(Images: Google Maps via URB-I.com)
This week’s Monday Roundup is brought to you by Metro’s Bike There! Map, now available at local bike shops.
Here are the bike links from around the world that caught our eyes this week:
Before/after gallery: A new website from Brazil documents public space transformations from around the world.
Los Angeles turns: Its Mobility Plan 2035 abandons the practice of street widening in favor of 300 new miles of protected bike lanes, 240 new miles of bus-only lanes and in 20 years, it says, zero traffic fatalities.
Biking vacation: Fox News host Megyn Kelly’s plan for cooling off this week in the wake of being attacked by Donald Trump for asking aggressive debate questions: turning off her phone and riding her bike.
“We’re All Drivers”: That’s the name of Bike Cleveland’s new public awareness campaign, intended to help people see bike users as legitimate road users.
Protected intersection: 18 months after a Portland-based designer coined the phrase, the country’s first is open in Davis, Calif.
The Paris stop: France’s capital, where the bike mode share has risen from 1.5 percent in 2006 to 5 percent today and which is aiming for 15 percent by 2020, recently legalized going through red lights on a bicycle “with all due care and attention.”
Vision Zero: San Francisco’s policy includes a pledge to complete 24 priority safety projects by February, including banning most turns onto part of Market Street.
Park and Pedal: That’s the name of a network of parking lots in the Boston area that are designed to help suburbanites drive partway to work, then saddle up to head into the city.
Advertisement
Bike-ped lawsuit: A judge ordered a Virginia man to pay $300,000 in damages for unexpectedly turning, while he jogged, into the path of someone biking.
Breathalyzing bike lock: The $250 “Alcho-Lock” won’t open until you blow clean.
Inhuman collision: A Missouri man whose truck broke down was hit with such speed that his remains were scattered across the freeway and not recognized as human for hours.
Pro-bike poll: What convinced Seattle to start removing some parking lanes to make room for protected bike lanes? Maybe it has something to do with the poll two years ago that found 63% of Seattlites support this.
And in your very brief video of the week, Golden State Warrior Klay Thompson hits a one-handed basket from half court without even pausing his pedal.
— If you come across a noteworthy story, send it in via email, Tweet @bikeportland, or whatever else and we’ll consider adding it to next Monday’s roundup.
Thanks for reading.
BikePortland has served this community with independent community journalism since 2005. We rely on subscriptions from readers like you to survive. Your financial support is vital in keeping this valuable resource alive and well.
Please subscribe today to strengthen and expand our work.
I’m surprised Fox didn’t fire Kelly for mentioning that she rides a bike.
Sigh.
Not gonna fire a girl that has the courage to throw a little water on the fiery bluster from the Donald. It could be a benefit for him to have some kind of companion to help tone himself down a bit. If he’s nominated, for her comparatively milder deportment, maybe he ought to ring up Sarah from up there in Alaska, to be his running mate (…another shot at being VP.) .
By the way…what did Kelley have to say about herself riding a bike? I didn’t watch the debate, though have heard some about what transpired. About references to bikes though, I haven’t heard.
“You might chuckle at the idea of a drunk cyclist, but since they often share the road with motorists, they can be just as dangerous as an inebriated driver.”
While I chuckle at the idea, I take issue with it being just as dangerous. A drunken bicyclist is not likely to kill people. This sort of false comparison has been gone over a multitude of times by contributors and commenters alike, but its restatement here does not make it more true.
OK. Maybe not JUST as dangerous, but it is just as stupid and irresponsible.
No, it’s not nearly as irresponsible because it’s not nearly as dangerous.
Stupid I have no argument with.
Ok. I disagree with you, respectfully. I can’t see how hitting the road on your bike drunk is anything but irresponsible. I know it’s not of the same caliber of driving a car drunk, but you can still very easily cause an accident from riding drunk. Not sure how often that happens though.
“you can still very easily cause an accident from riding drunk”
Someone surely has some statistics at their fingertips: frequency and severity of crashes caused by someone biking drunk vs driving drunk divided by the number trips, or equivalent.
My hunch would be that biking drunk is stupid and rankles but is not all that dangerous to others. But perhaps I’m mistaken.
I’d wager that for every one death from drunk cycling, there’s 1000 from driving drunk. And most likely, it’s only the cyclist killed, not innocent people who got hit. I still don’t think riding drunk isn’t anything but irresponsible. The roadways are a public resource and using them while not sober isn’t right, no matter what your form of conveyance is, in my opinion.
““You might chuckle at the idea of a drunk cyclist, but since they often share the road with motorists, they can be just as dangerous as an inebriated driver.”
While I chuckle at the idea, I take issue with it being just as dangerous. A drunken bicyclist is not likely to kill people. …” resopmok
And drunken bicyclists are people, and their drunkenness does tend to raise the likelihood of their succumbing to errors in judgment and ability resulting in serious consequences. Mention of this story and comments to it in this Roundup, brought me to remember Eric Davidson. He started out biking home, totally sopped, and was hit by another drunk that was driving. He was severely injured as a result. It seemed at the time his recovery would be far from a full recovery. I wonder how he’s doing now.
I picked a link from bikeportland’s archives:
http://www.google.com/url?q=http://bikeportland.org/tag/eric-davidson&sa=U&ved=0CAkQFjABahUKEwigwsXa17DHAhUCkA0KHZkXAx0&usg=AFQjCNGRR9_SBHLFjERtr4htQcQVUTPuaQ
It’s somewhat alarming to consider that the possible result of this arbitrary comparison of drunk driving to drunk biking may be people attempting to justify their being drunk and using the street for travel.
wsbob,
It is curious to me that you keep bringing up the example of Eric Davidson in these discussions to highlight the dangers of biking drunk. Eric “had his bike light turned on and, ‘despite his intoxication, was seen on Safeway security video riding legally (close to curb, traveling straight, normal speed, etc).’” Eric, drunk though he clearly was, didn’t hurt anyone.
Jeremy Jordan, was also drunk, however did hurt/nearly kill someone.
“wsbob,
It is curious to me that you keep bringing up the example of Eric Davidson in these discussions to highlight the dangers of biking drunk. …” watts
Curiosity can be a good thing. What might curiosity lead us to know about how Eric Davidson having been not just drunk, but very drunk while riding home late at night, may have contributed to his being involved in the collision that resulted in a great deal of injury to him, his family, and friends?
Generally accepted, and proven, is that in a range of ways, intoxication impairs people’s normal function; judgment, reflexes, co-ordination, and so on. Safely pedaling a bike down the road requires more than simply sitting on and balancing the bike and spinning the pedals. Got to be able to be sufficiently alert for possible hazards along the way, and have well functioning reflexes to help avoid the hazards.
Attempts to rationalize drunk biking as being acceptable or somewhat so with arguments that people biking drunk aren’t likely to kill people as people driving drunk are, is just silly. People biking drunk at an intoxication level that impairs their ability to safely travel the road is just plain bad. There’s not really any excuse or justification for it whatsoever.
“Attempts to rationalize drunk biking as being acceptable or somewhat so with arguments that people biking drunk aren’t likely to kill people as people driving drunk are, is just silly.”
What exactly is your point? If Eric Davidson had been in a wheel chair or blind or infirm he could just as easily have been creamed by Jeremy Jordan. The problem was and is with people driving drunk. Eric’s ability to interpret the aural signature of psychopathic driving enough in advance to to dive out of the way should not be a requirement of walking or biking in this world.
I don’t know how the point about the hazards of drunk road use can be made any clearer than people, myself included, posting thoughts to that effect, have attempted to make it for people reading here. In use of the road, it’s not only people driving drunk that present problems, but other people drunk and using the road as well, while walking, biking, skateboarding and so on.
Drunk people on the road, whatever their mode of travel, assuming they’re walking or operating some sort of vehicle,…bikes and skateboards, etc, included…increase hazards accompanying road use for people that aren’t drunk…and for themselves, family and friends.
I wonder if, among many people encouraging the embrace of the Vision Zero campaign, there is an expectation that the public should deliberately seek and be prepared to pay for the design and construction of street infrastructure to accommodate people choosing to at times use the street while being very drunk…as long as they’re not driving a motor vehicle. If so, that’s one aspect of Vision Zero I think many people would have a great deal of reservations about.
“it’s not only people driving drunk that present problems, but other people drunk and using the road as well, while walking, biking, skateboarding and so on.”
You keep saying this, but I think you should also supply evidence.
Since you like to bring up Eric Davidson in this context, what problems did Eric’s drunkenness present? Or anyone else’s (not in an automobile)?
http://bikeportland.org/2014/10/31/vision-0-08-major-safe-streets-effort-must-tackle-alcohol-112928#comment-5753777
http://iteamblog.abc7news.com/2007/05/bikes_vs_cars_c.html
Interesting to note that bicyclists were nearly 3x more likely to be intoxicated.
Also, what I don’t understand about the breathalyzer lock is: so I’ve had one or two too many and I come out of the bar and find my bike and then…what? Squeeze my tipsy self between my bike and the one locked practically on top of it on the overcrowded rack, somehow get down to where the lock is binding my wheel and frame, and blow into it?
Yeah, that’s an attractive option.
Also, aside from the awkwardness of the alchoho-lock keeping you from getting your bike, what’s to keep you form walking your bike home or loading it on TriMet or a taxi? Try that with a car!
Who would anyone voluntarily use a bike breathalyzer? If I ride my bike somewhere to drink I’m pretty sure I’m going to have alcohol on my breath.
I wasn’t sure what the Paris article was going to be with such a title, but I would be all for allowing bikes to have the ability to cross redlights on T streets. Think like Naito when no pedestrians are crossing. zoom zoom.
“We’re All Drivers”: That’s the name of Bike Cleveland’s new public awareness campaign, intended to help people see bike users as legitimate road users.
This has got to be the stupidest campaign in a long time, at least as long as the ill-fated BTA info-graphic that purported to show how road funding actually worked, but hewed to this same semiotically unfortunate inversion.
Did they happen to consider ‘We’re All Pedestrians,’ or ‘We’re All Bi-peds’?
With the content and presentation of its campaign, Bike Cleveland unequivocally acknowledges the fact that people traveling the road by bike are legitimate road users, and suggests that the wod ‘driver’ in reference to their being road users, is as valid a reference to them as it is to people that travel the road by motor vehicle.
It’s quite a good, upbeat campaign. Very nice, and lighthearted, is below the story, the picture collage of a range of different types of people, examples of different types of ‘drivers’…all with a bike, with the exception of one of the people that apparently travels by bike. They’re all smiling, some with big, beaming, jubilant smiles. Good going, Bike Cleveland!
I love Boston’s Park and Pedal!
Great concept, great name. I’m just now browsing the Park and Pedal website. Haven’t yet found information there suggesting what actual ‘last mile’ distances the parking locations typically work out to. Though people most likely could easily choose to ride a greater distance if they wanted more of a workout. Two or three miles from key destinations, would be just right for many people.
The car parking is ‘free’, and that’s a big incentive to bike the ‘last mile’.
wsbob, your description prompted me to click a little further. It just gets worse. Is this a stealthy sabotage campaign by the Yes Men? Stockholm Syndrome? A Bike Snob spoof?
Who comes up with this nonsense? Why would anyone in their right mind want to re-brand people who cycle (who cause very little trouble to anyone) as drivers (who cause 98% of the trouble out there on our roads) as a way to humanize them to drivers? This has to be the nadir, the lowest possible point to which any (formerly) self-respecting group could stoop in its obsequious attempt to win favor with the identified antagonist.
The campaign is designed to humanize people on bikes as people in your community, and to raise awareness that people on bikes are legal road vehicles with the same rights and responsibilities as people in cars; we’re all drivers….“People in cars often see people on bikes as merely an obstruction, and we are here to show that people on bikes are indeed people; worthy of the same respect you would show them in any other aspect of life.
I think these smart folks in Cleveland should market this to other groups:
The campaign is designed to humanize Palestinians as people in your community, and to raise awareness that Palestinians are legal citizens with the same rights and responsibilities as Israelis; we’re all Israelis….“Israelis often see Palestinians as merely an obstruction, and we are here to show that Palestinians are indeed people; worthy of the same respect you would show them in any other aspect of life.
I like the “We’re All Drivers” campaign! I’m not sure why you are so against it or why you wouldn’t like a campaign that also highlights pedestrians, but that’s your opinion. Cleveland has been making huge, huge progress in so many areas regarding bicycling and they have lots and lots to be proud of, including this public awareness campaign. How about a little support for fellow advocates of bicycling and active transportation instead of naysaying and nitpicking.
“I like the ‘We’re All Drivers’ campaign! I’m not sure why you are so against it”
Well, let me ask you: what, specifically, do you like about it?
I’m against it because it is a throwback, dredges up from the late 20th Century the fading trope of everyone in their own car; normalizes the behavior, the mode choice, that is the source of (very nearly all of) our problems, suggests that the most important thing to know here is that everyone is, really, like you, Mr. or Mrs. Car Driver. The odd thing about this campaign slogan is that our fellow Americans’ travel habits have moved on; autodom is on the wane. So why hearken to this lost vision, this dead end?
How does the framing of this campaign help us get to the place where we recognize that ‘We’re All Cyclists’? That is one of the behaviors—a cycling organization of all things—should be pushing, normalizing.
Semiotics is, I think, helpful here.
“There are no ideologically ‘neutral’ sign-systems: signs function to persuade as well as to refer. Sign-systems help to naturalize and reinforce particular framings of ‘the way things are,’ although the operation of ideology in signifying practices is typically masked. If signs do not merely reflect reality but are involved in its construction then those who control the sign-systems control the construction of reality. However, ‘commonsense’ involves incoherences, ambiguities, inconsistencies, contradictions, omissions, gaps and silences which offer leverage points for potential social change. The role of ideology is to suppress these in the interests of dominant groups.”
My earlier critique of the BTA’s highlighting of the same idea is here:
http://bikeportland.org/2013/11/12/do-bikes-get-a-free-ride-advocates-infographic-shows-why-not-96950#comment-4478490
Actually, Autodom is not necessarily on the wane, the recession dip in VMT has been obliterated and total VMT is reaching new heights post-recession (Actually, the data suggest that, while VMT per capita is still dropping, total VMT is continuing to rise, which I assume means a few ‘super-commuters’ are driving further distances, thus eliminating the benefits of the lower per capita VMT).
https://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/series/M12MTVUSM227NFWA
https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinformation/travel_monitoring/tvt.cfm
http://www.ssti.us/2014/02/vmt-drops-ninth-year-dots-taking-notice/
As for the Portland Metro area, Neither ODOT nor Metro seem to have completed VMT analysis past 2012, and ODOT only monitors VMT on state highways, so it’s a bit hard to know what the Metro and Oregon trends have been over the past three years.
http://www.oregonmetro.gov/sites/default/files/101513_transportation_system_monitoring_daily_vehicle_miles_traveled_1990-2012.pdf
http://www.oregon.gov/odot/td/tdata/pages/tsm/vmtpage.aspx#Oregon_State_Highway_VMT
“Actually, Autodom is not necessarily on the wane”
I agree that the last ten years of VMT statistics offer a mixed assessment of this, but I think it is still fair to say that
(a) younger cohorts are acquiring driver’s licenses, owning cars, and driving at *much* lower rates than older cohorts, and
(b) notwithstanding any preference shifts (see above), google’s Jetson-cars, or the developments in alternative fueled vehicles, the prospects for autodom are utterly bleak. The Climate Change and Peak Oil nooses draw ever tighter with each passing month.
“How about a little support for fellow advocates of bicycling and active transportation instead of naysaying and nitpicking.”
If they do something brilliant I am first to laud their efforts, but why should I keep my scorn to myself if or when they do something foolish? What is gained by pretending not to notice unhelpful or misguided endeavors? Criticisms are one form of participation, and a very visible one at that. Indeed, criticisms have positive elements in that it can lead to a review of unpopular decisions and it can influence the tenor of future decisions.
oops…my comment was supposed to be in reply to 9watts, but I put it in the wrong place. Thank you BikePortland for coverage of other cities which helps Portlanders see outside of our area.
Why not install breathalyzers in all cars instead of bike locks?
Because our country’s stupid, hick, gutter transportation culture insists on making false equivalency statements between drunk cyclists and drunk drivers.
Actually we need phone killers installed on all new motor vehicles.
The real cost of cheap gas..
“There were more than 18,600 motor-vehicle deaths from January through June this year, compared to 16,400 deaths in the first six months of 2014.”
…
The NSC partly attributes the jump in fatalities to the fact that people are driving more because gas is cheaper.”
http://money.cnn.com/2015/08/17/autos/traffic-fatalities-up-2015/index.html
Sine the death rate is climbing higher than the VMT rate at this point, one has to wonder if cheap gas encourages dangerous driving, or dangerous drivers to be on the road? Are the people that couldn’t afford to drive during the recession responsible for this uptick? Are people that are right on the border of taking the bus and affording a car worse drivers than the general population?
the before and after photos are great, and should be used as a tool for advocating with city government about what we need to do here in Portland to improve urban spaces downtown as well as in different neighborhoods. its taken how many years to get one block on Ankeny closed off? meanwhile NYC and other cities have made major strides.
why not close off part of Alberta? Clinton? NW 21st?
“The Climate Change and Peak Oil nooses draw ever tighter with each passing month.”
From where I sit, economic warfare with OPEC and ever-increasing reserves due to fracking mean cheap gas will be the norm for quite some time to come. I’m not sure where you’re seeing “peak oil.” It’s certainly not on the worry list of the oil & gas companies I work with (and they kinda sorta look out for these things).
“I’m not sure where you’re seeing ‘peak oil.'”
I see it everywhere. Fracking-as-solution-to-our-energy-woes here in the US is 80% hype, and will turn out to be extremely short lived. And were it not for fracking in the lower 48, which is, briefly, propping up worldwide extraction of liquid hydrocarbons, we would have a hard time denying that the peak of world oil extraction already occurred. Fracking is masking the inexorable, but only for another year or two.
http://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/Bakken-Decline-Rates-Worrying-For-Drillers.html
You’re missing the conversion of much of our energy base to natural gas, including former coal-powered plants in eastern OR and across NA, and entire fleets of trucks and locomotives. You’re also missing the application of modern technologies (under the ‘Industrial Internet’ umbrella, roughly) to extract entirely new levels of efficiency out of O&G-based infrastructure, including (already proven in) aircraft fleets, trains, power generation, etc. Energy production is no longer the biggest technical challenge we face here, but rather the efficient and widespread distribution of it.
“…we would have a hard time denying that the peak of world oil extraction already occurred.”
Would love to see proof of that (beyond some article on Bakken – fracking is going on all over the continental US and has been for many years). This is not a defense of the practice, mind you, but remember that oil is measured in quantifiable reserves and not production rates. Production rates are intentionally varied on a global level on a regular basis for the purpose of price manipulation, so it’s a measure I tend to overlook.
“Production rates are intentionally varied on a global level on a regular basis for the purpose of price manipulation, so it’s a measure I tend to overlook.”
Hm. Let’s try this.
From a Chris Nelder interview in the Washington Post (2013), noting in part :
“In 2005, we reached 73 million barrels per day. Then, to increase production beyond that, the world had to double spending on oil production. In 2012, we’re now spending $600 billion. The price of oil has tripled. And yet, for all that additional expenditure, we’ve only raised production 3 percent to 75 million barrels per day [since 2005].
…….
Mature OPEC fields are now declining at 5 to 6 percent per year, and non-OPEC fields are declining at 8 to 9 percent per year. Unconventional oil can’t compensate for that decline rate for very long.
……
And we’re replacing it with tight oil wells in the U.S. that decline 40 percent in the first year, where the production cost is over $70 per barrel. Or deepwater wells, which deplete at 20 percent per year. Or tar sands, which is expensive. Anticipated production growth for tar sands has consistently failed to meet expectations, year after year after year. Ten years ago, tar sands production today was expected to be twice what it actually is.
These are just low-quality oil resources, and we’re relying on them to compensate for the decline in cheap, high-quality stuff.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2013/04/13/peak-oil-isnt-dead-an-interview-with-chris-nelder/
“It’s certainly not on the worry list of the oil & gas companies I work with (and they kinda sorta look out for these things).”
I guess they prefer myopia. It probably plays better with their creditors.
Fracking and tarsands are signs of desperation. They show that the cheap to pump type of oil is no longer plentiful so it now makes economic sense to go after the more expensive type of oil extraction.
There are those who would argue they are signs of localization (or nationalism), and the quality of the crude produced correlates to where it comes from, not exactly how it’s extracted. Again, not defending the practice by any stretch, but the application of technology to optimize the refinement and use of it will far outpace production shortfalls for quite a while to come. I’m still willing to bet we won’t see a significant “peak oil” impact on human behavior in my lifetime anyway… and maybe that’s unfortunate, as human behavior seems to need a pretty big push to effect overcoming even minimal inertia.
“I’m still willing to bet we won’t see a significant ‘peak oil’ impact on human behavior in my lifetime anyway”
I’ll take that bet. And I don’t even know how old you are.
“There is a general consensus between industry leaders and analysts that world oil production will peak between 2010 and 2030, with a significant chance that the peak will occur before 2020. Dates after 2030 are considered implausible.”
“A 2014 validation of a significant 2004 study in the journal Energy proposed that it is likely that conventional oil production peaked, according to various definitions, between 2005 and 2011.”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Predicting_the_timing_of_peak_oil
Phase 1: Never heard of it.
Phase 2: It is wrong.
Phase 3: It is right, but irrelevant.
Phase 4: It is what I had been saying all along.
taken from Ugo Bardi, Peak Oil: The Four Stages of a New Idea. 2009
We’re likely the same age. It’s interesting reading – no, I’m not ignoring your viewpoints – but again, it’s focused solely on production rates and not reserves or consumption. Look at the consumption side. It goes well beyond passenger automobiles into freight trains, trucks, airplanes, plastics, etc. Our worldwide consumption, while continuing an upward trend, is using much more of a heterogeneous supply of energy and materials. Drinking coffee and eating take-out, for instance, used to consume massive amounts of Styrofoam in our earlier years, and now those artifacts are based primarily on post-consumer recycled fibers and corn-based plastics built by more energy-efficient production processes. Even cars – the primary thing people on this site tend to think of – are increasingly hybrid or electric powered more by natural gas and wind rather than coal and diesel (plus MPG has gone up a bit).
So my sense of this ‘temperance’ mitigating increased production needs is based on witnessing the raw power of pure greed in corporations. All of this efficiency and evolution I refer to is the culmination of decades of demand for ‘shareholder value’ driven by institutional investment (even public employee retiree funds), and individuals at the top gambling personal fortunes in this game. Yeah, the oil guys hate this, but them having seen it in the same timeframes referred to in your analyses is the reason they started fracking in the first place. Fast forward to today, you’ll continue to see our energy platforms move away from oil and towards natural gas (power plants are already making this transition; locomotives are next).
Your bet is one I wouldn’t mind losing, by the way, but again I make the comparison to cartels: if the US reduced its gigantic demand for the drugs they produce, many of the problems (and associated management costs) would be reduced. (And of course Internet and mobile phone usage continues to add demand for this energy production we refer to, which is still a much bigger consumer of oil than passenger cars).
“(And of course Internet and mobile phone usage continues to add demand for this energy production we refer to, which is still a much bigger consumer of oil than passenger cars).”
Not to drift too far from our topic, but this is something you’ll need to explain. While the calculations could become somewhat involved, I’d be VERY surprised if our personal transport oil use wasn’t significantly more than the oil (you mean fossil fuels or electricity I think) sucked up by the internet and mobile phones.
http://www.techthefuture.com/technology/how-much-electricity-does-the-internet-use/
http://money.cnn.com/2011/05/03/technology/internet_electricity/
Apple has surpassed Exxon-Mobil as the largest revenue producer in the world. The energy that goes into designing and producing electronics is non-negligible, the markets are now global and emerging quickly, and the lifecycles of these consumables are rather short, with great financial impetus to continue to shorten them.
More locally, Google added a 5th server facility to its farm in The Dalles this past spring, and just finished the tax (avoidance) negotiations to add a 6th.
I assume many of the objections to Park & Ride also apply to Pedal & Ride. I recall the argument that besides the cost of building garages, a lot a car’s total pollution happens when it’s started. How are our 2035 goals achieved by anything that would encourage more car starts in the PDX Metro? Was this covered here at BP in regards to Orange Line construction?
We are promoting ‘alternate drop spots’ at our elementary school this year. More than HALF of the student body is losing bus service this year, and many parents are concerned that their kids won’t be able to walk the entire distance to school, so we have laid out a map with drop spots where parents could drive them part way, and the kids could walk the rest of the way themselves.
We’ve received a lot of positive feedback on the idea, but I don’t know how much people will actually use it. I suspect people will wait to see how bad it is trying to drive their kids all the way to school before they seriously look into alternatives.
Ugh. The school drop-off phenomenon is rather frustrating for me. I say this all the time, but when I was in school, if I got dropped off or picked up by my parents, I was either in trouble or it was for a special event/practice. For regular school attendance, I walked, rode the bus, or on rare occasions, rode my bike.
I can guess which school you are referencing here; if I’m right, it used to be on my bike route to work and provided several demonstrations of clueless, impatient, and exasperated driving daily. I would love to hear how distributed drop-offs end up working out.
It would also be interesting to know the rationale for driving kids, whether to school or a drop-off. Are students being driven out of safety concerns? If so, which safety concerns: dangerous traffic, stranger abductions, bullying, etc. Or is it mostly due to perceived inability of students to make the walk or bike ride? E.g., too far, kid will get lost, kid will dilly-dally and be late, too cold/hot/wet/icy for kid to walk/ride, etc.
We are hearing a lot of reasons that parents are concerned about letting their kids walk.
* Too far
* Rain
* Bethany is unsafe to walk on
* Bethany is unsafe to cross
* Abduction and/or sexual predators
* Kids not able to handle responsibility
* Scheduling (have to leave for work, etc)
We have started a forum to address many of the concerns, and help parents meet up to make walk/bike trains from their parts of the neighborhood.
The ‘alternate drop spots’ plan is just to help people in the ‘Too far’ bucket. It’s likely that even with this plan in place, the other factors on that list may still lead them to try driving to school, until they realize how bad it actually is. That Bethany/Oak Hills is going to be completely backed up, since all incoming cars will be trying to turn left through the main crosswalk.