Good morning
- WaPo on BikePlanner and the Great College Park Bicycle Move. Did they use WABA's MOABT? Still more here.
- 5 DC Bike rides.
- Ok, despite the fact that it's tied to the Premium Rush movie coming out in August, this is a pretty good article about fixed gear bikes, how they work and why people choose them. You can expect more articles about fixie's if the movie has any success and they may not be as good as this one.
- A study of San Jose shows how high stress streets create islands of low-stress bikeability that are disconnected from each other, and how to fix that.
- From an article on the Olympic atheletes who finish in 4th place (including Taylor Phinney twice) "In the women's triathlon, after swimming, biking and running about 34 miles, Sarah Groff gave two hours of all she had. While biking she said she "rode over" a Polish entrant who had fallen in front of her. Still, she ended up 10 seconds behind the bronze medalist." Speaking of the women's race, there may have been a tie for first.
- Stockholm's congestion fee was initially opposed by 75% of residents. But then the pilot worked...really well, and so they voted to reinstate it. "Six years after the city imposed a congestion fee on drivers coming into the urban core, the sense of sanity in Stockholm’s streets continues to awe local researchers, environmentalists, and politicians." Oh, if only sanity ruled the land.
- Lance Armstrong takes his case to court.
Are triathletes bike handling skills that much worse than pure cyclists, or have I just been reading too much BSNYC?
Posted by: Tara | August 10, 2012 at 06:10 PM
Triathletes have a reputation for poor bike handling skills. Part of that could be the result of the bikes. Triathlon/time trial bikes are notoriously more difficult to handle in tight situations than road bikes are.
Perhaps part of it is the wave of beginners who have joined the triathlon community over the past decade.
Part of it could just be snobbery on the part of a small segment of road cycling enthusiasts. I'm sure there are many non-triathletes who are beginner cyclists that have poor bike handling skills. I see many of them out on the streets, though I can't say for certain whether someone is a triathlete, a road cyclist, a bike commuter or a new recreational rider (or some combination of the above).
Posted by: Cyclist | August 10, 2012 at 07:12 PM
I might check out "Premium Rush" but I'll wait for some reviews first. I don't have high expectations. Hopefully I will be pleasantly surprised. Either way, I don't think I'll be getting a fixed-gear bike at any time in the near future.
Posted by: Cyclist | August 10, 2012 at 07:13 PM
6 AM for the Crescent/Rock Creek loop? That seems wholly unnecessary. (& there isn't a heck of a lot of 'heavy DC traffic' on a route that goes from Jeff Memorial down the MVT to Old Town.
Posted by: Kolohe | August 10, 2012 at 09:29 PM
Weirdly sloppy. How could a magazine with any budget or a even a random copy editor screw up the towpath route map to White's Ferry. Yet Washingtonian managed.
Posted by: Read Scott Martin | August 11, 2012 at 12:04 AM
If I remember, the residents of stockholm didn't mind the congestion fee; it was suburban/neighbooring cities that complained. And they didn't vote to extend it -- they voted to stop it. The referendum was blocked. The greens forced it through as part of agreement to form a national goverment.
However, I would like to start taxing DC residents evertime to come to DCA and IAD. Or BWI for that matter.
Posted by: charlie | August 11, 2012 at 10:58 AM
charlie, from the article
"public opposition to the fees initially ran as high as 75 percent."
and
"When the trial was over, the cars came back. Traffic volumes rose so close to their original levels that city residents, by a slim majority, voted to make the congestion charge permanent."
and aren't DC residents already taxed to go to DCA and IAD and BWI? I have a lot of taxes on my airline tickets and parking ain't cheap.
Besides, that's not the point of "congestion" pricing. If things are truly congested than do so at the times they are - I have no problem with that. I normally bike or take transit to DCA and MARC/Metrobus to BWI anyway.
Posted by: washcycle | August 11, 2012 at 11:58 AM
"After a seven-month trial earlier this year, Stockholm held a referendum this month on whether to make the charge permanent. In answer to the question: “Should congestion tax be used in Stockholm?”, 53% voted yes and 47% no, making it the first European city to approve a road user charge.
Whether the vote will mean a reintroduction of the congestion charge is less clear thanks to a complicated set of political circumstances. A somewhat different referendum was held in 14 of the 25 other municipalities in Greater Stockholm – areas under control of centre-right parties – and in answer to the question “Should the congestion tax in Stockholm be made permanent?”, 39.8% voted yes and 60.8% no."
As before: voters in the center city voted for it, voters outside did not, and the referendum lost. the national parliment then decided to impose it, as a said, as a condition of the greens entereing the coaltion.
Stockholm is pretty unique with the number of bridges and choke points.
Posted by: charlie | August 11, 2012 at 02:14 PM
Whether the vote will mean a reintroduction of the congestion charge is less clear thanks to a complicated set of political circumstances.
Charlie, the tax was made permanent on August 1, 2007. So, that's pretty clear.
Voters outside the city weren't really voting on it. They were voting in consultative votes, so that's totally irrelevant - and may not even accurately reflect what a real vote would be. You get a different set of voters for an opinion poll then a vote that will actually change policy.
But the referendum won.
It would not be that difficult to do this in DC.
Posted by: washcycle | August 11, 2012 at 10:55 PM
Airport taxes already exist and amounts vary depending on which airport you fly. I think the issue here about congestion pricing is the complaint of driving commuters whenever the talk of commuter taxes comes around. I assume they don't want to be forced to pay extra if they get the same slow commute into DC. To me that says there's a failure of that state's own transportation system - if congestion commuters were given faster and more convenient non-driving options to get into the city which didn't involve having to pay a commuter tax, then I bet more commuters would take that option. As it stands now, those states don't offer those options. Instead of blaming DC for considering congestion taxes, maybe MD and Virginia congestion commuters should look at their own state and start with solutions there first. DC has to shoulder a much larger portion of road wear and tear done by Virginia and Maryland congestion drivers, than DC drivers have on Virginia and Maryland roads.
Posted by: Upside | August 13, 2012 at 11:56 AM