Greeson: The good, bad and funny from bike lane feedback

Jay Greeson

As a longtime TFP sports columnist, I thought people were passionate about college football.

Who knew that nine blocks of bike lanes would be a way bigger deal?

Three things have become abundantly clear since I split column writing between sports and page A2:

First, political issues - whether global, national or local - generate as much passion and fervor as the most-heated college football discussions.

Second, they are unlike college sports and rivalries, where the opposing fan bases understand that no matter the volume or the vitriol, an Alabama fan is not going to convert an Auburn fan. It's one lesson - agreeing to disagree - that political junkies would be best served to adopt.

Divergent political views are not going to be changed no matter how impassioned or lengthy the arguments.

The other lesson I have learned is that Times Free Press readers are caring and thoughtful and interested in making our town better.

Want proof?

Last week in this space, I wrote about the bike lanes the city is putting on Broad Street. The feedback was impressive online (and to commenter Rick Armstrong, I respect and appreciate your well-reasoned responses) and in my email.

Most of the feedback to me personally is more often positive; the negative responses tend to come online or on Facebook. I am comfortable with both, and appreciate the feedback as the discourse is both fun and informative.

Here are a few of the more than 100 emails and one of the Facebook responses I received about the bike lanes, and yes, I feel certain we will revisit the topic in the days to come:

From Bob -

Having read today's column I implore no, I outright beg you to run an assortment of responses in a few days I'm positively giddy with anticipation as to the hue-and-cry of the "outdoor elitists" (nice).

(Sorry to disappoint you, Bob, but it was at least 20-to-1 against the bike lanes in the email. Maybe you can check out the Times Free Press Facebook page, where there are a lot of folks who, shall we say, are less than thrilled with me.)

From Michael at timesfreepress.com -

Why build protected bike lanes? Similar protected bike lanes in other cities caused a 30-60% decrease in injuries to all street users, a 49% increase in retail sales, 49% fewer commercial vacancies, and 74% of all users prefer the new configuration. And, lest we forget, we have an obesity epidemic that takes 300,000 lives per year. Compare that to the entire civil war, which has been our bloodiest, at 620,000. So while it's really convenient to drive everywhere, never have any traffic, park right next to the door, and not have to walk more than 10 steps, it might help us all live longer if we made it a lot nicer and safer to bike and a very very tiny bit less convenient to drive. Ultimately people's lives are a lot more important than people's time.

(Great numbers, Michael. In truth, if the South had bike lanes, well, here's saying that war criminal Gen. Sherman would never have gotten to Cartersville.)

From Stephen -

After spending this past weekend in Richmond, Va., at the UCI Cycling World Championship, witnessed a bloom of cycling. Not only because of the racing but Richmond has strong cycling community. Commuter lanes everywhere. Chattanooga officials should take a trip to Richmond and study their model.

(I believe the city has done a fair amount of research on this issue, but I could read a dozen medical books and that doesn't mean I'm ready for surgery. In fact, several folks have emailed potential questions and/or issues that could come up, things ranging from pedestrian car doors to right-hand turns that cross the bike lane to handicapped people trying to clear the bike-lane curb. This is not even to discuss the point that the main idea for this - according to the city - was to help increase biking commuters. Which seems somewhat puzzling since July and August are too hot to bike to work unless you have a shower at your workplace, and really from December to early March is too cold. All are interesting points, and ones that will have to be addressed.)

From Robert -

I'm a cyclist, and for what it's worth, I'm totally opposed to what they are doing to Broad Street.

It's going to make cycling there less safe, not more.

And I've worked (and driven) downtown since 1977, so I know we don't need to tie up traffic there any more than the 'powers that be' already have.

Don't blame the cyclists for this move. The people doing this don't represent the interests of the bicyclists I know. I doubt if they are cyclists at all. And they surely don't have to drive downtown, either.

Best regards.

(Notice the detractors do not finish emails with "Best regards" and that's OK. There was good and bad - and funny )

From Bobby -

(Your) column absolutely hits every nail on the head. Don't get me started on bike lanes. They have totally screwed up North Chatt.

Maybe you could consider a column promoting horse lanes. Then the government folks have to deal with our horse (poop) instead of the other way around.

Thanks for reading - and for the feedback.