, storms, late and sleepless nights, early morning coffee with friends ...

Friday looks to be my first opportunity to ride, so that's my goal.