A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » Regional Cycling » Australia
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Bike-friendly cities?



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old July 26th 06, 04:07 PM posted to aus.bicycle
cfsmtb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Bike-friendly cities?


Although this article describes Seattle, many of the scenarios described
sound rather familiar. Almost like a cautionary tale for other aspiring
cycling-friendly cities ..

*********************

Seattle Weekly: Breaking the Vicious Cycle - 26 July, 2006
http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/0630/bicycling.php

Seattle has a reputation as a cycling paradise, but there’s a lot that
has to be done before bike commuting is truly viable for regular folks.
Maybe it was the most recent $50 fill-up for your supposed economy car
that did it. Or the most recent price increase in the downtown parking
lot you use. Or you went to see Al Gore’s global-warming movie and came
out feeling like you ought to do something. Maybe all of the above.

But suddenly you’re noticing all those people who are commuting to work
on their bikes these days—and it seems that there are a lot more of
them. And you notice that a lot of them nowadays are just normal
schlubs like yourself. Suddenly, riding a bike to work seems to make a
lot of sense. After all, Seattle has a national reputation as a
bike-friendly city. It should be fun and easy, right? Well, um . . .
yes and no.

Sure, it’ll probably start out pleasantly enough, especially if the
weather is nice. If you live, say, in the U District or Ballard and
work downtown, you’ll likely catch the Burke-Gilman trail over to the
Fremont Bridge, then connect with Dexter Avenue, the “bicycle freeway”
into downtown with designated bike lanes on each side. So far, so good.


But then, as Dexter ends at Mercer, reality hits: You’re now riding in
the midst of auto traffic, and lots of it. You may make a dash over to
Second Avenue and take its left-hand-side bike lane—the only one in the
downtown area—but that isn’t a whole lot better, thanks to an assortment
of left-turning vehicles that are prone to making their moves right in
front of you as though you don’t exist.

And then there are the grates and opening car doors. Dodging them, you
get to work, all nice and sweaty and smelling like it, and discover
there are no showers at your workplace. Well, maybe tomorrow you can
ride slowly so as not to break into a sweat. the hill on Dexter
notwithstanding. Eight hours later, when it’s time to go home, you
discover that there is no northbound bike lane anywhere on downtown
streets. (Third Avenue is closed at rush hour to cars, and bikes are
allowed to use it northbound, but it also entails dodging major bus
traffic.)

So you’re stuck making your way back to Dexter by riding in traffic and
hoping nobody spills a latte while using their cell phone in their SUV
as they drive past you. Better still are the encounters with drivers
who believe that they paid for the roads and you didn’t, so you better
get out of their way. Much colorful language and exchange of hand
signals often ensues.

There! Was that worth it? And it’s not just downtown. Commuting to the
suburbs can be even worse. If you take the I-90 bike trail to the
Eastside (after discovering that the crossing on the floating bridge
may look nice, but it’s really not very pleasant), you can tool along
until it ends abruptly at Eastgate—amid a consistently hostile snarl of
auto traffic. And commuting into downtown Bellevue?

Fuggedaboutit. That city was built for cars, and city fathers seem
intent on keeping it that way. Kirkland, in sharp contrast, is actually
fairly hospitable to bikes, while Redmond’s self-proclaimed title as the
“Bicycling Capital of the Northwest” (due to the velodrome at Marymoor
Park) is severely undercut by its poor record in providing bike lanes
along its broad boulevards.

Even if you commute to the Microsoft campus, as I did for a number of
years, by using the Burke-Gilman/Sammamish River Trail, it’s still a
two-hour ride. You’re inevitably going to want to use the bike-bus
option over the Evergreen Point Floating Bridge (which has no bike
path). This is the only direct route to the campus, and usually takes
about an hour. While Metro’s bike racks are superb—easy to use and
reliable—there are only two of them per bus, and when you arrive on
summer mornings at the Montlake bus stop, there can be 10 or more
cyclists ahead of you.

It may take a half hour before enough buses cycle through for your
turn. Seattle is supposedly bike friendly, but the system doesn’t work
very well for commuters. Renee McMahon In other words, the Seattle
area’s oft-touted bicycling system is actually a happenstance, an often
broken network that doesn’t function particularly well, especially when
it comes to providing a complete infrastructure that could encourage
people to take up bike commuting.

Andrew Galbraith, who moved here last year from the San Francisco Bay
Area—where he also used to commute by bike—has found, in his year of
commuting from Fremont to Pioneer Square, that Seattle’s bike-friendly
reputation isn’t everything it’s cracked up to be. “I think that it
probably got that reputation because people look at things like the
Burke- Gilman trail or Green Lake and think, ‘Oh, there’s bike paths,’
because that’s what the city is promoting, but the reality of actually
commuting is different,” he says.

“It’s one thing for people like myself who are avid bicyclists, but
certainly somebody who doesn’t bike much and thinks it might be a new
way to commute, they might find it frightening. Especially downtown.” A
lot of these bottlenecks and dysfunctions have solutions, but they
require investment on the part of local government.

And for the most part, local government, both at the county and city
levels, has tended to treat the bicycle infrastructure more as a
boutique recreational amenity, with specialized paths being built here
and there, rather than a functioning segment of a regional
commuter-transit system. A 2005 study by the Cascade Bicycle Club,
titled “Left by the Side of the Road,” found that even though the Puget
Sound region boasts a 1,521-mile bicycle network, “many needed
improvements are necessary to turn this . . . into a true, working
system.”

It found that 27 percent of the existing network “fails to meet the
basic needs of bicyclists. This means that bicyclists attempting to
navigate the region face severe safety hazards and sometimes
insurmountable accessibility challenges—and there are no practical
alternative routes.”

Some of this has to do with an entrenched transportation bureaucracy
that is often skeptical about the costs and benefits of accommodating
bicycles, and that translates into reluctance on the part of
policy-makers to make the kinds of changes that might make the network
This is not necessarily for lack of trying. Peter Lagerway, the city of
Seattle’s longtime bicycle-program coordinator, has been working for a
number of years to change the culture and expand opportunities for
cyclists from within City Hall. His progress has sometimes been
halting.

There have been experiments like the Second Avenue bike lane that
produced mixed results at best, and others like the decision to remove
the large signs along Lake Washington Boulevard reminding drivers to
yield to cyclists that have not turned out very well at all. Sometimes,
the city’s existing infrastructure, its discombobulated grid system, and
its challenging, hilly terrain conspire to make changes difficult if not
impossible for road planners and designers. In other cases, there are
cultural and civic roadblocks, like the opposition to completion of the
Burke-Gilman Trail through Ballard by the businesses adjoining the
proposed route.

Nonetheless, Lagerway’s long-term project of creating a master
bicycling plan for Seattle is finally coming to fruition. Beginning in
late August, Lagerway will host a series of public meetings on a draft
Bicycle Master Plan, with the first scheduled for 7 p.m. Tuesday, Aug.
29, at UW’s Gould Hall. Lagerway is seeking the public’s input and
asking for help in identifying specific areas that are problems for
bike commuters, as well as ideas for solving them.

“We really have a two-part strategy here,” Lagerway says. “One is,
first of all, to integrate the bicycle into standard plans so that it
doesn’t get ignored. But having said that, we obviously now say that
it’s very important to do a Bicycle Master Plan, and it’s going to take
it to another level. But it’s because it’s going to work, and it’s going
to get off the shelf, and it’s going to get implemented, because we’ve
laid the basis in the comprehensive plan and the transportation
strategic plan.”

The general concept is one adopted nearly 20 years ago in Portland.
Sometimes called “Complete Streets,” the idea is to require that
planning and construction for all city street projects take into
account not just automobiles but all other users, including bicyclists
and pedestrians. It’s worked marvelously in Portland, which now boasts
a real model bike-commute network that functions well because it is
fully integrated.

Lagerway insists that his new master plan integrates the “Complete
Streets” concept into Seattle’s planning process. But David Hiller,
Cascade Bicycle Club’s advocacy director, notes that Lagerway’s plan
would only be adopted by the city as a resolution, which leaves it
toothless when it comes to enforcement. “A resolution can be ignored
with impunity. It’s guidance,” scoffs Hiller.

“Seattle is notorious for putting many good words on paper.” Hiller
says that the CBC is working with city planners and council staffers to
prepare an ordinance that, if passed by the City Council, would give the
plan some teeth: “We want to be able to get it adjudicated, if need be.”
According to Hiller, Mayor Greg Nickels’ proposed $1.8 billion
transportation initiative, scheduled to go before the voters this
November, includes only $63 million (or about 3.5 percent) in line
items directed at improving the cycling infrastructure.

But Gregg Hirakawa, the city’s Transportation Department spokesperson,
points out that the larger transportation plan also integrates a
planning imperative to improve streets for bicycle use, so its actual
contribution to biking in the city goes well beyond those line items.

What concerns people like Hiller is that for years, Lagerway and his
fellow bike advocates have been voices in the wilderness, and their
calls to make Seattle a better biking community have often been smiled
at indulgently, given political lip service, and then placed on the
back burner.

“The challenge we have is convincing people,” says Kirste Johnson, a
transportation planner for the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC),
“because we see these really small percentages of commute trips from
census data [the average in King County has for years been about 2
percent to 3 percent]. When it comes to divvying up pots of money for
transportation projects, it’s like, ‘Why should we spend any more than,
say, 3 percent? Why should we put more money towards this when nobody’s
doing it?’ “I think it’s more of a chicken-and-egg thing, where if you
don’t put more into it, how will you know?

There could be more people using it if we made it usable.” But now more
people are using it, regardless of usability. Back in 2000, a census
report found that bicycling was the fastest-growing mode of commuter
transportation in the Seattle area, and another count reported a 57
percent increase in ridership between 1992 and 2000. In the past year
especially, cycling commuters have become a common sight in Seattle.

During rush hour on Dexter, the clumps of cyclists waiting at lights
have grown to crowd size, and the bike paths have a steady flow of
riders coming and going. The Burke-Gilman between Fremont and the U
District likewise has become almost crowded. Exact numbers of riders
and the frequency of their trips are hard to come by, but there are
some rough indicators of the growing popularity of bike commuting.

One of these is the annual Bike to Work Day held in mid-May; in 2001,
some 6,500 people participated. According to Chris Cameron, the Cascade
Bicycle Club Education Foundation’s commute director, that figure had
climbed to 10,000 by 2005. This year, there were 15,000.

Cameron estimates that, this summer, as many as 12,000 people a day are
commuting by bike in the Seattle area. What’s perhaps most notable about
the change is the kind of people who are commuting by bike now. For many
years, bike commuters have often been the most zealous cyclists, very
fit, often boasting the latest gear and fast bikes as they zipped to
their jobs. Most people couldn’t relate.

Nowadays, you’re more likely to see a middle-class professional with
ordinary clothes and an ordinary bike trundling to the office. And as
the image has changed, so have perceptions and motivations. Ballard
resident Jesse Christianson’s commute to Madrona takes about 45
minutes. “I think for me it’s about getting the exercise and not having
to sit in a car,” she says. Whereas cars tend to turn people into
enclosed objects, there’s a human dimension to biking that she
appreciates. “You get to meet a lot of people who are really friendly.
And then sometimes you’re just riding on your own.

But generally, I like being on my bike and being available to people,
and have them be available to me.” The PSRC’s Johnson, who also
commutes to work by bike, says she consciously tries to cultivate a
“normal image” when she’s riding: “When I ride, I try to wear regular
clothes as much as possible. I’ll wear things like a pair of shorts
under my pants or one of those liners. I want other people to look at a
middle-aged woman, which I am, and think, ‘You know, she’s just a normal
person.’ I want it to look accessible, and not unachievable. I think one
of the things that keeps people from riding is that they think they have
to get a new wardrobe. They don’t.”

While no one is certain exactly why there are significantly more bike
commuters out there, nearly everyone observing the trend notes the rise
in gasoline prices as well as concerns over global warming and the
pollution caused by automobile use as certain contributors. But the
most significant underlying trend, they say, is the general growing
acceptance of the very notion of bike commuting.

The public perception of bike commuters is transforming
rapidly—especially the more that people do it. “It used to be that we
were always having to do bike counts because we had to prove that if we
spent X dollars we could get that many more people to use their bikes,”
says Lagerway. “The issue now never really comes up. If we build it, we
know there are going to be bikes there.

The issue now is, do we want all those bicyclists here? The people who
are concerned about bike facilities are not saying it’s a waste of
money because nobody will use it. They’re saying we don’t want it
because of precisely the opposite—it’s going to get so much use, and we
don’t want that.”

This change is critical to making bike commuting work in Seattle,
because the relationship between cars and bikes has been historically
tendentious here, and remains so. Nearly everyone who commutes by bike
has tales—usually in multiples—of tangles with rude, threatening, and
sometimes simply stupid drivers. The favorite: getting “doored” by
someone who forgot to check their mirror before getting out of the car
next to a bike lane. Ouch. One of the real underlying problems is the
entrenched sense of ownership of the streets by car drivers.

Most of us have encountered, on a number of occasions, drivers who yell
at us to “get off the street!” I’ve been called an asshole just for
biking on Lake Washington Boulevard—which was built in the 1890s,
before the advent of cars, as a bicycle route. It was a major tourist
attraction for Seattle visitors. So briefly, a reality check: There
have been several studies (including one in 1995 from the Bicycle
Transportation Alliance) that have established that bicycle riders
actually subsidize the roadways for people in cars, and the logic for
this is fairly simple.

Nearly all bicycle riders also contribute, whether as property owners
or renters, to the property-tax systems that underwrite most of our
roadways, as well as other taxes—federal and state— that do so as well.
Most also own cars, so they’re also paying licensing fees and other
associated charges that contribute to roadway construction. The only
tax they’re not paying—when they bicycle, anyway—is the gas tax, which
only contributes a portion of the cost of roadway construction. In
contrast, the amount of road wear that bicycles cause is insignificant
next to that produced by cars and trucks.

So bicyclists wind up paying significantly more in road costs than
automobile drivers. On the other hand, some of the animus coming from
automobile drivers can be well earned. Some commuters—especially the
inexperienced ones—are capable of all kinds of dangerous stupidity,
including riding against traffic or without a light at night. And then
there are the downtown bike messengers, whose athleticism and grace—as
well as their competitive drive—can be awe-inspiring, but whose open
flouting of traffic laws often leaves mouths agape and people stuck in
traffic chafing.

Among the people who chafe the most, though, are the law-abiding
cyclists. The scofflaws create a hostile environment for other bike
riders, if for no other reason than they are so conspicuous. Drivers
notice them because, well, they pull stunts that get your attention.
And they certainly create an image of cyclists as people who see
themselves—perhaps by dint of their superior virtue as physically fit
nonpolluters—as somehow above ordinary traffic laws the rest of us have
to obey.

If you talk to some of them, you’ll find that that attitude really does
exist. In the meantime, the law-abiding and conscientious cyclists go
unnoticed, because they’re trying to be. A skilled and experienced bike
commuter is usually good at blending into traffic so that your encounter
with them hardly registers. The Cascade Bicycle Club’s Hiller notes that
every bloc of roadway users includes some lawbreakers, but for a
community trying to gain credibility, as bicyclists are, the “scofflaws
definitely hurt,” he says.

“It’s important for cyclists to be seen as cooperative, law-abiding
co-users of the roads, and when people ignore the law openly, it
hurts.” The recent arrests of a couple of cyclists participating in a
Seattle Critical Mass demonstration (in which large numbers of riders
traveling in a crowd intentionally clog city streets) by King County
Metro Transit police—the brutality of which raised a lot of
eyebrows—underscored the cultural tensions that continue to exist
between cyclists and motorists in Seattle.

While the sheriff’s office defended the arrests as appropriate, even
County Executive Ron Sims wondered out loud just how necessary it all
was. Bike commuters have, by themselves, created their own sort of
critical mass— one that seems to have undermined, if not erased, the
long-held doubts about the effectiveness of building a bicycle-friendly
infrastructure. If we build it, they will come.

There’s a building principle involved: “Bicycling isn’t terribly
dangerous,” observes Hiller. “The more people that are riding, the
fewer accidents there are per cyclist; the accident-injury index goes
down. The peripheral awareness of motorists goes up. So if you’re
thinking of getting out there and joining this growing group of
transportation cyclists, you’re making it easier for everyone,
including yourself. The more bikes that are out there, the safer
everybody gets.”

That, in turn, helps build a mainstream cycling culture within the
community that makes using a bike practical and attractive for more
than just commuting. “Only one out of five trips in the city is a
commute trip,” notes Lagerway. “It’s really important to remember that
we’re going after all the trips.

And a commute trip, a utilitarian trip, a school trip, a recreational
trip—they’re all equally important, because those are trips when you’re
not taking a car.” What makes it all tick is a robust infrastructure
that creates a functioning network, enabling people to get to their
libraries and grocery stores as readily as they might ride to work.
Necessity, however, may prove the biggest reason for Seattleites to
start biking to work. Seattle is pretty much built out in terms of its
traffic capacity, and as volumes continue to increase, traffic speeds
are going to bog down even further.

It’s already easy for bikes to keep up with cars downtown because of
the decreasing speeds, and as things get more and more jammed up, it’s
easy to outdo them. That’s only going to become more the case in coming
years. “I’m very optimistic about the future of bicycling in Seattle,”
says Lagerway. “It’s a built environment, but at the same time, the
disadvantage that we have in the sense that it was built years ago and
we only have so much room, it’s also our biggest advantage.

Because we’re really at a point now where we cannot build our way out
of congestion. The space isn’t there, the dollars aren’t there. We’re
not going to tear down buildings to widen streets. There is no other
alternative but to do something other than be in a single-occupant
vehicle if Seattle continues to grow. So once we get more people on
bicycles, well, success builds success.”


--
cfsmtb

Ads
  #2  
Old July 26th 06, 10:48 PM posted to aus.bicycle
dave
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 192
Default Bike-friendly cities?

Now THAT was well ridden er written,

The above was a genuine slip btw I left it in cos it was so apt



Dave
  #3  
Old July 27th 06, 01:44 AM posted to aus.bicycle
Duncan
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 196
Default Bike-friendly cities?


dave wrote:
Now THAT was well ridden er written,



Wow.. you can say that again.

That's the first article I've seen that covers pretty much everything
going on in the commuter cyclist world.

  #4  
Old July 27th 06, 04:41 AM posted to aus.bicycle
cfsmtb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Bike-friendly cities?


Duncan Wrote:

That's the first article I've seen that covers pretty much everything
going on in the commuter cyclist world.


It's so good I've emailed a copy (in it's entirety) to the BFA-oz list
at well. Anyway, it's a damn fine piece & should have a wider audience
than simply the good citizens of Seattle.

Seattle Weekly has also published these two complementary articles:

*************

Can’t We All Just Get Along? Forging a peace plan between cyclists and
drivers - 26 July, 2006
http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/06...ling-peace.php

Drivers hate cyclists because, it seems, they’re always flagrantly
disobeying the law, running red lights and stop signs, but most of all
because in doing so they slow down traffic and force cars to brake and
swerve when they shouldn’t have to. Why doesn’t someone write them a
ticket? Cyclists hate cars because drivers refuse to share the road,
cars are loud and make smelly exhaust that no one wants to breathe, but
most of all because they are large moving hunks of metal and their
drivers couldn’t seem to care less about their impact on a frail human
body perched atop a lightweight bicycle.


A lot of this is simply attitude. Auto drivers ought to realize that
having more bikes on the road benefits them: It reduces the number of
cars as well as the demand for gasoline. Cyclists ought to understand
that fostering a respect for the rules of the road helps create a less
threatening environment for them as well.

We could all get along if we all took some simple steps.

Getting along with cyclists

Sure, bikes can be a pain to deal with in traffic. They can slow you
down at inopportune times, and inevitably, there are the bad apples who
force you to lay on your brakes and your horn.

But it’s important to understand that the only reason you notice these
cyclists is because they’re breaking the law and creating a road
hazard. The best cyclists—the ones who obey the law, stay out of your
way, and generally avoid creating problems—are exactly the people
you’re not likely to notice. And believe it or not, they are in the
majority.

Even those cyclists, however, need your cooperation, because
inevitably, they do have to interact with you. Here are some
suggestions:

• Remember that bicycles, by state law, are vehicles just like
cars—only slower moving. Accord them the same kind of respect that
other slow-moving vehicles enjoy.

• When possible, pass bicycles with a minimum of five feet between your
right fender and the cyclist’s left legs. That will give both of you a
feeling of safety.

• Don’t honk. Bicyclists, unless they’re illegally wearing headphones,
can always hear the cars behind them, so even a courteous honk to let
them know you’re there is unnecessary. At the same time, honking can be
very unnerving for a cyclist and can produce the kind of swerves you
don’t want to deal with.

• If passing a bicycle immediately is impossible because the lane is
too narrow and oncoming traffic too heavy, simply be patient—slow down
and maintain the same speed as the cyclist. Your chance to pass will
come along sooner than you think, especially since passing a bike is
usually quick and easy.

• If you’re in traffic and can see that cars in the oncoming lane are
stuck behind a cyclist, move to the right to give them all more passing
room.

• Remember that bikes, particularly on downhill slopes, can move almost
as fast as a car, and when they’re in the 20–30 mph range, they need to
move out more into the middle of the lane for an increased margin of
safety. Concede them that space, and be patient about passing them.

• Be especially conscious about turning into bikes. The most common
kind of bike-vehicle collisions are those that occur when cars turn
directly in front of an onrushing cyclist. Be aware of the presence of
bikes, both ahead of and behind you, before you make any turns. If need
be, wait for the cyclist to go by you before turning. Trying to dart in
front of them is a quick avenue to a collision and a claim against your
insurance policy.

• The one exception for the bicycles-as-vehicles rule comes when
cyclists use designated pathways like the Burke-Gilman Trail. In that
situation, according to state law, they enjoy the same status as the
pedestrians with whom they share these paths. So when you come to a
crossing with such a path, treat cyclists exactly as you would a
pedestrian: Stop and let them cross.

Getting along with autos

When you’re out on the road, it never hurts to remember that you play a
role in how automobile drivers perceive all bicyclists, and that, in the
long run, affects your own commute. The more drivers there are who
perceive cyclists as cooperative co-users of the road, the less likely
you are to be riding in a hostile environment. Call it enlightened
self-interest.

Sure, there are plenty of rude and unpleasant drivers out there with an
attitude about people on bikes. What will change that, however, is
increasing the numbers of cyclists who demonstrate that, with a little
patience, cars and bikes can get along just fine.

Here’s how to make a difference:

• Always ride on the right or within a bike lane when one is present,
unless other vehicles (including bikes) or other circumstances (like a
suddenly opened door) force you into traffic. But try to be alert and
considerate of cars when those circumstances arise. Riding against
traffic is monumentally stupid.

• Obey all traffic signals. You are, by law, a vehicle, and can be
ticketed for ignoring signals or any of the rules of the road. Of
course, there are situations—obscure stop signs in remote spots on the
Burke-Gilman trail when no vehicles are in sight, for instance—when
complete obedience to the law makes little sense. But for the most
part, flouting the rules of the road, especially when cars are present,
just perpetuates the image of bicyclists as rule-breaking jerks and
raises the general hostility toward bike riders accordingly.

• Ride single file if you’re in a group, unless there’s no traffic
around you.

• The safest place on the road to ride is in a straight line about
three feet from the edge of the road or curb. This gives you a safety
margin in case of an obstruction or the need for a sudden maneuver, and
it still gives cars enough room to move around you comfortably in most
situations.

• Ride steadily. Nothing makes drivers more nervous than a weaving
bicyclist.

• Use hand signals to indicate turns. For right-hand turns, the old
left-hand-up signal is now considered obsolete, as it tends to confuse
drivers more than it helps; just use your right hand and point where
you’re going. And in the event of an obnoxious driver, the middle
finger of either hand does not qualify as the signal of a courteous
cyclist.

• Use headlights and rear lights at night. Again, this is the law. And
besides, riding without a headlight at night is considered an entire
category unto itself in the Darwin Awards. A mere blinking rear light
doesn’t cut it, either, because oncoming cars and cars pulling out at
intersections in front of you still can’t see you.

• In case a driver decides he or she doesn’t want to co-exist with you,
wear a helmet. Always. (Back in Montana, the saying among the biking set
was that a helmetless rider didn’t have brains worth protecting
anyway.)

• Leave the headphones at home.

Oh yeah, it’s nice to have tunes on your bike, especially when you’ve
created that special “Biking” playlist on your iPod, but it’s against
the law, and for good reason: In traffic it’s unsafe. Not to mention
dumb. Cyclists need to be able to hear cars behind them to ride safely
among them, and even on dedicated bikeways, you need to hear other
riders around you as well. About the only excusable time to ride with
headphones is late at night or midwinter on the Burke-Gilman, when
there’s no one around.


*************

Seattle Weekly: Tips for Beginning Bike Commuters: What you need to
know to get started - 26 July, 2006
http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/06..._beginners.php

Figuring out a route
Sometimes the best way to get to work is not necessarily the shortest
or fastest. Most cyclists start out finding the quickest route, or the
one best supported by infrastructure such as bike lanes or wide
shoulders. After a while, considerations like the pleasantness (or lack
thereof) of the route may figure in. Usually the best route is a
combination of ease, aesthetics, comfort, and efficiency.

Maps of bike routes throughout King County and the city of Seattle are
available through the Cascade Bicycle Club (www.cascade.org) and from
Seattle (http://www.ci.seattle.wa.us/transpor...ikeprogram.htm) and King
County (www.metrokc.gov/bike.htm) bicycling program offices. They’re a
good place to map out your initial route to work.

Equipment
Here’s what every bike commuter needs:

• Helmet. Wearing one is required both in King County and in Seattle,
and for good reason. It is probably the most important piece of
equipment you can buy, because it can save your life, and your brain as
well.

• Bicycle. You don’t need a fancy bike to commute easily. And everyone
has their own taste in what they like to ride: road bike, mountain
bike, hybrid, recumbent, single-ring racer, whatever. What really
matters is finding a solid, dependable bike that won’t start falling
apart after you start putting on the miles.

• Panniers or some kind of gear bag. You’ll need something to carry
your work clothes, papers, sack lunches, towels and toiletries for the
shower you’ll need at the end of your ride, and whatever else you need
for a day at work. Commuter panniers, which are essentially hang-up
bags that attach to a bike, can be found in some bike shops.

• Headlights and rear lamps/reflectors. These are essential for anyone
riding in any kind of darkness, evening or morning. Like helmets, not
only do they save your life, they’re required by law.

• Toe clips and clipless pedals. Optional. These are leg-saving devices
that enable you to achieve spin on your pedals instead of just pushing
all day.

• Fenders. Strictly optional. These help keep you from getting a stripe
up your back and mud in your face when you ride in the rain, but they
also cause additional drag on your bike.

• Tools. Not many are needed, but a patch kit, tire levers, some Allen
wrenches, and a screwdriver are usually a good idea, unless you’re
willing to walk your bike a distance in the event of a breakdown. Spare
tubes are usually a good idea, and I like to carry a Swiss Army knife.

• Pump. Essential for refilling your tire in the event of a flat. •
Rain gear. A poncho or raincoat is always a good thing to tuck into
your gear.

• Lock. Bicycle thieves are everywhere. Protect yourself with a good
U-type lock that can’t be easily cut in the way traditional cable locks
can. A Little Help Bicycle commuting is always best achieved with
cooperation from your employer. Some employers actually provide
financial incentives related to “commute trip reduction,” but they are
few and far between. However, you will need two things from your boss:

• A place to park your bike. It’s essential that you have a relatively
secure place where you can lock your bike that’s out of the way.

• A shower and locker. Trust me: Your colleagues won’t want to work
around you if you smell the way most people do when they’re finished
with a nice, sweaty ride. Of course, it may not be easy convincing your
employer to provide these amenities, and they’ll often take as cheap a
route as possible. (When I commuted to the old Bellevue
Journal-American, I had to shower in the basement pressroom facility.)

But if there are other bike commuters among your colleagues, it may
help to make a concerted plea. And incentive programs like Metro’s
Commuter Trip Reduction can help you make a persuasive case.


--
cfsmtb

  #5  
Old July 27th 06, 04:56 AM posted to aus.bicycle
Tamyka Bell
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 157
Default Bike-friendly cities?

cfsmtb cited:

Can't We All Just Get Along? Forging a peace plan between cyclists and
drivers - 26 July, 2006
http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/06...ling-peace.php

snip
* If you?re in traffic and can see that cars in the oncoming lane are
stuck behind a cyclist, move to the right to give them all more passing
room.

snip

It always amazes me that people don't think of that. It's like, if you
pull up at lights and there's a car behind indicating to turn into a
slip lane, then you pull as far over as you can to let them into it. And
if you're stuck in traffic and motorcyclists are coming up the outside,
you sit further into the other side of the lane, so they have more
clearance. Don't you? Or is it more fun to be an imbuggerance?

snip
* Ride single file if you're in a group, unless there's no traffic
around you.

snip

Did I just read that?

Otherwise, good to see some sensible comments out.

Tam
  #6  
Old July 27th 06, 07:46 AM posted to aus.bicycle
Michael Warner
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 284
Default Bike-friendly cities?

On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 01:07:20 +1000, cfsmtb wrote:

Seattle has a reputation as a cycling paradise


It also has a reputation for constant rain. I think there's some
tension here :-)

--
Home page: http://members.westnet.com.au/mvw
  #7  
Old July 28th 06, 12:15 AM posted to aus.bicycle
Dan the free bike man
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default Bike-friendly cities?


cfsmtb wrote:

Article said:
Always ride on the right or within a bike lane when one is present,
unless other vehicles (including bikes) or other circumstances (like a
suddenly opened door) force you into traffic.


this is crazy. this is encouraging Russian Roulette car door riding.

what happens when the car door opens as soon as you pass it? You crash
into passing traffic, happens heaps of times. Luckily not to me while
I didn't know better and would ride in the car door lane

Daniel

  #8  
Old July 28th 06, 01:52 AM posted to aus.bicycle
cfsmtb
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default Bike-friendly cities?


Dan the free bike man Wrote:
cfsmtb wrote:

Article said:
Always ride on the right or within a bike lane when one is present,
unless other vehicles (including bikes) or other circumstances (like

a
suddenly opened door) force you into traffic.


this is crazy. this is encouraging Russian Roulette car door riding.


No, it's America, they ride on the right, we ride on the left. Got it?
I don't seem to have many problems with being doored, probably due to
positioning myself at least 1m from parked cars. A onroad bicycle path
is only a guide of sorts, it's up to the cyclist to position themselves
correctly in relation to traffic.


--
cfsmtb

  #9  
Old July 31st 06, 12:23 AM posted to aus.bicycle
Dan the free bike man
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 9
Default Bike-friendly cities?

No, it's America, they ride on the right, we ride on the left. Got it?
I don't seem to have many problems with being doored, probably due to
positioning myself at least 1m from parked cars. A onroad bicycle path
is only a guide of sorts, it's up to the cyclist to position themselves
correctly in relation to traffic.



Yeah, I was referring to the "not riding in car door lane if a door
suddenly opens up" being crazy. You would need to see in the future
to ride in the car door lane safely!

Daniel

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Groningen in Holland: 60% of people travel by bike cfsmtb Australia 12 June 18th 06 12:51 AM
The Ugly Bike [email protected] General 4 October 17th 05 02:43 PM
May 6 NYC NBG Day to Honor Fallen Bike Activist Cycle America General 0 April 11th 05 04:15 PM
May 6 NYC NBG Day to Honor Fallen Bike Activist Cycle America Recumbent Biking 0 April 11th 05 04:13 PM
Rec.Bicycles Frequently Asked Questions Posting Part 1/5 Mike Iglesias General 4 October 29th 04 07:11 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:32 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.