Extreme Cyclist Holiday

I didn't really start out intending to have an Extreme Cyclist Holiday in Houston. I just meant to take my folder along and get some riding in, instead of spending all my time in a car, worrying about gas, parking, etc. Then things just sort of got out of hand.

Let's back up a little. At the last minute, I decided to go to the Rice University homecoming to hopefully see some old friends and hang out some with my older daughter Claire, who helps run a bookstore there. I booked a flight, and found my usual close-to-Rice hotel had some good rates, so I got a room. Then I thought, "Hey, I wonder if I can get from the airport to reasonably close to my hotel using mass transit?" Hopping on the Houston Metro website and entering a couple of addresses, I found that I could catch a bus right at the airport that took me to within a quarter-mile of my hotel with no transfers. Wow. Sixteen miles in Houston for a buck and a quarter. Double wow. (The image at right is from the Houston METRO trip planner, very convenient.)

So, that axed the rental car, which saved me about a hundred bucks, probably a hundred thirty with gas. Ka-ching. But it also meant that my in-town trips would be either by bus, by taxi, or by bike. (Now there's an easy decision.) Houston is flat, and the November weather in Houston is really perfect for riding (high 60's to mid 70's, and not terribly humid). And good weather (no rain) in the forecast.

So, to make a long story short, I spent an entire weekend (three days, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday) in Houston, Car City USA, and not once did I even get into an automobile. It didn't seem strange until early Sunday when I realized that I hadn't been in one. Of course all my old classmates thought it weird, but I caught some whiffs of envy among the incredulity, when they asked, "You're kidding! You BIKED to the party?"

Good things: Saving money, great exercise, the flatness of Houston (my little Dahon folder is great for packing, but really not much for hills), Rice University bike parking facilities (basically, good secure bike racks everywhere), not having to worry about parking a car, Daniel Boone's Cycle Shop, and great weather.

Some people complain about Houston drivers. I was told by the bus driver (friendly guy) coming into town that Houston drivers don't respect cyclists, but I had zero bad experiences over about 60 miles in 3 days. Of course I was in a university part of town, where there are quite a few cyclists, but overall, no complaints from me about Houston motorists.

Not so good things: Houston has the world's narrowest bike lanes (where they have them), and the paving in Houston is the pits. Literally. Basically, Houston is built on the flat gulf-coast plains that have a lot of clay in the soil. This "gumbo" as it is called is just hell on pavement. I found myself weaving a lot more than I wanted to be to avoid really nasty potholes and large cracks.

I even had an accident because of the bad roads! It was late at night and I was riding back to the hotel from my daughter's apartment. I hit a bad pothole (hard to see) and went right over the bars (not hard to do on a short-wheelbase, small-wheeled folding bike.) Luckily, no injuries beyond some bruised kneecaps, as I wasn't going all that fast. Not even any torn clothes.

The funny thing is, I picked myself up and dusted myself off, determined the bike was rideable (it needed the derailleur hanger bent back into proper position) and proceeded home. The next morning, I got up early and looked at bike and saw what I missed the night before: my cyclo-computer was missing. Muttering under my breath at my obliviousness the night before, I hopped on the bike and went back to the accident site (I figured if I waited, there was more chance of it getting smashed by a car) and there it was, flung up in a driveway, fully operational. I clipped it back on and went back to the hotel for breakfast.

But it's been almost 30 years since I had an over-the-bars experience! I'll probably be sore for several more days, but the only cure for that is more riding. I really wouldn't mind not ever going over the bars again, ever. Good thing I was wearing gloves. But the accident seemed to underscore the "extreme" quality of the weekend.

I have to say though, I wouldn't hesitate in the least to do a pure "bike holiday" again (except for the accident part). A little planning can yield a lot of riding, and a lot of fun.

The Urban Repair Squad

There's an interesting group of urban cyclists in Toronto who are practicing a form of "street art". They call themselves the "Urban Repair Squad", and a website showcasing their work can be found here. The manifesto of the URS goes something like this:

MISSION:

To encourage bicycling as an antidote
to the poison that is car culture.

To invert the status structure of the commons,
returning priority to pedestrians and bicyclists over cars.

To create an infrastructure
that promotes polite sharing of the roadway.

To employ the concept of Critical Mass,
encouraging cyclists to bond together
and more safely take back their rightful place
on the public roadways.

To encourage citizens to reclaim
ownership and stewardship of their public space.

To actively construct a positive future
of what urban transporation could be
by installing it NOW.

Your city is broken.
Don't wait for the bureaucrats to fix it.
DO IT YOURSELF.

So, what doe the Urban Repair Squad do, exactly? They surreptitiously paint bike lanes and sharrows. This is usually done under cover of darkness ("rush hour bike lanes.") Tom Vanderbilt, in his blog, notes that they do this while "disguised as municipal workers." This is an interesting and amusing (if true) twist on the term "street theatre", entertainment not only in the street but in fact changing it. Vanderbilt notes that they have painted over 6kms of bike lanes in Toronto.

If you download and read the URS manual, it outlines (sometime in amusing hand-drawn comics) the process and results of this urban guerrilla activity. I think that, as long as the bike lanes are well-chosen and well-executed, this is a laudable activity, although it raises some potentially difficult questions, e.g. what happens if a cyclist is struck by a motorist while in a guerrilla bike lane? Is the liability of the motorist somehow reduced because of the illegality of this urban infrastructure? (I'm reading a book on the legalties of cycling, which I will post on in the near future, that will hopefully point the way to some answers on this.)

PS. The URS website linked above is claimed to be not an "official" web site. It is maintained by a photographer named Martin Reis who claims to be only a "fan" and documenter of the URS activities and not a participant (sure, Martin, sure! :)

Good Cop / Bad Cop [Redux]

This New York Times article gives a recent update on the NYC cop who brutally shoved a cyclist at a Critical Mass night ride on July 25, 2008. He's Gone! This is good news, and actually done in a pretty timely fashion (you may not agree with this, but the wheels of justice do turn slowly.)

Pogan was indicted on December 16, 2008 for this incident. The NYPD said he was fired about February 9, 2009. (There was no press release on this. It's a little understandable that the NYPD doesn't care to shine a light on its most questionable officers, but on the other hand, it's also a clear PR opportunity missed.) The press accounts say that charges have been dismissed, and that a "spokesman" for Pogan (do 23-yr old cops get spokesmen now?) said that Pogan resigned, and was not fired. In any case, the dropping of charges was no doubt a quid pro quo for getting rid of this bad apple, and the NYPD just wanted it done.

I first reported on this last August. You can see a video of the incident here (my original YouTube link has gone stale).

I feel pretty strongly about this (in case you hadn't guessed) as I'm sure others do. I guess this is because I think most police understand their job is to protect cyclists (along with everyone else). Riding to work this week on a cold morning, I was breezing by two Howard County police officers engaged in drivers-side-window conversation. The one facing the road who could see me gave me a wave as I went by. It was respectful, possibly because she (the cop) was a cyclist and it was below freezing that morning. There are good cops out there who appreciate cyclists (particularly ones who practice safety). What a great world it would be if we could count on all cops to respect cyclists this way!

A second rather obvious thought on this. Since the seminal amateur videotaping of the beating of Rodney King, video cameras are now everywhere. There may be one in your pocket right now. The world has changed, and while pictures can be altered electronically, the ubiquitous vid-cap still serves as a vital witness that didn't exist even five years ago. I've given some thought to mounting one of those Flip Mino camcorders on my seatpost, just to record cars overtaking (and their license plates). It's overkill, but it's an idea to consider. Maybe for a future topic on "Your Bike's Data Network".

Bicycle Lights are "Fashion", sez the NY Times

OK, the venerable Gray Lady has an online review about, of all things, bicycle lights. I say "bicycle lights" instead of "bicycle lighting systems" because all the lights (and they choose front-rear pairs) cost less than $60 total and have regular battery cells contained. None of that high-tech, rechargeable, exterior battery pack stuff (costing $150 and up) that is intended to either blind oncoming motorists or light up the Black Forest so you can find your way home without being waylaid by an evil witch who wants to put you in a puff pastry.

What bemuses me about this whole thing is where the review shows up online. Not in the Technology section next to David Pogue (who had a wonderful article about Twitter recently) but in the "Fashion and Style" section! The reviewer is this hunky young bike courier (pictured) named Hugo Giron (love that name!) I think this says a number of things:

1. Bicycling in urban settings is considered hip. Take heart, those of you (of us) out in unwashed suburbia, and remember that when you get a chance to move to the big city, you will be part of the elite.
   
2. There are a lot of young, good-looking kids out there cycling these days, and this invariably leads to thoughts of "fashion". The NYT is by no means alone on this. Look at London Cycle Chic, which is on my blogroll at right, or Copenhagen Cycle Chic. (Note: some images on these sites may be NSFW.)
3. The NYT is a quality tome, no matter what. The content of the reviews is really pretty good. I like the criteria the guy uses, and tend to agree with his ratings.
4. Nonetheless, I find it hard to consider bicycle night lighting "fashion", and therefore feel this review is misclassified. I would never have come across it if I hadn't seen a link in another blog. Which leads me to my conclusion:

I think it's time for the NYT to create a "Transportation" section for their media, where they can conglomerate articles about automobiles (also mislocated in the Sports section of the print edition), mass transit, air travel (they can keep the "Travel" section for "Destinations" (which I think they sometimes call their Travel section already), bicycling, and other various forms.

The LightLane, a Better Mousetrap?

It seems to me that people over-value ideas, and under-value the hard sweaty work it takes to get ideas to be really fruitful implemen- tations. I remember Rich Diehl, a friend and employer, once saying to me, "One doesn't patent ideas; one patents implementations," and he was absolutely correct. Which brings me to the LightLane.

The LightLane is a concept from Alex Tee and Evan Gant of Altitude (I'm not 100% sure what "Altitude" is. A design firm, maybe?) Here's what they say about it:

A close brush with a distracted driver is enough to intimidate the most avid bikers from riding at night. The problem isn’t just about visibility, as safety lights are effective at capturing the attention of a driver. However, these lights are typically constrained to the bike frame, which highlights only a fraction of the bike’s envelope. Bike lanes have proven to be an effective method of protecting cyclists on congested roads. One key is that the lane establishes a well defined boundary beyond the envelope of the bicycle, providing a greater margin of safety between the car and the cyclist. Yet, only a small fraction of streets have dedicated bike lanes, and with an installation cost of $5,000 to $50,000 per mile, we shouldn’t expect to find them everywhere anytime soon. Instead of adapting cycling to established bike lanes, the bike lane should adapt to the cyclists. This is the idea behind the LightLane. Our system projects a crisply defined virtual bike lane onto pavement, using a laser, providing the driver with a familiar boundary to avoid. With a wider margin of safety, bikers will regain their confidence to ride at night, making the bike a more viable commuting alternative.

The LightLane is an idea (NOT an implementation, if I am to interpret the Photoshop job as the work-in-progress.) Not a bad idea, although not by any means fully fleshed out. The concept of defining in a clearly visible way a "safe zone" around a bicycle using a stroked laser is interesting. But it doesn't seem remotely ready for prime time, in my opinion. It looks to me like Tee and Gant might be trying to solve the wrong problem here:

• Firstly, if (as they admit) high-intensity bike lights "are effective at capturing the attention of a driver", then the rest of the problem is simply a matter of obeying the rules of the road. What makes the "envelope" around bicycles any different from the reasonable safe clearance given any other vehicle by a safe driver?
• Secondly, does this concept work in the day time, or is it conceived strictly as a replacement for bike lighting? (I can't imagine the laser that would be sufficiently bright to light up a virtual bike lane in the daytime without burning holes in things, if you know what I mean.)
• Thirdly, the device as shown seems to be oriented more towards overtaking cars rather than cars ahead. It's been shown through accident statistics that very few accidents occur from cars overtaking bikes. Far more often, collisions occur when cars pull out in front of bicyclists (see below) or when they turn left in front of them, both as a result of not seeing the approaching bike. This device doesn't seem to significantly increase forward visibility of the bicylist, although it might in certain terrain.
  
• Fourthly, and possibly most importantly, it seems to me that a (regular) bike lane has value precisely because it provides a zone of protection for a cyclist that has been agreed to by statute. It's there day and night, and it doesn't move around. The "virtual bike lane" does (at least in theory) make the cyclist more visible in certain situations, but that's really the limit of it. It should really be billed as an alternative night-lighting arrangement and compared to other such devices, and not as a alternative to infrastructures, which it really doesn't provide.
• Lastly, even if all these issues could be dealt with, could this device be produced at any reasonable cost?

All these criticisms aside, I can think of things you could do with stroked laser type lighting. The idea of creating a virtual envelope around a bike might have merit, but I think it needs to be a 3D envelope, which almost suggests something more holographic. (I'm not sure this is possible with current technology). I could also conceive of a training aid to teach cyclists how to "find their line" in the traffic lane, although this is something that should be projected ahead of the cyclist, and should probably have some sonic detection to help the cyclist move out around parked cars, and this of course would add complexity and cost.

All in all, it's hard to see how this is much of an improvement over conventional night lighting for bicyclists. I'm put in mind of the Trek bicycle ad that they ran on OLN during the Tour de France, where they showed a cycle commuter at dusk on (presumably) a Trek bike, but with no headlight! (Hey, doofus, why do you think that car is pulling out in front of you? It's because he can't see you!)


Well, hmm, this has been a bit of a wandering post. I guess the point I want to make is about "the better mousetrap". I'm not seeing where projecting a lane on the pavement around me is going to increase my visibility to drivers all that much, while simply using a conventional light device doesn't do a bad job of it.