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.

You may recognize this language as a phrasing much like [...]]]>

This Wednesday, December 13, 2011, the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation will consider an amendment offered by Alaska Senator Mark Begichto provide safe and adequate accommodations for all users in all federally-funded street projects.  The Amendment is S. 1950, “safety for motorized and nonmotorized users.”

You may recognize this language as a phrasing much like Complete Streets language.

Most of what Congress has considered lately has been language that removes funding for active transportation from federal projects, so this is good. The League of American Bicyclists says this will be the first time in six years the Senate considers something with Complete Streets language.

Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar is a member of this committee. Minnesotans who are in favor of Complete Streets are strongly urged to visit her web site and use the contact button to e-mail her, or phone her office, to express your support of this amendment and encourage her to vote in its favor. Phone or e-mail is the best bet, as consideration will begin tomorrow. Complete Streets, as cyclists are aware, help to build community, add jobs, and help people get to jobs in cost-effective ways that help their families. I’ve written about Complete Streets and its value plenty of time, and more info can be found at the National Complete Streets Coalition.

Please contact Senator Klobuchar today in support of this amendment!

Edit: A stellar outline of why mixed-use communities are good, and how reducing auto trips for kids is good, from Strong Towns, is part of the case for integrating active transport options in development.

This brings up the important safety question of what to do when the sky lets loose and you’re on your bicycle. Generally speaking, if you know there’s tornado warnings, you shouldn’t be wandering on out to go for a nice ride. That’s [...]]]>

Last night, Minnesota saw some yellow-green skies and golfball-sized hail. Spring has in fact sprung.

This brings up the important safety question of what to do when the sky lets loose and you’re on your bicycle. Generally speaking, if you know there’s tornado warnings, you shouldn’t be wandering on out to go for a nice ride. That’s somewhere between ‘kinda dumb’ and ‘evolution failed,’ depending on the warning and the notice you have, and the sort of ride you’re about to execute.

However, there are days where rain is predicted for ‘after 3.’ You leave at 10 AM, knowing you have plenty of time for some good miles and a stop for a double-scoop waffle cone. You blow a tire, and have to spend a bunch of time stabilizing it with duct tape and a dollar, then you cut your scoop short to a single. And the storm, it seems, is showing up at 2, not 3. In these situations, you need to have a duck-and-cover protocol.

As the sky starts turning green, consider your strategy. Do you know the area? If you’re in the country, is there a town or a gas station nearby? Even if it’s not necessarily in the proper path of your eventual destination, start heading towards the nearest source of shelter. If the sky is putting lime in its coconut, it’s not the time to be concerned about progress to endpoint.

In general, once the sky opens up and is pounding, let alone emitting hail, you should get off the road. There will be some cars who continue in the weather; depending on volume of downpour/hail and visibility, they are dumb. As far as you, on a bicycle, are concerned, the visibility factor is giant. You won’t be able to see or be seen, which can end badly.

Look for some form of cover. In the city, bridges and overpasses can work pretty well. If you’re fortunate, you may be near a shop — or better yet, a cafe. Nearby homes with garages or car sheds may also be an option. In the country, you may have some bridge or overpass options, but often you end up needing to show more creativity. A culvert won’t keep you dry, but it’s a safer place to be (short of flash flooding). I spent one hailstorm in Wisconsin hanging out in a crop-duster shed. If you’re really fortunate, you’ll be near the rural center of action and be able to get in to the town bar. While you may feel weird showing up with your bike and little bike shorts, the locals will typically be welcoming and nice about the fact that you don’t want to be hailed on. Stay away from metal objects, like metal picnic tables, and possibly your bike if you have enough space to put some distance between you and it.

Don’t decide the storm is over too soon. If you have been unable to get into a building situation with wether radio or TV, this can be a challenge. In the situation with the crop duster shed, I was a mile from the rest stop for the event, and I knew there were cookies there (cookies!). I was already soaked. The wind had eased off and the rain was much more sensible. I figured I could make a break for it. About a quarter mile out, POW. Got hailed on. Not recommended. So don’t trust me to give you tips on telling when the storm blew, just try to figure it out and hope.

Be safe out there.

One project of especial note to bicyclists is the 3-year project to replace the structurally-deficient Lafayette Bridge (US 52) in Saint Paul. The project is [...]]]>

MNDOT has released the list of 2011 major road projects for the Twin Cities and Greater Minnesota. All kinds of mayhem will ensue, especially during I94 work between Cretin/Vandalia and Nicollet Avenues.

One project of especial note to bicyclists is the 3-year project to replace the structurally-deficient Lafayette Bridge (US 52) in Saint Paul. The project is expected to add another river crossing for cyclists and pedestrians.

Obviously, many county and local roads are also subject to construction as well, and the projects for those roads are controlled by more local authorities. Cyclists should stay abreast of planned street work near their usual routes.

The [...]]]>

Wondering about the current state of Minnesota’s bridges? Transportation for America has you covered. They’ve been releasing state-by-state reports on the state of bridge infrastructure in each state. Minnesota was one of their early releases, as Minnesota also offers one of the horror stories about the worst-case scenario for a bad bridge with the I35W bridge.

The report is a mix of standardized information included in every report, along with some specific information about bridge conditions in the state. The Minnesota report reveals many facts, including:

• Out of 50 states and the District of Columbia, Minnesota ranks 34th worst nationally for the state of its bridges.

• Of Minnesota’s 13,068 highway bridges, 1,149 of those bridges are structurally deficient (1 in 11)
• The average age of Minnesota bridges is 35.2 years; bridges are typically built with 50-year life expectancies. Almost 2,900 existing Minnesota bridges are already older than 50 years.

Many structurally deficient bridges are in rural areas and carry lower volumes of cars. Seven of the top 10 most trafficked deficient bridges are in Ramsey County, with 2 additional of these high volume bridges in Hennepin County. The last bridge in the top 10 for volume is in St. Louis County (Duluth). Note that three of the Ramsey County bridges are the MN52 River Crossing, which apparently is statistically considered three spans. (I can kind of see why.)

The report provides solid information about the proportion of funding used for maintenance versus expanding the highway system, and features a really nice color-coded map of Minnesota’s counties and their bridge situations. The information is extremely valuable in light of current discussions about the gas tax, the new Transportation Bill, and budget issues. Minnesota continues to deal with bridge issues, ranging from bridges on I-34 and I-94 to city and county bridges like the Plymouth Avenue Bridge in Minneapolis, currently closed to vehicles pending finding the money to repair corroded cables. The Lift Bridge in Stillwater continues to get a lot of press, as Representative Michele Bachmann (R-MN6), Senator Amy Klobuchar (DFL), and Governor Mark Dayton (DFL) all work in various ways to get a new St. Croix river crossing approved. This report shows that these bridges in the news are just the ones getting coverage, and are by no means the extent of Minnesota’s infrastructure problem.

Summed up, a contraflow bike lane is a bike lane that puts cyclists riding on street against the flow of traffic.

Arguments in favor of such lanes typically relate [...]]]>

Via TheCityFix comes news that the Federal Highway Administration has officially blessed the concept of contraflow bike lanes as part of the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD).

Summed up, a contraflow bike lane is a bike lane that puts cyclists riding on street against the flow of traffic.

Arguments in favor of such lanes typically relate to allowing cyclists to use one-way streets in both directions, which makes it more convenient for cyclists. Some also argue that it helps calm traffic, although I don’t know that there’s good data on that.

While TheCityFix seems to lump opponents in with people who also oppose mode shift, saying “(t)hose against the idea argue on the basis of traffic laws, safety, directing resources away from automobiles and even based on the cost of new signage,” the pro-auto folks are their own group. Many bicycle advocates argue against contraflow bike lanes without being pro-automobile. Going against traffic flow creates confusion, and the laws of physics are pretty immutable in that a head-on collision between two moving objects — even one at a lower speed — is more damaging than a rear end collision or a collision where the moving bodies are moving in a direction other than straight at each other.

It’s obvious that opening up streets with contraflow lanes will reduce travel time for the group receiving the road rights. I’m still not sold on the safety of it, particularly in situations in which cars attempt to pass one another, or bicyclists attempt to pass each other. Momentum cares not for MUTCD guidelines. Advocate John S. Allen did a very nice piece on contraflow lanes that I think sums it up well in that sometimes a contraflow overlay can serve a good purpose, but at other times it’s a hazardous addition to the road. Much like many other guidelines in the MUTCD, I expect to see contraflow lanes implemented in ways that are both good and bad.

As cyclists and advocates argue for ongoing funding for alternative transit [...]]]>

With the Minnesota Bicycle Summit last week and the National Bike Summit this week, I have been noting a pernicious habit among cycling advocates and friends that I wish I could punch out of everyone: Quoting studies selectively or in ways that simply do not apply.

As cyclists and advocates argue for ongoing funding for alternative transit infrastructure in a difficult budget environment, data helps. With those who already support bicycles, data is a tool to offer them to help argue the position or defend their position to others. To doubters, data can be a means to shift opinion.

But using data badly does no one any favors. It’s easily assaulted by opponents. It makes cycling advocates look stupid.

Some recent examples:

• That damn cycletracks study. I have ranted about this seventy-eleven times at this point. There are major flaws in this study’s data methodology.
• Studies that say more people would ride if more facilities were built. Very often the data collection in these meets appropriate statistical standards. But these really do become a tyranny of the masses — what is popular is not always a good idea. National obesity trends are one example of how what is popular (being sedentary, high fat convenience foods) not necessarily being a good plan. It’s important not to let opinion polling override other forms of science.
• The Baltimore study that says that investing in bicycle infrastructure creates more jobs than highway projects. The data in this study is specific to one metro and one series of projects, and is thus difficult to credibly extend across all projects and metros. However, I am definitely seeing bicycle advocacy groups try to do so.
• I saw someone reference a study the other day from Bristol, England that says that “pedestrians, cycle and public transport users provide as much if not more spending power than car users in town centres.” It’s been re-tweeted a lot by people going to the National Bike Summit.

  One issue: This is a UK study. The way UK cities and neighborhoods are built around “High Streets” is completely unlike how most of the United States is built. I’ve lived near a UK High Street, when I was attending school in London. Neighborhoods are built around a core intersection/broadway/circus in which most of the basic needs of life can be procured, and major transit transfers are possible.

  There are some junctions within cities that act like high streets in the UK — an intersection like Cleveland and Ford Parkway in Saint Paul comes to mind, where you can get almost all the amenities of life within a short walk of the core intersection. But more often the setup is more like MN65 in Fridley/Blaine — a series of strip-malls along a high-speed state highway corridor. To invest on a High Street model would mean blowing up a lot of America to start from scratch.

I’m sure there are more out there that would just make me snarl to hear cited.

Not all studies based on small geography or populations are of no use. The health study in Madison and Milwaukee has broader applicability, because the controlled factors are such that you can credibly say: We don’t know what the total financial savings would be in THIS metro, but based on the savings in THOSE metros it’s pretty safe to bet it’d be a good chunk of change, eh.

I have seen a number of advocacy groups stick to citing well-controlled data studies and facts and figures that can easily be applied within a region without acrobatics. The Bicycle Alliance of Minnesota is one such organization.

As advocates, we don’t need to try to mutilate data to serve our needs. There are studies and data to support our goals that are credible as they stand, without trying to say “we could be more like Europe!” (which is not a good message with even some moderate Republicans, and is often not realistic based on existing build patterns). There are countless health and environmental benefits. There are social benefits. Infrastructure investment can reduce congestion and thus increase business productivity. Infrastructure can attract educated workforces to urban cores. Citing those factors, and data collected in the United States in broadly applicable studies, is going to have a greater impact on fiscal conservatives and the unconverted than using data dodgily.