Read on Twitter
Alright let’s take a moment to talk about reasonable vs unreasonable opinions. Not wanting bikes on GC trails, I think, is a completely reasonable opinion to have and folks who believe that should absolutely make that clear in consultation
Bikes don’t deserve unmitigated access everywhere in the city, and it can’t be provided anyways. However they do need ~ s o m e ~ access between places
I was really happy about the bike plan because I’d get to meet new people and I like people 
I was also excited because it seemed like a good way to improve accessibility for disabled folks. Get two birds stoned at once kinda deal
I was also excited because it seemed like a good way to improve accessibility for disabled folks. Get two birds stoned at once kinda deal
But bikes on the GC trails, even paved, might not be the best option. We don’t have enough information to know! Consultation hasn’t even happened yet!
But when decisions are made, I don’t really care what it will be because it will be supported by evidence. As long as an alternative route is provided for safe cycling for all ages and abilities, whatever, it doesn’t need to be on the trails
But if alternatives are ultimately chosen for shared-use paths that diverge from the trails that does not mean we’ve addressed disabled folks access to the GC trails
I expect.. individuals to commit to making GC trails accessible since they’ve said that they do care about accessibility. A LOT. (Have they signed the other petition yet? https://www.change.org/AccessTrail )
I also expect folks from the cycling community to advocate for accessibility even when it’s not aligned with bike infrastructure, which might be the case here
To restate, completely reasonable to not want bikes, and the shared-use path, on the GC trails
An unreasonable opinion would be that there should be no bike infrastructure in the city and that the bike plan should be scrapped. There is no dialogue, no vision moving forward if you support scrapping the plan and stopping the mechanisms for bike infrastructure in their path
Another unreasonable opinion would be that certain places should not be made accessible. It is reasonable to have material or aesthetic preferences for example but not to determine who gets to use certain public facilities
I prefer a shared-use path because I just want to meet a longboarder but maybe it wasn’t meant to be and if that’s the case then so be it. But let’s not pretend that this is a both-sides situation
Also a Segway. I wanna meet a Segwayer
