Ride Boldly! || Bicycle Safety, Advocacy & Events in Minnesota

May 15, 2010
by julie
1 Comment

Complete Streets to Become Minnesota Law

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.

May 13, 2010
by julie
2 Comments

Unchanging Red Light Rule Now Law in Minnesota

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 â€œbicycle orâ€ 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!

April 14, 2010
by julie
2 Comments

Fearmongering in Duluth

0saves

Save

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.

April 13, 2010
by julie
Comments Off on Group Riding Skills Seminar – May 8, 2010

Group Riding Skills Seminar – May 8, 2010

Highway 61, Winona 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.

April 12, 2010
by julie
Comments Off on Bicyclists vs. People Who Ride Bikes

Bicyclists vs. People Who Ride Bikes

0saves

Save

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?