Judge rules in ‘Missing Link’ appeal

Geeky Swedes Ballard

A new ruling is out in the continuing legal battle over the “Missing Link” of the Burke Gilman Trail.  According to SDOT, a state appeals court has denied a motion for review filed by a group of businesses fighting the trail.  Back in April, a King County Superior Court judge ruled against those businesses on 8 of 9 complaints.  The only complaint they won involved an environmental review on a small section of the missing link which the city is now close to finishing.

Despite the new ruling, SDOT tells us the legal issues are far from over.  Once the environmental review is wrapped up, SDOT says the project will probably have to go back to the hearing examiner and could end up before the same King County Superior Court judge who issued the original ruling in April.  An attorney for the businesses who filed the lawsuit has not returned our calls for comment.

Disclosure: MyBallard is a non-voting member of the Ballard Chamber of Commerce.

Geeky Swedes

The founders of My Ballard

126 thoughts to “Judge rules in ‘Missing Link’ appeal”

  1. MyBallard is an ACTIVE, DUES PAYING MEMBER of the Chamber of Commerce.

    By remaining in the Chamber, MyBallard supports this lawsuit by providing support the plaintiffs suing the city, costing us tax dollars, and making Ballard a dangerous neighborhood for bicycle commuters and families.

    SHAME ON YOU KATE AND CORY!!! SHOW BALLARD YOU CARE MORE ABOUT MONEY AND QUIT THE CHAMBER!!!

  2. You mean your own attorney did not return your calls?

    As Chamber members, isn’t MyBallard one of the “businesses who filed the lawsuit.”?

  3. For a moment, try to imagine any of the other big neighborhood blogs in Seattle like SLOG or Capitol Hill Blog remaining in a business group that sues to stop bike trails of all things.

    The GeekySwedes should quit the Ballard Chamber immediately. Enough is enough.

  6. DENIED! AGAIN!!

    Suck it, Ballard Oil.

    Suck it, Salmon Bay Sand and Gravel.

    Suck it, Ballard Chamber of Commerce.

    Suck it, MyBallard.

    DEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE-NIED!!!

  8. Oh, this rant again…

    Listen, I’m pro-bike and I love that the missing link is one step closer to being complete. I will love love love it.

  9. Not caring whether the bike route is completed via Shilshole Ave is a perfectly acceptable answer. There are plenty of issues that are of a higher priority in Ballard and the world.

    Additionally, since MyBallard receives revenue from ad sales generated from website traffic, by viewing and posting on this website you are also contributing to the lawsuit against the missing link. I am sure that MyBallard thanks you for your support.

  10. Exactly because it seems to me they care about a few extra pennies instead of doing what’s right for families and kids and bike commuters and taxpayers in the neighborhood.

    Trust me I do not support their advertisers. Their advertisers are paying MyBallard to tell me not to go there.

    But I’m sure Ballard Oil is happy to have the Geeky Swedes on their side, fighting this appeal after appeal after appeal.

  12. Pho doesn’t like bike lanes because his trendy imported fixie bike may get splashed on by a dirty car tire. He’s special, so he needs a special place to ride his special bike. Because, you know, he’s better than you or me.

  14. Chris, no offense but you really need to read all the available information on the web that has led to this point in the saga of the “Missing Link” if this thread allowed web links to be posted i would post a number of them that would give you the history of this issue and it goes back to the early 1990’s. You can check the SDOT web site and the Cascade Bicycle Club web site, both have information about the issue.
    And no, a bike lane would not work to connect the two ends of the Burk Gilman Trail. The trail is a multi use trail, not just a bike trail and the other users, joggers, walkers, skaters and wheelchairs etc can not go from a trail to a bike lane to get to the other part of the trail. This trail has to go where it is planned and the sooner the better.

  15. Exactly. I’m a biker myself and it would be nice to see the trail extended but let’s stop beating a dead horse. Take a different route or move. Maybe a park n ride that you can drive part of the way and bike the rest.

    I’m sure there are many places to live close to the bike trail. Next we’ll be voting on the missing link between Ballard and Shoreline.

  16. oh please. it’s a multi use trail not a bike trail, you morons. I like to run with my child and it’s much safer to do it there than on the street. Would you suggest i take my child into a bike lane to run?

  17. The people beating the dead horse are the industrial businesses. They lose in court, then they appeal. They lose again, appeal. Lose again, appeal. Lose, appeal. Lose, appeal. Lose, appeal.

    Stop beating a dead horse and build the trail! I’m sick of you obstructionists causing delays and costing our tax dollars!

  18. Can we, like, build this simple bike trail already??? The lawsuits are done, let’s move on now. The bicyclists and the community won, the curmudgeony businesses and chamber lost. Lick your wounds, congrats on all your new legal bills, and get over it.

  19. One step closer to completion.
    One step closer to a functioning multi use trail.
    One step closer to safer transportation for all.

    The only downside is all the money and time being wasted on this when the outcome is inevitable. So much animosity as well. Salmon Bay Sand and Gravel has lost me as a customer. The Chamber does not have my support and my business will not join or participate in their events.
    I look forward to the completion of the Missing Link, but I’m not sure anything short of SBSG dropping the suit and donating the materials to build the trail will get me to reconsider my boycott.

  23. a park and ride? that’s your solution for businesses lack of cooperation and unwillingness to give up the public land they use for a parking lot? are you suggesting we use their parking lot for a park and ride? i’m sure they would sue to stop that idea, too.

  24. Pho, it’s not like they’re torturing puppies or something. You’re trying to reframe a disagreement over road use as a moral issue: good people favor the trail without question, everyone else is evil. This is not good for our neighborhood. Really, you just sound like an angry person that won’t be satisfied until everyone falls in line, or at least shuts up. Go ahead and continue to state your case, but could you at least stop attacking the Swedes, who provide a valuable service to the community, at no cost to any of us? Does the whole meaning of life come down to this one issue?

  25. have you run pushing a stroller on the sidewalk? visibility is limited due to pushing the kid and the pits and lumps in sidewalks become dangerous. Yes, i’ve fallen on poorly maintained sidewalks while jogging.

    On the MULTI-USE TRAIL there are fewer street crossings, no untended and low-hanging trees. the trail is a well maintained level surface for many activities. Asphalt is a much better surface on which to run as well.

    i’m sorry you’re biased against some hipsters on fixies, but those kids ride in the road to begin with. :)

  30. I wish it would be completed so that I do not have to constantly listen to bikers complain about this. Please get on your bike and stop complaining here. Now you can all complain about something else as you ride your bike along the trail. Congratulations.

  33. Whatever shall we do once this issue has been settled?

    This is like a perfectly effective dog-whistle that instantly causes all the morons to jump up and scream “hey, I’m an idiot, look at me!!!!”

  36. If you actually believe that “Suing to stop bike trails IS evil!”, I suggest that, considering we live in a world of (in my opinion) far more significant injustices inflicted by people on each other, your value system is parochial, petty, and self-serving. Lucky you that this is all you have to complain about.

  37. Qwerty-you will still jump up and yell that you (qwerty) are an idiot.

    Typical moronic Seattle politics by selfish idiotic people, which is why nothing in this city gets done. Everything gets voted on twice or three times, then lawsuits then more votes. But there is some good coming from all of this…

    The multi-use trail will end up following the railway ALL the way rather than the stupid compromise up into the businesses for that few blocks. So the trail took longer due to selfish interests of a couple good ol’ boys and their mindless legion. But the trail will end up where it should have been all along. Ha Ha.

    Why don’t you ignorant people now file suit to keep the buses from taking away parking spots on the new street plan.

  39. I think you meant, “care about more than money,” right?

    It is disturbing that they choose to support such an anti-neighborhood industrial business group. What a PR coup for the Chamber having MyBallard as a member!

  40. SLOG should write about this and force MyBallard to go on the record defending their membership! Anybody know a writer over there? They are very pro-bike.

  44. Pho favors multi-use trails (frequently mislabeled as “bike trails”) over dedicated bike lanes, which share the existing roadway with other vehicular traffic. Does that clarify it?

  46. The good ol’ boys don’t even live in Ballard. And since when do oil company owners care about bikes?

    What impresses me are the people who defend their side. Including MyBallard?

  47. In other words, I think Pho is a spoiled brat who throws tantrums and acts naughty until he gets his (or her) own way. Well, if his (or her) online comments are any indication. Pho never discusses, only accuses. On the multi-use trail issue, Pho tolerates nothing less than absolute obedience to Pho’s wishes. Pho is a big baby.

  50. Your points are all valid, of course. However, as a walker and relatively slow bike rider I have had my share of near-misses with hotshot riders (not fixies, you’re right) on the MULTI-USE TRAIL despite staying well within my designated lane and being aware of those around me.

    I pay over $5000 in real estate taxes each year, and would be happy to pay more if it would give us better sidewalks, better bike lanes, better multi-use trails, a whole lot of better everything. But the fact is that we can’t get everything we need or want, and if the sidewalks are THAT bad, then I favor spending the money to repair them before doing any more trail construction, simply because more people (and a wider variety, such as the aged) will benefit from those improvements. It’s about priorities, isn’t it?

  51. AB – “Pho” is one of the multiple online personalities used by one of our local ‘net trolls. You can’t take what it (are trolls male, female, or neuter?) posts seriously, especially on this Trail lawsuit stuff.

  56. It’s ABtm who seems pretty trollish to me. And naughty ;0

    Pho is the reason the GeekySwedes add that disclaimer to their stories now.

  59. “Pho is the reason the GeekySwedes add that disclaimer to their stories now. ”

    And I believe Pho took exception to the wimpy disclaimer they posted on this story as a means of disclaiming it to an extend but also trying to disown the chamber’s actions at the same time.

  60. you’re going to let your bias against a few bike riders inform your opinion on a trail that is a safe solution for so many users?

  61. I blame these people for putting Ballard bikers at risk.

    How nice that two of them can’t even keep their own businesses open in Ballard. Snacks and Lombardi’s are closing!

    Ballard Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors
    Kerri Lonergan (Lombardi’s Neighborhood Italian)
    Darrell McManus (Merril Lynch)
    Dante Rivera (Dante’s Inferno Dogs/Snack)
    Erik Stangvik (Nordic Heritage Museum)
    Greg Swanson (Viking Bank)
    Monique Tran (La Tienda)

  62. funny that some of these folks have ‘scandinavian roots’

    have these people been back to the motherland? everyone is riding bikes there. 40% of rides in Copenhagen via bike!

    now the italians I can see rallying against it. very few people bike in italy. they prefer to ride vespas so they can smoke simulataneously.

  65. I challenge the Ballard Chamber of Commerce to provide me with one example where a company went out of business due to construction of a multi-use path on adjacent public land.

    If they can I will consider attending the Seafood fest next year. Currently I will spend no money at a business that is a member of the Ballard Chamber.

  67. Let’s admit it none of these people look like they are the sharpest tools in the shed.

    They are lackeys for Ballard Oil.

    The hot dog man and the Nordic “Heritage” Museum must feel all big and mighty with a lawsuit!!

  68. I don’t think the BCC has been up front about their reasons for opposing the trail. It occurs to me that there is a lot of free parking on the public right of way along Shilshole. Some of that would be lost to the trail. Given the congestion in the Ballard downtown, less available parking could affect businesses many of which are struggling in the current economy.

  71. There is no doubt that a bike lane needs to be established through downtown Ballard but why does everyone feel it needs to go right through a group of businesses that have beed conducting there work in that area for years. Wouldn’t it be a better idea to detour around that active strech of road? As a motorist I find myself being having to swerve around cyclists who are either not paying attention or who just do not care that they are riding in a lane of traffic and then get mad when we pass because they feel I’m a little too close. If I hit you then I’m too close otherwise I am just passing you. Why should I have to swerve way out in oncomming traffic to give you a more comfortable ride? The city should look into making Ballard Ave a one way street therefore allowing sufficient space for a two way bike lane thus avoiding the problem are of the trail all together.

  72. How exactly will the trail help the economy? Believe me, I’m in favor of the trail, but I don’t see how it will help the economy.

  73. Excellent point. If the dozens of parking spaces along Shilshole goes away because of the bike trail…which I am in favor of…businesses on Ballard Avenue will certainly suffer.

  75. Not at all. I’m just saying, if the sidewalks are in such poor repair that they are unsafe for a perfectly reasonable use, wouldn’t it make sense to prioritize improving them, if for no other reason than they serve a larger, more diverse body of users? A multi-use trail is a wonderful benefit, but the demographic of users is much narrower than that of a typical urban sidewalk.

  76. TipyToo I think you have the facts wrong, the proposed multi-use path does not go “through” the businesses. The fact is that the proposed path is along existing public right of way. The proposal requires the taking of no private land.

  77. It’s our land. Taxpayers own it. You sound like a bad driver. I hope you do not kill a bicyclist some day. Be careful and give them a little extra space for when the unexpected happens. By law they can take the entire lane if they want it.

  83. in one breath you suggest the path be routed through the streets instead of the dedicated multi use trail and then in the other complain about bikes on the road? which one is it? This morning I saw a car rush through a green light to the back of a pack of traffic only to move into the bike lane to wait for that traffic to clear. All so he could make it through the light before it turned red (it wasn’t imminently doing so). As a result, cyclists had to find a path around this dbag. There are jerks all around you and they take whatever mode of transport they prefer.

  85. i’ve thought hard about it. and i would like to see the trail built. but i can also see where ballard businesses might have concerns.

    i look at it as dozens of parking spaces being lost meaning dozens of people not coming to ballard to do business.

    please explain to me how making it easier (and safer) to ride your bike from fremont to golden gardens is good for the economy?

  87. actually, the property that the old yankee diner sits on is for lease, and has a huge parking lot. metro could lease it and build a park and ride on it.

  88. “anti-neighborhood industrial business group”

    have you actually looked at the list of chamber members? please explain to me what’s “anti-neighborhood” and “industrial” about ballard swedish hospital, the ballard boys & girls club, the ballard food bank, ballard animal hospital, olympic athletic club, etc.

  89. To quote gobigblue..
    “please explain to me how making it easier (and safer) to ride your bike from fremont to golden gardens is good for the economy? ”

    Lets see, a safer path eliminates injuries and the very real possibility of death. How is this good for the economy? Lets see, less time off work due to recovering from injuries(affecting both the employee and employer), less people with medical bills they have a difficult time paying. Etc…. Many injuries have occurred through the missing link especially around the area of 15th. What is the economic cost of a death? A safe multi-use path is good for the economy from a safety perspective.
    Several studies have been done on the positive economic benefits of a bike path, These studies can be easily found with the help of Google.
    Immediate benefits to our local economy would result during construction, think economic stimulus.

  90. Yes, I have looked at the businesses that are part of the Ballard Chamber. Any business that is a member of the BCC is a place where I will not spend my money. They are working against the best interests of our community. I do not understand why some of these businesses are anti neighborhood, but I will not support them.

  92. Not everyone drives to Ballard. Those that do, will just park a few feet further or pay to park in a lot.
    People in Fremont and the U district who bike, walk, or push a stroller will be much more likely to come to Ballard. These people coming to Ballard will offset the inconvenience of a few parking spots.
    The other thing that will happen is that the neighborhood will look nicer and more people will want to come here. That’s what the industrial businesses are afraid of, gentrification.

  93. It’s not like you’re taking seats out of a plane. People will park a few feet further and even more people will use the trail to get here and not need to park anywhere.

  95. and what would be the point? a waste of money to avoid some businesses losing free parking for a 1 mile stretch of trail? perhaps those businesses could lease that lot for parking for their employees.

  96. and seattle has buses and cabs! that’s how I get to capitol hill. i don’t see that neighborhood suffering due to lack of parking.

  98. “working against the best interests of our community”

    really, just because of one issue that all of my friends in the community know nothing about?

    give it a rest already…

  99. not saying it’s a solution. just pointing out that there is land available in ballard, near the desired trail, to build a park and ride.

    getting the businesses to lease that lot for parking is a great idea…

    but the sad thing is it’s the only idea i’ve heard from any of the pro-trail zealots in how to address concerns of businesses the trail could affect.

  101. So people are going to go for a stroll on the new Shilshole Bike Trail instead of just walking down Ballard Avenue where all the shops, restaurants, and bars are?

    I’m for the trail. I just don’t think it will help the economy. The trail won’t make Ballard any more or less desirable. People come for the shops, bars, and restaurants, the latter two being mostly at night. Hipsters don’t get all dressed up and then hop on their bikes to go meet people at Matador and Kings. The trail will mostly be used by recreational cyclists, myself included, on their way from Fremont to Golden Gardens, and west Ballard residents on their way to and from work by bike.

  102. How many cyclists have actually been injured and/or died on Shilshole? And what has the medical costs to those cyclists actually been and what was the economic losses for themselves and their employers that resulted? Please, you’re reaching.

    Sure, bike paths might be good for the economy in the short-term, but what about long-term? They’ll create temporary jobs for contsruction workers from companies based outside of Ballard.

    I want the trail but I just don’t see how this one will make downtown Ballard more desirable or draw more consumers. The trail will go down Shilshole behind Ballard Ave where all the retailers are. Nobody pushing strollers or walking from Golden Garden or the Locks into downtown Ballard to shop/dine/drink will use it. They’ll just continue east on the sidewalk on Market Street across 24th until they hit Ballard Avenue and then walk down it.

    The path will be used almost exclusively by recreational cyclists on their way from Fremont to Golden Gardens (or vice versa), or by west Ballard residents on their way to and from work downtown by bike (like myself).

  103. Then do what people used to do before running became trendy. Go to the local school and run on the track. And really, the only problem with running on the sidewalk is that you have to actually pay attention to your environment, rather than lose yourself in your iPod.

  104. I worked adjacent to the BG Trail between Fred Meyer and Fremont for over eight years. This isn’t scientific, but I saw precious few shopping bags being transported. And the vehicular traffic in the Fred Meyer was many many times greater than the traffic on the Trail.

    And you clearly haven’t scoped out the parking situation on Shilshole, Market, Ballard Ave. or Leary Ave. on any typical Friday or Saturday evening. This ain’t the sleepy ol’ Ballard I moved to years ago.

  105. Expanding on this, there is actually a decent body of evidence that adding ambiguity to a traffic situation (such as reducing the number of warning signs, special lane markings and other traffic control features) actually IMPROVES the safety of the area due to the fact that people need to slow down, pay attention, and react appropriately just to navigate their way through.

    My guess is that completion of the trail along Shilshole will result in an increase in both vehicular and bicycle accidents. Get that? The bicyclists make Shilshole Avenue SAFER for drivers and for themselves.

    Oooh, the heresy.

  106. Clearly you’ve never lived there. Capitol Hill has declined greatly in diversity, economic activity, and vibrancy since the ’90s’. Not sure if it’s just because of the lack of parking (I walked everywhere when I lived there), but the relatively poor accessibility (going East-West in Seattle by bus is a nightmare that should be corrected) certainly hasn’t helped the area.

  108. I know most Seattle cyclists, excluding myself who rides regularly with my kids, are clueless about the law so here it is:

    RCW 46.61.770

    (1) Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a rate of speed less than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time and place shall ride as near to THE RIGHT SIDE of the right through lane as is safe except as may be appropriate while preparing to make or while making turning movements, or while overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction.

    So unless you are passing another vehicle, turning or going the speed limit, get the **** out of my way.

  109. “By law they can take the entire lane if they want it.”

    Another moron on two wheels….I’ve cycled on public roads for nearly 40 years, in several countries, but only in Seattle have a met such a bunch of obnoxious, self-righteous ***holes bikes who don’t know the law:

    RCW 46.61.770

    (1) Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a rate of speed less than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time and place shall ride as near to THE RIGHT SIDE of the right through lane as is safe except as may be appropriate while preparing to make or while making turning movements, or while overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction.

    So unless you are passing another vehicle, turning or going the speed limit, get the **** out of my way.

  110. I’ve been conducting a little experiment lately. I thought it would be fun to ride my motorcyle like a bicycle. When there is traffic if front of me at a stop light, I ride up the side. If there isn’t room on the side, I ride on the side walk. Of course, no one has to wait for me after the light turns green so the experiement fall apart, but man what reactions I get. The car drivers are just dumbfounded. But the cyclists are livid. They don’t like a person in a powered vehicle taking the liberties they think should only be taken by them. At least that’s my take on it. Look out pedal bikes, I can go anywhere you can go, and a whole lot faster…

  112. Actually the number of accidents along the :missing link” are numerous. Unfortunately no one is compiling numbers that I know of. I have talked to hundreds of people that have fallen and many that have sustained injuries on that stretch of road. The Ballard Hospital has treated many of those injuries over the years. I believe that if someone could document all the injuries sustained along the “missing link” we might all be surprised. There have been a lot.

  113. I believe what you are failing to understand are the words “as is safe” in the line “shall ride as near to THE RIGHT SIDE of the right through lane as is safe” For most streets bicycle riders have to avoid drains, glass, car doors opening and pot holes and that means we will be often riding almost in the middle of the lane in order to ride safely. So therefore it is your responsibility as a driver to drive in a safe manner and avoid colliding with or endangering a bicycle rider at all times. If you don’t like this then you soul not be driving.

  114. Well cdpenne – there is a law against riding a motorized vehicle, your motorcycle, on the sidewalk. However in Seattle it is legal to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk. So what are you trying to prove? You might just get a ticket if a traffic officer sees you.

  115. does the fact that bicyclists ride up along the shoulder at a red light really bother you *that* much? and it’s not only illegal of you to ride your motorcycle on the sidewalk, it’s also stupid and highly dangerous.
    i suggest you get used to the fact that you live in a city with several hundred thousand people, and things don’t just revolve around you.

  116. Many of the businesses along Shilshole Avenue have buildings on either side of the Street. What bothers me is that they use the public street as their personal driveway and access to go back and forth. A few bicyclists (more on the weekend — when they are usually closed) shouldn’t bother them too much.

  117. There is also a law against bicycles running red lights and stop signs, yet it is done on a regular basis, (observably) by the most avid riders. Why do people who regard themselves as above the law deserve special infrastructure that excludes the general populace?

  118. And conversely, if you, as a bicyclist, don’t like sharing the road with automobiles, and refuse to be realistic about the conditions in which you ride, then you should not be riding. It goes both ways.

  119. Good points. Howver, if we became more vigilant about “long term” parkers in that area, we would prorably solve the problem

  120. Every accident I’ve seen there (and I commuted that stretch daily for over eight years) has involved the railroad tracks. If you fall there, it’s your fault, because your track-crossing technique is deficient. Railroad tracks are a feature of the urban landscape, and bicycle riders should know how to negotiate them. Perhaps we should require bicycle riders tests and licenses as we now do for vehicle drivers, to ensure at least a minimum level of competence.

  121. This law exists for cars as well. SO those red light cameras around town and speed traps aren’t catching any cars doing anything wrong?

    there are scofflaws all around you. Don’t pigeonhole them into one group that you dislike.

  122. so you’ve got 8 years of cycling ahead of me in Seattle, and I wait at stoplights with other cyclists every day!

    you’re so full of shit if you think cars don’t run red lights.

  123. “It’s about as rare to see a car run a red light as it is to see a bicyclist obey it.” You can spin it anyway you want, but this is untrue, especially in Ballard.

    As for it being dangerous to run a red light at an empty intersection with good visibility, it may be illegal, you may perceive it as “arrogant,” but dangerous is a stretch. Do you rail against jaywalking as well on the “walking” posts?

    There’s a reason why there is such a cultural taboo against automotive red light running. It actually is dangerous. 2 tons of moving metal, higher speeds, relatively poorer visibility.

    But I do stop at red lights, even without cross traffic impeding my movement, especially so if other cars are present. Not just or my safety, or to follow the law, but because it gets your tighties in a such a bunch and I’m just so tired of hearing motorists whine about the things people on bikes do that they can’t.

    The reason you sound like a mostly-car-modal person is because of your selective vision here. We tend to notice what “the other” is doing illegally more often that what “people like us” are up to.

    As for your callous comments about rider error on the tracks (who is it that’s sounding arrogant or superior again?), oblique track crossings are a dangerous road design for cyclists, plain and simple.

    If SDOT added a narrow ice rink feature to the tracks, to appease the Choo-Choo Train and Zamboni Aficionado Short-Line Railroad Company (how would Ballard’s economy survive without ’em?), would you boast about how honed your ice-driving skills are, and mock drivers that just “don’t know how to drive on ice” as the accident statistics piled up?

  124. The mixed-use Burke Gilman trail excludes the general populace? Now that is just super for my arrogant, spandex-wearing, scofflaw, insert-homophobic-comment-here, card-carrying-Cascade-member, bike riding self.

  125. I, for one, never mentioned Spandex, sexual preference, or Cascade Bicycle Club. And you are right, the Trail does not exclude the general populace. I was incorrect in saying that, and you’re right to call me on it. The Trail, however, does constitute a more narrowly-defined infrastructure than the road/sidewalk system, and therefore serves a smaller demographic.

  126. We can agree to disagree about unprovable observations that support our respective arguments. You do, however, seem to give tacit approval to the breaking of laws based on your perception of the possible consequences.

    Personally, I don’t expect the government to construct an environment that is designed to make it impossible for me to hurt myself. I do believe in a certain level of responsibility. You obviously feel that you need to be protected from yourself 0r your own incompetence.

    And it’s a shame (not to say immature) that you will behave in a certain way just because you think it annoys someone. If you think the average motorist is jealous of your gnat-like maneuverability and bulging quads, you are both cluelessly Narcissistic and dangerously oblivious to the attention they are paying to their cell phones and GPS units rather than you.

    I spent my first thirty years in the Northeast. If the conditions were too slippery for my abilities, I found alternatives to driving, which was often inconvenient for me, but that’s the way life was. Apparently inconvenience is not something you are willing to endure.

Leave a Reply