Is Road Riding Worth the Risk?

[Emm]

@lordofthemark 189976 wrote:

On WABA’s advocacy page

3. Enacting laws and policies that protect bicyclists

◾Holding DC accountable to enforcing its Safe Accommodations Policy
◾Vision Zero implementing regulations
◾Recent victories: ◾Bicycle Pedestrian Safety Act of 2016
◾Motor Vehicle Collision Recovery Act of 2016 (Contributory Negligence reform law) – in effect as of December 2016

They also mention pushing for accountability on VZ in DC, MoCo and Alexandria, and supporting adoption of it elsewhere. VZ includes many things other than infra.

I think the point Judd and others are trying to make is yes, each of the local groups SAY they are working for these things and put it in their strategic plan, but their actual resource allocation is not split evenly across all of the activities included in these plans. So WABA may have in all its plans that enforcement is key and important, BUT they are not dedicating much staff time and funding towards working towards those goals, and are instead using those resources on infrastructure and other (important) issues.

As someone who does ALOT of strategic planning as part of their day job, I can tell you from experience putting something in your strategic plan is meaningless unless you then follow it up with actual work. And honestly, many organizations put things in their strategic plan to pay lip service to certain constituencies or issues, while knowing full well they do not plan to dedicate many resources to that specific section of their plan.

Side note–I think when it comes to WABA issues, you need to trust Judd, who holds a position on their Board and therefor has a good amount of insider knowledge. Not sure any of us can really claim to more more than him about WABA’s current activities… (unless you too are also as involved as he is with the organization)

[dasgeh]

@sjclaeys 189971 wrote:

I think that an objective examination of local bike advocacy organizations’ activities would show that they are mostly focused on promoting bicycle-specific physical infrastructure. Look at the projects they focus on, the items on their meeting agendas, and what they advocate the cycling community to engage in.
Also, by institutional infrastructure, I don’t just mean law enforcement agencies. This would also include changing the agencies that conduct and oversee roadwork to always ensure that a safe and reasonable accommodation is made for cyclists and pedestrians. Another institutional infrastructure change would behaving an ombuds-person who has authority to advocate for vulnerable road users with the local government. This would be different from agencies like BikeArlington that have a limited mission of promoting cycling (which they do very well).

We’re bike advisory, not bike advocacy, but Arlington’s Bike Advisory Committee has identified 3 priorities for the year. You’ll see that our agendas follow these priorities. The last is infrastructure focused, but includes non-bike specific infra, like signals.

– Trails: Behavior and Design
– Safe Accomodation (providing safe routes when construction or maintenance takes bike facilities out of service)
– Network Priorities: Columbia Pike, Lee Highway, quick fixes and problem intersections.

Also, you’ll see a lot of non-infrastructure stuff in the Bike Element adopted at last night’s County Board meeting.

As mentioned, you are welcome to come to our meetings, participate and help shape our work. We work with ACPD, but are dependent on what they are willing to do.

And in Arlington, if you want to get involved specifically on the enforcement side, look in to getting on the Emergency Preparedness Advisory commission

[lordofthemark]

@Emm 189984 wrote:

I think the point Judd and others are trying to make is yes, each of the local groups SAY they are working for these things and put it in their strategic plan, but their actual resource allocation is not split evenly across all of the activities included in these plans. So WABA may have in all its plans that enforcement is key and important, BUT they are not dedicating much staff time and funding towards working towards those goals, and are instead using those resources on infrastructure and other (important) issues.

As someone who does ALOT of strategic planning as part of their day job, I can tell you from experience putting something in your strategic plan is meaningless unless you then follow it up with actual work. And honestly, many organizations put things in their strategic plan to pay lip service to certain constituencies or issues, while knowing full well they do not plan to dedicate many resources to that specific section of their plan.

Side note–I think when it comes to WABA issues, you need to trust Judd, who holds a position on their Board and therefor has a good amount of insider knowledge. Not sure any of us can really claim to more more than him about WABA’s current activities… (unless you too are also as involved as he is with the organization)

I definitely trust Judd, but I think (help me here Judd) he was speaking specifically of enforcement – there are legal and policy issues that are not enforcement but also not infrastructure. For example changing contributory negligence was a big win (not absolutely sure how much of a role WABA played) but its not “enforcement”. Similarly allowing bikes to proceed legally through an LPI. In Virginia a lot of that is done statewide, and VBF is the lead advocacy org.

I am not sure what all of SteveC’s issues with Arlington BAC are – but I know his characterization is incorrect about Alexandria BPAC, I suspect Judd would agree its not fully correct regarding WABA, and Dasgeh has pointed out on a different thread that the Arlington Bike Plan update is about more than infrastructure. Certainly regarding DC my twitter is full of people talking about enforcement, about safe accommodation, etc – and they are mostly people involved in bike advocacy in the District.

[dasgeh]

@lordofthemark 189987 wrote:

Certainly regarding DC my twitter is full of people talking about enforcement, about safe accommodation, etc – and they are mostly people involved in bike advocacy in the District.

It’s also important to note that infrastructure changes often go through a public process, so the bike advocacy piece of it is a very public push to get people to write in, take surveys, go to meetings, speak up.

But the institutional changes are a lot about building relationships, changing hearts and minds, finding where the weak link is, crafting policies to address those issues. That doesn’t usually look like a twitter campaign or a rally or a call to action. You don’t see all the coffees and emails, and individuals who go to other meetings and catch a leaders ear as they’re walking out. It’s a LOT of work that you don’t see, but it doesn’t mean it’s not happening.

[ImaCynic]

If we do live in “a society that devalues cyclists” and from recent Australian study found that “more than half of car drivers think cyclists are not completely human”, it seems that more bicycle infrastructure would just add to the resentment among drivers as to some, this is not sharing the road, but rather having some of it taken away from them. How is this helping the situation?

[sjclaeys]

@lordofthemark 189975 wrote:

I attend meetings of Alexandria BPAC every month, and I can state with certainty that you are incorrect. We spend time on the police report, on discussing city policy issues, Vision Zero (which includes enforcement, education, and culture change in city agencies). We discuss speed limits, no right on red, etc. We even spend time on data and data collection efforts, how police record crashes in their database, etc. Our infrastructure discussions include sidewalks, curb cuts, traffic calming where it mostly is for pedestrians, etc, etc. We have at least three members now who never or rarely ride bikes.

We DO ask the bike community to get involved on behalf of complete streets projects that often include bike lanes as ONE ELEMENT. We also asked people to get involved to support the adoption of VZ, which as I noted, as plenty of non infra components, and is oriented towards peds as much as riders.

Aside from lobbying, we spend time on education and encouragement efforts, such as supporting bike education in Alexandria schools, and holding bike rodeos for kids.

If you don’t like what Arlington BAC spends it time on, I suggest attending meetings, and volunteering your own time on other activities. I would be surprised if they turn you down.

This generalization about the regional bike advocacy community is not helpful, IMO.

Ah, the “if you don’t like how we’re doing things then why don’t you do it” response is so unfortunate. As at least quasi-governmental organization, if not outright governmental organizations, the various bicycle advisory committees should be open to receiving public input, not just rejecting out of hand to input that doesn’t fit their agenda.

[sjclaeys]

@dasgeh 189989 wrote:

It’s also important to note that infrastructure changes often go through a public process, so the bike advocacy piece of it is a very public push to get people to write in, take surveys, go to meetings, speak up.

But the institutional changes are a lot about building relationships, changing hearts and minds, finding where the weak link is, crafting policies to address those issues. That doesn’t usually look like a twitter campaign or a rally or a call to action. You don’t see all the coffees and emails, and individuals who go to other meetings and catch a leaders ear as they’re walking out. It’s a LOT of work that you don’t see, but it doesn’t mean it’s not happening.

ACPD continues to run stop sign sting operations targeting cyclists and put up large electronic signs that actively perpetuate drivers’ stereotypes that cyclists are scofflaws that do not belong on the streets. At the same time, ACPD continues to not devote resources to improve safety for cyclists and pedestrians at intersections like Lynn & Lee Highway. I’m sorry, but how can one objectively see any improvement in this regard?

[lordofthemark]

@ImaCynic 190003 wrote:

If we do live in “a society that devalues cyclists” and from recent Australian study found that “more than half of car drivers think cyclists are not completely human”, it seems that more bicycle infrastructure would just add to the resentment among drivers as to some, this is not sharing the road, but rather having some of it taken away from them. How is this helping the situation?

Where do we start? One, plenty of drivers think we are human. When I drive I think cyclists are human. When my wife drives she thinks cyclists are humans. Etc, etc. As for road diets, some people oppose them (even some cyclists) Some drivers support them. In the case of Seminary Road, we have some drivers who support a road diet with bike lanes because they live right on the road, and don’t want drivers speeding at 40MPH 3 feet from their front lawn. Others live on cul de sac streets that intersect with Seminary without a traffic light, and want slower traffic to make it safer to turn on to the road. The folks who don’t want the road diet are folks who live on side streets that intersect WITH a traffic light, so they don’t think they gain (not all of them obviously, but a fair number).

The notion that everyone but people on bikes hate road diets is incorrect, though it is spread by that groups of drivers who hate road diets.

There is no evidence I know of that road diets make drivers drive more dangerously around cyclists in general or dehumanize them more. If you have such evidence, be kind enough to share. AFAICT there are as many conflicts created by cyclists taking the lane as there are by bike lanes – to the extent there aren’t it is just because there are not that many cyclists actually taking the lane (IE VC wouldn’t scale up well, IF we could get more than a handful of people to take the lane on fast arterials, which we can’t)

[lordofthemark]

@sjclaeys 190004 wrote:

Ah, the “if you don’t like how we’re doing things then why don’t you do it” response is so unfortunate. As at least quasi-governmental organization, if not outright governmental organizations, the various bicycle advisory committees should be open to receiving public input, not just rejecting out of hand to input that doesn’t fit their agenda.

Alexandria BPAC is a private non profit. So is WABA. I want input from people willing to do work, not from the on line peanut gallery.

[lordofthemark]

@sjclaeys 190005 wrote:

ACPD continues to run stop sign sting operations targeting cyclists and put up large electronic signs that actively perpetuate drivers’ stereotypes that cyclists are scofflaws that do not belong on the streets. At the same time, ACPD continues to not devote resources to improve safety for cyclists and pedestrians at intersections like Lynn & Lee Highway. I’m sorry, but how can one objectively see any improvement in this regard?

I know in Alexandria, APD has gotten much more bike friendly in recent years, but faces both political counter pressures, and a legacy culture that takes time to change. I have learned a lot by being involved. I do not know the situation in Arlington because I am neither on Arlington BAC nor in Chris’s unofficial group. I would think to have insight on the politics of the police I would need to be involved. I would hesitate to give Arlington BAC a performance review based on police behavior seeing as even if they are working hard, they do not control the police.

The bicycle lobby – to the windshield perspective NIMBY’s we are all powerful. To the angry VCers. we are at fault for NOT being all powerful.

[sjclaeys]

@Guus 189972 wrote:

We have to start somewhere though, right? Physical infrastructure is not easy to obtain — but changes in institutional infrastructure are much harder. To get changes in institutional infrastructure, “the public” or “the voters” will need to consistently push for changes over very long time-lines. To get a critical mass of people that push for that, infrastructure is an crucial first step.

The question is when do we finish this first step? At what point does focusing on installing PBLs and getting other bicycle-specific infrastructure detract from making the harder institutional changes? Under this current approach, everyone from elected officials down to bicycle advocacy organizations get to pat themselves on the back with the opening of each PBL without addressing the underlying causes for vulnerable road users to be at risk. Yeah, its hard to get police to focus on driving behavior that poses the greatest threat to the community and not assume that the cyclist is always at fault in a crash. It is hard to get the public works construction managers to prioritize cyclist and pedestrian safety over contractor convenience. But that is what will ultimately need to be done.

[sjclaeys]

@lordofthemark 190007 wrote:

Alexandria BPAC is a private non profit. So is WABA. I want input from people willing to do work, not from the on line peanut gallery.

Well the Arlington County Bicycle Advisory Committee is charted by Arlington County so, as required by their charter, they at least are required to listen to the “peanut gallery” of the great unwashed masses.

[lordofthemark]

@sjclaeys 190009 wrote:

The question is when do we finish this first step? At what point does focusing on installing PBLs and getting other bicycle-specific infrastructure detract from making the harder institutional changes? Under this current approach, everyone from elected officials down to bicycle advocacy organizations get to pat themselves on the back with the opening of each PBL without addressing the underlying causes for vulnerable road users to be at risk. Yeah, its hard to get police to focus on driving behavior that poses the greatest threat to the community and not assume that the cyclist is always at fault in a crash. It is hard to get the public works construction managers to prioritize cyclist and pedestrian safety over contractor convenience. But that is what will ultimately need to be done.

We have a police officer attend BPAC meetings, and we go over collisions involving a bike rider OR a pedestrian. Lt May (head of the traffic squad) rides, and seems to get it. But changing the culture of the force takes time. We are all working on it, again, you should join in the effort if it matters to you.

[lordofthemark]

@sjclaeys 190010 wrote:

Well the Arlington County Bicycle Advisory Committee is charted by Arlington County so, as required by their charter, they at least are required to listen to the “peanut gallery” of the great unwashed masses.

Dasgeh listens with more patience than I would. I am not sure they are required to listen to comments on this forum though – at least in Alexandria chartered commissions, etc, have public meetings for citizen input.

And since we know each other here, we might want to treat each other as human beings, not as pols to be attacked. Dasgeh is one of a small group of advocates who works tirelessly on such issues (which I have pointed out even when I have disagreed with her). Someone complaining about how she spends her volunteer time, who is not themselves expending similar time on the issue, rubs me the wrong way.

If I am coming off harshly, we are engaged in a bitter, emotionally exhausting fight over Seminary Road in Alexandria. A bike advocate in DC was just murdered last Friday. I am really, really, really, not in the mood for people crapping on bike advocates, especially “avid cyclists”.

[lordofthemark]

@sjclaeys 190009 wrote:

The question is when do we finish this first step?

We do both at the same time. We add infra, and even with only around 2% bike commute share in ArlCo and Alex, we push for institutional change. With more infra, AND with SOME institutional improvement, we get more riders. That gives us more supporters, more activists, and more sympathizers in the community – which enables BOTH more institutional improvement AND more infra.

But you can’t get there from here without blood sweat and tears, and you can’t do it if you don’t do the steps that actually get more people riding (and, BTW, more people walking and taking transit)

[Author]

Posts