The Digital Cobbler

We opened a new separated bike lane on a downtown street. It’s a start.

Cars and Pedestrians, but no bikes.

I realize it looks totally unused to motorists but it’s a necessary first step: we won’t attract cyclists until we have infrastructure because of safety perception.

I suspect this is not how car usage grew. Motorists don’t feel unsafe around other road users so they will try using a route as soon as they see it’s avaailabe and then they’ll complain because  it’s slow and congested.

The difference is that potential cyclists *won’t* try a route if they think it’s the slightest bit unsafe but instead complain that it’s not safe.

We have to be willing to build (some) infrastructure and then exhort/market to citizenry to use this capacity.

Of course, this leaves us open to criticism from right-wing car addicts/lobby that we’re spending money on infrastructure for nobody (or for latte-sipping urban lefties, or whomever). I’m optimistic this time that our civic politicians have the ability to withstand this criticism.

We’re finally making some progress and getting better at defining and maintaining bicycle infrastructure. Our bike routes, especially  in the central areas of the city, are highly problematic because of short-cut SOV traffic. I complained about this before. Now something’s going to be done to fix Ontario St. Maybe I can start riding it again without getting bummed-out.

It’s amazing but little old “ditchmond” actually has real bike lanes with a little curb between the cars and the bikes and a smooth transition from roadway to bike lane and back. this all on their prime street: No. 3 Road. Why couldn’t Vancouver do this on Cambie instead of the minimal painted lanes they just put in?

We’re not the only ones with problems accommodating bikes on our bridges. Here’s an article from the New York Times illustrating the bridge, bikes and pedestrians problem is pinching the Brooklyn bridge.

Just finished a (mostly) complete arterial route ride. Didn’t really plan it this way but my usual crossing-light at Fraser St. was all clogged up with construction and I ended up at Prince Albert & Kingsway. What to do?

Well, the only thing that seemed sensible to do was: ride the arterials! So, down Kingsway I went. Then down Main street. Did I turn at 5th ave? No way! Straight on until Union St. and then over the viaduct and up Dunsmuir ’til hamilton. Next thing you know it’s an “all arterial” route. And, you know what else? It’s not so bad. I know lots of ink is spilled about safe riding routes (I’ve spilled some of that ink myself) but just taking a lane and going for it is the thing to do, sometimes.

I’ve been wondering why it is that the current rage for “useful” bicycles, which in itself is a marvelously Good Thing, is centred around bikes which, while being made of new materials, are shaped like very old bicycles. Hundred-year-old bicycles, in fact. When it’s been well-known (at least among cycle engineers) that the most efficient shapes for two-wheels-in-line transport are somewhat different. 

The unpopularity of recumbents is somewhat understandable, if unfair. They don’t “look right” and they can be harder to ride at first. And when people buy bikes after riding them around the bike-store’s block for ten minutes, that makes recumbents a really hard sell, I suspect. 

But small-wheeled upright bikes don’t suffer from this problem. They ride like a “normal” bike and you can tell that as soon as you start to turn the pedals. It’s also reasonbaly well-known by bike engineers that a little bit of suspension at both of those small wheels makes for the most efficient bike of them all. (I know I’m biased. I’ve got an old Moulton.) Still, I don’t really know the answer to my question: why don’t the regular (and nicely outfitted, I might add) Dahons, have suspension? I’m puzzled buy this.

And I’m also puzzled that there aren’t more companies marketing a wider range of bike shapes (small wheels, spar frames, etc.) to capture the audience of new utility cyclists?

So I became one of those guys who rode in the snow today. Not on purpose. In fact, I headed west on a training ride and it was all blue skies in front of me. Unfortunately, it was all grey skies when I turned back east and the snow started some where around Kent & Cambie. Then it got cold & blowy, let me show ya.

So I guess I shouldn’t be so quick to complain about the attention paid to our bike routes. Ridgeway greenway (37th ave. bike route) was certainly salted when I rode this morning. And today was a Sunday so I don’t know when this was done.

Rock salt on the bike way.

Here’s one of these vexing, ongoing daily-cyclist’s conundrums. Regular pants that are fine for sitting in front of the computer all day in an office are, essentially, a big-time fail for riding on the bike in Vancouver in the Winter.

It’s not just the rain so rainpants aren’t just the answer. And, anyway, part of the problem is trying not to have to change or carry too much paraphernalia. I’ve got gore-tex rainpants and, when it’s really raining, I give in and pull them on.

There’s already been plenty of talk on Vancouver blogs about looking and/or not looking like a cyclist. That’s not really the problem. I’m not pretending that I don’t care what I look like, that would be a bit disengenuous. It’s more that I want to be comfortable while, at the same time, not having to worry about what I look like or have to screw around with changing clothes.

One of the unspoken problems is that, around here in winter, three default weather conditions: Raining (about which see above); if it isn’t raining it’s either 4-degrees and clammy and about to rain; or it’s beautiful, clear, and 1-degree (and icy, but that’s a whole ‘nother post, trust me).

I admit, in the comfort/function department: I’m spoiled. But they fail the practical hang-around-all-day-in-them test.

Regular casual sit-around pants, on the other hand, aren’t warm enough. I just find that the wind cuts right through them and my knees are cold for half the ride (the downhill half). I’m starting to think I’ll have to try a pair of knickers. They’re making a bit of a comeback. Maybe they won’t look as goofy as they sound. Hmmmm. What else is out there, I wonder?

Saw something interesting the other day: A handful of folks gathered under the portico of Vancouver’s central library around an electrical outlet charging their electric bikes. That got me to thinking: nomads need electricity.

Now, of course, in this day and age we already know this. But I suspect most of us who are thinking of on-the-go electrical needs are thinking of electricity for devices (you know: laptops, phones, and so on). That’s certainly an important question. But E-bikes are becoming an important part of the transportation spectrum and they can’t bring them into coffee shops and libraries to get them charged. And, in addition, coffee shops aren’t exactly free electricity anyway. You have to buy something to sit there.

So, that brings me to the puzzle of finding free or near-free, outside public electricity access for E-bikes. Is there some kind of wiki/blog/list where somebody is keeping track of outdoor plugs? Is it in this Yahoo Group? It would seem to be a good idea to maintain a list somewhere. I’m not tapped into the e-bike community at all so I don’t know.

As an example: people are tracking power in airports and there’s plenty of public wifi lists (here’s one) so I suspect the e-bike community trades this info somehow.

Of Course, if the idea catches a public-buzz, then somebody will definitely try to commercialize it so I suppose one should be careful what one wishes for.