What I see is a lot of support for something that ends up being called a bike boulevard, but way too much willingness to compromise on the details that actually make it a functional bike boulevard. The bollards and diverters, for instance, aren’t just a minor detail – in most cities, they are what makes the thing work, and we’ve already ‘compromised’ those completely out of the picture.

The place city council failed was in making a choice between competing interests (by default, then, choosing parking). Don’t present this as if a compromise is possible if it really isn’t, because then the other ‘choice’ will win out every time.

Though in this case, I assume there’s as station right near this? There doesn’t appear to be one on Nueces itself anyways.

Though if they wanted to, they could solve the fire department problem with bollards like they have at the Capitol. They’re up most of the time, but the fire department has the ability to lower them as needed, either from the station or from the fire trucks themselves (like the traffic light changer things?) It might be expensive, but not *that* expensive. (Just make sure they’re more far apart — the ones at the capitol are tight enough to be slightly dangerous for cyclists.)

(Though to be fair, it will require more thought than that. The bollards would need something to prevent them from going back up when a car was on top of them or approaching.)

I believe the property owners are against this plan because the case has not been made that there will be either neutral or positive economic benefit to the owners. I’d welcome an opportunity to make that case.