City reinstalls Triviz turning lane, nixes bike lane

Full story: Las Cruces Sun-News

First it was there. Then it was gone. And now it's back. The city of Las Cruces early this month re-created a center turning lane along a 1.9 mile section of Triviz Drive - north from the large municipal water tank by Walmart to around Kohl's department store.
Comments
61 - 77 of 77 Comments Last updated Mar 9, 2013
First Prev
of 4
Next Last
A little common sense

Las Cruces, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#67
Mar 22, 2011
 
Sturm und drang wrote:
<quoted text>
You assume wrong. I'm referring to the guy who used to post as Jimbob. I don't think he is Harbison, but you never know. How do you argue with facts and logic against someone who is ignoring your position and criticizing your grammar??? Wasn't that the whole point of your first comment?
Just what is your position Sturm?

Referring to someone as Jimboob instead of Jimbob, whether it is Harbison or someone else, is just name calling and not addressing the issues with facts and logic.
Eroding Mayan Pyramid

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#68
Mar 22, 2011
 
"Alot of people need to be more mindful of the riders safety around here. We have our right to the road as well, even if it can be a little narrow at times."

Sincerely,
The fattest blimp in town on a unicycle during the rush hour traffic.
A little common sense

Las Cruces, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#69
Mar 22, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

Opus the Poet wrote:
<quoted text>This is so wrong I can't stand it.

And if you want to talk danger, motor vehicles killed 33,000 people in the US in 2009, the last year that data is available, and everybody celebrated because this was the lowest number of people killed since the Korean War started. Bicycles on the other hand killed 3 people that I have been able to track down in 2009 in the US. AFAIK there has never been a year that more than 5 people were killed by cyclists. It's just really hard to find this data because there were so few people killed by bicycles. TX keeps records on that, but they have only had one person killed by a cyclist between 1999 and 2010.
You make the perfect case for having bicyclists (very few deaths caused) share the bike path with pedestrians rather than having motor vehicles (evil machines that cause many deaths) share the road with bicyclists. It makes perfect sense to keep both pedestrians and cyclists away from those evil motor vehicles that cause so many deaths, doesn't it?

Quit being hypocritical. Share the existing bike path with pedestrians that make you slow down and may cause collisions. Come on! Can't you just share the bike path that is already there on Triviz with a few walkers?
Cruiser bike

Las Cruces, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#70
Mar 22, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

jaytheorc wrote:
<quoted text>
...Additionally, I think riding your bike with traffic on any one of those roads, should only be done if you have to- all kinds of residential streets parallel most of those roads.
I've been there before. When I first moved here it was my only option to get around, but most of those parallel residential roads have a lot of stop signs. I hate unnecessary stopping as much as any other commuter. I'm not lazy, just time efficient. I used to take Chapparro until Gardner where I was forced to take Solano anyway and still fight for space on the road, just to get to all my classes.
People don't realize how helpful a bike lane really is. You complain about not being able to get somewhere faster. Well, all I want is to get where I'm going safely.
bikemanlc

Las Cruces, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#71
Mar 23, 2011
 

Judged:

4

3

1

Wow. The city openly admits that the reason they returned center turning lane is due to the incompetence of motorists who use Triviz. I guess, for the good all the bad drivers out there, that cyclists can be inconvenienced on that road. Sure, we are offered the same legal rights and responsibilities of all other users of that road when we operate on it, but given the difficulties that motorists seem to have through there, I guess I will be moving my daily commute over to the MUP (multiple use path). I guess it doesn't really matter that I will be inconvenienced on my commute, as long as the motorists on Triviz have all the extra space they need to avoid running into each other at every turn.
writer

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#72
Mar 23, 2011
 
From reading all the posts, it seems the majority of Las Cruces drivers are waaaay to stupid to risk exposing cyclists to them...unfortunately, those same drivers will end up on their bikes soon enough when gas gets to be too much to afford-what's going to happen then?
writer

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#74
Mar 23, 2011
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Eroding Mayan Pyramid wrote:
<quoted text>
I think I can speak for many people here hoping that someone will invent an engine that can utilize just your bad breath for fuel (should last us another few thousand years). Though containment will be tricky, our sources in Portsmouth tell us.
Can't you just discuss why the city spent $25,000 to repaint and remove a bike lane in what was a relatively low traffic, slow speed area? Triviz in not a major artery. HELLO, THE INTERSTATE IS RIGHT NEXT TO IT-GOING THE SAME DIRECTION! The only logical conclusion resulted from stupid drivers rear ending each other on a 30mph road.
Eric

Santa Fe, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#75
Mar 24, 2011
 
This city does not deserve responsible infrastructure
bettersafety

Las Cruces, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#76
Mar 5, 2013
 
So there is a new problem with the safety planning department of our traffic 'engineer'.

As lovely as the new Channel Path extension of the Triviz multi-use trail is, there is now a very unsafe crosswalk in a rather blind curve for people to walk or ride across.

Rather than allowing people to safely cross in a straight-away between the driveway that serves Lowe's and Kohl's or the intersection with Bentley or Bugatti, we have spent way too much money on the caution lights that are far too close to the danger zone to allow drivers to react.

Do the people who come up with and approve these designs even drive this route or use the paths? It is just a matter of time until someone is hurt here.
Cyclist

Las Cruces, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#77
Mar 7, 2013
 
watchdog 1 wrote:
<quoted text>Roads are paid for through fuel tax & lisence plate fees and are designed for motor vehicles.Not bikes! They were not designed for that and that is where the trouble arises.
Here's great idea. If cyclist want to use the roads have them share in the costs. Maybe an equal cost lisence plate. Same cost as motor vehicles. If they don't have one when riding on the road Police ticket them the same as the motor vehicles.
Also I found out it is perfectly legal to ride bikes on sidwalks,oddly enough. So problem is solved.
It is not legal for bikes to ride on the sidewalk nor is it safe. bicycles are not allowed on sidewalks unless in residential areas. It is not safe for cyclists or pedestrians who are listening to ipods, texting or abruptly changing direction to share space with bicycles going in excess of 20-30 miles an hour. Furthermore sidewalks are littered with glass, sand, rocks, potholes and cracks which can easily cause a crash or a flat. Bicycles are designed to be ridden on the road, hence the name "road bike". Most motorists in this city do not pay for the road as they are driving illegaly or with out of date tags so demanding that we pay the same fee for licensing is rediculous. Bicycles do not cause the damage to the roads that cars do, it's all of those monster trucks out there. It does not make sense to demand that we pay as much as motorists to ride on the road. Most states do have licensing fees for bicycles but New Mexico is as always 15-20 years behind the rest of the country.
Finally, cyclists love this part of the country because we can ride all year long, so if you do not like us perhaps you should move to a snowy place where you will only have to deal with us 3 months out of the year.:)
Cyclist

Las Cruces, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#78
Mar 7, 2013
 
Better wrote:
<quoted text>
Try any Rail to Trail path in the US on a bike and everyone survives together on much more crowded routes. You have confessed to not biking due to something that required surgery, so your confession of a slow speed being too fast for the path is not going to fly in this discussion.
The physics of a car vs. cyclist theories have been covered in local topix articles and the numbers are saying there were rear end collisions monthly since the lanes were added. Driving this route often, I did see an increase in use of the bike lanes during morning and evening rush hours, much more than previously had used the path. Hopping back on the paved path is the right thing to do for everyone's safety. Just pretend you are a bike messenger in a big city. They don't think they are limited to the roads and weave through crowds with wings on their pedals. Those involved in the rear-end collisions could have done much more damage had they hit a cyclist.
Wrong. Bikes belong on the road not on the sidewalk with pedestrians.
Cyclist

Las Cruces, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#79
Mar 7, 2013
 
A little common sense wrote:
<quoted text>
You make the perfect case for having bicyclists (very few deaths caused) share the bike path with pedestrians rather than having motor vehicles (evil machines that cause many deaths) share the road with bicyclists. It makes perfect sense to keep both pedestrians and cyclists away from those evil motor vehicles that cause so many deaths, doesn't it?
Quit being hypocritical. Share the existing bike path with pedestrians that make you slow down and may cause collisions. Come on! Can't you just share the bike path that is already there on Triviz with a few walkers?
Bicycles are going 20+ miles an hour, walkers 2-3.5, cars 25-30. Hmm which one of these things is not like the other ones?
Cyclist

Las Cruces, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#80
Mar 7, 2013
 
A little common sense wrote:
<quoted text>
Touched a nerve there eh Martin? Common sense would tell me that if gas prices are so high that I'm riding a bike, then there will not be any uneducated jacka$$es driving on the streets anyway.
As for the rest of your childish rant, you have no idea what you are talking about, nor any idea about what I drive, nor what I weigh, nor anything about me at all. Please try to just discuss things you actually have some knowledge about.
All Las Crucens are fat, let's just put that out there.
betterargument

Las Cruces, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#81
Mar 8, 2013
 
Cyclist wrote:
<quoted text>
All Las Crucens are fat, let's just put that out there.
Wow. This last retort just reinforces your inability to see the big picture and alienate anyone who may have tried to see your POV in your efforts to address a few opposing points of view.

Trade your 'road bike' in for a hybrid or a mountain bike. This is not some giant metropolis where hordes of pedestrians use the sidewalks.

25% of our local population live below the poverty level, that will keep the county in a 20 year time warp. It is great that you can choose to hop on your carbonframe stallion to commute and look down on the dirty masses who are just trying to keep a roof over their head day in and day out. There are many things that will bring the local infrastructure up to date, but recognize this is not the place you came from and those that have been here long before your arrival deserve responsible growth.

Just look at the progression of curbside recycling. Weekly, then biweekly and now what? Monthly? It is a waste of everyone's money to force the gullible local leaders to modernize in haste because of the way things are done elsewhere. Y'all move in here have more time and money to hassle the eager officials who so want to be liked by people who have connections they may need to use some day. The masses are piecing together multiple minimum wage jobs because that what is available here. And you don't want to pay to keep the roads paved so they can get to work to serve your needs. ay-ay-ay.

Don't be a cycle-elitist. It really is off-putting.
APPAUSEPLEASE

Rio Rancho, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#82
Mar 8, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Another bad idea overturned by popular demand
and common sense.

Gee Sharon Thomas was the brainchild of this
failed idea - just like so many others.

Of course, Disaster Mike and Nacho Way Dick
stood by and watched the disaster unfold
along with the other clownbots on City Council.
APPAUSEPLEASE

Rio Rancho, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#83
Mar 9, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

Another bad idea from a equally bad City Council.

Amazing that we put the general population thru
so much bs and the expense only to figure that
it was another stupidly idea.
speaking of

Santa Fe, NM

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#84
Mar 9, 2013
 
APPAUSEPLEASE wrote:
Another bad idea from a equally bad City Council.
Amazing that we put the general population thru
so much bs and the expense only to figure that
it was another stupidly idea.
stupidly (sic) LOL

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 4
Next Last
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
•••
•••

Hatch Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Hatch People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Hatch News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Hatch
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••