03.07.08
Posted in Advocacy
by Mark Dieterich at 11:07 am
According to an ABC syndicated news report, the Chicago City Council is considering imposing fines ranging from $150 to $500 on motorists who endanger bicyclists.
The proposed ordinance includes fines on motorists who turn left or right in front of someone on a bicycle; pass with less than three feet of space between car and bike; and open a vehicle door into the path of a cyclist.
The council’s Traffic Committee approved the legislation Wednesday, and moved it on to the full council for consideration. However, the action came after some aldermen complained there should be equal treatment for rude bike riders, including the city’s bicycle messengers.
I’m all for equal treatment under the law, so if they can come up with some fair way to fine cyclists who endanger pedestrians and motorists, more power to them. My one concern is that cyclists will start being fined for “inconveniencing” motorists, rather than endangering them. There is precious little I can do to really endanger a motorist. I try to do my best to stay out of their way and behave like a car, I certainly hope a well behaved cyclist wouldn’t end up with a ticket.
The proposed ordinance came about after Mayor Richard Daley, an avid rider, had his own unhappy encounters with motorists.
This just goes to prove we need more politicians on bikes. If they were out there, riding the streets with us, they would have a much better understanding of the dangers we face on a daily basis.
Permalink
03.06.08
Posted in Advocacy
by Mark Dieterich at 11:56 am
I sent a question about traffic-light sensors into “Ask RIDOT” a while back and just happened to notice they answered it. The bottom line appears to be:
RIDOT does not currently use bicycle detection at signalized intersections. The Department has not researched the operation and efficiency of these detection systems yet. That does not mean, however, that we are opposed to installing them.
I’m still curious whether it’s significantly more expensive to install these newer sensors, as repairs are completed. RIDOT’s suggestion for how to get around the problem:
In the meantime, we recommend using the push button provided for pedestrian crossings at signalized intersections. This is a much safer alternative than proceeding through a red light.
is completely ridiculous. Perhaps we could legally require motorists, waiting to turn left at an arrowed intersection, to get out of the car and run around it until the light changes for them. This would make about as much sense as trying to trip a light, moving over to the pedestrian area, pushing the button, and then moving back into the travel lane. I’ve got a lovely intersection on my way home, where it would be far more dangerous for me to try and get over to the pedestrian crossing light, than it is to turn left through a red arrow. I’d be happy to take a ride with someone from RIDOT and show them how challenging this would be.
Sorry RIDOT, but I’d still prefer a roadway that works for my vehicle.
Permalink
03.05.08
Posted in East Bay
by Mark Dieterich at 4:30 pm
From an EastBayRI.com article:
The long-studied Warren Bike Path will be delayed yet again, as a review of the proposed site by the Rhode Island Department of Transportation has triggered a request for an archaeological study by the Narragansett Indians.
The survey was recommended to the town in a March 3 letter. Because of the survey, about four to six weeks will be added to the bike path’s completion time. This will allow the town’s engineering firm, the PARE Corporation, to request a survey from the Public Archaeological Laboratory and to complete the survey.
The $2.5 million project was most recently pitched and planned after a re-design by PARE in April 2006. The first idea for a trail came in 1987, with the idea morphing into a bike path in the 1990s. However, the state’s engineering firm went bankrupt, which required Warren to hire PARE to complete the work. The path would stretch 4,500 feet, from the Warren-Fall River railroad bed near Long Lane to the end of the Kickemuit River.
Permalink
03.04.08
Posted in Advocacy
by Eric at 8:57 pm
The first Boulevard bike lane striping entry on this website attracted far more comments - pro and con - than any other topic that has ever appeared on this site. So it wasn’t terribly surprising that the public meeting, held Monday March 3 at School One, was well attended.
However, despite memories of a rancorous meeting on the same topic some 7 years ago being fresh in many minds, this one was respectful, smooth, and civil.
I estimate that 40-50 people were there, and while not everyone elected to speak, many did. Also in attendance were John Nickelson (Prov DPW), Lambri Zerva (RIDOT engineer), Scott D’Amelio (VHB, the consulting engineer), Cliff Wood (City Council), Lts Schiavulli and Ryan of the City Police Dept., and Alix Ogden (Director, Providence parks Dept.). The meeting was led by city planner Melanie Jewett.
Most speakers were in favor of removing an automobile lane and replacing it with a bike lane. Those opposed to the bike lane were heard clearly. Their concerns were generally related to the viability of roadway narrowing as a traffic calming method, and the perceived vs. actual safety of a bicycle lane.
Those who spoke in favor of the proposal - the majority of speakers, and attendees - included those speaking on behalf of Summit Neighborhood Association and Blackstone Parks Conservancy. There were also a number of eloquent speakers from the Providence Bicycle Coalition and Take Back the Boulevard.
All in all, it was quite clear to the officials in attendance that the proposed changes are desired. Melanie told the attendees that the work would be done this spring.
Speakers asked the City to revise the plan in one specific way. The VHB plan calls for a 9′ parking lane, 6′ bike lane, 14′ car lane, and 3′ shoulder. We want to see the car lane narrowed by 3 feet or so, more in line with that to be expected on a residential street, and less like the lane width you’d find on I-95. The City and VHB now need to determine where to stick those extra ~3 feet: wider shoulder against the median? enhanced buffer between the car lane and the bike lane? When the plan is finalized, the results will be posted on this site.
Permalink
Posted in Bike-to-Work Day
by Mark Dieterich at 3:28 pm
May is just around the corner and this means Bike Month! PBC is working with the Providence Foundation and US Open Cycling Foundation to help organize Bike to Work Day, May 16th. Keep an eye on the site, we will be posting more updates as the date gets closer.
In the mean time, take a look at the League of American Bicyclists, list of 50 ways to celebrate bike month publication. Here are some of my favorites:
- Ride with your child to school
- Join your local advocacy group
- Commute to work on a bike
- Work with your state DOT to clean the shoulders of a popular biking road
- Ask your employer to install bike racks at your workplace
Permalink
Posted in Advocacy
by Mark Dieterich at 3:07 pm
The people over at DailyPress.com posted an article about whether high oil prices will make 2008 the year of the bicycle.
Oil costs are surpassing $100 a barrel, global warming alarm calls are mounting, polluting autos and trucks increasingly clog city streets, and health concerns about a sedentary and fattening society are mounting.
All of these reasons convince me to keep cycling, but are they enough to sway the general populous and governments to make real change? I look around me every day and see the majority of autos with only a driver. Worse yet, most of the autos seem to be SUVs or trucks. I hear plenty of people complaining about the gas prices, but when I inquire, hardly any of them are even considering a change to their daily behavior. How expensive will gas need to get before we actually see change? I’m guessing somewhere in the $5-$6/gal range.
The National Bike Summit started today. It will be interesting to see if they manage to make any political headway this year. Only time will tell.
Permalink
03.03.08
Posted in Events
by Mark Dieterich at 8:52 pm
| March 12, 2008 |
| 10:00 am | to | 11:00 am |
The next STC meeting is March 12th @ 10am. During this meeting, RIDOT will be addressing the concerns we raised during the last meeting. You can read <a href=”http://biketobrown.brown.edu/?p=100″>notes posted on the B2B site from the last meeting</a>. We should try for another strong showing at this meeting.
Permalink
03.02.08
Posted in Advocacy
by Mark Dieterich at 8:50 pm
Some progressive cities have begun using sharrows, shared road markings, to remind motorists that bicycles have a right to the road and that we may well be riding farther in the lane than they would expect. Unfortunately, cities that have used sharrows needed to pass special legislation to permit their DOT to use the signage, as they aren’t part of the manual uniform traffic control devices (MUTCD). The MUTCD lists all nationally accepted road signs and RIDOT could use any symbol listed.
Many cycling advocates have been holding their breath for sharrows to be included and the rumor mill has been churning that they will be included in the 2008 release of the MUTCD. The proposed changes to the 2003 version of the MUTCD is now available online. Section 9 appears to cover most bicycle related laws. While there is a new section (9B.06) that discusses the addition of a “Bicycles May Use Full Lane Sign”, I see no mention of sharrows in the document. I also looked through the proposed figures for the 2008 version of the MUTCD and saw no hint of sharrows in there either.
Did I just miss them? I sure hope so as they would be a huge boost to cycling advocacy in Rhode Island. Many of our roads are too narrow to safely allow cyclists and automobiles to coexist, sharrows would provide an often needed reminder to motorists that there could well be cyclists out on the road.
Permalink
