Alexandrians and the Bike Reich

There's quite a back and forth going on the LTTE section of the Alexandria Times.

It started in August with a letter from someone who saw many cyclists running stop signs on Union Street and wrote a letter demanding an end to the cycling anarachy. 

In response, bike advocate Jonathan Krall, wrote to criticize the promotion of "an offensive stereotype."

The idea that cyclists are somehow less law-abiding than others on our roads is a stereotype that has no basis in fact. Studies show that people who ride actually react to the “danger” of cycling (another myth) by being more cautious rather than reckless. For example, a years-long study of alcohol-related crashes showed that non-cyclists were twice as likely to be drunk as cyclists in car-bicycle or cyclist-pedestrian collisions.
Sadly, this stereotype is so pervasive that even many cyclists believe it. Nevertheless, when it is repeated by the media or by our elected leaders, this shameful stereotyping reflects badly on us all.

Another writer the same week asked why Alexandria was spending money on bike facilities when the city has been "in a tight fiscal environment for the last six years." She advocates spending time figuring out how to lower property taxes and also wishes the city would spend more on fire equipment and public employee salaries. She also has noticed that cyclists run stop signs and stop lights. I think the fiscal answer to her question is that spending money on new bike facilities - especially where they replace extra-wide roads or curb-side parking - increases mobility and capacity on area roads at a rather low cost, while also improving health and the environment. All the alternatives of achieving these goals are likely more expensive, as is the cost of doing nothing. 

The next week a pair of letters also criticized cyclists. One person took a hard-line "follow the law" approach and called for heightened enforcement of all road users - but mostly cyclists, and for cyclists to be issued points on their license so that they can no longer drive, which would result in more cycling. I think that 100% enforcement of the law (tickets for 1mph over the limit, 3-foot passing violations, etc...) for all users would likely be a net win for cyclists, so I'm not going to stand in the way of complete and equitable enforcement. But really, that's not what this is about. 

The final letter compares Alexandria's proposal to create bike lanes on Cameron and Prince Streets to the Nazi party's use of the Riechstag fire to create Nazi Germany (no, I'm not kidding). The claim is that the stated need for the bike lanes is to get cyclists off the sidewalks, a problem Alexandria created by legalizing sidewalk cycling. The analogy fails in many ways (the Nazis didn't start the fire, for example), but the main criticism is that the city's decision to build bike lanes on these streets does not represent a power grab. It has always had that power. The writer asks

Why would they legalize riding bicycles on the sidewalk unless City Hall considered it safe and desirable?

In part because VDOT may have required it, but also to serve young and less confident cyclists. Sidewalk cycling can be safe - though not at the same speed as riding in the road - , and while more desirable than driving, is not as desirable as biking in the road.  So the other reason for the change in law was to support young and less confident cyclists. 

And why would City Hall use discouraging cyclists from using sidewalks as a justification for more bicycle lanes so soon after they allowed said cyclists on sidewalks?

I don't think the goal is to discourage sidewalk cycling, it's to encourage cycling in the roadway. And surely that is only part of the justification of the law. It is not unusual for places to allow sidewalk cycling while also trying to encourage people not to do it. In fact we allow all kinds of activities (smoking, drinking, watching Dance Moms, etc...) that we might simultaneously want to discourage people from doing.

Update: And there's more.

Following this article about how WABA and the BPAC have been doing outreach to encourage better behavior among cyclists, and this letter about how we're all scofflaws, there was another flurry of letters.  One argued that he saw more bad behavior from cyclists on Union Street than from drivers. 

Our old friend, Capital Bikeshare slayer and bike registration fan Kathryn Papp, wrote a letter that called into question the validity of the count data the city is relying on, because by publishing the time and place of counts through requests for volunteers, they are encouraging cyclists to inflate the county by riding in those places at those times. I'm not sure cyclists are that interested in inflating the counts.

Another writer makes the argument that applying to cyclists laws written for drivers may not always make sense. 

And Krall again writes in, this time to support the public process and criticize those who try to subvert it by spreading false rumors. 

Comments

[Greenbelt]

So lets all go out with our video cameras and film traffic, shall we?

I daresay we'll see some sorta unsafe and sorta illegal stuff, like speeding well above the limit and rolling too fast through four-way stops, a little bit of recklessly unsafe and blatantly illegal stuff, like drunk driving and red light running, and we'll see a tiny bit of absolutely legal letter-of-the-law behavior.

But what we'll mostly see is mostly safe but not technically legal stuff, like speeding a little over the limit, jaywalking when it's clear, slow-rolling stop signs safely, Idahoing lights etc.

[Michael H]

In an unrelated item, it seems as though Courtland Milloy has a colleague in NY Post writer Natalie O'Neill, who seems to sympathize with those who "dream about wiping out obnoxious Citi Bikers."

http://nypost.com/2014/06/05/sharknado-2-takes-a-bite-out-of-citi-bikers/

[washcycle]

She's got nothing on the Washington Post's Richard Cohen who's 1988 article "Bicycle Grief" is the worst. Here's a quote:

"I want to kill a bicyclist. I want to hit one of them with my car, knock him off the road, send him spilling over the curb, tumbling out of control. I want to see the bike go flying and then- this is my fantasy-I stop my car, get out and so do all the other drivers. They cheer me. They yell `Hooray!' and then they pick me up and carry me around on their shoulders. And then they take me down to the District Building, where they have a ceremony for me. The mayor and everything, if he's in town."

[Crickey7]

A week ago, I was driving my daughter and her friend home on Goldsboro Road, a two-lane road near my house. I drove at (not below) the speed limit for the roughly 1 mile stretch between lights. One driver behind me absolutely started losing it--honking, swerving as if to pass, slamming on brakes theatrically--until we got to where he could pass. At their most scofflaw, cyclists never do insane things like that.

[Daniel]

Dino Drudi is the best gift Alexandria cyclists have been given to define the opposition. His other interests include institutionalized slavery. Whoops, sorry, I meant to say "heritage:"

-start quote-
The street-naming section dates back to the early 1950s when the city annexed the West End from Fairfax County, essentially doubling its size. Alexandria was known to fly a Confederate flag above City Hall at the time and, according to a 1953 Washington Post article, the naming requirement was aimed at reducing some confusion.

The deleted section required all new streets running in a north-south direction to, “insofar as possible,” bear the names of Confederate military leaders. The change also erased a requirement that new east-west streets bear the names of persons or places prominent in American history.

City resident Dino Drudi spoke in general opposition to the change, saying naming streets after historic figures has importance.
- End Quote -

http://patch.com/virginia/delray/alexandria-council-repeals-confederate-streetnaming-law-delray#.VEVbcfldV0o

[SJE]

Papp seems to think that cyclists have nothing better to do than break the law and artificially inflate the bike counter, instead of working joes (and joans) who just happen to be on two wheels, not four.

[Greenbelt]

Greenbelt has its problems, but the great Alexandria bike lane drama makes me really, really glad I live where I do!

[Smedley Burkhart]

Like a celebrated political institution, the auto-supremacists know that current demographic trends are all against them. There will always be a backlash.

[DE]

Crickey, I was briefly in front of and then behind a cyclist who did just that on the I-66 bridge last month. This is the bridge with the ridiculously narrow sidewalk. He actually shouldered a runner aside to pass, flipped him off, then got caught behind a cargo bike and kept throwing his hands up in the air in frustration because he couldn't pass.

This is evidence of nothing, of course, except that everyone is insane in all modes of travel.

[Crickey7]

Wow. What a menace. You should post a description on WABA as someone to keep an eye out for.

[DE]

I should have. Alternatively, I could kill myself flying up the hill from Rosslyn to catch up with him and give him an earful for being a jerk to a runner. Not that I would ever do such a thing.

[Greenbelt]

DE's story brings to mind (in a very left-field way) the proper renaming of the Washington Redskins football team. I've always thought the "Pigskins" would be a good team name, as fans could still use "hogs" and "skins" as nick-nicknames, and a football is a pigskin after all. And bringing to mind pork seems DC appropriate.

But maybe the truly appropriate DC-area label would just be the "Entitlements," since so many of DC area people behave as if they were entitled to more of the public resources or should receive more privileges than their neighbors or be allowed to bully others without restraint. Sadly that does seem to be a local characteristic too.

[Catherine]

I was afraid of this when they legalized sidewalk riding. I honestly thought it was the Upper King Street people's idea to legalize sidewalk riding so that we'd stop fighting for a bike lane in their precious overflow parking spaces. I was shocked when I found out that it was actually bike advocates pushing for that.

And now we have "just ride on the sidewalk because you fought to be able to ride on the sidewalk" when it is in the majority of situations, a very dangerous place for cyclists to be (and is not good on the PR with pedestrians either--most of whom are walking to/from a car anyway).

Not a good move by BPAC.

[DE]

Is it local, or is this just the way a lot of people are everywhere anymore? I really don't know.

Regarding sidewalk riding, I'm a big fan of it being legal for kids in suburban areas where they otherwise wouldn't ride.

[cyclistinthecity]

"I was shocked when I found out that it was actually bike advocates pushing for that."

RTA - This was done to conform with state law which allows cycling on sidewalks with certain exceptions. BPAC supported it because Alexandria is still lacking in bicycle connections all over the city and sidewalks are the only option on roads such as Duke Street or Seminary Road.

Frankly, it's better this way because I'd be pretty angry if I got a ticket for riding on the sidewalk on Seminary Road at 530pm on a weeknight while going home.

[Jonathan Krall]

Fun post, thanks for the laugh.

@Catherine The reason BPAC supported legalized sidewalk riding is that sidewalk riding is such a small issue that it should be dealt with using education and design (like maybe put bike parking on the street, where bikes belong), not enforcement.

As we predicted at the time, legalizing sidewalk riding changed nothing about how cyclists behave (few knew/know about that law). It also changed little in the public debate. Cyclists are still pushing for bike lanes because all but the youngest and most timid cyclists belong on streets. However, they can only ride there if streets are safer.

[Catherine]

@cyclistinthecity and Jonathan Krall

Oh, I do understand the thought behind it, particularly as it relates to the more highway-like roads that are the only option between points A and B (Duke, Seminary, Telegraph etc).

But I also know that a first line of defense against the argument that bikes should "get on the sidewalk" is that, "well, actually that is both unsafe and illegal". I had long found that very effective when in conversations with anti-bike folks, particularly when discussing the need for bike lanes.

So I really actually thought that it was the upper King/Taylor Run crowd that had pushed for the legalization of bikes on the sidewalks, so they could have an argument against the lanes. Maybe it was just the timing of the legalization that made it seem that way, I don't know.

For me, I don't see a cop writing a ticket for the 530 ride on Seminary--ever. They use common sense. They'd write a ticket for doing it on mid-King street (and rightly so), but for the most part, I think they "get it".

I DO see the cyclist being unable to get damages etc if injured or hit while riding there because legally he wasn't supposed to be riding there.

Obviously, you want the laws in line with reality, I get that, and I completely agree with that. But an unfortunate (and perhaps predictable) outcome of this move was that now BPAC is in the position of looking a little...something-- "legalize riding on sidewalks because the road is dangerous" to, immediately "build bike lanes because sidewalk riding is dangerous". It's a tough sell.

Especially when the opposition doesn't understand (or, more accurately, employs willful ignorance to the fact) that not all roads, or sidewalks, or bike lanes are created equal. Or that the idea idea is to have more options so that common sense and courtesy can rein. Or that the sidewalk legalization was a step to provide *something* while we're waiting for the actual solution. They'll only see that something is being "taken" from them and that the explanations sound contradictory. Too bad.

[ACyclistInThePortCity]

I still think Alexandria is a good place for cyclists - I was at the bike ped plan update meeting and the energy and vision for real improvement was impressive. Old Town is always a problem I guess - so many bikes, so many peds, cars less dominant than elsewhere in the City, and some die hard NIMBY's. But the real room for improvement is elsewhere in the City. I do not know the best way to do advocacy re Prince and Cameron, I need to attend more meetings and learn more.

[Dino Drudi]

The Washington Informer captured what I said more completely than the Patch “blog”: “The definition of what is or is not ‘obsolete’ is very subjective,” said Dino Drudi, 56, an Alexandria resident. He suggested that new Alexandria streets be named after military figures on both sides of the Civil War.
http://washingtoninformer.com/news/2014/jan/29/alexandria-ends-street-naming-requirement/