Andrew Beaujon over at City Paper thinks we doth protest too much.
Living in a city means making tradeoffs. In our nonstop complaining about being forced to veer around cars’ blind spots, I think we’re developing a major one of our own... we are a tiny percentage of the vehicular population in D.C., and I think it’s time we stopped acting like that gives us superpowers.
He states that people "think we're weenies" because
1) The clothes. For Pete’s sake, yellow lycra?
2) The incessant whining.
Maybe Andrew is just cranky, but I have to say I disagree.
First, I don't see that many cyclists decked out in lycra. Sure, out around Hains Point or even on trails, but once you get onto city streets, it's a lot of people biking in jeans and polo shirts.
Second, I don't think we whine any more than drivers or metro riders do.
If only there were some way to measure whininess...oh wait, there is.
Looking at Dr. Gridlock's discussions, which are largely unfiltered and contain much whining, for several months, here are the percentages of complaints I saw based on mode (All rail and bus complaints are listed as "transit"). From April though today I counted 88 "whines." This means I didn't count the winter when there are fewer cyclists and I theorize there would be fewer cycling whines.
[On the most recent discussion someone complains that they look out there window and see cyclists run stop lights. They are not complaining that they almost hit a cyclist or that they were almost hit by one, but that they must deal with the constant stress of watching cyclists run stop lights. That's whining. They should call Green and Fazio.]
Disclaimers: this is somewhat unscientific since what is and what is not a whine is subject to one's reading. If they seemed to be asking a legitimate question, it didn't count. For some complaints it was hard to tell which mode they represented. One whine was by a cyclist who rides the bus for most of their commute. They're complaint was about tax benefits. Since the census would count them as a transit user, so did I.
Breakdown of whines by group
Drivers - 63.6%
Transit riders - 27.3%
Pedestrians - 6.8%
Bicyclists - 1.1%
Telecommuters - 1.1%
And the breakdown of users as part of the whole (From 2007 census data)
Drivers - 44.9%
Transit riders - 36.4%
Pedestrians - 11.1%
Telecommuters - 5.0%
Bicyclists - 1.7%
And finding their whine ratio (percentage of whining/percentage of users - low numbers are less whiny)
Drivers 1.42
Transit riders - 0.75
Bicyclists - 0.64
Pedestrians - 0.61
Telecommuters - 0.22
I think a value below 1 means you're not a whiner. (I'd love to have access to - and time for - all of Dr. G's data to get a better data set). Drivers are the real whiners. Telecommuters are the least whiny.
This is not a surprise. According to surveys done elsewhere
Most content with their situation are the people who walk or cycle to work/school with 68% and 64% indicating to like commuting in the current way. Only among train riders, unhappy commuters (33%) outnumber the happy ones (24%).
Litman found that people with short, human-powered commutes were happier than their transit or motor vehicle-using counterparts.
And third, about the bike lanes. Parking in the bike lane is just another form of double parking. I often say that I don't care if you break the law or not; I just want people to be polite and safe. Double parking is probably, IMO, neither.
Double parking - in a bike lane or otherwise - is saying, "I know I'm holding up traffic, but I'm just too important to find/pay for a parking space."
Double parking is dangerous according to NYPD's traffic command. Though I could not find any definitive scientific study on the impact of double parking, I can't believe that a car stopped in a traffic lane is safe.
So why is it that UPS, Fedex, DHL etc...should be allowed to double park? Are they some group of noble entities fighting the good fight? No, they're private entities trying to make a buck on a business model that apparently involves breaking the law and causing gridlock. If the police were to crack down on them, these companies would do one of several things.
1. Pay the fines and go about business as usual. At least that's more money for the district.
2. Find actual parking.
3. Come up with a different model - runners who bring things to trucks or using bikes (as Richard Layman point out) in the city center. UPS started out as a bike messenger service, maybe a return to roots would serve them well. This idea is not so crazy...
"More delivery businesses are ditching vehicles and getting their goods to customers via bikes. Not only are business owners saving money on gas by using bikes that have baskets, flatbeds and cargo lockers, they also save on liability insurance because their automobiles are off the road. Massachusetts-based Petsi Pies operates two pie stores and enlisted a bicycle delivery service to give the owner more time to focus on business."
Pinched by both logistics and expenses, Corno shifted gears, settling on the lowly bicycle as the best way to pedal his pitas. His riders are a common sight on the streets and sidewalks of the Foggy Bottom neighborhood, and teaming up with DCSnacks, another bicycle-based delivery service, helped boost his sales by $2,000 a week.
Besides more timely deliveries and fewer parking tickets, Corno found there were definite economic advantages to the low-tech distribution method. First, salary expenses went down because he didn't have to build the cost of gas into his drivers' wages. Secondly, with no motorized vehicles to worry about, his liability insurance plummeted. And finally, much to Corno's surprise, turnover decreased.
4. Lobby for setting aside parking spaces for delivery vehicles, and for new buildings to require proper loading docks.
But the idea that the status quo - an entire industry which breaks the law, endangers citizens and holds up traffic by design - is OK, is ridiculous. If people have to pay extra for their packages to keep the streets safe, let them whine about it.
if it makes you feel any better a saw a fedex truck getting a ticket in dc last week. Pitty it wasn't in a bike lane, but at least we know they are not immune.
Posted by: IAn | October 13, 2008 at 06:49 AM
Under current circumstances, with on-street parking allocated to those who are either lucky or willing to spend long periods of time searching for a space, double-parking by delivery trucks is understandable, and even necessary to keep commerce moving. (Imagine the effect on traffic and convenient living if everyone had to pick their packages up at the FedEx office.)
But isn't performance parking the solution to this? The truck driver would be happy to pay a high hourly rate to park since he's only parking for ten minutes. If 15% of the parking spaces were almost always free on every block, there'd be no need to double-park.
Posted by: Ben Ross | October 13, 2008 at 10:19 AM
Sure, performance parking would be another great solution.
But, I disagree with the notion that double parking is necessary to keep commerce moving. Making everyone pick up their package at the FedEx office is not the only alternative. What about the impact of blocked lanes on traffic and convenient living? How is holding up traffic enhancing the movement of commerce?
It would be great if I could double park everywhere I went to do my shopping. That's commerce isn't it? Not letting me double park is bringing commerce to a screeching halt. Where do you draw the line? Why is one form of commerce more important than another?
Posted by: Washcycle | October 13, 2008 at 11:06 AM
Lycra shorts and jerseys are easily the most comfortable and practical thing to wear on a bike (for me anyway). Making fun of it is like making fun of a pedestrian for wearing sneakers. More transportation cyclists would wear lycra if they had the money or knew the benefits. I'm sick of people mocking bike shorts. But I confess to avoiding bike shorts now if I'm heading for the grocery store. What a shame.
Posted by: Jack | October 13, 2008 at 11:45 AM
Washcycle - You're right to ask where do you draw the line. At the same time, without performance parking, it becomes impossible for a delivery service to operate downtown without double parking. Bicycles can carry the little express envelope, but not the three-box document dump.
The point is that this is yet another part of the parking conundrum for which performance parking is really the only solution. If the price of parking is high enough, the deliveries that can go by bicycle or hand truck will go that way, and parking will be available for those who truly need it.
Posted by: Ben Ross | October 13, 2008 at 12:44 PM
Good point Jack. I hate the criticism of bike clothes as well and skipped over that point. No one expects you to swim in button-down or run in a pair of corduroys...
Posted by: Washcycle | October 13, 2008 at 12:53 PM
i've been commuting to work (9 miles each way) for about six years now and wouldn't have it any other way.
Through the hot and cold its an enjoyable way to start and finish my workday, and I biking for work and errands is a completely normal thing for me - not something novel.
oh and I wear jeans or shorts and a t-shirt with whatever applicable layers I need. no fancy bike clothes here
james
http://www.futuregringo.com
Posted by: james | October 13, 2008 at 01:00 PM
As for the claim that NYPD's traffic command finds that double-parking "endangers" cyclists, you have to understand that in the traffic biz it is customary to use "endanger" as a synonym for "inconvenience." Once you're attuned to it you'll see it everywhere.
Posted by: Contrarian | October 17, 2008 at 10:12 PM