Kyle is a heaven for motorists but somewhat of a disaster for those looking for alternate means of mobility, especially walking. Oh, the city pays lip service to the concept of walking, but in reality it’s not much of a priority. Priority? It’s not really on the table as a subject for discussion.
I’m not talking about the idea of a neighborhood stroll. I’m speaking of walking as a viable mobility option. What percentage of Kyle residents, for example, live within desirable walking distance of a grocery store other than a convenience store? Fact of the matter is, I live only a quarter of a mile — as the proverbial crow flies — from the front door of the Kyle H-E-B. However, my mobility options are all ground based and the distance from where I live to the front door of the Kyle H-E-B using improved surfaces of any kind is a mile and a half. As I said, Kyle is not only not a haven for walkers. It is not a viable option for those who prefer that means of transportation.
Let me give you an example of what I mean when I say "the city pays lip service to the concept of walking." There was much to-do made of something called the Emerald Trail network a couple of months back, but all that’s nothing more than a pipedream wafting around the imaginations of a few misguided visionaries. The thought that it might ever become a reality any time, say, in the next quarter of a century (if that) should be dismissed by any serious planners. And the City made a lot of noise about clearing garbage out of a proposed trail along Plum Creek, but such a trail is not a mobility option if the city’s residents have to drive to access it.
I was thinking about all of this when I read on Tuesday’s City Council agenda a pair of proposals to ban parking on one side of the street in two different parts of the Plum Creek neighborhood. Not that there’s anything wrong with these proposals. Quite the opposite. Since the agenda items are being put forth, at least nominally, by Fire Chief Kyle Taylor it would seem this ban is necessary in order for emergency vehicles to move freely in these sections of town. And that’s’ important. It’s vital. It’s the reason I supported the construction of that much-debated new bridge over the Blanco River — so that emergency vehicles could reach people in need by the quickest available route.
No, those two agenda items should be approved without much debate. But what amused me about them was that the city took the opportunity of these two items to once again pay lip service to the concept of walking as a mobility option. In the very first "whereas" in both of the resolutions the council will be asked to approve are the words that claim the current parking situation "is detrimental to the safety of pedestrians … traveling through this street." Give me a break!
I had many questions about Tuesday’s council agenda when I first saw it posted Thursday evening and made those questions known to the city staff. And, bless their hearts, they answered the majority of them. But one they not only failed to answer, they also failed to even address or even acknowledge was the question of "How are these parking situations detrimental to the safety of pedestrians in these areas?". I also specifically asked for the number of pedestrians injured there and, if there were any, the cause and extent of those injuries. The fact that these questions weren’t answered, addressed or even acknowledged only proved what I thought all along — lip service.
This was also supported by a Facebook posting from Mayor Travis Mitchell who wrote "On Tuesday at 7pm, the Kyle City Council will consider accepting KFD's recommendation to create one-sided parking on certain sections of Wetzel, Hellmen (sic), and Kirby. See pics for location and what side of the road is proposed to be designated ‘no parking.’ I would appreciate your feedback on this proposal, especially if you will be affected. KFD has cited the difficulty of first-responder access to these homes because of the narrow lanes created by double-sided parking." At least he was being honest in his post. He did not try to further the myth this was being proposed because the current situation "is detrimental to the safety of pedestrians."
And the responses to Mitchell’s post (all of which were very supportive, I should add) also reflect this has everything to do with driving and nothing to do with walking. Typical was this one from a Keith McCullough: "Needed very badly. We live off of Nevarez and have had to back up 50 feet because I came to another car with nowhere to go." Or this one from a Mandy Kay McIntyre: "Yes! So needed — I got boxed in at the Kirby curve due to parked cars and oncoming traffic — had to drive backwards to get back out!"
The City just needs to be honest about its motivations. Don’t be trying to mask good intentions with meaningless and misguided homilies. Don't try to con the public into believing agenda items like these are to remedy situations that are "detrimental to the safety of pedestrians" when we all know it's really about making lives easier for those behind the wheel of the family SUV.
Tuesday’s consent agenda contains another pair of items which will reduce utility rates for a handful of Kyle residents due to the recent reduction in federal taxes these utilities pay. Aqua Texas is reducing water rates for 450 residential and 24 commercial customers in Meadow Woods, Arroyo Ranch, Dove Hollow Estates and the Quail Meadows Subdivision. Texas Gas Service is reducing its monthly rate that will result in lowering the average residential bill by a whopping 54 cents a month. It will also offer a one-time credit of $9.66 designed, in the company’s words, as "a "catch-up" to reflect the impact of the voluntary rate reduction from the time you see it on your bill back to January 1, 2018, when the Federal Tax Cuts and Jobs Act took effect." Telephone calls I made to Texas Gas Service to determine how many Kyle residents were affected by this reduction were not returned.
No comments:
Post a Comment