But, it's not all bad.
From the opposite side of the spectrum, in today's Post and Courier:
I don't understand closing the James Island connector to one form of vehicular traffic. The bicycle is the cleanest mode of transportation there is. I believe every road should have enough space on the shoulder to allow bicyclists to travel without harm from larger vehicles.
There is more than adequate space along each side of the connector to allow bicycle traffic. One cyclist was killed, it is true, but that reportedly resulted from the driver of a van not paying attention. There are no trees or other obstacles to block vision on that span of road.
In Mount Pleasant the driver of a four-wheel vehicle slammed into -- not one but two -- motorcyclists who were sitting at a red light. They were killed. Did we see Mount Pleasant banning motorcyclists from Highway 17? I certainly don't remember that happening.
If a ban on cyclists exists on the connector, why isn't there a ban on all highways? Danger is present wherever a roadway is shared by cyclists and autos.
Space alongside lanes for automobile traffic on the connector is marked with a painted line. If the line is not sufficient then put up a barrier that is. Yellow posts at intervals might work, as might studs on the road surface to alert drivers they are moving into an area not meant for them. Or a concrete barrier.
Why punish those who want a simpler means of transportation because of this accident? It's a step backward.
We need to be more strict with drivers of machines that can prove lethal. We are rewarding the wrong element with this decision.
Change this decision, and simply make the ride safe for the environmentally conscious.
Alfred F. Croucher III