Blog

Hello, see me?

Hello, see me?

OK, it’s been WAAAY too long since I posted anything. What can I say? Life.

Yeah, that’s not a good excuse. But I have been doing some serious thinking about this whole biking/”alternative transportationa’ thing. Partially because I’ve been forced to do so.

In my work with police agencies in the last few years, they’ve asked me to expand the scope in small ways. OK, individually, they were small ways, but the changes really added up. First, it was pedestrians. Then e-bikes. Then, as other newer “micro mobility conveyances” came out, I had to add those, too.

Why? Because laws and lawmakers haven’t kept up with all the new ways people are getting around: hoverboards, one-wheel skateboards, e-bikes, motorized bikes, electric personal assisted mobility devices, electric unicycles…the list goes on. Can they use the bike lanes? What’s their maximum speed supposed to be? Can they be used on sidewalks? Do I need a license? Do I have to wear a helmet? Do they follow the same rules as motorists? Again, the list goes on…With each new conveyance, the questions start again.

New devices, new laws

What are the laws? ARE there laws for their use?

Adding to the confusion is the fact that states, as they craft statutes to deal with these new devices, create DIFFERENT sets of laws, sometimes for seemingly identical devices: this one follows the same laws as that one, but type A has a max speed of 20mph, and type B has a max speed of 28mph.

Great. Let’s make safe use, and equitable enforcement impossible. Oh, let’s not tell motorists anything about any of this. We’ll just let them go on their way, with no understanding or appreciation that everyone on every one of those conveyances is a mother, a father, a sister, a brother…a PERSON, and is just trying to get from work to home, or to go the grocery store, or gym.

Consistency? Nah

I’ve done work this year in two states, and while the questions are often the same, the answers are widely divergent, due to the lack of standard treatment of all the new devices. I was asked yesterday to put together a proposal for another state; I took a quick glance at some of the key statutes, and guess what? The answers will all be different from the answers in the other two!

Well, I guess that’ll keep me busy, but it really leads to problems for everyone. Users don’t know what they’re supposed to do. Law enforcement officers don’t know how they’re supposed to react. Lawmakers may not even be aware of the latest new device that should have some structure around its use!

And in all that, it’s fantastic that we’ve come up with myriad ways to get around without using a motor vehicle. we’ll just have to deal with this period of growth and realize that it’ll all work out in the end.

Share
Frustration

Frustration

As I’ve done for the last several years, I worked with folks to schedule training classes for police officers. This year, they were scheduled in Alabama, Louisiana and New Jersey. The New Jersey sessions were successful; seven groups of officers, from multiple municipalities all across the state participated with great, thought-provoking ideas and discussions in each. In Alabama (one session only), the officers of one agency in a town that sees many bicyclists daily, learned a lot about how and why bicyclists and pedestrians act in certain ways, and we discussed what the law really says versus what many people think it says about the rights and duties of road users. The chief of police in that agency already wants to schedule another session. I’ll be heading back in the fall.

Louisiana, though, was a different story. Sessions in three parishes were scheduled for July. A fourth had been promising to get me and the course into their academy to work with new recruits. I was excited to be able to work in my home state since Louisiana is a focus state under the federal guidelines…that means that the number/rates of injuries and fatalities is higher than most states. Pardon my bluntness, but that means that yes, we’re doing a better job of injuring and killing road users than most other places in the country. What happened? Even with registration open for several weeks I had ZERO registrants for any of the sessions. Another region tried to get a session scheduled. We offered several dates…twice…and then (crickets). I’ve gotten radio silence from the agency that wanted me to present in their academy…

Not the response you might expect. I do understand that staffing is problematic most everywhere, and I’m asking agencies to give me several officers for a half- or a whole day. But there are requirements for continuing education anyway. How does this education not matter? Doesn’t keeping all road users safe make the list? This in a state that has FOUR of the top 50 most dangerous counties (parishes) in the entire country for bicyclists. And those four are all in one region! And in that region, we’ve been trying for three years to get agencies to participate, to no avail.

Given that, I’m not sure Louisiana will renew my grant for the next fiscal year. And that will be the worst thing, because I won’t be able to back and try again for another year. But believe me, I will try again. Because it’s too important not to try!

Share
Same song…again

Same song…again

“Each year about 2 percent of motor vehicle crash deaths are bicyclists.”

Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS)

Yeah…I have started many of my blog posts with a quote…from a book, an essay, an article. Usually they’re about some aspect of being on a bicycle that provides a way to discuss how we can be safer or more confident, but occasionally straying into discussions about crashes, injuries and other such things.

Today, though I was struck by the facts on a particular webpage that I accessed in the process of writing a proposal. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety looked at the US Department of Transportation’s Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS).

As the quote that started this article says, each year about 2 percent of motor vehicle crash deaths are bicyclists. That’s 843 lives lost in 2019. That’s down a bit from the 888 in 2018, but it still represents a frightening number of fathers, mothers, friends, children, sons and daughters who died…

There are some remarkable details in the numbers. Ninety percent of deaths were among bicycle drivers aged 20 and older. Ninety percent is also the reduction in deaths since 1975 for bicycle drivers less than 20 years of age. And in every year since 1975, more males were killed than females.

Helmet use – no, you don’t have to wear a helmet as an adult, but 62% of bicyclists killed in 2019 were not wearing helmets. And yes, I understand that wearing a helmet would NOT prevent a large number of the deaths, but thank you, I’ll be wearing mine every time I get on my bicycle.

I’ve conducted a couple of certification seminars recently, and one of the topics covered is rural riding. One member of the class has to do a presentation on the things one should consider when riding in a rural setting. And in both, the dangers of the rural setting was emphasized. But here’s the thing: 22% of deaths were on rural roads. The other 78% were in urban settings. Hmm…maybe I’ll ride more out in the country.

And the majority occurred on major roads, and away from intersections. Yes, we need to have “eyes in the back of our heads” to see what’s going on around us.

Be vigilant. Be careful. Be alert. But be there. Get on your bike. Ninety-eight percent of motor vehicle crash deaths are NOT bicyclists.

Share
Complete Streets…and all that

Complete Streets…and all that

Complete Streets. A movement. A philosophy. A way of looking at the state of things and creating new avenues of change.

Hmm…avenues of change. Figuratively, or literally?

Yes!

Complete Streets (figuratively)

What does it even mean? Well, to understand that, we need to go back…way back. History of transportation in 25 words or less: People walked. They started riding on animals and making carts. Bikes and roads came along. Then motor vehicles pushed everyone else off the road.

I did it, with one word to spare. The reality is that as each new mode came along, people were forced further and further off the road. Complete Streets is about changing the trajectory. We have historically looked at “throughput,” a term engineers and planners use to mean “how can we ‘improve’ the road so that we can get more cars through here faster?” In America, over time, the road became almost exclusively for motor vehicles. Pedestrians and other road users were shunted over to the edges, and only tolerated rather than acknowledged as legitimate users of the roadways.

And now, we’re taking another look. It’s far too late, but voices are beginning to be heard. There are simply too man y people dying on our roadways every year. We “accept” 30,000 to 40,000 lives lost every year as the cost of doing business. Thirty to forty THOUSAND mothers, fathers, children, sons, daughters lose their lives because we need to get to the shopping center, or across town, or to visit our relatives a few states away faster…

Complete Streets (literally)

So what are we doing? Taking another look at streets. Why are they designed the way that are? Does that street really need to have 3 17- foot lanes in each direction? Does the median need to be 100 feet wide? Using that example, we observe that the speed limit of 35mph is ignored by virtually all motorists. And why wouldn’t it be? The road is begging them to go faster! Would they go fast if the lanes were 10 feet wide, with a narrow median? Studies have shown that the answer is no. Yet, there is very little difference in throughput when lanes are narrowed down…

Hmm. So narrower roads do not really affect how many cars will pass, but slows them down in the process…Sounds like there may be an opportunity there. How about giving some of that space back to other road users, maybe? Like people on bicycles, people on foot…you know, the ones who were using roads before there were cars. It’d be greener, too. And it would take some of the motor vehicles off the road!

That’s one example of how Complete Streets can impact the trajectory. The idea is to look at all roadways, particularly when road changes/improvements are planned. In the design/redesign, think about all road users: how can we make this safe for anyone who needs to use this road, regardless of the mode of transportation? Is a separate bike lane needed? How about green space? What should the speed limit be?

Retrofitting is obviously harder than designing from scratch. But that’s the real world. We have to look at all of the existing roadways and figure out how we do a better job so that the cost of business comes down – WAY down. We CAN’T just keep killing people and saying its ok.

Share
Two Sides of Changing a Flat

Two Sides of Changing a Flat

Which one do you want to hear first? Let’s flip a coin. Oh, it doesn’t matter because they’re both relevant.

Several years ago, the League of American Bicyclists revised the Smart Cycling curriculum. There were some things that needed to be updated. The focus before the revisions was on roadies. Spandex-clad, skinny-tired, long-distance road riders…With the revision, the whole point was to be more inclusive, with anyone pushing the pedals considered a bicyclist.

That was good, because, of course, not everyone driving a bike wants to do a century, or to race. Far more people use their bicycles for transportation and/or recreation, so the shift was appropriate.

One thing that fell off the plate left me wondering, though. The basic course taught by LCIs nationwide included basic bicycle maintenance. It included a bike check (the ABC Quick Check) designed to make sure your bike is ok before a ride. It also included brake and derailleur adjustments (that many folks may never attempt to do…). Finally, it included changing a flat.

All of those except the ABC Quick Check went away when the curriculum changed. All of those changes seemed OK to me, except…changing a flat. I, and several others, pointed out that everyone riding a bike ought to know how to do that. And…even in training to become an LCI, there was officially no requirement that someone know how to do that. We felt then, and I feel now, that there is an issue of (dare I say it) fairness, or equity, in that change?

In my experience, working with many LCIs over the years, more men than women know how to change a flat. And here’s where the two sides I mentioned earlier come in. Shouldn’t we equip all riders with that basic knowledge? Undoubtedly, some people riding bicycles will never do it themselves (bike shops will do it quickly, and at low cost). But there are some who will do it themselves, because it empowers them to take care of their vehicle, or because it frees them to go wherever/whenever without major concern. But if no one ever shows you how to do it, you’re at a disadvantage.

Here’s the other side. I’ll illustrate with a story. On a long charity ride, my (adult) daughter got a flat. Several of the men in our group jumped in to fix it. They assumed 1) she didn’t know how to do it, or 2) she would take too long. My daughter, having been taught to do it, told them all to back off (it was fun to see!). She quickly and efficiently changed the tube, and we went on.

So now we see the issues. We don’t teach people to do it, and then even if we do, we assume they can’t (or they aren’t good at it). How about we give people the skills they need, and then let them decide how to address the problem?

Share
A giant leap…and baby steps

A giant leap…and baby steps

And so it begins. without a quote today, because I’m just going to tell you a story. About police and bikes…good news.

It’s about perseverance, and has both a giant leap and the baby steps I mentioned in the title of this post. As many of you know, I moved back to New Orleans a few years ago after spending much of my adult life in New Jersey. If you’ve read any of my early blog posts, like this one , or this one (both about law enforcement), or one about road rage, you know of my passion for trying to get everyone to play nice in the sandbox. In 2014, I talked with a couple of friends, active police officers who also ride bikes regularly. They said that officers didn’t have any better knowledge of what it means to ride a bike than anyone else!

So we decided to put together a course on how traffic law applies to bicyclists. We did, tried it out in 2014, the worked with a couple of groups, getting state grants to do the program. We’ve done it most years since then, and participation has been great. So when I moved back to Louisiana, I was all ready to jump in with both feet. That didn’t turn out the way I expected. There is no state bicycling group. I contacted the local police agency to see if we could do it here and ran into one roadblock after another. But…baby steps. I finally was able to present a “pilot” of the course in Kenner, LA. Meanwhile, though, I didn’t stop reaching out to all the names I heard. I didn’t stop calling and emailing people at the Louisiana Highway Safety Commission, either. My name was out there (maybe as that crazy bike guy who won’t stop calling)!

Finally, late one Friday, I decided to give just one more try to reach the key person…and she answered the phone. She said,”I want to talk to you!” I replied, “I’ll be in your office as soon as you give me a date and time to be there.” Long story short, I got a grant. It took 5 years. We’re now implementing the program statewide.

There are still plenty of baby steps, though. Getting the details of the course approved took quite a long time, which cut into the length of time I had to actually do the course during the year. Meeting/discussing/organizing sessions (oh yeah, with COVID thrown in the mix!!!) has been even harder than it should have been. But we’re getting there. Two sessions down, several more to go. I’m trying to do it in all regions of the state, so that I can gather a core group of people who know about it and who will champion it to others for next year.

I could keep going, but I’m not going to ask you to keep reading more right now. My next post will tell you a little bit about how it’s going so far. I’m already seeing some interesting patterns in the two sessions I’ve done. Of course, that’s just to tease you so you’ll read the next post. Don’t worry, it’s coming soon!

Share
Insurance! Insurance?

Insurance! Insurance?

“Why don’t bicyclists have to purchase insurance like motorists do?”

-anonymous

That’s a question I heard very recently at a class I conducted. The questioner couched it in terms suggesting that if bicyclists want the same rights as motorists, they should be responsible in the same way for covering the damage they cause.

Umm…the damage they cause?

Let’s go back to the basics of insurance coverage. What is it, really? It’s really a bet. I heard your brain explode just then…but that’s just what it is. The contract between you and your auto insurer is no more than a glorified bet. You’re betting that you will be involved in a crash. Your insurer is betting you won’t. They’re willing to take the bet, because for the most part, people aren’t involved in vehicle crashes. So they take the bet (and your money), knowing that the odds are in their favor. The damage to property they must pay is far less than the funds they collect in premiums (bets).

So let’s talk about that property damage. The damage in a collision depends partially on the mass of the two colliding objects. It also depends on the speed of the objects at the moment of the collision; higher speed equals more damage. 

Let’s apply that to the subject at hand. A small sedan weighs just about one and a half tons. The impact of a 1.5 ton object hitting anything is going to cause significant damage to whatever it hits. Of course, there would be even more damage from the average (two-and-a-half ton) SUV when it hits something. Now when those two objects collide with each other, the damage is enormous. Liability insurance covers the property damage that results.

Let’s apply that same thinking to the bicycle and its driver. A road bike may weigh as little as 14-15 lbs. The heaviest bikes (e-bikes) may weigh as much as 80 lbs. What’s the comparison to the impact of a motor vehicle? It’s easy to see that even the heaviest bike could not cause anywhere near the amount of damage as even the smallest sedan. But when those two collide with each other, what’s the outcome? 

Because of the weight differential, there can be, at most, minimal damage to the motor vehicle. And the driver of that vehicle probably suffered no injury at all, since cars are designed to protect the occupants, who are already shielded inside a substantial metal box. How about the bicyclist? Having collided with a 1.5-2.5 ton object, much more damage is to be expected to person and property. Aside from the simple weight differential the bicyclist does not have a sturdy metal frame around him/herself.

Let’s not forget the speed differential. The motorist will typically be moving at two to five times faster than the bicyclist. The likelihood of serious injury or death rises quickly as speed at impact increases. But regardless of speed, the damage will certainly be greater to the bicyclist and the bicycle than to the motorist and the motor vehicle.

The questioner then continued to deflect from the (obvious) problem with his argument, saying, “Well what if the motorist swerves to avoid a bicyclist and hits another car?” The answer is, of course, that’s 100% on the motorist. From the question, it’s clear that the motorist was not paying enough attention to the environment at the time. If he/she were, other solutions might have been apparent.

Yes, there are cases in which a bicyclist collides with a pedestrian or with another bicyclist, but those are rare. When they occur, there is typically little damage to persons or property. Could there be serious damage or injury? Yes, but that’s unusual. In those cases, of course, the courts are available for adjudication. And oh, by the way, many homeowner/renter/condo insurance policies would cover damage anyway. So the whole argument is without basis.

We come to this: as a motorist, you bet the insurance companies that you’ll cause substantial damage with your vehicle. They take the bet since you probably won’t. If you do, they’ll pay out, but still make lots of money in the end. As a bicyclist, it’s unlikely you’ll ever cause any significant damage, so you don’t initiate the bet.

Share
Another “Oops!”

Another “Oops!”

I’m sitting in a car dealership, having recall work done. The perfect opportunity to start going through stuff on the computer and cleaning things out/reorganizing/deleting, etc. In digging through the files, I find an old post on bicycle safety from 2020 (wow! pre-COVID) that I apparently never put up. But it’s worth taking a look at it. I wrote it after going on a bike ride with local police officers. And my goodness, that day, they got to experience first-hand some of the craziness that people on bicycles experience ALL. THE. TIME. So I’ll just go ahead and put this out there.

You should think about this in light of all the new bike infrastructure now being built around town. Of course, it’s meant to make roads safer for all users. The whole “Complete Streets” philosophy entails making roads safer for ALL road users, rather than just getting motorists from Point A to Point B faster (which has been the operating principle of road design for quite some time). However, motorists are saying that bicyclists “taking over my streets” and “getting in the way of traffic” and “slowing me down” are just wrong. And they’re taking it out on anyone who disagrees with them…see the road rage incidents mentioned below against bicycling groups that include police officers!!!

Read on…


At the end of January, several LCIs/ride leaders met with officers from New Orleans Police Department’s First District for a bike ride. The inspiration for the ride came when Clark Thompson spoke with Captain LeJon Roberts at a neighborhood association meeting. To Capt. Robert’s statement , “We should go for a bike ride,” Clark responded, “OK. When?”

And so last week, Clark and I, and three other LCIs (Janneke van der Molen, John Strange, Scott Verdun) led a group including about a dozen officers (including Capt Roberts) on a bike ride through the CBD during evening rush hour. Blue Bikes provided bicycles to officers who needed them. The ride included a bit of the French Quarter, Baronne St, Loyola and Tulane Avenues, Galvez, Canal, and Broad Streets, and the Lafitte Greenway/Basin Street.

The officers were split into small groups, riding in plainclothes, so as not to attract any special attention. A mere three blocks from the start of the ride, one group experienced road rage as a motorist told us to quit blocking the street (in not so friendly terms). As soon as we crossed Canal, another group encountered a taxi driver blocking the bike lane, who, when approached and asked to move, threatened the ride leader (it didn’t hurt that Capt. Roberts was in that group).

On reaching Tulane and Loyola, because on the high volume of traffic, we elected not to move to the left lane to turn onto Tulane. Instead we did a two-stage turn, crossing Loyola and Tulane, then waiting for a green light to proceed on Tulane. The light turned green and a motorist gunned it to get in front of us and turn right, almost hitting an officer in the process.

We stopped along the way to discuss what we had seen, and to alert officers to upcoming challenges. We could not have planned for a better (worse?) outcome, as several incidents brought home the reality faced by bicycle drivers every day in the Big Easy…it’s not so easy for people on bicycles. The incidents I mentioned (and others along the way) brought a new level of awareness to the officers. We leaders could see/hear the “Aha!” moments on the ride.

At least this group of officers has a better understanding of how much different roads look when you’re under your own power on two wheels, rather than in a big metal box with the power of a gasoline engine. Capt. Roberts told us that he wants everyone in the First District to experience bicycle safety (or in this case bicycle “un-safety”), and that he will bring it up as something that should be done across the city.

And by the way, the next day, officers were in front of the business where the taxi driver was blocking the lane, handing out $300 tickets.

Small steps, big results. We’ll take it.

For more about These Guys’ efforts in law enforcement, see my post Bikes and the Law or Bicycling and Traffic Law 2018.

Share
“I want to ride my bicycle…”

“I want to ride my bicycle…”

Freddie Mercury, Queen

Health. Thankful that I have it, but all too aware of our fragility.

So what’s with my philosophical musing today? Well, in mid-January I went on a trail ride with a friend. My first trail ride since moving back to Louisiana, believe it or not. We were having a nice ride on a flat, but very winding course. Having a good time on a warm January day. The trail was (mostly) dry, and well-maintained. We were just about done the circuit. About 100 yards from the end, we came across a slightly wet portion of the trail. Roots everywhere. All of a sudden, the bike went one way, and I endo’ed. Yep, splat. Perfect face plant, splayed out completely. My left wrist hurt a bit as I untangled myself from the bike and the roots and stood up. Got back on the bike and rode out to the levee for the trip back to the car.

My left wrist complained. I wasn’t sure if it was broken…I did immediately think back to when my wife had a bike mishap that led to surgery and multiple screws in her wrist…I drove home and took some ibuprofen. My wife and I agreed that if it still hurt the next morning, I’d go to Urgent Care.

Well, yep. First thing next morning. X-rays showed what’s called a “buckle fracture,” a tiny little thing. A few days later the orthopedist put my thumb/wrist into a cast. It’s still on…they tell me they’ll (probably) take it off next week.

I want to ride my bicycle. Not exactly feasible right now. I want to go see the “House Floats” that have sprung up all over the city in this pandemic-cancelled Carnival season. I want to get out with my wife and ride around town to explore the amazing creativity that fuels this city in spite of everything. I don’t want to have to get in the car to do that. But the reality is that, for now, I have no choice. I realize this is really a tiny setback, and that things are much worse for many other people. Unlike some others, I will be able get back to this thing that I love to do, very soon.

Next week, though…

Share
A thing apart

A thing apart

“It is no exaggeration to affirm that a journey by bicycle is like none other; it is a thing apart; it has a tempo and a style of its own.”

James E Starrs, The Noiseless Tenor

A journey by bicycle is a thing apart. It’s not like driving a car.

In a car, you are separate from the world, not a part of it. The metal box has its own environment; one created by the car manufacturer, and customized by the driver, to minimize the interaction with the world outside. In recent years, the car’s environment has become even more insular. Touch-screen interfaces, messaging, Bluetooth connectivity, all combine to make the motorist even more laser-focused on the inside of the vehicle and the inside of his or her mind. More and more distractions are available. Less and less attention is given to the outside world, to the ROADWAY, and to OTHER ROAD USERS! 

We’ve seen (among many other things in 2020) an increase in bad motorist behavior. It seems that as the streets emptied early in the COVID era, those who were on them decided that they didn’t need to follow the rules so closely. Average speeds increased, with a parallel increase in crashes, injuries and fatalities.

But another thing that has increased in 2020 is bicycle use. Data show increases across the country. People have rediscovered the bicycle’s tempo and style. Continuing the musical analogy, what’s the tempo of a bicycle? Somewhere between a pedestrian’s “Andante” (a walking pace) and a motorist’s Allegro” (quick) or “Presto” (very fast). Moderato,” then, using the musical term for “moderate.”

And it’s more than just a difference of speed: it’s a difference of approach. When driving a car one sees the world in glances, in (often) disconnected bits. The driver passes through the world at a pace that allows only glimpses between the start of the journey and its destination. The journey is incidental. The goal is the destination. 

On the bicycle, the journey is often as much a part of the experience as the destination. One sees so much more. The more relaxed pace allows the bicycle driver to see details that would be missed by the motorist. The sights, the smells. The sounds, the breeze. The hills, the weather. The light, the clouds. In all, a journey, not a mere conveyance from Point A to Point B.

Think about your neighborhood, and about your usual haunts. Most of your travel is within a few miles of your home. What if you used a bicycle to get to the hardware store for those batteries you need to replace? How about a bike ride to get that gallon of milk? Do you ever think about driving your bike instead of your car to the drugstore? What would you get?

A little cardio exercise…a little saving on gasoline…a little less wear on your car…maybe even more time to do something else, since you didn’t have to get the car out, find a parking place, park it, walk to the store’s front door (you can park right in front!), put things in the trunk, drive home, find a parking space (or put it back in the garage)…

And it’s not just about those things; it’s about being outside on a bike. Maybe it’s been a very long time since you’ve been on a bike. Maybe it’s time to rediscover the joy that is possible on two wheels!

Share
Theme: Elation by Kaira.
USA