On democracy and bike lanes
Barriers would not have protected Dr. Friedes as she was killed by a drunk driver doing almost 60 m.p.h.
I awoke to a breakfast of red herring and a fast Friday morning.
Let me explain.
What’s on my menu is Daniel Pearson’s op-ed piece in the Inquirer, which covered several topics, one of which being the bike lane river and its associated tributaries.
Under the subhead “Bike lane battle,” he praises the city for acting after the truly tragic death of Dr. Barbara Friedes in a bike lane in 2024. Her death was the red herring.
The city has not yet acted to erect "protective" barriers on bike lanes on Pine and Spruce, but it has banned momentary stopping on those two routes. Following the tragedy, and the city’s plans, the nonprofit group Friends of Pine and Spruce (FOPS) was born. Pearson doesn’t seem to approve of fighting City Hall, and criticized it for opposing the city’s “democratically approved plan.” That is not entirely accurate, as I will show in a moment.
The city has yet to define what the barriers look like, but I am told what seems likely are capsule shaped concrete barriers about 3 inches high.
Such barriers would not have protected Dr. Friedes as she was killed by a drunk driver doing almost 60 m.p.h. Had a 3-inch barrier been there, the car would not have been stopped. Most likely it would have gone airborne.
And the city’s illegally implemented plans — following lawsuits led by FOPS lawyer George Bochetto — were stopped, admittedly creating chaos in Center City parking, with loading zones being set up and knocked down.
For the record, FOPS does not oppose bike lanes per se. I do. I disagree with FOPS on that point but I remain a supporter through my work and through financial donations. It is a classic case of fighting City Hall, which is a foundation of democracy. No Kings, right?
As to what’s “democratic,” Pearson does not acknowledge, and may not know, that when the Michael Nutter administration was selling the idea of bike lanes, Center City residents were assured that bike lanes would not restrict their access to their homes, which the no-stopping ban does. The absence of that fact by Pearson was the fast I mentioned.
Promise made, promise broken. By the city. And FOPS fought back.
The truly moronic no-stopping idea is “credited” mainly to Council President Kenyatta Johnson, parroting the usual “safety” issues raised by the Bicycle Coalition of Greater Philadelphia, which like ghouls feast on Dr. Friedes‘ corpse.
Safety? I asked the police department for a record of any bicyclist killed or injured at a stopped car on Pine or Spruce.
There were none. Nebraska reports more shark attacks.
If the bike lane is briefly blocked, cyclists can go up on the sidewalk (as many do, anyway), safely steer around the stopped vehicle, or just wait for all traffic to pass.
Final word on “democracy.”
The city never asked Philadelphians if they wanted bike lanes.
I have challenged the Coalition to put bike lanes on a referendum, added as a question to a citywide election.
It wants no part of that.
Because it would lose.
