Developers to Tucson bicyclists: Eff you and the bike you rode in on
(Apologies for the advertising in the above video)
Tucson has embarked on what it calls a “Sustainable Land Use Code Integration Project,” whose objective is “…to prepare a sustainability analysis of the Land Use Code, identify a series of recommended amendments to the [code], and ultimately to draft amendments that implement the City of Tucson’s sustainable goals and policies.”
A well-known threat to Tucson's sustainability is its over-abundant bike parking, which experts like Jason Wong,the developer interviewed in the above story, tell us is currently limiting our business's ability to prosper and thrive. So the City Council will be voting on a proposal to improve our sustainability by reducing the onerous bike parking requirements that are currently inhibiting sustainable development in the city.
You can attend the meeting and voice your support for more sustainability and fewer bikes at 5:30 PM on March 8 at the Mayor and Council Meeting, 255 W. Alameda Street.
Lots more information about this issue can be found here (Living Streets Alliance Website) and here (TucsonVelo.com story).
In case you are curious about what sustainable development looks like in the eyes of Mr. Wong, here's a satellite view of one of the properties he developed:
According to the internet (ahem), Mr. Wong is Director of Development for Red Point Development, Inc.. Here's what their Website says: "Red Point envisions, and succeeds, in creating sustainable and timeless communities and projects that are in balance socially, economically and environmentally. Our mission is to combine all of the resources, experience and knowledge available to us, and through our associates, to develop high-quality projects that create value for our partners as well as the surrounding community."
It's pretty to think so, isn't it?
--Erik Ryberg
February 17th, 2011 at 8:26 am
[...] Developers to Tucson bicyclists: Eff you and the bike you rode in on [...]
February 17th, 2011 at 10:47 am
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Portland Pedal Power and BICAS, Justin Chick. Justin Chick said: A well-known threat to a cities sustainability is its over-abundant bike parking, duh. http://ow.ly/3YnUc [...]
February 17th, 2011 at 12:00 pm
at least it’s got water-efficient landscaping and a white roof, though I suppose that’s just complying with the law. All that dark-covered pavement kind of cancels out the white roofs though…
February 17th, 2011 at 1:38 pm
Someone needs to make clear to Jason Wong that the objective is improve conditions for bicyclists. It has nothing to do with rickshaws.
February 17th, 2011 at 6:47 pm
I counted 160 parking spaces for cars in this development. 5 were occupied by a total of 3 vehicles. Clearly the low hanging fruit in terms of the Land Use Code and costs to developers haseverything to do with infrastructure that is required for cars. A quick guess on the ratio of building to parking lot is maybe 60/40. A couple of bike racks within 50 feet of an entrance is nothing compared to what he’s paid for all of these empty parking spaces. Even if this is a Saturday or a Sunday it still makes the point that we as a society dedicate enormous resources to sustaining cars. Parking lots, roadways, traffic lights filling stations, bridges, drainage ways, they all consume resources 24 hours a day even when they aren’t in use. Not to mention the spilled fluids and ground off rubber and carbon black that cars deposit everywhere they go. Merchants can’t make a go of it because they are required by code to subsidise the automobile. A couple of measly bike spots near a door is not the problem.
February 18th, 2011 at 7:46 am
p.s. I didn’t use the image you have posted, I used a Google Earth satellite image to get the count. Obviously the image above has more than 3 cars in it. Maybe 23 which yields a percentage used of 14%. Again what’s costing Mr. Wong money is having to provide automobile parking for cars that will never park in his centre. Actually the reality is even worse. It costs us all money because even if we use a bicycle to travel to a strip centre for a dentist’s appointment or to buy some object we don’t get a discount for not using the car parking. The cost of that parking is directly reflected in the rents Mr. Wong charges.
February 19th, 2011 at 1:49 am
[...] Next time you ride in Portland, you may not need headphones. Tucson developers say eff you and the bike you rode in on. Oregon votes to make traditional-style bike traffic signals part of the state code. What better [...]
February 19th, 2011 at 11:28 am
Seriously? We’re the type of folks that don’t have a problem with pedalling a bicycle X miles to the store or other business, but we’re all gonna whine about having to walk an extra 50 ft. (about 20 or so paces for most) from the rack to the door? And that’s only if there isn’t a tree, fence, or signpost that’s closer – or you don’t just take the bike in with you? Yeah, I agree, way more money is spent catering to the car driving customers – do you suppose that might have something to do with the fact that 98% of their business still comes from people who arrive by car? And playing the “women need safety” card would carry more weight with the public if it weren’t for the fact everyone recognizes that you’re just as vulnerable to attack on a bike as you are on foot, so how does getting to your bike sooner really make a difference?
Shouldn’t we be more worked up about something that might make a *real* difference? Like getting TPD to actually enforce existing laws that would save bicyclists lives?
February 19th, 2011 at 12:57 pm
Scott–
I had a bit of a hard time getting worked up about this too until I saw how much energy is being put (by developers) into reducing the bike parking standards and how disingenuous the arguments for these reductions are. Retaining the current standards, as low as they are, or better still improving them, will also tell the world that bikes belong in Tucson and bikes are a legitimate way to get around. I have realized that things like bike lanes, bike signage, bike racks on buses, and bike racks in front of business serve to show motorists that people who ride bikes have a right to do so and a right to be on the road.
This increases our safety immensely in my opinion — probably more than having a receptive police department would, in the long run. And, it also increases the likelihood that our police department will be receptive to us.
Also, I think TPD has improved a whole lot in the last few years. I am not seeing *anything* like what I saw from them when I first started paying attention in 2007. Obviously there are exceptions, and too many exceptions, but nowadays it’s rare to get treated like a criminal just because you are on a bike. I attribute a lot of this to a change in personnel over the past few years. TPD’s priorities have changed for the better.
EBR
March 7th, 2011 at 7:24 am
[...] his entire post: Developers to Tucson bicyclists: Eff you and the bike you rode in on I had a bit of a hard time getting worked up about this too until I saw how much energy is being [...]