Ride Boldly! » bicyclists

Update on Minneapolis 2-Way Street Initiative

Julie — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 16:48:13 +0000

Last fall, Minneapolis took Hennepin Avenue and 1st Avenues in downtown from one-way streets to two-way streets. This was a big deal, both from people in favor and people who were horrified.

In the sense of promoting more people coming downtown, it probably was a net good – one-way streets confuse people who are not near them every day and who are in for a special event (theatre on Hennepin, a Twins game, whatev).

They’ve published an evaluation of the conversion. Because this study was performed by the same agency responsible for the conversion, there is a bit of a question of impartiality, but data is at the base of most conclusions:

Bicycle traffic is up, based on user-count metrics.
Allegedly, there have been no bike crashes on Hennepin since conversion, whereas prior it was known as one of the worst ‘bikeways’ in the city because it violated every principle of bicycle lane planning ever created. (I’m a bit dubious that it went from apocalypse to idyllic – I’m wondering about reporting, personally.)
The city claims people have figured out the odd parking/bike lane configuration.

When you dive into the stats, it turns out that bicycle traffic on Hennepin Avenue alone is down by about half. The increase is based on a combination of Hennepin, 1st, and Nicollet. Apparently, some people really liked the bike-lanes down the center configuration on Hennepin – a configuration that almost undoubtedly was a part of the crash statistics, and may have led to more serious crashes due to the physics of bicycle-vs-car based on lane placement and speed.

I think the parking zone/bike lane setup remains the most confusing element of the conversion. Flipping them around does put the bike lane in the door zone, but that’s a more common configuration, and motorists and cyclists typically know where they’re supposed to be in such a setup. The city have stated that they intend to paint all of the shared lanes for vehicles/bicycles green, particularly on Hennepin. Buffer zones are to be added between the bike lanes and parking zones on 1st Avenue to reduce dooring risk and facilitate use of the parking areas by handicapped vans with ramps.

Copyright © 2010 Ride Boldly!. This Feed is for personal non-commercial use only. If you are not reading this material in your news aggregator, the site you are looking at is guilty of copyright infringement. Please contact legal@www.rideboldly.org so we can take legal action immediately.
Plugin by Taragana

Saint Paul Bicycle Coalition Forming

Julie — Sat, 24 Jul 2010 14:16:06 +0000

In the ongoing movement for municipalities and cities to have their own advocacy groups to extend and support the work of state-wide organizations like the Bicycle Alliance of Minnesota, a new bicycle coalition is forming in St. Paul.

Locally-oriented groups are a key piece of the advocacy puzzle, as they are typically made up of local voters who live within a city or town. As constituents, members can further local and state-wide initiatives more effectively than state-wide groups coming in without the local support.

This organization has particular value, given the deactivation of the St. Paul Bicycle Advisory Board.

The group is involved in the attempts to extend the Midtown Greenway via the Ayd Mill corridor, and are also meeting monthly on the second Tuesday. If you’re a St. Paul resident, consider hitting their August 10th meeting.

Recent Headlines

Julie — Fri, 23 Jul 2010 14:15:27 +0000

Pedicab quandary in St. Paul: Basically, pedicabs aren’t regulated in St. Paul, and there’s a question of if adding regulation would protect operators. It probably would, if St. Paul were capable of sensible regulation – something that can be debated.

There are some classic St. Paul-isms in this article that point to that very concept:

The woman and seven officers convened on the scene, where they talked for two hours before reaching a decision to ticket him.

Uh, two hours? Awesome.
Edina Bike Trail Controversy: Edina want to build a bike trail via the Nine Mile Creek watershed/wetland. A bunch of neighbors are opposed. Those opposed to the opposed neighbors are making it out to be NIMBYism. The opposed claim it’s about suitability because of the wetland nature of much of the route. Various groups are building websites and Facebook groups around their positions.
I’m not familiar with the entire run of the trail, but I suspect a middle ground is pretty accurate. The public land is pretty narrow and tends to mud, high water during spring thaw that creates trail erosion and maintenance issues and, of course, skeeters. (It’s a creek!)

There are a couple of quotes around facilities issues in the Strib piece that stick out:

“Just like you don’t put a playground in a parking lot, I wouldn’t put a bike trail on a roadway unless there is completely no other way.”

That’s because when you build it on-street, it’s definitionally not a trail. Depending on construction protocol, there are lots of terms for on-street bikeways. Bicycle facilities encompass a lot more than happy little trails.

For me, it also comes down to a question of purpose. It appears the approach is as a recreational trail. A roadway route has greater merit in connecting bicycles to destinations and driving greater multi-mode adoption. Many end-to-end recreational trails, particularly smaller ones in neighborhoods, don’t actually have a lot of community impact on mode shift. As such, I’d rather see them working on on-street facilities that help connect users to community destinations, rather than happy views of the creek.
Legal Roadblocks to Greenway Extension: A judge has ruled in favor of the Canadian Pacific in a right-of-way dispute over the Ayd Mill railway corridor, a target for those who wish to extend the Midtown Greenway to downtown St. Paul. There is a meeting about ongoing vision and next steps for Greenway extension planning on July 28.

Ride Boldly!

Plugin by Taragana

Sharing the Road: Bicycles & Autos & Turn Signals, Oh My.

Julie — Mon, 12 Jul 2010 18:18:46 +0000

It seems like one of today’s big trend stories is about how motorists can better share the roads with bicyclists. Everyone from Bicycling magazine to local papers are getting in the act.

Never one to let a trend completely pass me by unless it’s a really heinous one (I’ve never owned a pair of Crocs, for instance), I think this is all very well and nice. They are all chock full of helpful advice for motorists and cyclists, such as the 3-foot passing rule, wearing helmets, avoidance of distracted driving, etc. etc.

But you know what? I have not seen a single article mention something I think is fundamental: Cars need to signal their turns. Use your turn signals, motorists.

A number of the articles mention the danger of the right-hook – where a cyclist on the curb lane ends up to the right of a vehicle who is right turning, with somewhat predictably painful results. There are several good ways to avoid the right hook, but one of the top ways – beyond cyclists wising up to the idea that hugging the curb isn’t always strictly necessary under law, and is often injurious – is for vehicles who are right turning to always signal their intent.

Because this doesn’t always happen, I tend to be mildly annoying in lanes that can work as either right-turn or through lanes, pulling to the left into the right-hand wheel well where vehicles might go, even if there’s not a car at the intersection when I arrive there. A vehicle arriving might pull alongside, and depending on positioning, it an be difficult to see a signal if it’s even used.

Turn signals are really bueno for the benefit of other cars and pedestrians on the road, too.

So, in summary: Sure, read all those happy articles about road sharing. Then try using your turn signals. Cyclists, pedestrians and other motorists will praise you for it.

Cycling Classes for Women

Julie — Wed, 09 Jun 2010 14:09:27 +0000

Women and girls have traditionally been underrepresented among cyclists – recreationally and as bicycle commuters. There are a lot of reasons for this, including the traditional role of female as caregiver. Trailers aside, heavy use of a bicycle is a lot harder when trips include stops to daycare, work, and the grocery store. Surveys have also suggested that women feel more nervous cycling on roadways than men do.

Bike Walk Twin Cities, which is a federally-funded initiative through the Non-Motorized Transportation Pilot Program, is working within the community to reach out to underrepresented groups such as women, and in the coming weeks have a number of pretty awesome educational opportunities for women. There are several Biking with Traffic class opportunities for women, each 1.5 hours long and taught by women who are League of American Bicyclists Certified Instructors.

Complete Streets to Become Minnesota Law

Julie — Sat, 15 May 2010 14:37:43 +0000

Governor Tim Pawlenty signed Minnesota’s Complete Streets legislation into law this morning.

The Complete Streets bill is made up of H.F. 2801 and S.F. 2461.

Per the bills – and general definition of Complete Streets from a national policy perspective – Complete Streets considers the needs of all users moving along and across roads, intersections, and crossings in a manner that is sensitive to the local context and recognizes that the needs vary in urban, suburban, and rural settings.

In the case of Minnesota’s Complete Streets legislation, Complete Streets applies to every road construction, reconstruction, or rehabilitation project funded partially or completely by the state.

Federal bills to create similar consideration for federally-funded road projects is still pending as S. 584 and H.R. 1443. Minnesota’s Senators – Amy Klobuchar and Al Franken – have both signed on to S. 584 as co-sponsors. H.R. 1443 is currently co-sponsored by Reps. Keith Ellison (MN-5) and Tim Walz (MN-1). Minnesota’s other Congressional representatives have not yet signed on as co-sponsors. While this is not necessarily a sign that they do not support the legislation, if you live in Districts 2, 3, 4, or 6, consider writing a letter of support to your Congressperson.

Unchanging Red Light Rule Now Law in Minnesota

Julie — Thu, 13 May 2010 19:22:15 +0000

As of April 16, 2010, new rules about bicyclist behavior at unchanging red lights has become law in Minnesota. This is a fairly big deal for cyclists, both because it provides traffic empowerment to bicyclists, but also because misuse of the rule by some cyclists has potential negative publicity value for all cyclists.

SF 2453 and HF 2616 amend Minnesota Statutes 169.06, Subd. 9 to insert the words “bicycle or” into the existing law that allows motorcycles an affirmative defense for proceeding through a red light if the motorcycle is unable to trigger the signal to change to green.

Subd. 9. Affirmative defense relating to unchanging traffic-control signal.
(a) A person operating a bicycle or motorcycle who violates subdivision 4 by entering or crossing an intersection controlled by a traffic-control signal against a red light has affirmative defense to that charge if the person establishes all of the following conditions:
(1) the bicycle or motorcycle has been brought to a complete stop;
(2) the traffic-control signal continues to show a red light for an unreasonable time;
(3) the traffic-control signal is apparently malfunctioning or, if programmed or engineered to change to a green light only after detecting the approach of a motor vehicle, the signal has apparently failed to detect the arrival of the bicycle or motorcycle; and
(4) no motor vehicle or person is approaching on the street or highway to be crossed or entered or is so far away from the intersection that it does not constitute an immediate hazard.
(b) The affirmative defense in this subdivision applies only to a violation for entering or crossing an intersection controlled by a traffic-control
signal against a red light and does not provide a defense to any other civil or criminal action.

The big things to keep in mind is that a full stop is required, and it needs to stay red for an unreasonable time. Cyclists need to use some sense when defining ‘unreasonable.’ Motorist distance on the cross-street is also a consideration.

Jumping the red after resting for 2.2 milliseconds is not the intent of this new rule, and has a risk of increasing cyclists’ reputation for ignoring traffic signals and laws. Use the law in good faith!

Fearmongering in Duluth

Julie — Wed, 14 Apr 2010 14:16:01 +0000

There’s nothing quite like headline writing expressly designed to freak people out, while not necessarily matching article content.

Duluth’s Northland News Center, which is a site for Duluth’s CBS, NBC, CW and ‘MyNetwork’ affiliate television outlets, provokes today’s big headsmack with their article “BICYCLE RIDING DEATHS UP IN MN.”

While the article does include some fatality statistics for the state, I’m relatively sure that the safety message being put out by Susan Koschak, the chair of the Statewide Non-Motorized Advisory Committee, didn’t include the OMG YOU WILL ALL DIE tilt. The DPS official quoted also is quoted on safety, although the fatality figure (average of 8 cyclist deaths/year) is a DPS number.

Just as a comparison, DPS reports 72 motorcyclist deaths in 2008, and 416 car accident deaths in 2009. Obviously, working towards 0 in all columns is important, but you rarely see the attachment of OMG DANGER! attached in the same way to these other modes of transport.

Northland News also inserts a “use bike paths!” comment, even though DPS and MNDOT share the 8 principles of the Share the Road Minnesota campaign, all of which focus on appropriate and legal use of roadways by cyclists.

I’m blaming this all on Northland, as the state agencies quoted are typically right on and supportive of the Share the Road principles and Minnesota statutes on bicyclists. Education of all roadway users – and not breathless sharing of noncontextual fatality statistics – is the key to cyclist safety on the roads. All a headline of this nature does is forward a not-especially-subtle bias against cyclists’ road rights.

Group Riding Skills Seminar – May 8

Julie — Tue, 13 Apr 2010 21:01:10 +0000

On behalf of the Twin Cities Bicycling Club, I will be teaching the League of American Bicyclists Group Riding Skills curriculum in Saint Paul the morning of May 8.

This event is free to TCBC members. If space permits, non-members may be able to attend as well. If you are either a TCBC member, or an interested non-member, course information is online at Eventbrite. Non-members can contact me for information and space availability.

I also do custom programs for other organizations, groups, events and ride marshalls, etc. etc. Contact me for info on that if you’re interested in such a program.

Bicyclists vs. People Who Ride Bikes

Julie — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 21:06:40 +0000

By Let Ideas Compete, via Creative Commons

One of the big themes at the National Bicycle Summit this year, and that’s worthy of some thought among people in the community, is the difference between bicyclists and people who ride bikes.

The short summary of this: Many more people ride bikes than consider themselves cyclists. This makes a big difference when planning outreach, working on advocacy or community education, or otherwise trying to get attention on non-motorized transportation alternatives. It’s a good bit of what’s involved in the People For Bikes campaign.

To a certain extent, it’s this bikers vs. cyclists, for want of better terminology, that gets into some of the haters who post to online message boards whenever good (or bad) news involving bicycles gets posted on local media websites – as well as the bikes-are-toys-not-transport stuff that oozes into such commentary as well.

But it also reflects a divide among people who really should be united. While someone who rides to work for function may not consider themselves a cyclist, they benefit from the same policies and initiatives the spandex-clad weekend warriors or lifestyle cyclists who spurn cars and count their carbon footprint savings.

A lot of it does come down into the spandex-vs.-not crowd, and also the virulent hatred the haters have for the spandex crowd. The bikers, who do not consider themselves cyclists, look at the spandex and the hate, and the mass generalizations about stop signs and road ownership, and think: That isn’t me. I bike in loose pants, I use sidewalks when I can and like trails, I don’t go fast.

It’s something worth considering, although I don’t know that I would say to the spandex-clad superheroes that they need to relax. But it’s an interesting notion to think upon, and ask: How do you convince bikers that they are cyclists? How do you convince the people who give the community a bad name – the stop sign blowers, regardless of garments, the daredevils, the Critical Massholes – to reach out instead of alienate?

How do we all recognize we’re in this together?