There’s a tendency among bike advocates to champion the delineation of a “bike space” even without any actual space being created. You know, “if there’s room for a bike lane” without changing anything else on the street.
At best you get no benefit, and at worst you’re given a “safe space” that isn’t safe at all. This bike lane is almost entirely in the door zone, which is why these users are staying to the far left. But cars will pass too closely (up against the line) so they really should be riding outside the bike lane for safety, but then motorists become arrogant and hostile as they think you’re being a jerk.
That’s when cars are parked flush against the curb. Even in the summer they often intrude into the bike lane. But in the winter the lane is completely taken away for car parking. Bike lanes in Boston are only open 1/3 of the year. And it’s always the bikers and pedestrians who lose out; car drivers get plowed streets and the same ability to park their personal property: who cares if anyone else has trouble getting around?
You can see the city’s priorities. They claim to be a “world-class bicycling city” where “the car is no longer king” but what this street design really does is appease some bicycle advocates while maintaining a car dominant streetscape. Fail.
This major business district is also a major transportation corridor. The 39 bus seen here is one of the highest ridership MBTA lines, yet all winter it struggles to pass arrogantly parked cars, often waiting for opposing traffic before it can cross the centerline. Buses often can’t pass each other.
In a fairer city, cars that park outside the designated space would be ticketed and towed immediately. Better yet, restrict parking in certain spaces that can be used to store the snow that the city should be removing from sidewalks.
Yes, for those of you who pointed out that properly clearing snow from sidewalks would require burning more fossil fuels … I present the bike snow plow:
You could add a salt spreader to the back if you really want to excel.
My second response is that even if you did use motorized plows, there would be a measurable decrease in the number of people who drive because streets and transit stops are not accessible to pedestrians.
It’s been a day of heavy snow here in Philadelphia. While viewing the city from its trains and buses was quite pleasant, a snow storm presents significant challenges for transit operators. Depending on the timing of the storm, either buses and streetcars will be stuck in heavy traffic or they will be empty and running on time as nobody goes anywhere.
It makes sense to reduce scheduled service on most lines to match reduced ridership and make more buses (and drivers) available to respond to special needs that will arise – Some lines will require snow routes that add significant time and require an extra bus. Other needs include stalled buses, extra trips, rail replacement shuttles, evacuations and more.
Vehicles take a lot of abuse during a blizzard and that means many may be out of service the following day. Don’t run the risk of having to run 70 percent of normal service on several subsequent regular days because you couldn’t be bothered making a snow plan.
Plan ahead and communicate. Everything in a snow plan, from route detours to service reductions to plowing busways, can be planned ahead of time and strategically implemented early. That means employee shifts can be different, supervisors will know what to do and what scenarios to watch for, and customers will know where to find a snow route — but only if the information is made available in advance, such as in timetables and maps.
There’s usually a buffer space between the sidewalk and the street where signs, utility poles, mail boxes and other things can go. Bus stop signs, for example, must be placed 1-2 feet back from the curb so the bus mirrors don’t hit them. But if you get rid of the buffer area to add parking or maximize the driving lane width, don’t encroach on the already narrow path for parking meters, construction signs or anything else that doesn’t belong there.
Also, to all the highway engineers out there, if you put any objects on the sidewalk, remember that the sidewalk has been narrowed. It’s not a 5-foot (1.5m) sidewalk if 2 feet are taken up by poles and signs.
This is a 2-foot (0.6m) clear width, less than the minimum required, even while the driving width is at least 30 feet (9m).
Do you have thoughts on these topics? Of course you do, so share them with the world! Suggest other viewpoints, new perspectives and ideas for further research, show topics and/or guests, by emailing email@example.com or using the contact form or those socialmedia tools.
Find me at Planning Camp on February 1 in Philadelphia, at the Human Transit talk in New York on February 6, and otherwise riding trains and buses around the northeast.
Finally, if you enjoy this time dumpvery useful transit project, please help support my work by sharing it with your friends and colleagues, leaving a review on iTunes and other places, and consider sponsoring an episode if you are able to.
Bixi, which runs the bike sharing system in Montreal and sells the bikes, stations and software to other cities, has filed for bankruptcy. The city has taken over the operation of the local network at an estimated $1.5 million cost.
Like most bike share hosts, Montreal has thus far refused to contribute to operating costs. But if we consider the usage, about 2 million trips per year, I agree with the new mayor that $0.75 per trip is a great investment for a healthier, more accessible city. Let’s hope support remains high among residents for continued operation.
Every city that has implemented a bike sharing system (as far as I know) has done it the same way: rely on a private company to run it, refuse to spend any public money on it, then complain about the over-reliance on advertising, station placement and failure to reach low-income and minority communities.
Perhaps it’s a small issue: if you can make it run well without city funds, well, more money for schools and libraries. Except what happens when we use a federal grant for a new library building but then expect managers to solicit sponsors to help pay for books and computers? Same with bike sharing: at some point ad revenues decline and things fall apart. Like bus routes, many stations will be critically important but never profitable. But social equity and environmental justice goals don’t easily mesh with running a business.
If we are serious about encouraging bicycling as healthy and effective transportation, cities should start funding and operating bike share as a public service, integrated with other modes of transportation. The Montreal mayor’s comments are encouraging, as Bixi certainly is a fantastic public service worth paying for, and Montreal’s transit agency STM has put together a plan for running it. After all, bike sharing only supplements the trains and buses that form a comprehensive, useful transportation network for maximum mobility.
Relying on smartphones and third-party apps leaves many people out and the information can be spotty or a hassle to look up. Set an example by putting upcoming departures on a display board in a consistent format for everyone to see and understand.
Use shelter advertisements to generate revenue for the display boards as well as lights and heaters.