We Wear Short Shorts

At last nights City Council meeting dozens of supporters of the Complete Streets initiative showed up to voice their support for legislation that would accommodate all modes of transportation in future road construction plans. In practical terms, designs would incorporate bike lanes, mass transit lanes and pedestrian access in addition to existing car lanes. In a moment of selective amnesia (or gross ignorance), a supporter with the obligatory hyphenated name claimed "passing this policy is really the easy part...finding ways of making change happen is the hard part." Really? Isn't it so cute when new folks come into the City with the misconception that they've settled into some liberal utopia. They see the cute downtown and the over-priced liberal arts college and assume wow, what a great, progressive little town. I cant wait to tell all my friends back home how I live in Saratoga Springs now and I bike downtown and protest in front of the post office and clear nature trails and do hot yoga and drink chia shakes. And now we're lobbying to implement a complete streets program! Hurray!

Well, sorry to burst your bubble but passing the policy might be a bit tougher than you think. You see, back in 2007 a like minded group attempted to implement the same strategy for Broadway. And, unfortunately for that group, the plan wasn't some abstract pipe dream...it was a real, tangible plan with pictures and fancy computer overlays and the such. In fact, it contained so much specific detail that it garnered fierce opposition from over a thousand petitioners.

Now, I don't mean to assume the worst about people, but by passing this initiative off as something harmless is simply dishonest. Especially without countering the valid criticisms that sank the 2007 Broadway initiative. That opposition was based almost purely on eliminating two lanes of a four lane commercial thoroughfare. If this plan were implemented on any residential two lane street the opposition would be based on eliminating portions of front yards. Now, I'm not saying that's not a sensible trade-off, but lets not pretend its an "easy" one. And make no mistake about it, "passing this policy" (i.e., codifying it in the zoning) has very real consequences that will actually "make change" quite easy....even for those that don't want it. Point being, the debate needs to happen now...not down the road after the policy has been passed.

On a related note, is it really necessary to show up to the Council chambers in full racing gear? Did you really need to be THAT aerodynamic to get to the meeting? Somehow, I think not. In truth, tight cycling wear (absent a sanctioned bicycle race) is really the mark of a lazy cycler...doing everything he can to cut down on wind resistance and do as little work as possible. You want to see a real cycler? Check out the guy in jeans and a windbreaker pedaling six garbage bags full of bottle returns to the local Price Chopper. Now THATS hard-core. THATS "really doing it." And THAT dude has no use for tight shorts. And since were on the topic of tight shorts, I personally think that an ancillary purpose of this group is to establish that walking around in tight shorts is now somehow socially acceptable. Well, I'm here to tell you that its not*. Not anymore than me walking down the street in my underwear. You know why? Cause next thing you know the Polish Cycling Team is in line at Ben & Jerry's next to you and your toddler. And how does daddy explain that one away?

*unless you're a really hot chick, that is.