uapd1

A lot of times when the police are mentioned on this site it’s about some kind of enforcement against bicyclists or something negative in general.

Last night on my way back from my MBA class, I saw an officer speaking to a woman he had pulled over on Park Avenue just south of Second Street.

I was initially annoyed that they had stopped in the bike lane, but then I heard their conversation.

It turns out the woman was driving in the bike lane next to the tracks. The officer was explaining to the woman that the streetcar and cars were designed to share the road. He said that cars could and should drive on the tracks.

Then he said this, “This area is reserved for bicyclists to keep them farther away from the tracks.”

It was nice to hear and see an officer looking out for cyclists.

It’s interesting that on the other side of the street from where she was stopped, a loading zone cuts into that very same space.

A loading zone allows cars to park in the space for bicyclists.
A loading zone allows cars to park in the space for bicyclists.

It’s unclear if the city intends to remove the loading zone in front of Paradise Cafe or not. Joe Chase, the construction manager for the streetcar project has not returned three phone calls and two emails inquiring about this and other issues related to the streetcar.

The stop was also interesting because the woman who was pulled over is not going to be the only one motorist (see comment below) who has no idea where to drive and how to interact with the streetcar.

The city will have an uphill battle educating everyone moving along the route.

6 thoughts on “A nice reminder: UAPD not always out to get cyclists”
  1. From your photo, it does look to me that most cars will avoid the tracks and drive in the bike lane.  Drivers will be confused.

  2. “The stop was also interesting because the woman who was pulled over is
    not going to be the only one (sic) who has no idea where to drive and how to
    interact with the streetcar.” (from the Tucson Velo piece).

    Should be, “The stop was also interesting because the woman who was pulled over is
    not going to be the only motorist who has no idea where to drive and how to
    interact with the streetcar.”
    or, “The stop was also interesting because the motorist who was pulled over is
    not going to be the only one who has no idea where to drive and how to
    interact with the streetcar.”
    Fortunately the stereotypes haven’t reached to class, nor to ethnicity in these pages.

  3. Thanks for pointing that out. I hope most readers of this site understand the intent was not to stereotype women, but I can see how it insinuates it. I’ve fixed it.

  4. Sorry — what Red Star meant to say is as follows:
    Hey Mike — In your sentence, “The stop was also interesting because the woman who was pulled over is
    not going to be the only one (sic) who has no idea where to drive and how to
    interact with the streetcar,” you accidentally suggest that only women are confused about where to drive and interact with the streetcar.  I am pretty sure you didn’t mean to suggest that.  Perhaps edit to say “motorist”?
    This has been a public service announcement from the Red Star Comment Interpreter.  Thank you for your understanding.

  5. Perhaps some paint indicating “Bicycles Only” or a graphic showing a bicycle painted in the bike lane would be in order.

  6. No worries
    The Tracks will quickly sort out the student chaff upon their return
    Good thing easy repairs were part of the plan with the ER directly in route

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.