May 2, 2007
What We're Missing: Bikes by the Thousands
It's been awhile since the last entry in this very occassional series. We love D.C., but we know it's not perfect. Is there something you think we're missing? Let us know.
Official Washington likes to think that it is bicycle-friendly. But we often hear a different story, involving dodging bricks, menacing drivers, annoying registrations, and brazen theives. For all but the most hardcore cyclists among us, the thought of negotiating D.C.'s streets on two wheels is harrowing, which is a shame. Washington is blessed with compact development, historic neighborhoods, and beautiful scenery which may be a bit spread out to enjoy on foot, but is easily covered by bike. Many who would love to tour the miles between Arlington Cemetary and the Capitol and beyond on two wheels are relegated to tour busses and Metro, which both limits their mobility and annoys the hell out of commuters. So, in the spirit of the upcoming Bike to Work Day on May 18, we pass on a solution from across the pond: municipal bikes.
In Paris, city officials have long wrestled with similar issues: Thousands of sightseers filling the roads with cars (and the air with exhaust) while attempting to visit its many historic sites. In response, the Parisian goverment is launching an effort this summer to provide cheap rental bikes. Lots of them.
Photo by Flickr user edwardaggie98.
From WaPo:
On July 15, the day after Bastille Day, Parisians will wake up to discover thousands of low-cost rental bikes at hundreds of high-tech bicycle stations scattered throughout the city, an ambitious program to cut traffic, reduce pollution, improve parking and enhance the city's image as a greener, quieter, more relaxed place.At first, we cringe at the thought of hundreds of street-clogging lost tourists and a cottage industry of bike thefts. With more examination, though, there's a lot to like. Providing bikes in those numbers creates a critical mass that changes the way the city deals with them -- pushing DDOT to crate a more continuous and extensive bike network in the city. Streets and paths appropriate for bikers would get even more so, which pulls bicycles off of streets that aren't, lessening the dangerous competition with autos.By the end of the year, organizers and city officials say, there should be 20,600 bikes at 1,450 stations -- or about one station every 250 yards across the entire city. Based on experience elsewhere -- particularly in Lyon, France's third-largest city, which launched a similar system two years ago -- regular users of the bikes will ride them almost for free.
In Denmark, Copenhagen's City Bikes program has been established for years, resulting in huge shifts in transportation, pollution, and the city's image. As for theft, both Copenhagen and Helsinki's bicycle programs have actually reduced it. The free bike use provided by the program both eliminates the need for theft and removes a considerable market for resale.
Now that we've got a triathlete Mayor, isn't it time to get Washington some bikes?
|
"For all but the most hardcore cyclists among us, the thought of negotiating D.C.'s streets on two wheels is harrowing, which is a shame."
Seems to me that Bike to Work Day is intended, in part, to demonstrate how wrong this thought really is. When I started riding my bike to work, I was far from a "hardcore cyclist." I might be considered one now, I suppose, but my early attempts to do so were far easier than I thought.
I can't find the link, but the new proposal for Union Station has a giant bike depot in it - with air pumps and bike storage facility. That might be the spot for this.
i feel like oberlin college does this; only nobody charges and it's kind of like... stealing... but then eventually you get your bike back by the time you graduate
Cue grumpy motorist comments in
3...
2...
1...
The first step to making DC a more bike friendly city would be to actually enforce the obvious law that bike lanes are for bikes, not cars or double parking. DC has a decent infrastructure for bike commuting, it simply has to be protected.
Re post 2, Union Station will need to provide another amenity - 24-hour on-site human security.
Somewhat off-topic, but if you're going to Paris and driving around instead of using their metro, you're simply an idiot. There is literally no location in Paris that's more than 1/2 km from a metro stop--it's just unbelievably convenient.
Enforce the bike lanes, fine. But then also enforce every other single traffic law on bikes. No more running lights or Stop signs, no more turns on Red when they are prohibited. No more riding on the sidewalks, etc. Fair is fair.
Just give the pedestrians guns so THEY can take care of the outlaw bikers AND cellphone driver lunatics.
I can't believe Don hasn't chimed in about he and his wife like to count the number of cyclists violating traffic laws as they drive (yes, drive) from their Mt Pleasant house to their downtown offices.
Sidewalks: The traffic laws of DC allow bikes on sidewalks outside of the central business area. It's nice for bikers and drivers alike, and only kind of disgruntling for pedestrians.
Other traffic laws: absolutely correct, cyclists ought to obey the traffic laws at all times. If for no other reason than they will die otherwise.
"Enforce the bike lanes, fine. But then also enforce every other single traffic law on bikes. No more running lights or Stop signs, no more turns on Red when they are prohibited. No more riding on the sidewalks, etc. Fair is fair."
Because we all know that motorists never, ever run stop signs, turn on red when it's prohibited, obey the speed limits, speed up to make yellow lights, and follow all other traffic rules, right??
Everyone should bike to work for a week, if for no other reason than the people who complain about bikers breaking the law would shut the hell up. I've commuted to work by bike, and to school by car for about the same length of time. I much prefer the bike commuting, and wish it was still practical...
Bicyclists disobey traffic regulations is very predictable and self preserving ways. As a driver, if you get into a problem you either 1) Employ massive amounts of hydraulic force on solid steel rotors to stop, or 2) employ massive amounts of dead dinosaurs to generate 120+ horsepower to go. If you're on a bicycle and get into a problem you don't have those options.
The only defense a cyclist has is their inertia. Bikes neither accelerate nor decelerate as quickly as cars and must therefore rely on changing directions in order to avoid accidents. It's impossible to change direction when you're at a dead stop. Stopping at every stop sign, while legal, would be suicidal. The one time that I was hit on my bike was because I HAD stopped at a red light, proceeded through it on the green, only to have a car make an illegal turn into the side of me. Because I had just started moving again, I didn't have any ability to get out of the way. If I had any inertia I could have turned in same the direction of the car, and avoided the accident. Fortunately the accident was fairly low speed and I wasn't injured- fortunately because the woman drove off immediately after looking out of her window to make sure I was still moving.
Andrej says: "The traffic laws of DC allow bikes on sidewalks outside of the central business area. It's nice for bikers and drivers alike, and only kind of disgruntling for pedestrians. "
Actually, it is downright dangerous for pedestrians. It is also bad law. If bikes are vehicles, they should stay in the street and obey all laws of the road, subject to penalties. Bike riders who want to go on the sidewalk should dismount and walk their bikes.
If we saturate the city with free or cheap bikes, there will be no reason to steal them. yehaw.
A friend of mine told me about his experience at his midwestern small liberal arts college and their attempt to have community bikes. They took old bikes picked up from police stations and donated from around the state and painted them yellow. Anybody could use the bikes for free, but you were asked to drop off any bike with a problem, flat tire or messed up chain etc, at a spot in the center of campus to be fixed. But nobody ever dropped off the bikes and soon the campus was full of unusable yellow bikes.
That is a different issue, but it is interesting.
But more on topic, I predict that if there are many cheap rental bikes provided by the city and if those rental bikes are left outside, DC will soon have many cheap rental bikes with slashed tires. Because random acts of vandalsim are fun and there are a lot of high school age kids who live in DC and have nothing to do in the summer.
"Actually, it is downright dangerous for pedestrians."
Mike, please show me the statistics that indicate how many pedestrians are injured in collisions with bikers riding on sidewalks each year.
Then let's put that side by side with the statistics on the number of bikers who are injured in collisions with automobiles on streets where there is no dedicated bike lane.
If it is more dangerous for pedestrians to share a space with bikes than it is for bikes to share a place with automobiles where there is no lane for them, I'll change my mind.
I'll also eat my shoe.
"Actually, it is downright dangerous for pedestrians. It is also bad law. If bikes are vehicles, they should stay in the street and obey all laws of the road, subject to penalties. Bike riders who want to go on the sidewalk should dismount and walk their bikes."
It is not that serious at all. Bicycles are not motorvehicles. Thats like saying you can't rollerblade on a sidewalk, you have to follow the law for anything with wheels. That's the difference between a motorscooter and a bicycle that you peddle with your feet.
"Bicyclists disobey traffic regulations is very predictable and self preserving ways"
right on, brother... it's very predictable that bicyclists will run a red light given the narrowest sliver of an opportunity... and not just moments after yellow turns to red, but whenever the coast is sufficiently clear of automobiles... after all, the calculus favors self-preservation there... going up against a car is going to be a lot riskier than going up against a pedestrian... self-preservation is also what makes the sidewalk so alluring to bicyclists... those are the collisions where *someone else* gets the worst of it...
The problem is that people tend not to report being hit by a bike on the sidewalk, whereas you can bet there'll be a report when said biker goes splat against Jane Sixpack's Canyonero.
I really wish there were more Segways downtown just to give bikers and pedestrians someone to hate on.
Everyone should bike to work for a week, if for no other reason than the people who complain about bikers breaking the law would shut the hell up.
So true.
I read about how they did this in Amsterdam decades ago (free bikes, painted white) and after a while, a lot of folks (many of them drug addicts) stole the bikes, painted them over, and sold them. If there is to be a system like this in place in DC, the bikes should be identifiable as being a part of this program specifically (ie, by etchings, tags, unique model, etc). And theft against such a civic program should be treated seriously. I'm talking parked-for-121-minutes-at-a-2-hour-meter-downtown seriously.
Then I suggest pink banana-seated Schwinns with purple and green streamers
DCist Ian, get ready to eat your shoes. A simple google search will show you article after article which state that studies show riding a bike on the sidewalk is more dangerous then on the roadway. One such study can be found here: http:// www.bicyclinglife.com/ Library/riskfactors.htm
Here's a quote:
"The average cyclist in this study incurs a risk on the sidewalk 1.8 times as great as on the roadway, and the result is statistically significant (p
I never ride on the sidewalk - save for when I'm pulling into the sidewalk in front of the building in which I live (and usually then I'm also in the process of dismounting). It should be noted, of course, that in most of the city, it is legal to ride on the sidewalk - only in the downtown business core is it illegal. This makes sense to me if you're talking about small children, but not for adults, and especially adults moving at a good clip.
DCPedestrian- I don't disagree with you in the least. Bikes belong in the street, with very few exceptions. There are place (like Eastbound Park/Klingle going from Cleveland Park to Mt. Pleasant) where the traffic is very fast, the steep hill makes it impossible for bikes to keep up safely, and the sidewalk is more than wide enough to accommodate pedestrian and bicycle traffic. But I regularly see people biking down the middle of the sidewalk on Mt Pleasant Street, Columbia Road, 18th street... That's unsafe, and shouldn't be tolerated.
You know, I'd love to see a community-bikes program like the one described, but the DC Is a Bad Bike Town crap doesn't need to be included. Sure, there are *always* improvements that can be made. But if you look around and compare DC to other major metro areas? It's pretty damn good here. Every bus I've ever seen has a bike rack. Bike lock posts are spreading. There's a fantastic network of both recreational and commuting trails.
Seriously, what is the author talking about, that one can't easily get from the Capitol to Arlington Cemetery? Aside from road crossings, you can *do the entire trip* without getting on the street. Or you can do it on the street. What, do you need an elevated bikeway? Jesus.
Chris while the results of that study are interesting, it doesn't necessarily contradict Ian's statement. He was discussing pedestrian safety on the sidewalk and this study examines cyclists. The study has no data on the cause of injuries on sidewalks.
Also note, "the risks of bicycling on the sidewalk (including bicycle paths and crosswalks)".. wonder how many of those are cars turning into cyclists.
Chris, your study doesn't prove your point. The study is about bicylce vs. vehicle accidents. The statement about "risk on sidewalk 1.8 times as great," means that a bicycle riding the sidewalk is 1.8 times more likely to get hit by a car at an intersection than a bicycle riding in the shoulder with the flow of traffic.
DCist Ian's claim about "pedestrian" safety still stands unrefuted.
I'll give $10 to any non-cyclist who bothers to read the Bicycle Chapter of the DC Traffic Code. At least then I should have one fewer driver yelling made up and imagined "rules" at me. I'm convinced proximity to steering wheels reduces IQ 50 points.
Hmmmm, what I've learned from this is that you have ask present an assertion that's so carefully worded, the contrary can't be proven!
Guess you should expect that in a city full of lawyers!
My point is that it's safer for a cyclist to ride on the road then on a sidewalk. I'm thinking it's just logical to also say that if those cyclists were on the road, the pedestrians might be safer too.
Brendan,
My fav imagined rule was a women who was yelling at me because cars turning left in front of oncoming traffic have the right away if the oncoming traffic is a bicycle. Fascinating.
MB-
I tried to make two points with this post:
First, having a bikes program like the one Paris is implementing would be a boon for visitors and locals, especially those who don't bike frequently enough to own their own. These are the folks most likely to be down on or near the Mall in cars/Metros/busses, who might otherwise use the free bikes. The second follows from the first, that a critical mass of cyclists on our streets would foster a more cohesive bike network throughout the city.
I was definitely not claiming that it is currently difficult to ride a bike on the Mall - I agree that it's already pretty bike friendly, and that's why the bikes program would work so well here.
DC is way way way too ghetto for city bikes.
All the bikes would be wrecked, thrown in the river, or be in PG within days.
DC is NOT Copenhagen!
Hell DC isn't Philly!
First, having a bikes program like the one Paris is implementing would be a boon for visitors and locals, especially those who don't bike frequently enough to own their own. These are the folks most likely to be down on or near the Mall in cars/Metros/busses, who might otherwise use the free bikes.
Okay, locals maybe, but tourists? Have you been down to the Mall lately? It's bad enough that the sound of their trunklike thighs rubbing together is deafening, you're going to try and get these people on a bike? They're on vacation! This consists of waddling around in 3-for$10 teeshirts, sweating, and complaining about how they can't get a good New York slice or Chicago dog or In-n-Out burger or decent borscht or Watney's Red Barrel or some other godawful food from their hometown that's unavailable in DC.
Admirable that you want these chunk-stylers to pedal a few pounds away, but let's be realistic.
O.K., i am a cyclist (own a car too) and admit to running the occasional red light or stop sign... only speaking from my personal experience, i have never done such to disrupt traffic. And i have never seen a cyclist, blatantly run a light without thereby, causing near accidents...in fact, i don't know anyone who would do this intentionally unless they just didn't give a F@ck (about themselves). So this leads me to the notion that these uptight motorists are a) ignorant or b) envious... yes, i know it sucks to have and wait a whole 35 seconds for a light to turn green (especially when there is no cross traffic) and then it must suck even more to see me fly past you through the intersection, while you are waiting...i mean, after dropping 40 dollars at the pump, sitting in traffic for 1 hour to make it to the city, and seeing these free willing, happy go lucky, manipulating city traffic with GREATER efficiency would make me pretty aggravated too... now, how that correlates to motorists seeking revenge by obstructing the bike lane doesn't make any sense...if you block my lane...i block your road (it is rude and more accident prone to ride on the sidewalk)
However, i submit this with caveat, there are some people, a minority at that, who until they know how the handle themselves on two wheels, should stay off bikes completely.
31: "And i have never seen a cyclist, blatantly run a light without thereby, causing near accidents" should read the same sans the "without".
31: "And i have never seen a cyclist, blatantly run a light without thereby, causing near accidents" sans the "without"
DCist Ian:
Could you compromise and munch on your pedal-clips a bit?
Seriously, two words are missing from this discussion: bike messenger (is Ian one, maybe the Ian in DCist June 2, 2006?). Unsafe and illegal bike riding seems part of the job description when a bike courier is on the clock. Bike courier accidents ramp up accident figures for all bike riders; too bad these occupational mishaps cannot be "disaggregated" (or whatever they call it) from safety figures for actual bike commuters.
Reliable figures for medically significant bike/pedestrian collisions appear hard to come by. Non-reporting has been mentioned. As far as I can tell, several states lump bike and pedestrian injuries in the same category. Laws require reporting automobile/bike accidents when there is injury, as there often is when cars collide with bikers or pedestrians.
But the laws of physics that make bicycles inherently unstable make riding them on sidewalks undeniably dangerous to pedestrians. And to bike messengers on the clock, pedestrians on the sidewalk are time-sapping obstructions to be whistled at. You figure it out.
BTW, Bike lanes are not the whole answer. In five years of bicycle commuting in the bike lanes of bike-friendly Austin, I was hit by cars twice (yes, I was riding safely).
DCPedestrian talked about bicyclists' self-preserving calculus, and did so ironically -- but there's something to it. It would be great if drivers were used to dealing with bicyclists and we really could be sure of a decent level of safety simply by following the rules for motorists.
But that's just not the case. The best thing a cyclist can do to ensure his or her safety is to stay away from cars as much as possible. Sometimes that means taking advantage of a light cycle to get on a road before cars do. Other times it may mean heading through a stop sign in order to beat an approaching car. Remember, we're generally at least a foot higher off the road than a driver, and can see a lot more of what's going on.
With that said, is it the case that we sometimes blow through a stop because we don't want to waste our inertia and then regenerate it? Yeah. Pedaling is harder than depressing a pedal, and we're already at a speed disadvantage. That behavior isn't admirable, but I think it should only be condemned when it's done in an unsafe manner (and a motorist being surprised doesn't constitute proof that something unsafe has occurred). It's wrong in the same way that jaywalking is wrong. In neither case is anyone else being endangered (cue links to stories about collisions with pedestrians -- it's pretty rare).
But my general point is simply this: drivers shouldn't assume they know more about how to move safely through the city on a bike than bicyclists do. We do it a lot more often than you do and are the ones who end up paying the price if an accident occurs. It's ridiculous to think that we're trying to piss you off at the expense of our own safety.
One more thing about bicyclists following the rules -- I'm a pretty cautious bicylcist and will only run a stop sign or go through a red light if there aren't cars around, and I normally stop at red lights. But I can't tell you how often motorists get mad at me for not running the light. They're trying to turn right and my presence isn't letting them. You can't have it both ways...
I'd love to see what happen if enough DC cyclists did something like Critical Mass in SF each month, clogging up K Street during both morning and evening rush hours, blocking buses and generally wrecking havoc for commuters. It's certainly an interesting way to push for things like more bike lanes. Usually results in even more bitching from pedestrians and drivers. But the politicians have taken notice.
DCist Tom:
The simple fact that it's impossible to predict what a cyclist is going to do makes *all* cyclist behavior unsafe. If cyclists reliably followed traffic laws, motorists would be much better equipped to deal with them.
Mike Licht has a good point, though: is there a lower form of humanity than bike messengers? Man, what a blight on civil society.
It was Portland OR that tried the free bikes, under the Yellow Bike Project. All 350 bikes were stolen. There is a second attempt proposed with some kind of safeguards.
J: That's a bit strong. It's not the people (some of my best friends* etc, etc.,) it's the way we let them do the job. Just get them off the sidewalk.
*Actually, my best friends are too old and fat now, but some were once couriers.
Funny, we just started a "yellow bike" program here at American University. I'm not sure that it is official, but it does not appear to be taking off yet, maybe because it is finals season.
As for Mike B.'s comments about Critical Mass, I know DC riders have a "first friday" that meets somewhere near or in DuPont. I've watched them block all lanes of traffic in front of my house and I don't think it is very constructive. I ride nearly every day and the last thing I want is to suffer the ire of a angry motorist who had to sit in traffic on a beautiful Friday afternoon behind some self righteous jerk on a bike.
I'd love to see a post about bikes here that doesn't break down into "bikers suck" or "drivers suck" or "pedestrians suck," but maybe that's asking for too much.
Mike-
Sorry, I don't ride with clips.
I've also never been a messenger, and have a feeling I'd be really bad at it.
You know, what this all comes down to is EVERYONE, bikers, pedestrians, motorists, all actually 1) taking the time to understand the perspective of each of the others and 2) being careful and alert enough that the occassional erratic behavior by any one of the other groups isn't enough to send everyone into apoplectic fits.
For instance, you have an issue with bikers being on sidewalks, but what you really have an issue with is inconsiderate bikers on sidewalks. Personally, only rarely do I ever hop up on the sidewalk, and it's usually because either a) there's a backup I can't get around on the road or b) it's a stretch where cars are going really fast and there's about 18 inches between them and the curb, leaving no room for me, leaving me feeling extremely unsafe and exposed. When I am on the sidewalk, I only pass pedestrians when the way is completely clear, and if it's not, I wait and pedal at the same rate that the people in front of me are walking. If I have to do that for blocks at a time, so be it. Similarly, everyone else who has a beef on these biking threads, about drivers who do X or pedestrians who do Y, what they really hate is when those things happen without regard for anyone around them.
The fact is, it's possible for a biker to engage in a rolling stop or run a red at an empty intersection with just as much confidence of safety as a car that doesn't come to a complete standstill at a stop sign with no other cars present, or a car going 10mph over the speed limit, or a jaywalker crossing against the light when there isn't a car in sight. The problem isn't the "infraction", because let's face it, regardless of our mode of transport, we're all guilty of a little rule breaking. And if you've never ever gone over the speed limit, or slowed to 5mph at a stop sign, or walked against the light on an empty road, you're a better man than I. The problem is when people in cars, on bikes or on foot engage in these infractions carelessly and recklessly. And as far as I'm concerned, as someone who walks, bikes and drives, my experience has always been that there are equal numbers of assholes in