Posts RSS Comments RSS Flickr Photos RSS
EcoVelo on Twitter EcoVelo on Facebook EcoVelo Group on Flickr
Subscribe via E-MailD'Arcy in Bike Commuting 101: Lights: "After reading Peter White’s page, I installed a dynamo head light and..."
Spencer in Busch & Müller IQ Cyo R N Plus: "Chris–Absolutely. I have this light on 2 of my bikes. My..."
voyage in Bike Commuting 101: Lights: "@Bee Missing the point and point making the point! Thanks and regards!"
Bee in Bike Commuting 101: Lights: "@voyage Have you tried obtaining a reflector from your LBS by simply asking the..."
Alan in Bike Commuting 101: Lights: "@Dolan I agree, dynohubs seem pretty much bulletproof. On the other hand, the..."
Dolan Halbrook in Bike Commuting 101: Lights: "@kanishka I’ve never heard of a dynohub failing. They’re..."
kanishka new england in Bike Commuting 101: Lights: "interesting thread. i’m an ixon person myself. i..."
bongobike in Bike Commuting 101: Lights: "Alan, in your listing of dynamos, you forgot to mention bottom-bracket..."
Lee in Bike Commuting 101: Lights: "“clip it on your back, and you’re good to go” I don’t agree..."
Philip Smith in Wildflower Commute: "Excellent shot. Really great."
EcoVelo Bicycle Gallery
(1,309 views)
Bike Commuting 101: The Bare Necessities
(1,033 views)
A 1x9 Conversion
(1,003 views)
A Few Random Thoughts on Frame Materials
(978 views)
Bike Commuting 101: A Basic Tool Kit
(928 views)
The Secret
(896 views)
Replacement Miles
(839 views)
Safety and the Door Zone
(714 views)
An Interview with Bryan Luce of Renaissance Bicycles
(624 views)
Bob Mionske, author of Bicycling and the Law, also runs the informative BicycleLaw.com website. He regularly publishes articles on bicyclists’ rights and responsibilities and how they relate to traffic law.
In a recent article, Mionske talks about how to handle encounters with law enforcement when the officer is unaware or plain wrong on the law, something that’s not all that unusual when it comes to bicycle traffic law.
20′s Penty For Us from Streetfilms on Vimeo.
The 20′s Plenty For Us campaign supports 20 mph speed limits for all residential roads in the UK. Lowering speed limits makes roads safer and neighborhoods more livable.
In highway engineering parlance, Complete Streets are roadways designed with all road users in mind, including transit riders, pedestrians, bicyclists, and motorists. Well-designed Complete Streets enable users of all types to move safely along their length.
A portion of a heavily-trafficked 4-lane, 45 mph arterial in my area was recently turned into a Complete Street. Prior to the conversion, riding a bike on this section of roadway was not a pleasant experience. The shoulder was narrow, rough, and strewn with debris, and because motorists often travel at freeway speeds on this road, taking the lane was completely out of the question.
Recently, the roadway was re-paved and widened, and a full-width bike lane and sidewalk were installed. The improvement in the riding experience was astonishing; the road went from being one to avoid, to being a useful and comfortable route to get across that part of town.
While the philosophical arguments for and against bicycle-specific infrastructure continue unabated, out in the real world Incomplete Streets don’t hold a candle to Complete Streets.
Some choice tidbits from the New York City Department of Transportation 2009 Sustainable Streets Index:
3.2% increase in bus and subway ridership in 2008; 12.3% increase in bus and subway ridership since 2003; 2.0% decline in weekday traffic volumes in 2008; 3.4% decline in weekday traffic volumes since 2003
32% increase in bicycle commuting into the Manhattan core from 2007 to 2008; Additional 26% increase in bicycle commuting from 2008 to 2009; 126% increase in bicycle commuting since 2003
“From 2003 to 2007, rising levels of mass transit ridership and bicycle commuting accompanied population and job growth in New York City, while vehicle traffic levels were essentially unchanged.”
and
“The continued growth of transit ridership and cycling, even as traffic volumes declined, indicates that the shift toward sustainable modes is not dependent on economic growth. Instead, this shift has been produced by the long-term investment in the transit infrastructure and rapid expansion of the bicycle network, both of which have attracted growing numbers of New Yorkers during the start of the recession as well as the earlier period.”
and
“These results show that at a citywide level, regional transportation policy decisions made over the last three decades—to rebuild and expand the transit network, to build a quality cycling network, and to manage traffic demand by shifting as many drivers as possible to higher-performance modes—have had a measurable impact on the way New Yorkers choose to travel, through good and bad economic times.”
As a follow-up to our Helmet Laws and Bicycle Use post from last week, Richard Masoner interviewed one of the study authors and posted the results on his blog, Cyclelicious.
In what is sure to be a controversial study recently co-published by the University of Manitoba and University of Ottawa, researchers concluded that mandatory helmet laws do not discourage bicycle use. The effects of provincial bicycle helmet legislation on helmet use and bicycle ridership in Canada looked at the association between the comprehensiveness of helmet legislation and both helmet use and bicycle ridership in 6 of 10 Canadian provinces. From the Abstract:
Results. Helmets were reportedly worn by 73.2% (95% CI 69.3% to 77.0%) of respondents in Nova Scotia, where legislation applies to all ages, by 40.6% (95% CI 39.2% to 42.0%) of respondents in Ontario, where legislation applies to those less than 18 years of age, and by 26.9% (95% CI 23.9% to 29.9%) of respondents in Saskatchewan, where no legislation exists. Though legislation applied to youth in both Ontario and Nova Scotia, helmet use was lower among youth in Ontario than among youth in Nova Scotia (46.7% (95% CI 44.1% to 49.4%) vs 77.5% (95% CI 70.9% to 84.1%)). Following the implementation of legislation in PEI and Alberta, recreational and commuting bicycle use remained unchanged among youth and adults.
Conclusions. Canadian youth and adults are significantly more likely to wear helmets as the comprehensiveness of helmet legislation increases. Helmet legislation is not associated with changes in ridership.
The findings go against conventional wisdom and are likely to cause quite a stir in the bicycle community. Prior studies have shown a correlation between compulsory helmet use and reduced bicycle ridership.
*The full study is only available for a fee.
DIY Streets is a Sustrans project set-up to help London residents redesign their own streets to make them more livable. What a great project!
Streetfilms →
Sustrans →
Great news from the Office of the City Attorney in San Francisco today:
Judge Busch finds that City has complied with CEQA, grants City’s request to allow remaining safety, usability improvements
SAN FRANCISCO (Aug. 6, 2010) — San Francisco Superior Court Judge Peter J. Busch issued an order late this afternoon finding San Francisco in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act, or CEQA, in seeking to implement its Bicycle Plan citywide. The ruling effectively dissolves an injunction that continued to prohibit City engineers from moving forward on some planned bicycle route improvements intended to enhance the safety and usability of streets for bicyclists. A previous order from Nov. 2009 lifted significant portions of the original 2006 injunction, but left limited restrictions intact while the adequacy of environmental review for certain projects was adjudicated.
“I am very gratified by the ruling from Judge Busch, who carefully considered an enormous amount of evidence in this case, and found that the City met its environmental review requirements,” said City Attorney Dennis Herrera. “Today’s decision clears an important hurdle toward making San Francisco safer for bicyclists, and healthier for all of us. I am very thankful to the many dedicated public servants involved in this policy initiative and meeting the stringent legal requirements to fulfill it, including Mayor Gavin Newsom and the Board of Supervisors, the Municipal Transportation Agency, and the Planning Department.”
The case is: Coalition for Adequate Review et al. v. City and County of San Francisco, San Francisco Superior Court No. 505-509, filed July 28, 2005.
View Judge Busch’s Order →
From the Mayor’s office:
MAYOR VILLARAIGOSA ANNOUNCES AUGUST 16 BIKE SUMMIT
Town Hall meeting is an opportunity for dialogue on enforcement, infrastructure, and related issues.
LOS ANGELES – Mayor Antonio R. Villaraigosa today announced that he will convene a Bike Summit from 9:00 – 11:00 a.m. on August 16, 2010 in the Board Room of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, One Gateway Plaza, Los Angeles 90012. The Bike Summit will provide an opportunity for cyclists to talk directly with the Mayor and representatives of key departments and agencies about improving conditions for cycling in Los Angeles.
“Let’s get together and talk about what we need to do to make the streets safer for cyclists,” said Mayor Villaraigosa. “Whether you depend on your bike for commuting or just take it out for fun, I invite you to come to the Bike Summit to talk about your experiences and learn about what we’re doing in Los Angeles to make streets safer for everyone.”
Topics for discussion at the Summit include: the City’s draft Bicycle Plan which would build over 1600 miles of bikeways including 200 miles in the next five years; LAPD enforcement of laws governing safe driving and cycling; Metro’s effort to integrate cycling in the region’s rail and bus network; and other infrastructure and enforcement related topics.
Mayor Villaraigosa first announced his plans for the Bike Summit in July.
Philadelphia’s Central Philadelphia Development Corporation and the Center City District published a limited, but interesting report on bicycle use in the city center.
On the National Journal’s Transportation blog, Tom Madigan posed the following question to a panel of policy experts: “Is it still possible to promote new bicycling and walking options in harmony with vehicular traffic? Or as city space gets more limited, will planners have to take sides?”
Panel members included (among others) Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-OR; Bill Graves, President and CEO, American Trucking Associations; Keith Laughlin, President, Rails-to-Trails Conservancy; Andy Clarke, President, League of American Bicyclists; and John Horsley, Executive Director, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
It’s an interesting discussion that’s well worth a read.
National Journal Transportation blog →
[via Cyclelicious]
The Barclays Cycle Hire bike sharing program debuted in London over the weekend. The system boasts approximately 5,000 bicycles and over 300 docking stations, making it one of the largest in the world (though only a quarter the size of Paris’ Vélib). Charges include an “access fee” of $1.55 per day, $7.80 per week, or $70 per year. In addition to the access fee there is a “usage charge” which begins accruing after the first 30 minutes of use.
Let’s hope the system is successful and that it really benefits the people of London!
Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa says “thank you” to those who reached out after his accident last week, while promising a bicycle summit in Los Angeles.
A new film from Clarence Eckerson, Jr. shot while at the Velo-City 2010 conference in Copenhagen earlier this year. Amazing stuff.
The first two of twelve total “Barclays Cycle Superhighways” were launched in London this week. The so-called cycle superhighways are continuous 5′ wide bike lanes painted bright blue. The first starts in a London suburb and runs 8.5 miles to the city center, while the second runs 7.5 miles from Barking to Tower Gateway. The bike lanes are part of the City’s “Cycling Revolution” plan that also includes a bike-sharing program and 66,000 new bike parking spaces.
In his landmark 2003 paper, Safety in numbers: more walkers and bicyclists, safer walking and bicycling, Peter Jacobsen found that accident rates involving motor vehicles and bicyclists/pedestrians decrease as the number of bicyclists and pedestrians on the road increase. From the Abstract:
Results: The likelihood that a given person walking or bicycling will be struck by a motorist varies inversely with the amount of walking or bicycling. This pattern is consistent across communities of varying size, from specific intersections to cities and countries, and across time periods.
Discussion: This result is unexpected. Since it is unlikely that the people walking and bicycling become more cautious if their numbers are larger, it indicates that the behavior of motorists controls the likelihood of collisions with people walking and bicycling. It appears that motorists adjust their behavior in the presence of people walking and bicycling. There is an urgent need for further exploration of the human factors controlling motorist behavior in the presence of people walking and bicycling.
Conclusion: A motorist is less likely to collide with a person walking and bicycling if more people walk or bicycle. Policies that increase the numbers of people walking and bicycling appear to be an effective route to improving the safety of people walking and bicycling.
It’s a common misconception that increased bicycling and walking will lead to higher injury and fatality rates. The Jacobsen study successfully debunks this myth while providing a potent tool for advocates in their efforts to improve conditions for bicyclists and pedestrians.
In the follow-up discussion to yesterday’s post about Bob Mionske’s article on bicycle infrastructure, there was a question about whether our readers prefer to ride in areas with bicycle infrastructure such as bike lanes, sharrows, and separated bikeways, or whether they prefer to ride in areas with no bicycle-specific infrastructure at all. The feedback I’ve received seems to indicate the majority of our readers prefer riding in areas where there is well-developed infrastructure, but in all honesty, I don’t really know. So, I ask the question: Given the choice, do you prefer to ride in areas with well-developed bicycle infrastructure, or do you prefer to ride in areas with only legacy roads and no bicycle-specific infrastructure?
Loading ...
First it was Tom Vanderbilt arguing for “bicycle highways” in Slate, and now another prominent blogger is powerfully advocating for bicycle-specific infrastructure, this time in Bicycling. In his article titled, Adding Bicycle Infrastructure Creates More Riders, Bob Mionske, author of Bicycling and the Law, convincingly argues that providing more and better bicycle-specific infrastructure is the most effective way to increase bicycle ridership. Consider this excerpt:
And the absence of infrastructure discourages most people from riding. In Portland, Oregon’s Bicycle Plan for 2030, the demographics for Portland’s citizenry is broken down into four categories : (1) the 33 percent of Portland’s population which, for various reasons, will never ride a bike, “no way, no how”; (2) those who would like to ride a bike in town, but are afraid to ride with automobile traffic; this “interested but concerned” demographic represents 60 percent of Portland’s population; (3) those who are already riding in Portland, because of Portland’s efforts at improving bike infrastructure, despite the incomplete status of much of Portland’s bike infrastructure; this “enthused and confident” demographic represents 7 percent of the population; and (4) those riders who are “strong and fearless” and would feel comfortable riding in (and may even prefer) a complete lack of infrastructure; this demographic represents less than .5 percent of Portland’s population.
I’m guessing the regular readers of EcoVelo mostly fit into the “enthused and confident” minority mentioned above. Some of us are “vehicular cyclists”, while others are advocates for bike-specific infrastructure; either way, we’re already riding and need little convincing to continue to do so. The way Mionske sees it (and I totally agree), we need to focus on creating infrastructure that caters to the “interested and concerned” 60% majority who are not currently riding, but who might if the conditions were right. Providing facilities that assuage the fears surrounding sharing the road with motor vehicles is arguably the most effective way to increase bicycle use. Again, from Mionske:
As Portland’s research has shown, most people in Portland do not currently ride a bike because they have fears about riding in automobile traffic—but these same people are interested in riding, and would ride if they felt safe. And as European experience has shown, addressing this concern about safety is the key to getting more people on bikes. When cycling feels safe for everybody, from young children to the elderly, more people ride, and when more people ride, the roads transform from feeling safe to being safe—and not just for cyclists, but for everybody.
I think Mionske is right on target with this article. It’s worth a read…
Studies have shown that the number one reason people don’t ride their bikes more frequently is the fear of cars. Considering this, the most obvious way to help newcomers feel more comfortable is to provide high-quality, separated bikeways. While it’s unrealistic to hope for a 1-to-1 ratio of bikeways to roads, even short stretches of bikeways that connect adjacent neighborhoods and road networks can encourage newcomers to give bicycling a try.
Consider the above beautiful piece of bicycle-specific infrastructure in my hometown. It’s part of a relatively short trail network that connects four neighborhoods with a shopping area and a school. Just this morning I needed to run an errand to the shopping area. The direct route would have taken me along a two lane, 50 mph road. I’ve ridden the road many times, and though I find it safe, I can imagine it would be intimidating to an inexperienced rider. By instead taking a longer back route through a neighborhood that leads to the bikeway, I reduced my exposure to high speed traffic by approximately 75% while only adding about 5 minutes to my travel time. I suspect that for many people, just having the option could mean the difference between taking the bike or driving the car.
For the foreseeable future, bicyclists here in the U.S. will need to depend upon existing roadways for much of their route planning, but strategically placed separated bikeways can serve as safe havens for novices in the process of developing the confidence and skills they need to share the road with cars, while also providing a pleasant respite for those already out there mixing it up with traffic on a regular basis.
