Turns out it may be even worse than previously rumored.

A few points:

Here’s the thing: These are serious issues. We should be concerned about them. But [...]]]>

I’ve been on a wee bit of a spree lately about the continual state of Defcon 11 every time there is federal hiccuping about restricting funds for Transportation Enhancements, or cutting Safe Routes to Schools, or classifying bicycles as vegetables instead of vehicles.

Here’s the thing: These are serious issues. We should be concerned about them. But freaking out every time it happens and having all the bicycle advocates write and call their congresscritters is a cute little bandage on a much larger problem — one that I don’t know that the active transport community is really prepared to deal with as yet.

To wit: The problem isn’t that these programs are under attack. The problem is that they are considered low-hanging fruit because the active transport lobby is considered a fringe segment, a small special interest group who wears funny spandex and don’t shower enough. The problem is that “cutting spending” is a big issue for a lot of people, but “safer biking and walking” is not.

Part of this is just the limitation of advocacy. Part of it is a failure to reach out from the circle of the converted and widen the scope of support. Part of it is that some of the advocates are unwilling to put the issues in a framework that a lot of people can support.

In general, biking and walking are not considered by a lot of people to be valid modes of daily transport. And that’s the problem. And to those people, when the advocacy community is represented by the militant car-free, or people who don’t have to buy diapers by the case, or people who can’t tie a tie and heavens knows don’t have to wear one to work… they get written off by the people who do have all of those issues.

The People For Bikes campaign from Bikes Belong has its heart in the right place — anyone who has ridden a bike should care. But even for P4B, a lot of the outreach has come at big bike races or other specialty events where the attendees are predisposed or already part of the community. Preaching to the converted is easy. This may be why, after launching the site in 2010 to try to get a million people to sign their pledge, they still haven’t hit half the goal.

Becoming sympathetic to people who perceive biking as “nice, but not for me because of time/family/commitment,” and showing them how offering added options helps them in their daily life even if they do not themselves embed their buttocks on banana seats is a lot harder. And it’s not necessarily happening enough.

As a result, TE is going to be on the block every 3-6 months for a long time. Until bicyclists convince Main Street America that bikes and pedestrians matter, that they are not merely a fringe contingent, those programs are easy targets to attack.

So ask yourself, if you support bicycling and walking, how you can help make it sympathetic to the woman working full-time with 2 kids in diapers. How street calming makes sense for an immigrant family who perceive bicycles as something children and poor people ride, and who aspire to join the car culture. How providing options that can increase community cohesion is not about special interests, but about providing freedom of choice as current options force a single modal selection. Can you back off of “bicycles as transportation!!” and expand the circle to emphasize the bicycle as a leisure activity that can and should be accommodated, and that it’s okay to maybe drive to the store for 4 gallons of milk, but bike out for some ice cream with the family — an activity that requires safe routes and traffic calming? And then get out there and try to do it.

It’s not that the lifestyle cyclists are wrong. But if the movement cannot expand and accept a broader base of people who benefit from transportation options and traffic calming, we will never get beyond a state of Save Cycling! Panic! Write your Congressperson Now! If we’re going to be expending all this energy, maybe we should do it fixing the disease, instead of slapping band-aids on gaping head wounds. And at the end of the day, the problem is that the circle isn’t yet big enough.

So go forth, and be friendly. Accept that multiple transport modes work for different situations in different families. Sympathize. And try to bring them into the movement.

As usual, we are being asked to PANIC about it and contact appropriate representatives. The League is asking us to contact [...]]]>

Next Thursday, February 2, the House Transportation Committee is expected to vote on the “American Energy and Infrastructure Jobs Act.” Note the propaganda-friendly naming. This is, in fact, intended to be the long-awaited multi-year transportation bill.

As usual, we are being asked to PANIC about it and contact appropriate representatives. The League is asking us to contact everyone (even though this is still in Committee), because the current version eliminates the two largest programs that fund biking and walking infrastructure — Transportation Enhancements and Safe Routes to School.

Most representatives will not be a part of this voting process. Work is also underway to restore these programs to the bill, probably via a Committee member such as Earl Blumenauer (D-OR).

I agree that keeping Transportation Enhancements and Safe Routes to Schools active in any new transportation bill is important. I agree that people should contact appropriate House members to urge amending the bill or not passing it from Committee. I am growing a little tired of the constant state of panic about “they are going to kill cycling!”

Transportation Enhancements has been under near-constant assault for the last year. Transportation Enhancements federally funded, community-based projects that enhance surface transportation by improving the cultural, historic, aesthetic and environmental aspects of the infrastructure. They can address bike/ped infrastructure and safety, landscaping, rail-trail work, environmental mitigation, archaeological planning/research, historic preservation, and tourist facilities. The Heritage Foundation, a big conservative think-tank, has labeled them “a waste of taxpayer dollars.”

Because, look. They can’t kill cycling. They can remove funding, make things harder when working with federal funds, etc. But they lack the ability to dictate the use of local funds for cycling. They lack the ability to quash the grassroots. Sure, some existing infrastructure could be eliminated, but that’s true right now. A key to keeping cycling alive is much more about expanding the “movement” beyond the already-involved, the lifestylers, and advocates and convincing members of the community that bicycling is worthwhile, that bicyclists aren’t trying to force everyone’s ass onto a banana seat, and that by providing access to many modes of transport within a community we enrich users of ALL modes.

When you make that expansion, situations like this are less about paaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaanic and more about harnessing the general social sentiment. Right now, the general sentiment isn’t there to harness outside of specific communities. And that’s where we need to focus more energy — rather than on repeating the advocacy panic response repeatedly.

That said, check the list of members. See if your member is on the Transpo Committee. Note that if your person is not a Republican, you’ll have to manually find their House web site to call or e-mail them, the preferred methods of contacting an office in this modern, post-terrorist age. In Minnesota, these are Tim Walz of MN-1, and Chip Cravaak of MN-8. The League of American Bicyclists also has an excellent run-down of the act, some facts around the at-risk programs, and nice contact forms for members of Congress.

This is a reasonably good article, with some gaps. The main gap is really surrounding the concept of Complete Streets, and I’m not strictly certain that’s on the author [...]]]>

Shouts out to @reubencollins on ze Twitter for tweeting this article about people looking to have the resurfacing project on Snelling Avenue in St. Paul include bike lanes.

This is a reasonably good article, with some gaps. The main gap is really surrounding the concept of Complete Streets, and I’m not strictly certain that’s on the author so much as the people he spoke to for the piece.

Would adding bike lane striping be cheapest during a resurfacing project? Certainly. Do cyclists lack reasonable North-South choices to get through the Saintly City? Ohmyyes. Is slapping some paint lines going to make most of Snelling Avenue a Complete Street? OhmyNO.

The article does mention a few reasons why — first, Snelling is a truck route. There is a limited ability to narrow the lanes and maintain the status of the road as a truck route. And, much as cyclists lack north-south options through the city, so do trucks. Snelling Avenue is a key arterial route for trucks, and connects to many local businesses that need trucks to be able to reach them. Most of the north-south streets aren’t truck routes, and have significant direct residential frontage — people who would oppose their north-south streets becoming truck routes, and people who have less need for trucks to be able to get into their neighborhood than many of the businesses with Snelling Avenue frontage.

There are also a large number of uncontrolled intersections. The merges off the Pierce Butler Route and Como Avenue come to mind, where cars have about 3 feet to merge and the curve is not entirely blind but certainly not unobstructed.

Another key consideration is the parking situation. Snelling has a lot of on-street parking, and a lot of driveways. If the on-street parking is maintained, parked cars + abundant driveways equals out to crummy visibility for cyclists coming through. Dropping some of the parking reduces this visibility issue, and makes room for bike lane striping. However, it almost ensures local businesses to mobilize heavily against such a plan. Much of the city is unlikely to get involved in a parking removal project right now, given the many challenges in the Central Corridor, parking included. (Check the closing quote in this article about Central Corridor parking. Oy vey.)

It’s nearly impossible to argue that Snelling doesn’t need traffic calming. It does. A lot of traffic calming, in fact. Bike lanes can be a part of a traffic calming strategy. But just slapping some bike lanes down does not equate to a Complete Street, or to making Snelling an attractive roadway on which to bike. For that matter, bike lanes won’t do much to promote pedestrian safety.

Doing this project correctly could be a very good thing. Just painting in some bike lanes is not a correct approach to the problem that is Snelling Avenue, and won’t do a lot to encourage alternative mode share through much of the corridor. I have high doubts that the public meetings will do much to really address the totality of the situation, because to actually address the real issues will be very expensive, and require a lot of people to cooperate. After all, this is St. Paul, where there are still fights about simple changes to Jefferson Avenue that are unlikely to impact most residents or users. To make Snelling safe for, well, anyone not in an armored tank will require changes that will impact everyone.

Via the grant, MCE is one of 26 organizations to receive a $1,000 grant for a project designed to encourage students and their families to safely walk and [...]]]>

Congratulations are in order to Minneapolis Community Education, who were awarded a coveted Safe Routes to Schools mini-grant for spring 2012 from the National Center for Safe Routes to School.

Via the grant, MCE is one of 26 organizations to receive a $1,000 grant for a project designed to encourage students and their families to safely walk and bicycle to school. The proposed Minneapolis program includes a two-part bicycle repair program for youth. During the winter, 12 students will refurbish bicycles donated by a local shop, as well as be trained in bicycle safety. Upon program graduation, each student will receive a helmet, lock and bicycle. Graduates will also serve as cycling ambassadors in their schools, and provide bicycle repair services to peers during the next National Bike to School week. Additional refurbished bicycles and training will also be offered as part of that event.

Walking or biking to school helps children achieve the recommended 60 minutes of physical activity recommended for health each day. The Safe Routes to School program aims to make bicycling and walking safe, accepted in the community, and fun. Small programs, such as this mini-grant program, can make real differences in community acceptance of cycling to school with a low price tag. This is a perfect example of the kind of program I’ve talked about in the past — one using smaller investment funds to help reach out into new communities or enhance visibility of existing infrastructure, and not an expensive infrastructure program. While $1,000 isn’t chump change, it’s also an achievable funding goal for many organizations even as local governments lack the money to do much more. I look forward to hearing the results of this project!

And once again, the new year highlights that there is a very real differentiator between “bicyclists” and “people who bike.” This differentiator can be fatal, as in the case of Kerry Steven Baker. Mr. Baker was killed pre-dawn on New Year’s morning, [...]]]>

So, here we are. Minneapolis gets recognition and awards for its bike culture. Bicyclists, woo!

And once again, the new year highlights that there is a very real differentiator between “bicyclists” and “people who bike.” This differentiator can be fatal, as in the case of Kerry Steven Baker. Mr. Baker was killed pre-dawn on New Year’s morning, riding northbound in the southbound lanes of the 4700 block of East River Road, near the Anoka County Riverfront Park. He was hit by a plow going southbound in those southbound lanes.

News reports are calling out that he had no lights and no helmet, but not calling out that much like lacking a headlamp in the dark, riding against the flow of traffic is contrary to Minnesota state regulations for bicycle use. Nope, it’s all about the helmet!

Further revelations (via Fridley Patch) indicate that the deceased had a long criminal record featuring many kinds of violations that would preclude driving a car legally, although nothing has outright stated that he lacked a driver’s license.

These sorts of accidents really call out the people who aren’t touched by “bicycle culture!” as is so frequently touted in mags like Bicycling, or on sites like Grist or Streetsblog, which speak to a certain level of audience. These people get lost in things like the annual bicycle counts for the Non-Motorized Transportation Pilot Program, because they don’t use “commuter” routes, and are often out at irregular times. Often, these people don’t speak great English, use sidewalks, don’t wear helmets, don’t have lights, etc.

There is much to be said that making roads safer for bicyclists also makes it safer for people who bike. But most communities remain stuck on the how of reaching many of the people who bike, because they are so outside of their experience. Some communities don’t even recognize/realize the need.

At the end of the day, the cycling movement really needs to work on empowering people beyond the spandex-clad, the hipsters, the young, and find ways to reach out to people who feel forced to ride, and people who think riding is out of reach, such as many women, people with kids, etc. It’s a hard problem. But the first step is recognizing the need, and not getting too caught up in congratulations, awards, and circle-jerking within the core community of bicyclists — a group who often look down on people who bike, and a group who people who bike often feel no kinship with. We’re all on these roads together.

Edit/Addition: The section of road where this cyclist died is highly bikeable, and there are several off-road routes that overlap, but are unlikely to have been passable immediately post-snow. A lot more of this accident is on wrong-way riding and a lack of lights — both of which can be taught. This accident was by no means a facility issue.

Something that is never mentioned explicitly in the ABC [...]]]>

The League of American Bicyclists teach the ABC quickCheck as though it were a religion. And, to be honest, it’s a good routine. It provides a solid basic bike check that can be customized to be used on nearly every bicycle by every rider, preschool age and up.

Something that is never mentioned explicitly in the ABC quickCheck, but which more riders need to do: Check your seat height.

You can have your seat at a perfect height, and a few rides later, it will sink. The only bike I’ve ever owned where regular readjustment hasn’t been an issue is the bike with a carbon fiber seatpost in a carbon fiber frame — probably something about the construction and relative friction of the material versus the friction of aluminum or steel, which are far more common as seatposts and frame materials.

The seat needs to be high enough so that you fully extend your leg when on the pedal downstroke. Not bent, extended. Not locked, but extended. Full extension is easier on your knees and puts more power into the pedalstroke, helping you go farther faster on the same effort. Having the seat properly adjusted helps you handle your bike more effectively, too.

So check that seat and adjust it, because it is good to do so, and it makes me happy when you do so.