TheWashCycle

Wednesday Morning Commute - High heels

Good morning. Tonight is DDOT's Capital Bikeshare expansion meeting

• So far, the money for next year's expansion is still in the budget (this is beyond the expansion that will be discussed this evening).
• Request for comment-disproving photos please "A circulator bus can take you from the station to Adams Morgan faster or you can also utilize the city's rental bike share, but try doing that in high heels for a night on the town."
• Georgetown is one of three schools with no cars on campus. "Georgetown, for instance, does not allow students who live on campus to have cars there, though the school's Washington, D.C., location allows access to a vast public transportation system"
• This year's bicycle crashes in Fairfax County. Can DC get something like this going? The fault breakdown is ugly (14 bicyclists and only 6 drivers).  I'm intrigued by the cyclist who was "drunk in public" 34 minutes after the New Year. Weren't we all? And I'm curious about the cyclist who was at fault in a crash with a hit and run. Who did the running?
• More about Lance. Why he should confess and Sally Jenkins' thoughts on him. Oddly, she blames the BCS.

Bikelash on Dr. Gridlock's chat

A couple of questions came in to Dr. Gridlock on bicycling that argued that cyclists are breaking the law (when they aren't) or using poor judgement, even though they're following the law.

As near as I can tell, in Maryland, bicycles are considered "vehicles" by the Transportation Code (11-104) and bicyclists are subject to "all duties required of the driver of a vehicle (21-1202). Those duties invclude stopping at stop signs and not passing on the right except in certain limited defined circumstances (beating a line of cars stopped at a red light not among those). Maybe DC and VA have similar laws, but I wonder why we don't seem to see these in your frequent columns on bicycles. Just this morning I had a bicyclist go between two lanes of traffic stopped for a red light and then proceed through the red light and resume a blocking position in the right lane.

Of course running a red light is still illegal in Maryland, but lane splitting is not according to WABA. So the commenter is wrong on that (it's also legal in VA and DC).

Dr. Gridlock says

Bicyclists across the region are supposed to obey the traffic laws, and as I frequently point out, many don't. (I also point out that drivers at least slow down for stop signs.)

That's the third time he's said that recently, as though that somehow absolves drivers. Of course drivers slow down (and so do cyclists more often than not). They're going faster to start with, had less time to look as they approached the intersection, have poorer vision and don't have the benefit of stereoscopic hearing. If I were half blind and half deaf, I'd be more cautious too. But either one is opposed to scofflaw behavior, or one is not. And even slowing down, drivers are still probably more dangerous at intersections.

The next commenter wrote

The WaPo has had quite a few stories about, yes, it's legal for bicyclists to take a full lane while riding. I wonder though whether it is prudent to exercise this right on (for example) a single lane curvy uphill road with a 35 mph speed limit, when you have trouble maintaining 6 mph. None of the stories ever seem to address the safety aspects of what can be an enormous speed differential.

Banning cyclists from going uphill, is the same as banning cycling. I wonder how often the situation described above has ever occured. Plus we just recently talked about how a driver should be prepared to stop for a stopped vehicle, so 6mph should give a pretty good cushion. The only reason it would be dangerous, is because of bad drivers. Dr. G does a better job with this one.

When I hear cycling safety advocates urge bikers to take the lane, it's usually in this scenario: They're driving on city streets with cars parked along the sides, and they're hugging the curb, then pulling out to get around cars, then pulling back to the curb, then pulling out to get around cars.

That's not a safe situation. They're confusing the drivers -- sometimes they're there, and sometimes they're not. It would be better to remain in the drivers' field of vision at all times, rather than popping in and out.

Tuesday Morning Commute - Craft Beer

In addition to Bike to Work week, it's American Craft Beer Week. Coincidence? Just don't combine the two (at least the drinking part, craft away..)

• The DCBAC has ticket data for bicyclists and pedestrians. For example in 2010, there were 334 tickets issued to cyclists for $6183 total. That includes everything from running a Traffic control device, to not having a bell equipped to riding on the sidewalk in the CBD. Last year, 6 cyclists got tickets for excessive speed.
• Alexandria has money for 6 CaBi stations and they hope to install them by next spring. That doesn't count CMAQ money for FY 2013.
• The 1983 Bike to Work day had 1500 participants. Were any readers there? I was busy with bus to school day.
• A section of the Four Mile Run Trail at Glencaryn Park near 3rd and Harrison Street will be closed for storm/sewer systems re-lining. Detour signs will be in place.   
• The League of American Bicyclists is having a contest for Bike to Work Day. You can win stuff. Also, you can become a member.
• Washingtonian has a story of Capital Bikeshare after 1 year. I would start the clock when the first bikes were rented, but they're counting from the time DDOT and Arlington teamed up (either that or this is from the future). "At the end of its first eight months, CaBi already has nearly 12,000 annual members and averages 4,000 to 5,000 rides a day....Anticipating increased ridership during the National Cherry Blossom Festival, he doubled the size of the bike station near the USDA building at 12th Street and Independence Avenue, Southwest. It worked: The system saw a big bump in 24-hour users for the three weeks during the festival. At last count, Capital Bikeshare has served about 21,000 single-day pass riders since its launch; at $5 a person, the numbers really add up."
• Local alley cat triple crown race. Three races, three cities, three days.

Thursday Morning Commute - Zombie Awareness Month

Good morning.

• DC DOE may build an elevated platform near the Anacostia Riverwalk crane to serve as a nesting spot for the construction-delaying ospreys (nicknames please) when they return in future seasons.
• Lydia DePillis beat me to it, but NoMa has new banners up branding the neighborhood. One of them highlights "Trails" as one of the amenities. 
• The Navy Yard had a ribbon-cutting on the Promenade yesterday morning. Can you cut the ribbon on something built decades ago?
• The wife of frequent commenter and photograph contributor Rootchopper was hit by a car recently and just got out of the hospital. Here's wishing her a quick and full recovery.
• Remember, it all starts with a cover-up. Might want to put air in your tires, that's all I'm saying. In actual news "The new W&OD Trail bridge over the Capital Beltway is currently under construction and expected to be complete in early June, said Titunik."
• In addition to appropriating $2M for 40 more CaBi stations, Tommy Wells also wants to designate funds for a "bait bike" and restore the $10,000 BAC budget.
• The next kidicalmass in May 21. "Once again we’ll meet in the park area just across Pennsylvania Avenue SE from Eastern Market Station (between 8th, 9th and D Street and Pennsylvania Avenue). From 10:00amFrom 10:00am till 11:00am, we’ll drink coffee, eat tasty snacks provided by our friends at Dessert Station, and share our family biking stories. Then we’ll leave for a leisurely ride through Capitol Hill and end with brunch at Pound Coffee. Participants will have a chance to win a $50 gift certificate from event partner BicycleSPACE."
• The Building Museum presentation on biking was last night. I didn't go, but did read many factoids on twitter.
• A woman was hit by a cyclist in Vienna. The cyclist "stopped to offer assistance and provided the woman with his contact information. The woman declined to be treated for her minor injuries, police said." Interestingly, "This incident does not meet the criteria to be considered a traffic crash, Vienna police said. Both participants are considered pedestrians under Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles reporting rules, they said." That's a bad policy. How can we know the magnitude of the problem if we don't track it? And, if being hit by a cyclist isn't a traffic crash, what is it?
• Montgomery County youth help Bikes for the World repair bikes. 
• "so it appears DOT has decided to degrade the bridge for the thousands of motorists just to benefit the dozens of bikers." This bridge has no bike accommodations, thus no one bikes there, thus no accommodations are needed.  But there are plans to add bike lanes to Cedar, despite what the letter writer says. The project is being escalated to get ready for BRAC, which also includes a push to - wait for it - get more people to bike. "We know that these roads are already failing, so with BRAC, every employee that rides a bike to work is one less car that's on the road -- causing gridlock."
• Bowie police chief wants more bike patrols. Paid for with speed camera revenue.

Sharing the Road replies

The Post published several letters in response to their editorial "Bicyclists are welcome in D.C., but they, too, should obey the law."

The first was last week and in it the authors asked if cyclists were welcome on the streets, where are our cycletracks? It went on to say that cyclists don't always feel welcome.

The other day, a woman in an SUV got behind us on Connecticut Avenue and began insistently beeping. When you are on two wheels and are being threatened by two tons of steel, it is more than a little intimidating. It was a beautiful day in front of the zoo, and the foot traffic on the sidewalk was such that even pedestrians had difficulty getting through. We asked the woman why she was beeping. Her response: “You were in the street.” When we asked where she expected us to ride, she drove off.

The rest all ran yesterday. The first of these is from a woman who feels that cyclists too often fail to signal when passing a pedestrian.

While some bicyclists do ring their bells soon enough for me to get out of the way, far too many do not. Some think a muttered “on your left” as they pass is sufficient — but if I do hear them, again it is too late to react. There is no place where pedestrians are safe from bicycles — on the streets, sidewalks or even off-road paths.

In the bicycle-pedestrian relationship, the walker is the one likely to come out the loser. The headline said it all: Let’s share the streets and walkways.

I'm not sure exactly what Ms. Hadary thinks she has to do to "react" to a passing cyclist. If a cyclist is doing it right, she shouldn't have to react at all. The only time when a bell is even useful is when a pedestrian might suddenly move into your path, and they're capable of hearing you (not wearing headphones). I have a bell, and I use it on the trails - largely for my own safety - but it is odd to imagine this rule applied to drivers who had to honk every time they were about to pass a car (I know, drivers have rear view mirrors so honking isn't necessary, but I hate it when cars honk before passing me on my bike). On her second point, about walker being "the one" who is likely to come out the loser - I'm not sure that's true. I've only seen one slow speed bike-ped crash and the cyclist ended up with an injured wrist. I'd guess the most likely outcome is two losers.

The second letter is from someone sporting the windshield perspective.

I’m more than happy to share the road — with those who obey the law.

So that would leave the roads in the DC area to krickey and an old woman who lives in Alexandria. Everyone else, hit the showers. The irony is that not sharing the road is illegal.

The next one is about a good driver-cyclist interaction

I had a bad bike accident on Massachusetts Avenue that was caused by the handlebars snapping off. A motorist whose name I never got immediately stopped, checked my condition, called an ambulance, waited until it arrived and carried my wrecked bike to my home in her car.

The overwhelming majority of drivers are respectful of cyclists and it's good to know that their are good people out there.

The last letter, well, you've really already read it. But I failed to mention in both my post and the letter that the fault analysis includes child cyclists, which is also likely to tilt blame towards cyclists.

 

Drivers are welcome in DC, but they too should obey the law

Oh Washington Post, what happened to you? Last year for bike month you had an editorial extolling the virtues of cycling, but this year you've started the month with an editorial admonishing cyclists. 

It all starts with the title, which online is "Bicyclists are welcome in DC, but they too should obey the law." Which is confusing as hell, because it seems there is some group who obeys the law that bicyclists can join. But I can't for the life of me figure out who that group is. A better title would be "Bicyclists are welcome in DC, but they alone should obey the law." In the paper version the title is "Sharing the Streets: Bicyclists welcome. But please obey the law." Which is better, but I could hardly see the same message aimed at any other group. It seems to be proposing the old quid pro quo - if you obey the law, you'll be welcome; which is a standard no one else is held to. If I break the law, then ticket me, but I have a right to the road and I don't need the paper to tell me I'm welcome to use it anymore than I need them to tell me I'm welcome to vote.

After the title things seem fine for a couple of paragraphs and then we get into this nonsense.

The city’s annual snapshot of bicycle ridership showed an 80 percent increase in daily bicycle ridership from 2007 to 2010.Disturbingly, though, the increase has been accompanied by a rise in accidents. Figures from the city’s transportation department show a 28 percent increase in cyclist injuries and fatalities from 2009 to 2010. Some of that may be attributed to better record keeping by authorities, but those familiar with cycling say there’s no denying that more cyclists on the roads have meant more accidents.

Sure, better reporting may be one reason for the increase. But is it really so hard to understand that part of the reason for an increase in crashes is that more people are riding. Looking at their first line, cycling is up 80% between 2007 and 2010. Bicycling crashes, on the other hand, are only up 57%. Gosh, it seems like cyclists have been getting safer over the years, not less safe. Which is the opposite of what the Post is implying. I also have different number for injuries and crashes (which I got directly from DDOT) than they reported showing a 24% increase in crashes last year and a 21% increase in injuries. But now I'm just quibbling.

Let's move to the worst part

A 2004 city report on crashes showed cyclists were slightly more likely than motorists to be at fault in a crash, spotlighting factors such as failure to yield right of way or cyclist inattention

I'm not sure which 2004 city report they're talking about. I'd love to know, but [Update: I have the report. It shows that in crashes involving cyclists, cyclists are to blame in 15% of those and drivers are to blame in 13%. But that isn't the whole story. 1% of those crashes are bike-bike and bike-pedestrian, so those can't be counted when considering who is more at fault drivers or cyclists. And 7% of bike crashes involve a hit and run driver - no blame is assigned in those cases. The rest are either unknown, other or no violation. The reports are so badly written that in 4 cases the cyclist is cited as being asleep [which is a neat trick]. DDOT studies in 2001 and 2010 show that the police in general don't do a very good job of reporting crashes. In the 2001 study  the number one contributing factor is listed as "other." For the 2010 study, 47% are listed as no violation, 16% are "other" and 7% are "unknown". Those are the top three categories. In the 2001 study, the author writes "Pedestrian in these charts most likely refers to the bicyclist" but they can't be sure. The police have no box for cyclists and only later make note that the type of "pedestrian" is a cyclist. So there is no way to determine who is "more often at fault" from such bad data. And to pile on, we know that sometimes cyclists are hit, taken to the hospital and ticketed without ever being interviewed. A study out of NYC showed that when a cyclist was hit and stayed at the scene they were less likely to be found at fault than when they were hit and taken to the hospital. The likelihood that they'd be found at fault went up even more if they were killed. Lesson: cyclists are more often found at fault when only the driver's story is told.

Before cyclists get off their bikes to e-mail us their complaints about motorists, we’ll stipulate there is plenty of blame to go around.

We just won't bother to blame anyone but cyclists. Has the Post ever written an editorial asking drivers to obey the law. And considering drivers kill 200 times as many people as cyclists do in DC, they're going to need to write articles like this about drivers once a week for four years just to balance it out.

There are drivers who are churlishly unwilling to share the road or are unaware of the rights of cyclists (yes, there are circumstances in which they can claim a traffic lane). That said, there are too many instances of cyclists who think that the sidewalks belong to them or that adhering to laws by stopping at red lights or stop signs is optional.

So drivers are merely churlish and unwilling to share, but cyclists are scofflaws. They sound like grumpy neighbors. Never do they mention that drivers are speeding, running red light and stop signs etc...Drivers think speed limits are optional, unfortunately it's behavior that is deadly.

As for sidewalks, if you're walking on the sidewalk, you're still more likely to be killed by a driver than a cyclist. I don't even know of a case in DC where a pedestrian on the sidewalk was killed by a cyclist. And, the vast majority of sidewalks in DC do belong to cyclists (though they must defer to pedestrians).

Keep in mind that it’s the cyclist who is more apt to come out the loser in a collision with a car; last year there were two cyclist fatalities and 336 cyclist injuries.

Believe me, there is not a cyclist out there who doesn't know that, which is why cyclists mostly obey the law and operate their vehicles safer than drivers. Those two fatalities involve a cyclist who was hit from behind by a hit and run driver and a woman standing with a bike who was run over by a military vehicle that should have never been a risk to her. She wasn't even reportedly moving, so how was she hit? Probably breaking the law right?

We would urge city officials who seek to make the District more bike-centric not to shirk on getting people — no matter if they are driving or riding — to follow the laws.

I agree. But since drivers do almost all of the killing, maiming and injuring, perhaps it makes sense to focus a little more on them.

[I apologize for the lack of links, I'm short on time. Perhaps I'll update it later]

Friday Morning Commute - Emancipation

For those of you with the day off, enjoy the weather. Rain is coming on Saturday.

• Coinciding with yesterday's discussion about what to do about drivers who kill because of something less than gross negligence, there's this article about a bill in the UK that would "create new crimes of causing death or serious injury through dangerous or reckless cycling." This is another good articles which includes
  • There are about 2 pedestrians killed by cyclists in the UK each year.
  • The penalties would be similar to what's on the books for drivers. I have no problem with that, but as someone points out - the law is a bit redundant. "twice in the past decade an 1861 act has been used to jail cyclists who killed pedestrians while riding on the pavement."
  • Statistics point out that cyclists don't kill in proportion to their numbers, and are half as likely to be to found at fault in crashes with cars. 
  • A sidebar has the history of the first bicycle crime, it was in 1841 by a man thought to be the "inventor" of the bicycle
  • A pedestrian advocate says ""Although fatalities are recorded, there is no way of measuring how many people have been intimidated or left feeling vulnerable by irresponsible cycling," he says."
  • "Can you imagine if every time we talked about cars people complained about drivers doing 80mph on the motorway?
• A cyclist was hit yesterday on the CCT while crossing River Road Little Falls Parkway 
  • According to Sgt. Lauryn McNeill, a man riding a recumbent bike entered the crosswalk, and as a BMW approached, both the motorist and the cyclist slowed. Then as the cyclist proceeded, the car struck the cyclist.
  • Update: Also,  a pedestrian was hit by a car yesterday and it sounds like the pedestrian was on the MVT "Near the Memorial Bridge, a pedestrian was seriously injured when struck by a vehicle on a ramp from the George Washington Bridge about 4:30 p.m" - I'm assuming they mean GW Parkway. Update: They do. But it's actaully on the Washington Blvd Trail right before it connects to the MVT.
• Richard Layman has a post on the bikelash that covers a lot of different topics, including a part of an email about the NYC bikelash. 
  • In large part, these are people who either drive everywhere themselves, or even more, have limos or paid government drivers and cars standing waiting for them. They don't take transit, they don't look for parking, they don't bike and they don't walk. They are the [21st] Century version of the Carriage Trade - people who went everywhere in their private carriages while everyone else walked or took the omnibus. Some of the traffic calming and transit enhancements are interfering with their limos being able to double park with impunity. They are outraged that their behind the scenes words are not being listened to.
• WABA and FABB team up, allowing FABB to seek donations.
• A DC couple will spend their anniversary on the Climate ride
• On the newhilleast listserv their is a discussion about using the RFK exit from the SE/SW Freeway to Barney Circle. It's illegal, but widely ignored. The police occasionally ticket this which prompted the discussion. There are dozens of responses by people saying they use it all the time and find the occasional ticket worth it. Some say that local residents are unofficially "authorized" to use it. No one says that it's the law and that people who use it are scofflaws who think the law doesn't apply to them, etc...I've had to bite my tongue something awful.
• CommuterPageBlog has a post that links to research (page 18) about "what could Arlington County do to make it easier for you to ride a bicycle." Number 1 (after "nothing, I won't bike") was more bike lanes at 17.8%. Bike sharing was at 3.9%, racks at 3.4% and lockers at 1.8% but in case someone in particular is reading this, it did show that (page 84) in the R-B corridor, bike sharing was a particular concern - which is where they're putting them next.
• Finally TBD lists Washington's top 5 bike trails. Now maybe they're only listed trails that pass at least part way through Washington DC, in which case this is a list of the top 5 out of 8, but I still wouldn't put Rock Creek Park trail on that list. Marvin Gaye is better. And if we're talking inside the beltway, I'd drop Met Branch (which I really like) for the Anacostia Trails or maybe Custis.

Focusing on cycling-pedestrian conflict

Another issue from the BAC/PAC oversight hearing yesterday is that both Jack Evans and Tommy Wells spent a lot of time talking about how to protect pedestrians from cyclists, but almost no time on how to protect both groups from drivers.

Evans complained about cyclists who nearly hit him "on a fairly regular basis" while he's jogging with his dog. He's been hit "3 or 4 times" he claimed. [I've never been hit by a cyclist while running, but I suspect if I had, I'd know just how many times it had happened. I've been hit on my bike by cars 4 times in my life]. He continued to talk about how often he sees cyclists run stop signs and how fast they go on bike trails. He said we need more education, both cars vs. bikes and bikes vs. pedestrians, and we need to figure out how to coexist. So he talked about how to improve 15th for drivers (like him) and how to protect joggers (like him) from cyclists, but he never asked how to protect cyclists and pedestrians from drivers. Despite the fact that drivers are hundreds of times more likely to kill.

I kind of feel like cyclists and pedestrians know how to co-exist, and largely do; but there is obviously room for improvement. Perhaps more education would help, but I suspect Jack Evans and I would have different goals of that education.

Wells brought up the issue of sidewalk cycling in business districts like Penn Avenue SE and Georgia Avenue. He said at one point that "we do need to keep bicycles separated from pedestrians, especially on sidewalks." At the 44:30 mark he asks for the opinion of the two councils on banning sidewalk cycling in select corridors outside the BID.  Apparently there is some talk of banning sidewalk cycling on certain corridors.

I think Wells is making the same mistake about sidewalk cycling that Evans is making about 15th Street - measuring the wrong thing (and once again it is public sentiment).

The right things to measure are crashes, injuries, fatalities, pedestrian traffic volume, etc... and see if we are, in fact, having a problem caused by what is, currently, legal sidewalk cycling. Maybe what we need is a sidewalk cycling speed limit, or a vulnerable user law that dictates that when a cyclist and pedestrian crash, the cyclist has a presumption of guilt (and then we should extend that to drivers when they hit cyclists and pedestrians).

Banning sidewalk cycling on certain roads will require pavement markings on those sidewalks and banning it city or neighborhood-wide is an inelegant solution that ignores the root problem - if, of course, we determine that there even is a problem.

Expanding on the answer that I gave yesterday I'd say it might be appropriate in places, but we should pursue a policy that is more carrot and less stick. Instead of forcing cyclists off sidewalks and onto roads they clearly don't feel comfortable on, we should entice cyclists off the sidewalk with complete streets. Sidewalk cycling is a symptom of bad roads. Let's fight the root cause and not the symptom. (The representatives from the Pedestrian Advisory Council and Bicycle Advisory Council echoed this sentiment). The 15th Street cycletrack reduced sidewalk cycling by 12% (in an area where it is legal), so if you want to reduce sidewalk cycling, that seems like a pretty good way.

I might be willing to accept a ban on adult sidewalk cycling on streets that have a cycletrack or even ones with a bike lane. But otherwise I'd have to see the streets in question and would be reluctant to support those bans. Enforcement and education would be difficult if sidewalk cycling were allowed on one block, and banned on the next.

The Mayor has the power to ban sidewalk cycling on any street. It is telling that none have used it since the law was passed.

Later, Wells brought up this year's fatal bike/ped crash. But that crash happened in an alley. The problem was not sidewalk cycling, but making an unsafe turn (probably at high speed) in an area where sidewalk cycling was already banned. There are only 10 reported bike-ped crashes/year. And 1 fatal crash per decade. I am familiar with the details of two of the four fatal crashes I know of, and neither was on a sidewalk. So I'm not sure he's made a case that there is a problem a sidewalk cycling ban would fix.

It's possible that wide public dissatisfaction is enough of a reason to ban cycling in places. Some of our desire as cyclists to support the 3 foot passing law is that passing closely scares cyclists. Pedestrians have a right to live without fear too, and we need to consider reasonable ways to help with that. Wells notes that he hears a lot from seniors who are "terrified" of cyclists. But, it isn't clear even that there is wide public dissatisfaction with current sidewalk cycling bans.

Wells is clearly talking about only expanding the ban to certain streets and he talked about how important the sidewalk is to children learning to bike.

These two items, as well as 15th street, took up a lot of the councilmembers time. With the exception of a discussion about changing the contributory negligence laws and some talk about crosswalks there was no talk about the danger of cars. The imbalance between how much time was spent talking about how dangerous cyclists were when compared to how much was spent talking about how dangerous cars were, was disconcerting.

Wells does seem supportive of changing the contributory negligence law to comparative negligence, which is a very high (highest?) legislative goal of WABA. I kind of flubbed my answer about the issue, but I wasn't quite prepared to talk about it and I think I covered the basic idea. Wells asked Evans what he thought about contributory negligence, but Evans never answered the question.

 

Tour de Links - Splinter

Maillot Jaune: Obama's budget consolidates all the bicycle programs under the $28 billion, 6-year "livability program" giving states greater leeway to decide how to spend the money. This should be good for DC. Miraculously, the 2011 budget that left the Republican controlled house still retains money for trails.

No amendment directly targeted the transportation enhancements program. An amendment that would cut funding for the popular Land and Water Conservation Fund, which funds some trails, was defeated by a “nail-biting” 213-216 vote, with 32 Republicans voting against the cuts.

Podium - ICYMI, Alberto Contador = cleared of charges. Meanwhile Lance Armstrong has retired again, and this time he means it.  I place his return from retirement as better than Brett Favre's and Michael Jordan's 2nd but not Jordan's 1st. Massive understatement award:

Lance came back in to do two things: raise awareness for his foundation and cancer victims by putting the issue on the world stage, which was tremendously successful; and to win the Tour de France again, which turned out to be a lot harder than he thought.

What will he do now

Armstrong, 39, will also announce that he will co-chair a campaign for the California Cancer Research Act initiative, which would fund cancer research by adding $1 to the price of a pack of cigarettes in the Golden State, the adviser said.

If he doesn't go to prison, I expect him to run for Governor of Texas, which he'll win, but not without allegations that he cheated.

Podium - The guy from "Third Rock from the Sun" and the girl from "Real World: San Diego" are starring in a movie about "a New York City bike messenger who is pursued by a dirty cop." It's called Premium Rush and is set to come out in 2012.

Maillot Vert: In favor of bicycling facilities. Speaking of which, the proposed Portland-Milawaukie light rail will feature a parallel bike path, and where the bike path crosses the Willamette River, they're thinking about a "sonic bike path". It's not a tube that pushes you at near sonic speeds, but rather grooved pavement that plays Simon and Garfunkle's "Feelin' Groovy" as a bicycle rides over it. I like the idea, but I have to wonder about the state of art when they're stealing from car commercials. Also, Chicago is planning a sweet flyover bridge to deal with a lakeshore drive chokepoint.

Maillot a Pois Rouge: As the Fabulous T-Birds asked, ain't that tough enough?

Maillot Blanc: Safety advice for riding with a baby. Idaho decides not to require kids to wear helmets.

[The] bill failed amid concerns from Sen. John McGee, R-Caldwell, that it mandated to people what they could and couldn't do.

Isn't that what laws do?

Anyway, speaking of safety, hybrid cars really are a risk because of how quiet they are, (and because soccer moms drive like maniacs?)

the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration which found that hybrid vehicles were involved in “significantly” more collisions than vehicles with internal combustion engines, under certain circumstances.

Lanterne Rouge: During NYC's crack down on scofflaw cycling, a man was issued a ticket for riding without a helmet, which is not illegal. Also, NYPD is ticketing cyclist who run red lights in Central Park even when the roads are closed to cars. Those tickets carry the same fine as for those for drivers ($270). So when you're doing your crackdown at a time and place that only cyclists can ride, that would be targeting.

Caroline Samponaro, Transportation Alternative’s director of bicycle advocacy, says, "Police enforcement of the most dangerous behaviors on the loop drive is important. However, reports to Transportation Alternatives in recent weeks all sound like the NYPD is undertaking a ticket blitz, targeting bicyclists only, rather than targeting the most reckless behaviors that endanger walkers and fellow riders. This lack of discretion undermines the type of enforcement needed to make our streets safer.

"At a recent meeting to discuss the loop drive in Central Park, safe cycling advocates proposed flashing yellow traffic signals during car-free hours. The park is open to car traffic for only a handful of hours each day, but the rules for cars are in effect 24/7. It’s time to institute more rational regulations that serve the safety, exercise and transportation needs of the supermajority of people who use the park on foot and bicycle."

And NYC wishes they had bike racks on their buses like DC does. Don't they....Don't they...



The Case for Bike Racks on NYC Buses from Streetfilms on Vimeo.

Thursday Morning Telecommute - 5-10"

It got ugly out there last night

• Update on upcoming WABA rides. Also WABA got FedEx to commit to not parking in the bike lanes on 15th St NW.
• Sign a petition to save the Sycamores along the Tuxedo Trail.
• The three-foot passing bill was killed in the VA house. The bill still has a chance on the Senate side.
• Chris Ziemann writes about why cyclists often don't obey the law. I disagree with him that bikes are not vehicles and prefer what one of the commenters wrote "that they're not the kind of vehicles that vehicular codes are designed for is pretty accurate. Saying they're not the vehicles lawmakers are thinking of when they use the word "vehicle" is probably accurate." The best argument for changing the law in my opinion is that since the Idaho stop law was instituted, Idaho became safer. We should institute laws that make the roads safer, especially if they make things more convenient as well. Or even laws that make things more convenient as long as they don't make things less safe.
• Sen. James Inhofe doesn't think of "bike trails" as transportation. Which is odd since Oklahoma City is builiding a network of bike trails, which I'm sure are used for transportation. Bill Dorey of the Associated General Contractors meanwhile must not want get any bike trail construction work, “It’s hard for me to defend a bike path.” Meanwhile Maryland's own Ben Cardin came to the defense of bike trails

“We need to look at multimodal transportation. Yes, the overwhelming amount of dollars that are reauthorized are going to be for the  traditional types of transportation, whether they be roads or bridges or conventional transit. But we need to look at smarter ways,” he said. Baltimore’s designer, he said, tried to connect communities through greenspace.

We’re looking at ways of trying to connect communities again so they don’t have to use our roads! So we don’t have to build so many roads! To me, that saves money in our transportation! And it’s the right investement for our nation. Every dollar that we authorize needs to be spent efficiently and appropriately for transportation in this country. But let us not be afraid to look at alternative ways that can save money, create jobs, and then have more dollars available for the expensive projects that we know we need to build such as high speed rail.

• Arlington County will have even more trail use data available next year.
• The Silver Spring Transit Center, and its section of the Met Branch Trail, has fallen 6 months farther behind schedule. It won't finish until December.
• More bike racks coming to the Bethesda Metro.
• As much as I admire this guy's moxie, I wish he'd get a tail light and head light.