

How to Get More Bicyclists on the Road - tdedecko
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=getting-more-bicyclists-on-the-road

======
RyanMcGreal
1\. Continuous network of physically segregated bike lanes. (No, that painted
line running for two blocks and ending abruptly doesn't count.)

2\. Secure bike parking facilities at major destinations.

3\. Smoother integration with transit (e.g. bike racks on buses, bikes on
commuter trains).

4\. Convenient city-wide bike rental program (e.g. _Vélib'_ in Paris).

5\. Abandon helmet laws and stop talking about 'safety'. The most reliable way
to reduce the number of injuries is to increase the number of cyclists, and
mandating helmets/kvetching about safety creates a false perception that
cycling is more dangerous than driving (it's not).

~~~
jrockway
_1\. Continuous network of physically segregated bike lanes._

Then you need different traffic signal patterns, because no turns can take
place when the bike lane has a green signal. (When bikes ride on the road,
they can be in the middle lane, so as not to conflict with right-turning
vehicles. When they are segregated, this causes many accidents without a new
traffic signal pattern.)

 _2 through 4_

Agree.

 _5\. Abandon helmet laws and stop talking about 'safety'. The most reliable
way to reduce the number of injuries is to increase the number of cyclists,
and mandating helmets/kvetching about safety creates a false perception that
cycling is more dangerous than driving (it's not)._

Helmets are not for protecting yourself from cars, they are about protecting
yourself from yourself. I have gone down hard on my head a few times, and
that's no fault of any other vehicle (only poorly maintained roads). The
helmet has been very helpful for that. (It also keeps my hair out of my eyes.
Doubleplus good.)

In the end, the problem is that most cyclists drive unsafely and that they are
not aware of the risks. (Or what "driving safely" even is. They just guess...
and get it wrong, and never think to maybe read a book about riding safely.)

(Many inexperienced cyclists are afraid of being hit from behind, so they ride
too close to the parked cars on the right. Then some idiot opens their door
into them, and they end up in the hospital. This is much more common than
being hit by behind. Similarly, cyclists afraid of the street ride on the
sidewalk, and then they get hit by a right-turning car. This is one of the
most common type of bicycle accident.)

Anyway, we really need to make people aware of these issues, and we need to
significantly reduce the speed limit on urban roads. (Most people seem to
drive about 35-40 near downtown Chicago before it gets too traffic-y. The
speed limit should be no greater than 25; then bikes and cars are almost at
the same speed. With the timing of traffic lights, the overall speed isn't
much higher than this, anyway. If 25mph is too slow for you, park your car and
take (grade-separated) rapid transit!)

My prediction is that this never happens, as recent legislation has been aimed
at reducing the rights of cyclists. I doubt we will be able to reverse this
trend; in 20 years, it will probably be illegal to ride a bike on the streets
my taxes pay for.

~~~
RyanMcGreal
> Then you need different traffic signal patterns

So? Increasing the share of cycling is already a transformative change to
traffic patterns.

>Helmets are not for protecting yourself from cars, they are about protecting
yourself from yourself.

My point is not that a helmet won't help reduce your risk of injury in a
crash. It's that the best way to reduce the number of injuries is to increase
the number of cyclists. A focus on danger, including mandatory helmet laws,
scares people away from bicycles and _increases_ the number of injuries.

Otherwise your explanation of how to ride safely to reduce risks is bang-on.
In a major study of bicycle crashes and collisions in Toronto a few years ago,
cyclists riding on the sidewalk were overrepresented.

[http://www.toronto.ca/transportation/publications/bicycle_mo...](http://www.toronto.ca/transportation/publications/bicycle_motor-
vehicle/index.htm)

On the other hand, a recent study also out of Toronto finds that an
overwhelming majority of bicycle-car collisions are caused by the driver, not
the cyclist:

[http://www.research.utoronto.ca/behind_the_headlines/smart-c...](http://www.research.utoronto.ca/behind_the_headlines/smart-
cycling)

------
jsz0
I've always wondered if American hygiene standards impact the number of people
riding bikes. I suppose there's no nice way of saying it but in certain
countries having some hardcore BO from riding your bike a few miles on a warm
day is completely acceptable. Not so much so in the US.

------
ax0n
I am a bicycle commuter. Relatively new, actually, by many peoples' standards.
I've been doing this for 3 years. I loathe bike lanes, and segregated paths in
the US, from what I've seen, also need help. If they're open to use by
pedestrians, you'll always end up with people walking three-abreast taking the
entire path, or people with mile-long dog leashes made of clothesline-esque
material, among other ridiculous hazards. Physically separated bike lanes
don't solve many problems, really. They cause quite a few that've already been
mentioned here.

Education and good on-road bicycle routes would probably do a lot more for
bicycling. A example of a good bicycle route would use residential roads with
low speed limits and traffic calming devices. Intersections with arterial
roadways would have traffic signals, and you might run into bike/ped-only
accessible things, such as a pair of back-to-back cul-de-sacs connected by a
sidewalk or no-through roadways obstructed with bollards to keep rat-runner
motorists at bay while allowing others the ability to pass through.

This would keep cyclists on the road where they belong, but off the major
roads where they cause frequent irritation among impatient motorists.

Then, education will be needed to teach cyclists a few things that many seem
to easily forget: * Traffic rules apply to all users of the road * Bike routes
exist that might add a little distance to your trip in the name of comfort and
safety. * Be seen, FFS. All it takes is some cheap blinkenlights and a light-
colored t-shirt or jacket.

------
Poiesis
I commute via bicycle. From my experience, and after hearing the opinions of
some coworkers, there are some other reasons more people don't do it:

1\. It takes more time. There are certainly situations where bicycle commuting
saves time (see: New York city or the like). There seem to be far more places
where cycling will double or triple your travel time, especially considering
the time needed to shower/change at the end. Which leads me to:

2\. Lack of shower facilities. I am lucky enough to be able to shower ofter
the ride; many aren't. Yes, I know the argument of "you don't need special
clothes to bicycle, do it like Denmark, yadda yadda". This may be true in
Denmark. My area is hilly enough to make you sweat. Also, if you go fast
enough to try to minimize the time issue above, you sweat. Also, it's not
comfortable to me to be biking in my work clothes so I have to change anyway.

3\. Grooming concerns. It's not easy for women to put on makeup in the typical
work/gym bathroom. It's also a problem (at least it takes a while) for anyone
with longish hair to get it styled after it's been in a helmet or been
windblown and/or been washed. And only the most devoted are going to change
their hairstyle just so they can bike to work or something.

------
GiraffeNecktie
In my city a woman recently died in a collision with a bus. She was riding in
a shared bus/bike lane. In other words, a lane that was supposed to permit
buses to go extra fast AND (theoretically) allow cyclists to travel at their
leisurely pace. Anyone see a problem with the road planning in our city?

~~~
RyanMcGreal
What a tragedy. It seems to be based on the particularly American binary
reasoning that there are two kinds of transportation modes: automobiles and
!automobiles.

------
marknutter
I hate to be the one to say it, but biking is extremely inconvenient,
especially if you live in the burbs' as I do. I'm very into fitness, but even
I don't want to have to jump on my bike just to deposit a check or get some
milk.

~~~
derefr
I think you've mixed up your propositions there. _Living in the suburbs_ is
inconvenient, especially if you bike. Cars are a release valve that papers
over a very bad idea.

