St. Louis alderman Scott Olgilvie (I-24) has introduced a new bill that, if passed, would modify our zoning code to require bike parking for some major new construction or renovations:
ABOVE: Bike parking on the campus of Washington University
BOARD BILL NO. 258 INTRODUCED BY ALDERMAN SCOTT OGILVIE, ALDERMAN SHANE COHN, PRESIDENT LEWIS REED, ALDERWOMAN JENNIFER FLORIDA An Ordinance recommended by the City of St. Louis Planning Commission, requiring residential and commercial bicycle parking under the Zoning Code for all new construction or renovations equal to or in excess of one million dollars ($1,000,000);ontaining definitions; bicycle rack construction requirement, bicycle rack site requirements, bicycle parking requirements, exemptions, off-street parking reduction, an administrative waiver provision and a severability clause. (BB258)
From Olgilvie’s blog:
On Wednesday the Planning Commission approved an ordinance that will require bike parking be included in new commercial construction and certain renovations. The bill is a collaborative effort between myself and members of the Mayor’s staff. A lot of assistance was provided by the city’s legal and zoning teams to craft an ordinance that will be effective, yet flexible for existing structures. The idea follows the lead of other cities like Cleveland, Minneapolis, and Portland, to provide secure and convenient bike parking where people will use it: at their work and the stores they visit. The specific amount of parking is determined by the size of the structure, or the number of employees for warehouse, hotel, and industrial uses. The goal is to provide adequate bike parking facilities to accommodate up to 5% of trips – a goal which some other cities have already achieved and surpassed. The rules build upon the bike infrastructure progress made in St. Louis over the last decade, including GRG trails and bike St. Louis on-street routes. (ward24stl.com)
Section Two E of the bill:
The total number of vehicle off-street parking spaces required under the Zoning Code shall be reduced at the ratio of one (1) automobile off-street parking space for each one (1) bicycle space provided. The total number of required automobile off-street parking spaces, however, shall not be reduced by more than ten (10) percent for any newly developed or rehabilitated structure.
The following shows bike rack styles, half allowed and half not allowed:
ABOVE: Ald Scott Olgilvie provided this image showing types of racks allowed and not allowed
I have some strong opinions on this bill but I’ll reserve those until I post the poll results on Wednesday February 8th.
– Steve Patterson
Currently there are "48 comments" on this Article:
The biggest challenge facing cyclists in St. Louis is not a lack of parking, it’s the fear of an untimely death, at the hand of inattentive or psychotic motorists. I’d gladly trade more bike racks for better, more fequent, more cycle-friendly connections over our waterways, freeways and waterways.
The biggest challenge facing cyclists in St. Louis is not a lack of parking, it’s the fear of an untimely death, at the hand of inattentive or psychotic motorists. I’d gladly trade more bike racks for better, more fequent, more cycle-friendly connections over our waterways, freeways and waterways.
Obviously, we disagree. I’m guessing that it’s mostly perspective, where one chooses to live. Between I-44, I-64, the River Des Peres and the railroads, access between southwest city and points north is constrained by limited, bike-unfriendly connections along Arsenal, McCausland/Wabash, Southwest, Hampton, Sublette, Macklind, Manchester, Kingshighway, Vandeventer, etc. Yes, the fearless “experienced transportation cyclists” are willing to go toe-to-toe with traffic passing inches away, but most cyclists prefer something less “exhilirating” on their daily commutes.
I was trained as an on-road cyclist by an LCI (League Cycling Instructor) and commuted by bike to work regularly in the late 90s. Then I was trained to be an LCI instructor myself. Those who are new to and not properly trained in on-road cycling have the concerns you express. See http://www.bikeleague.org/programs/education/instructors.php
And, like you, I commuted to work for many years in Denver, as well as training for and doing both RAGBRAI and Ride the Rockies a couple of times, each. Heck, I’ve been riding for 50+ years and still have 4 bikes in the garage. I get it, riding in an urban environment is both possible and something that should be happening a lot more than it is here. And while I still can and do ride in traffic, I also try to minimize unnecessary conflicts with motorists by choosing routes that avoid roads where cyclists are not expected by most drivers. I do agree that getting more cyclists on the road is at the core of the “problem”. Bicycles are simply not considered to have equal rights to use our surface streets by many motorists, either because they’re such a rarity or because many of the cyclists out there are either arrogant or ignorant about basic traffic laws. It doesn’t matter if you’re riding against traffic, blowing through stop signs and traffic signals or training in lycra-clad packs, if you don’t act like a vehicle and follow the laws, you won’t get the respect that we all seek. So while you think that parking is the biggest barrier, I still see the choke points (and the conflicts they create) as the biggest barrier.
Bike parking is highly visible throughout Chicago and so are transportation cyclists. Just like parking is needed for cars, so is parking for bikes if they are to be a viable alternative.
Bike parking is an important step but St. Louis’ bike lanes are disconnected, too few, and some are too narrow. Infrastructure all around remains essential to get people biking. Most people don’t get training and want separation before they adopt cycling. It’s cheap and doesn’t slow down traffic.
What role does the city anticipate for bike lockers here? Bike racks work well for trips to retail establishments and for people commuting to work, IF they’re under surveilance, “eyes on the street”. Bike lockers work better, to provide truly secure storage, at places like Metrolink stations and businesses where parking areas aren’t being monitored. RTD rents them for $5 a month in Denver, and they work well for people who commute between their homes and public transit by bike. http://www.rtd-denver.com/Bike_n_Ride.shtml
What role does the city anticipate for bike lockers here? Bike racks work well for trips to retail establishments and for people commuting to work, IF they’re under surveilance, “eyes on the street”. Bike lockers work better, to provide truly secure storage, at places like Metrolink stations and businesses where parking areas aren’t being monitored. RTD rents them for $5 a month in Denver, and they work well for people who commute between their homes and public transit by bike. http://www.rtd-denver.com/Bike_n_Ride.shtml
Obviously, we disagree. I’m guessing that it’s mostly perspective, where one chooses to live. Between I-44, I-64, the River Des Peres and the railroads, access between southwest city and points north is constrained by limited, bike-unfriendly connections along Arsenal, McCausland/Wabash, Southwest, Hampton, Sublette, Macklind, Manchester, Kingshighway, Vandeventer, etc. Yes, the fearless “experienced transportation cyclists” are willing to go toe-to-toe with traffic passing inches away, but most cyclists prefer something less “exhilirating” on their daily commutes.
I was trained as an on-road cyclist by an LCI (League Cycling Instructor) and commuted by bike to work regularly in the late 90s. Then I was trained to be an LCI instructor myself. Those who are new to and not properly trained in on-road cycling have the concerns you express. See http://www.bikeleague.org/programs/education/instructors.php
If I may, from about 200 miles north of you guys it looks like Steve is narrowly focusing on some nuts and bolts details of a grand idea ( finding ways to make people willing to travel about the city in ways other than single-occupancy autos ), and JZ is seeing larger and very pervasive reasons why people immediately dismiss any thought of transportation bicycling.
This won’t add anything specific to the discussion but I would like to call attention to a Danish blog site that is a photographic celebration of the Dane’s success in integrating thousands of daily bicyclists and automotive users in close in streets much tighter than most of ours.
Be aware, the guy who operates this blog is an evangelist for his cause, but the hundreds / thousands of his photos don’t lie; bicycle commuting there is huge and seemingly as normal to them as is single-occupant auto commuting here.
If I may, from about 200 miles north of you guys it looks like Steve is narrowly focusing on some nuts and bolts details of a grand idea ( finding ways to make people willing to travel about the city in ways other than single-occupancy autos ), and JZ is seeing larger and very pervasive reasons why people immediately dismiss any thought of transportation bicycling.
This won’t add anything specific to the discussion but I would like to call attention to a Danish blog site that is a photographic celebration of the Dane’s success in integrating thousands of daily bicyclists and automotive users in close in streets much tighter than most of ours.
Be aware, the guy who operates this blog is an evangelist for his cause, but the hundreds / thousands of his photos don’t lie; bicycle commuting there is huge and seemingly as normal to them as is single-occupant auto commuting here.
As someone that used to run errands by bike I can tell you having a place to securely leave a bike is a huge deterrent to those who want & do to use their bike. The more timid cyclists need to see others on the road before they’ll join. Get more hardcore transportation cyclists on the road and others will eventually follow.
As someone that used to run errands by bike I can tell you having a place to securely leave a bike is a huge deterrent to those who want & do to use their bike. The more timid cyclists need to see others on the road before they’ll join. Get more hardcore transportation cyclists on the road and others will eventually follow.
Steve Patterson took the League of American Bicyclists (LAB) Road I course I conducted on the Florissant Valley Community College campus and surrounding area in 1999 and was already a confident on-road cyclist. Steve was definitely the most competent member of the class.
Most adults and mature children can master the rules and handling abilities needed to use a bicycle safely for transportation on public roads, and navigating cooperatively with motorists. It’s not a difficult skill, but like all practical abilities it will be learned more quickly and in a more comprehensive manner if taught by an informed instructor using sound teaching techniques. This is no different than attending an art class or picking up a brush on your own. The main difference is that if you mess up a drawing you crumple up the paper and start again. If you mess up on a bike, it can be more painful, as any cyclist can attest!
That is my conclusion as a certified Cycling Instructor since 1997, having taught courses to many adults and some teens based on LAB’s Road I/Traffic Skills 101 foundation course. An even better course is the more recent CyclingSavvy course, started in Orlando, Florida in 2010, and which since last year is also offered in St. Louis. I offer a shorter on-bike only course focusing on bike handling and crash avoidance techniques, followed by on-road instruction, for those wanting such a course.
I discussed these issues in a recent St. Louis Beacon OpEd also published on my blog under the title: “Knowledge is best protection for bicyclist” at http://tinyurl.com/7nsa4cw
Regarding good designs for bike racks, in explored this in depth for the Ferguson Pilot BIKE Promotion Project I was coordinating from 2000 to 2006. One of the minimum requirements for a good rack design was that it support the bicycle frame in two points to prevent it from swiveling around when parked, as otherwise often happens with serpentine racks. The only addition to the approved rack designs in this ordinance would be what I call the offset serpentine design, which is a series of offset inverted Us bent from a single tube. This is the most economical design for accommodating more than two bikes.  (See Function First Bike Rib series III at http://www.bikerack.com/bikeracks/bikeribiii/ .Â
Steve Patterson took the League of American Bicyclists (LAB) Road I course I conducted on the Florissant Valley Community College campus and surrounding area in 1999 and was already a confident on-road cyclist. Steve was definitely the most competent member of the class.
Most adults and mature children can master the rules and handling abilities needed to use a bicycle safely for transportation on public roads, and navigating cooperatively with motorists. It’s not a difficult skill, but like all practical abilities it will be learned more quickly and in a more comprehensive manner if taught by an informed instructor using sound teaching techniques. This is no different than attending an art class or picking up a brush on your own. The main difference is that if you mess up a drawing you crumple up the paper and start again. If you mess up on a bike, it can be more painful, as any cyclist can attest!
That is my conclusion as a certified Cycling Instructor since 1997, having taught courses to many adults and some teens based on LAB’s Road I/Traffic Skills 101 foundation course. An even better course is the more recent CyclingSavvy course, started in Orlando, Florida in 2010, and which since last year is also offered in St. Louis. I offer a shorter on-bike only course focusing on bike handling and crash avoidance techniques, followed by on-road instruction, for those wanting such a course.
I discussed these issues in a recent St. Louis Beacon OpEd also published on my blog under the title: “Knowledge is best protection for bicyclist” at http://tinyurl.com/7nsa4cw
Regarding good designs for bike racks, in explored this in depth for the Ferguson Pilot BIKE Promotion Project I was coordinating from 2000 to 2006. One of the minimum requirements for a good rack design was that it support the bicycle frame in two points to prevent it from swiveling around when parked, as otherwise often happens with serpentine racks. The only addition to the approved rack designs in this ordinance would be what I call the offset serpentine design, which is a series of offset inverted Us bent from a single tube. This is the most economical design for accommodating more than two bikes. (See Function First Bike Rib series III at http://www.bikerack.com/bikeracks/bikeribiii/ .
Bicycles and motorists moving at different speeds on city streets is analogous to the danger of cars traveling at significant different speeds on an interstate highway.
Bad analogy. City streets are not freeways. City streets have no minimum speed limits (like freeways), nor do they prohibit pedestrians and non-motorized vehicles (like freeways). Bicycles, horse-drawn carriages, ice cream trucks, 49cc scooters and street sweepers are all alowed under current laws. Speed limits specify a maximum speed, anything less is legal, anything more is illegal. That said, I agree that speed disparities do create problems, which is why I personally try to minimize those conflicts when I’m riding, by choosing lesser-travelled parallel routes and by trying to be considerate of and respectful of motorists. It’s also why I continue to push the issue of choke points and congestion over parking – living in south city, there are few options that do not involve speed disparities if I want to ride my bikes north of the I-44/River Des Peres/Manchester/rail/industrial corridor.
In Toronto we have a lot more cyclists and streetcars. People manage. Every cyclist that doesn’t drive gives you more on street parking and more space on the road.
And, like you, I commuted to work for many years in Denver, as well as training for and doing both RAGBRAI and Ride the Rockies a couple of times, each. Heck, I’ve been riding for 50+ years and still have 4 bikes in the garage. I get it, riding in an urban environment is both possible and something that should be happening a lot more than it is here. And while I still can and do ride in traffic, I also try to minimize unnecessary conflicts with motorists by choosing routes that avoid roads where cyclists are not expected by most drivers. I do agree that getting more cyclists on the road is at the core of the “problem”. Bicycles are simply not considered to have equal rights to use our surface streets by many motorists, either because they’re such a rarity or because many of the cyclists out there are either arrogant or ignorant about basic traffic laws. It doesn’t matter if you’re riding against traffic, blowing through stop signs and traffic signals or training in lycra-clad packs, if you don’t act like a vehicle and follow the laws, you won’t get the respect that we all seek. So while you think that parking is the biggest barrier, I still see the choke points (and the conflicts they create) as the biggest barrier.
Bike parking is highly visible throughout Chicago and so are transportation cyclists. Just like parking is needed for cars, so is parking for bikes if they are to be a viable alternative.
Bicycles and motorists moving at different speeds on city streets is analogous to the danger of cars traveling at significant different speeds on an interstate highway.
Bad analogy. City streets are not freeways. City streets have no minimum speed limits (like freeways), nor do they prohibit pedestrians and non-motorized vehicles (like freeways). Bicycles, horse-drawn carriages, ice cream trucks, 49cc scooters and street sweepers are all alowed under current laws. Speed limits specify a maximum speed, anything less is legal, anything more is illegal. That said, I agree that speed disparities do create problems, which is why I personally try to minimize those conflicts when I’m riding, by choosing lesser-travelled parallel routes and by trying to be considerate of and respectful of motorists. It’s also why I continue to push the issue of choke points and congestion over parking – living in south city, there are few options that do not involve speed disparities if I want to ride my bikes north of the I-44/River Des Peres/Manchester/rail/industrial corridor.
There is nothing inherently wrong with this proposal. It’s very similar to what Denver implemented over a decade ago. The only real problem is that, like many zoning “tools”, it’s a relatively blunt instrument. The areas most likely to be populated by urban cyclists, downtown and the commercial corridors that developed along streetcar lines a century ago, are the ones least likely to be seeing million-dollar projects and major new parking requirements. Most projects are much smaller, being either new tenants or repurposing old structures for new uses – think the Grove, CWE, Cherokee Street, etc. With a change of use, and new parking requirements kicking in, it’s going to take more than 10 spaces before any credits can be applied (10% maximum limit). Downtown, where parking is not required for most uses, it’s the same issue. The biggest impact in Denver turned out to be on publicly-funded projects, like libraries and the Pepsi Center (similar to Scottrade here), where large amounts of bike parking ended up being required and provided.
Any commercial owner can already install bike racks if they choose to, and many already do so. That out-of-town chain that you love to hate at Chippewa and Lansdowne, Starbucks, installed inverted-U bike racks before they opened. That local chain, Lion’s Choice, built next door at exactly the same time, did not. Target, with its HQ in Mineapolis, at its store at Hampton and Chippewa (and elsewhere) has appropriate bike racks; the Schnucks across the street does does not (they do it old school, with a comb rack). Yes, laws can force more appropriate behavior, but it really boils down to a mindset, how local people think, consciously and subconsciously about how they live their lives every day. Seattle and Minneapolis have more serious cyclists than we do, so their designs seem to be inherently more cyclist-friendly. We, in contrast, seem to be solely focused on the private automobile, so both public transit and bicycling as a viable means of transportation are barely funded or respected, and then, only grudgingly.
So it remains an interesting chicken-or-egg discussion, which comes first? Does it take better infrastructure or more people choosing to ride to change the mindset and the power in numbers? The parts of Chicago where I’ve seen a huge increase in cyclists seem to coincide with gentrification, a return to the city and limited vehicle parking. In Denver, favorable weather combined with a robust, off-street and, many-times, grade-separated, trail network, seem to have helped. There is no one answer, no silver bullet. This legislation is a step in the right direction, but a lot more needs to be done with identifying and connecting the missing links and with improving the attitudes and actions of both drivers and cyclists, in addition to providing better parking.
There is nothing inherently wrong with this proposal. It’s very similar to what Denver implemented over a decade ago. The only real problem is that, like many zoning “tools”, it’s a relatively blunt instrument. The areas most likely to be populated by urban cyclists, downtown and the commercial corridors that developed along streetcar lines a century ago, are the ones least likely to be seeing million-dollar projects and major new parking requirements. Most projects are much smaller, being either new tenants or repurposing old structures for new uses – think the Grove, CWE, Cherokee Street, etc. With a change of use, and new parking requirements kicking in, it’s going to take more than 10 spaces before any credits can be applied (10% maximum limit). Downtown, where parking is not required for most uses, it’s the same issue. The biggest impact in Denver turned out to be on publicly-funded projects, like libraries and the Pepsi Center (similar to Scottrade here), where large amounts of bike parking ended up being required and provided.
Any commercial owner can already install bike racks if they choose to, and many already do so. That out-of-town chain that you love to hate at Chippewa and Lansdowne, Starbucks, installed inverted-U bike racks before they opened. That local chain, Lion’s Choice, built next door at exactly the same time, did not. Target, with its HQ in Mineapolis, at its store at Hampton and Chippewa (and elsewhere) has appropriate bike racks; the Schnucks across the street does does not (they do it old school, with a comb rack). Yes, laws can force more appropriate behavior, but it really boils down to a mindset, how local people think, consciously and subconsciously about how they live their lives every day. Seattle and Minneapolis have more serious cyclists than we do, so their designs seem to be inherently more cyclist-friendly. We, in contrast, seem to be solely focused on the private automobile, so both public transit and bicycling as a viable means of transportation are barely funded or respected, and then, only grudgingly.
So it remains an interesting chicken-or-egg discussion, which comes first? Does it take better infrastructure or more people choosing to ride to change the mindset and the power in numbers? The parts of Chicago where I’ve seen a huge increase in cyclists seem to coincide with gentrification, a return to the city and limited vehicle parking. In Denver, favorable weather combined with a robust, off-street and, many-times, grade-separated, trail network, seem to have helped. There is no one answer, no silver bullet. This legislation is a step in the right direction, but a lot more needs to be done with identifying and connecting the missing links and with improving the attitudes and actions of both drivers and cyclists, in addition to providing better parking.
It takes infrastructure from the studies I’ve read and people I’ve talked to who know more than I do. Parking requirements for zoning need to be changed. We shouldn’t require auto parking for these small projects you list. The cost of promoting cycling is way lower than cars. It would be a good idea to talk to business owners about this as many probably have no idea.
Bike parking is an important step but St. Louis’ bike lanes are disconnected, too few, and some are too narrow. Infrastructure all around remains essential to get people biking. Most people don’t get training and want separation before they adopt cycling. It’s cheap and doesn’t slow down traffic.
It takes infrastructure from the studies I’ve read and people I’ve talked to who know more than I do. Parking requirements for zoning need to be changed. We shouldn’t require auto parking for these small projects you list. The cost of promoting cycling is way lower than cars. It would be a good idea to talk to business owners about this as many probably have no idea.
In Toronto we have a lot more cyclists and streetcars. People manage. Every cyclist that doesn’t drive gives you more on street parking and more space on the road.
The fact that there’s often a speed disparity between cyclists and motorists – unless traffic stop and go – is not usually an issue, provided the cyclist rides predictably and is conspicuous to drivers. Brightly colored clothing, e.g. yellow for daytime, and most importantly, lane position, are relevant. (I also use a flashing high powered strobe front light during daytime rides.) On a multi-lane road. being highly visible typically means controlling the curb lane by riding down its middle. If there’s parking alongside, that requires moving further left to avoid the door zone + “flinch” zone. There’s an excellent illustration of this on-line by League Cycling Instructor, Dan Gutierrez, at http://tinyurl.com/895hglwÂ
The fact that there’s often a speed disparity between cyclists and motorists – unless traffic stop and go – is not usually an issue, provided the cyclist rides predictably and is conspicuous to drivers. Brightly colored clothing, e.g. yellow for daytime, and most importantly, lane position, are relevant. (I also use a flashing high powered strobe front light during daytime rides.) On a multi-lane road. being highly visible typically means controlling the curb lane by riding down its middle. If there’s parking alongside, that requires moving further left to avoid the door zone + “flinch” zone. There’s an excellent illustration of this on-line by League Cycling Instructor, Dan Gutierrez, at http://tinyurl.com/895hglw
Great, both legally and in theory, but would you do it on Manchester west of I-270? On Gravois? Taking a lane is always a judgement call. Just like how a fire truck or an ambulance always has the right of way when its lights and siren are activated, emergency vehicle operators are trained to look out for other vehicles who either aren’t paying attention or just freeze. Motorcyclists face similar challenges as cyclists (in being “seen”), even though they’re travelling the same speed as the rest of the traffic – you can be totally right legally, and still end up injured or worse . . . .
Regarding your query, yesterday I checked out a route prior to a doctor’s visit on Wednesday. The doctor’s office is on a busy part of Lindbergh in North St. Louis County, a little over a half-mile north of I-270, and I arrived there at around 4 pm. The traffic was bumper to bumper in both lanes as I arrived and I had to wait, but eventually a motorist allowed me into the curb lane ahead of him, and then I merged into the inside lane. When I got to the doctor’s office I did a U-turn from the center-turn-only lane into the inside lane to return the way I had come, and motorists passed me in the curb lane. When I got to my left turn I waited only a short time behind a motorist for a safe gap. (There are quite a few stop lights along this section and they do produce gaps in the traffic.)
I met only one irate motorist who pointlessly honked at me as he moved right into the curb lane to pass. That happened after my U-turn but it wasn’t obvious that I’d actually delayed him/her.
One thing I would suggest is that if, when controlling the lane, motorists start to build up behind and you start to feel stressed, unlike when driving a car you can readily pull over briefly (and even stop) until another gap opens up.
Great, both legally and in theory, but would you do it on Manchester west of I-270? On Gravois? Taking a lane is always a judgement call. Just like how a fire truck or an ambulance always has the right of way when its lights and siren are activated, emergency vehicle operators are trained to look out for other vehicles who either aren’t paying attention or just freeze. Motorcyclists face similar challenges as cyclists (in being “seen”), even though they’re travelling the same speed as the rest of the traffic – you can be totally right legally, and still end up injured or worse . . . .
Regarding your query, yesterday I checked out a route prior to a doctor’s visit on Wednesday. The doctor’s office is on a busy part of Lindbergh in North St. Louis County, a little over a half-mile north of I-270, and I arrived there at around 4 pm. The traffic was bumper to bumper in both lanes as I arrived and I had to wait, but eventually a motorist allowed me into the curb lane ahead of him, and then I merged into the inside lane. When I got to the doctor’s office I did a U-turn from the center-turn-only lane into the inside lane to return the way I had come, and motorists passed me in the curb lane. When I got to my left turn I waited only a short time behind a motorist for a safe gap. (There are quite a few stop lights along this section and they do produce gaps in the traffic.)
I met only one irate motorist who pointlessly honked at me as he moved right into the curb lane to pass. That happened after my U-turn but it wasn’t obvious that I’d actually delayed him/her.Â
One thing I would suggest is that if, when controlling the lane, motorists start to build up behind and you start to feel stressed, unlike when driving a car you can readily pull over briefly (and even stop) until another gap opens up.Â
AARP Livibility Index
The Livability Index scores neighborhoods and communities across the U.S. for the services and amenities that impact your life the most
Built St. Louis
historic architecture of St. Louis, Missouri – mourning the losses, celebrating the survivors.
Geo St. Louis
a guide to geospatial data about the City of St. Louis
The biggest challenge facing cyclists in St. Louis is not a lack of parking, it’s the fear of an untimely death, at the hand of inattentive or psychotic motorists. I’d gladly trade more bike racks for better, more fequent, more cycle-friendly connections over our waterways, freeways and waterways.
The biggest challenge facing cyclists in St. Louis is not a lack of parking, it’s the fear of an untimely death, at the hand of inattentive or psychotic motorists. I’d gladly trade more bike racks for better, more fequent, more cycle-friendly connections over our waterways, freeways and waterways.
Untrue, for experienced transportation cyclists lack of secure parking is a major problem.
Obviously, we disagree. I’m guessing that it’s mostly perspective, where one chooses to live. Between I-44, I-64, the River Des Peres and the railroads, access between southwest city and points north is constrained by limited, bike-unfriendly connections along Arsenal, McCausland/Wabash, Southwest, Hampton, Sublette, Macklind, Manchester, Kingshighway, Vandeventer, etc. Yes, the fearless “experienced transportation cyclists” are willing to go toe-to-toe with traffic passing inches away, but most cyclists prefer something less “exhilirating” on their daily commutes.
I was trained as an on-road cyclist by an LCI (League Cycling Instructor) and commuted by bike to work regularly in the late 90s. Then I was trained to be an LCI instructor myself. Those who are new to and not properly trained in on-road cycling have the concerns you express. See http://www.bikeleague.org/programs/education/instructors.php
And, like you, I commuted to work for many years in Denver, as well as training for and doing both RAGBRAI and Ride the Rockies a couple of times, each. Heck, I’ve been riding for 50+ years and still have 4 bikes in the garage. I get it, riding in an urban environment is both possible and something that should be happening a lot more than it is here. And while I still can and do ride in traffic, I also try to minimize unnecessary conflicts with motorists by choosing routes that avoid roads where cyclists are not expected by most drivers. I do agree that getting more cyclists on the road is at the core of the “problem”. Bicycles are simply not considered to have equal rights to use our surface streets by many motorists, either because they’re such a rarity or because many of the cyclists out there are either arrogant or ignorant about basic traffic laws. It doesn’t matter if you’re riding against traffic, blowing through stop signs and traffic signals or training in lycra-clad packs, if you don’t act like a vehicle and follow the laws, you won’t get the respect that we all seek. So while you think that parking is the biggest barrier, I still see the choke points (and the conflicts they create) as the biggest barrier.
Bike parking is highly visible throughout Chicago and so are transportation cyclists. Just like parking is needed for cars, so is parking for bikes if they are to be a viable alternative.
Bike parking is an important step but St. Louis’ bike lanes are disconnected, too few, and some are too narrow. Infrastructure all around remains essential to get people biking. Most people don’t get training and want separation before they adopt cycling. It’s cheap and doesn’t slow down traffic.
Untrue, for experienced transportation cyclists lack of secure parking is a major problem.
What role does the city anticipate for bike lockers here? Bike racks work well for trips to retail establishments and for people commuting to work, IF they’re under surveilance, “eyes on the street”. Bike lockers work better, to provide truly secure storage, at places like Metrolink stations and businesses where parking areas aren’t being monitored. RTD rents them for $5 a month in Denver, and they work well for people who commute between their homes and public transit by bike. http://www.rtd-denver.com/Bike_n_Ride.shtml
What role does the city anticipate for bike lockers here? Bike racks work well for trips to retail establishments and for people commuting to work, IF they’re under surveilance, “eyes on the street”. Bike lockers work better, to provide truly secure storage, at places like Metrolink stations and businesses where parking areas aren’t being monitored. RTD rents them for $5 a month in Denver, and they work well for people who commute between their homes and public transit by bike. http://www.rtd-denver.com/Bike_n_Ride.shtml
Bike lockers are great for commuters but useless for the cyclist running errands at local businesses.
Bike lockers are great for commuters but useless for the cyclist running errands at local businesses.
Obviously, we disagree. I’m guessing that it’s mostly perspective, where one chooses to live. Between I-44, I-64, the River Des Peres and the railroads, access between southwest city and points north is constrained by limited, bike-unfriendly connections along Arsenal, McCausland/Wabash, Southwest, Hampton, Sublette, Macklind, Manchester, Kingshighway, Vandeventer, etc. Yes, the fearless “experienced transportation cyclists” are willing to go toe-to-toe with traffic passing inches away, but most cyclists prefer something less “exhilirating” on their daily commutes.
I was trained as an on-road cyclist by an LCI (League Cycling Instructor) and commuted by bike to work regularly in the late 90s. Then I was trained to be an LCI instructor myself. Those who are new to and not properly trained in on-road cycling have the concerns you express. See http://www.bikeleague.org/programs/education/instructors.php
If I may, from about 200 miles north of you guys it looks like Steve is narrowly focusing on some nuts and bolts details of a grand idea ( finding ways to make people willing to travel about the city in ways other than single-occupancy autos ), and JZ is seeing larger and very pervasive reasons why people immediately dismiss any thought of transportation bicycling.
This won’t add anything specific to the discussion but I would like to call attention to a Danish blog site that is a photographic celebration of the Dane’s success in integrating thousands of daily bicyclists and automotive users in close in streets much tighter than most of ours.
Be aware, the guy who operates this blog is an evangelist for his cause, but the hundreds / thousands of his photos don’t lie; bicycle commuting there is huge and seemingly as normal to them as is single-occupant auto commuting here.
The Copenhagen Cycle Chic blog url. http://Www.copenhagencyclechic.com
Alf
If I may, from about 200 miles north of you guys it looks like Steve is narrowly focusing on some nuts and bolts details of a grand idea ( finding ways to make people willing to travel about the city in ways other than single-occupancy autos ), and JZ is seeing larger and very pervasive reasons why people immediately dismiss any thought of transportation bicycling.
This won’t add anything specific to the discussion but I would like to call attention to a Danish blog site that is a photographic celebration of the Dane’s success in integrating thousands of daily bicyclists and automotive users in close in streets much tighter than most of ours.
Be aware, the guy who operates this blog is an evangelist for his cause, but the hundreds / thousands of his photos don’t lie; bicycle commuting there is huge and seemingly as normal to them as is single-occupant auto commuting here.
The Copenhagen Cycle Chic blog url. http://Www.copenhagencyclechic.com
Alf
As someone that used to run errands by bike I can tell you having a place to securely leave a bike is a huge deterrent to those who want & do to use their bike. The more timid cyclists need to see others on the road before they’ll join. Get more hardcore transportation cyclists on the road and others will eventually follow.
I agree. And drivers will adapt.
As someone that used to run errands by bike I can tell you having a place to securely leave a bike is a huge deterrent to those who want & do to use their bike. The more timid cyclists need to see others on the road before they’ll join. Get more hardcore transportation cyclists on the road and others will eventually follow.
Steve Patterson took the League of American Bicyclists (LAB) Road I course I conducted on the Florissant Valley Community College campus and surrounding area in 1999 and was already a confident on-road cyclist. Steve was definitely the most competent member of the class.
Most adults and mature children can master the rules and handling abilities needed to use a bicycle safely for transportation on public roads, and navigating cooperatively with motorists. It’s not a difficult skill, but like all practical abilities it will be learned more quickly and in a more comprehensive manner if taught by an informed instructor using sound teaching techniques. This is no different than attending an art class or picking up a brush on your own. The main difference is that if you mess up a drawing you crumple up the paper and start again. If you mess up on a bike, it can be more painful, as any cyclist can attest!
That is my conclusion as a certified Cycling Instructor since 1997, having taught courses to many adults and some teens based on LAB’s Road I/Traffic Skills 101 foundation course. An even better course is the more recent CyclingSavvy course, started in Orlando, Florida in 2010, and which since last year is also offered in St. Louis. I offer a shorter on-bike only course focusing on bike handling and crash avoidance techniques, followed by on-road instruction, for those wanting such a course.
I discussed these issues in a recent St. Louis Beacon OpEd also published on my blog under the title: “Knowledge is best protection for bicyclist” at http://tinyurl.com/7nsa4cw
Regarding good designs for bike racks, in explored this in depth for the Ferguson Pilot BIKE Promotion Project I was coordinating from 2000 to 2006. One of the minimum requirements for a good rack design was that it support the bicycle frame in two points to prevent it from swiveling around when parked, as otherwise often happens with serpentine racks. The only addition to the approved rack designs in this ordinance would be what I call the offset serpentine design, which is a series of offset inverted Us bent from a single tube. This is the most economical design for accommodating more than two bikes.  (See Function First Bike Rib series III at http://www.bikerack.com/bikeracks/bikeribiii/ .Â
Steve Patterson took the League of American Bicyclists (LAB) Road I course I conducted on the Florissant Valley Community College campus and surrounding area in 1999 and was already a confident on-road cyclist. Steve was definitely the most competent member of the class.
Most adults and mature children can master the rules and handling abilities needed to use a bicycle safely for transportation on public roads, and navigating cooperatively with motorists. It’s not a difficult skill, but like all practical abilities it will be learned more quickly and in a more comprehensive manner if taught by an informed instructor using sound teaching techniques. This is no different than attending an art class or picking up a brush on your own. The main difference is that if you mess up a drawing you crumple up the paper and start again. If you mess up on a bike, it can be more painful, as any cyclist can attest!
That is my conclusion as a certified Cycling Instructor since 1997, having taught courses to many adults and some teens based on LAB’s Road I/Traffic Skills 101 foundation course. An even better course is the more recent CyclingSavvy course, started in Orlando, Florida in 2010, and which since last year is also offered in St. Louis. I offer a shorter on-bike only course focusing on bike handling and crash avoidance techniques, followed by on-road instruction, for those wanting such a course.
I discussed these issues in a recent St. Louis Beacon OpEd also published on my blog under the title: “Knowledge is best protection for bicyclist” at http://tinyurl.com/7nsa4cw
Regarding good designs for bike racks, in explored this in depth for the Ferguson Pilot BIKE Promotion Project I was coordinating from 2000 to 2006. One of the minimum requirements for a good rack design was that it support the bicycle frame in two points to prevent it from swiveling around when parked, as otherwise often happens with serpentine racks. The only addition to the approved rack designs in this ordinance would be what I call the offset serpentine design, which is a series of offset inverted Us bent from a single tube. This is the most economical design for accommodating more than two bikes. (See Function First Bike Rib series III at http://www.bikerack.com/bikeracks/bikeribiii/ .
I simply don’t care about the 7 annoying people that ride there bikes going 15mph on a 45mph rd. I hope this does not pass.
I simply don’t care about the 7 annoying people that ride there bikes going 15mph on a 45mph rd. I hope this does not pass.
And this is the core of the problem here – the assumption that if a vehicle is not going the speed limit, it has no right to be on the road . . . .
Bicycles and motorists moving at different speeds on city streets is analogous to the danger of cars traveling at significant different speeds on an interstate highway.
Bad analogy. City streets are not freeways. City streets have no minimum speed limits (like freeways), nor do they prohibit pedestrians and non-motorized vehicles (like freeways). Bicycles, horse-drawn carriages, ice cream trucks, 49cc scooters and street sweepers are all alowed under current laws. Speed limits specify a maximum speed, anything less is legal, anything more is illegal. That said, I agree that speed disparities do create problems, which is why I personally try to minimize those conflicts when I’m riding, by choosing lesser-travelled parallel routes and by trying to be considerate of and respectful of motorists. It’s also why I continue to push the issue of choke points and congestion over parking – living in south city, there are few options that do not involve speed disparities if I want to ride my bikes north of the I-44/River Des Peres/Manchester/rail/industrial corridor.
I can’t think of any 45mph roads in St. Louis.
In Toronto we have a lot more cyclists and streetcars. People manage. Every cyclist that doesn’t drive gives you more on street parking and more space on the road.
And, like you, I commuted to work for many years in Denver, as well as training for and doing both RAGBRAI and Ride the Rockies a couple of times, each. Heck, I’ve been riding for 50+ years and still have 4 bikes in the garage. I get it, riding in an urban environment is both possible and something that should be happening a lot more than it is here. And while I still can and do ride in traffic, I also try to minimize unnecessary conflicts with motorists by choosing routes that avoid roads where cyclists are not expected by most drivers. I do agree that getting more cyclists on the road is at the core of the “problem”. Bicycles are simply not considered to have equal rights to use our surface streets by many motorists, either because they’re such a rarity or because many of the cyclists out there are either arrogant or ignorant about basic traffic laws. It doesn’t matter if you’re riding against traffic, blowing through stop signs and traffic signals or training in lycra-clad packs, if you don’t act like a vehicle and follow the laws, you won’t get the respect that we all seek. So while you think that parking is the biggest barrier, I still see the choke points (and the conflicts they create) as the biggest barrier.
Bike parking is highly visible throughout Chicago and so are transportation cyclists. Just like parking is needed for cars, so is parking for bikes if they are to be a viable alternative.
And this is the core of the problem here – the assumption that if a vehicle is not going the speed limit, it has no right to be on the road . . . .
I can’t think of any 45mph roads in St. Louis.
Bicycles and motorists moving at different speeds on city streets is analogous to the danger of cars traveling at significant different speeds on an interstate highway.
Bad analogy. City streets are not freeways. City streets have no minimum speed limits (like freeways), nor do they prohibit pedestrians and non-motorized vehicles (like freeways). Bicycles, horse-drawn carriages, ice cream trucks, 49cc scooters and street sweepers are all alowed under current laws. Speed limits specify a maximum speed, anything less is legal, anything more is illegal. That said, I agree that speed disparities do create problems, which is why I personally try to minimize those conflicts when I’m riding, by choosing lesser-travelled parallel routes and by trying to be considerate of and respectful of motorists. It’s also why I continue to push the issue of choke points and congestion over parking – living in south city, there are few options that do not involve speed disparities if I want to ride my bikes north of the I-44/River Des Peres/Manchester/rail/industrial corridor.
There is nothing inherently wrong with this proposal. It’s very similar to what Denver implemented over a decade ago. The only real problem is that, like many zoning “tools”, it’s a relatively blunt instrument. The areas most likely to be populated by urban cyclists, downtown and the commercial corridors that developed along streetcar lines a century ago, are the ones least likely to be seeing million-dollar projects and major new parking requirements. Most projects are much smaller, being either new tenants or repurposing old structures for new uses – think the Grove, CWE, Cherokee Street, etc. With a change of use, and new parking requirements kicking in, it’s going to take more than 10 spaces before any credits can be applied (10% maximum limit). Downtown, where parking is not required for most uses, it’s the same issue. The biggest impact in Denver turned out to be on publicly-funded projects, like libraries and the Pepsi Center (similar to Scottrade here), where large amounts of bike parking ended up being required and provided.
Any commercial owner can already install bike racks if they choose to, and many already do so. That out-of-town chain that you love to hate at Chippewa and Lansdowne, Starbucks, installed inverted-U bike racks before they opened. That local chain, Lion’s Choice, built next door at exactly the same time, did not. Target, with its HQ in Mineapolis, at its store at Hampton and Chippewa (and elsewhere) has appropriate bike racks; the Schnucks across the street does does not (they do it old school, with a comb rack). Yes, laws can force more appropriate behavior, but it really boils down to a mindset, how local people think, consciously and subconsciously about how they live their lives every day. Seattle and Minneapolis have more serious cyclists than we do, so their designs seem to be inherently more cyclist-friendly. We, in contrast, seem to be solely focused on the private automobile, so both public transit and bicycling as a viable means of transportation are barely funded or respected, and then, only grudgingly.
So it remains an interesting chicken-or-egg discussion, which comes first? Does it take better infrastructure or more people choosing to ride to change the mindset and the power in numbers? The parts of Chicago where I’ve seen a huge increase in cyclists seem to coincide with gentrification, a return to the city and limited vehicle parking. In Denver, favorable weather combined with a robust, off-street and, many-times, grade-separated, trail network, seem to have helped. There is no one answer, no silver bullet. This legislation is a step in the right direction, but a lot more needs to be done with identifying and connecting the missing links and with improving the attitudes and actions of both drivers and cyclists, in addition to providing better parking.
There is nothing inherently wrong with this proposal. It’s very similar to what Denver implemented over a decade ago. The only real problem is that, like many zoning “tools”, it’s a relatively blunt instrument. The areas most likely to be populated by urban cyclists, downtown and the commercial corridors that developed along streetcar lines a century ago, are the ones least likely to be seeing million-dollar projects and major new parking requirements. Most projects are much smaller, being either new tenants or repurposing old structures for new uses – think the Grove, CWE, Cherokee Street, etc. With a change of use, and new parking requirements kicking in, it’s going to take more than 10 spaces before any credits can be applied (10% maximum limit). Downtown, where parking is not required for most uses, it’s the same issue. The biggest impact in Denver turned out to be on publicly-funded projects, like libraries and the Pepsi Center (similar to Scottrade here), where large amounts of bike parking ended up being required and provided.
Any commercial owner can already install bike racks if they choose to, and many already do so. That out-of-town chain that you love to hate at Chippewa and Lansdowne, Starbucks, installed inverted-U bike racks before they opened. That local chain, Lion’s Choice, built next door at exactly the same time, did not. Target, with its HQ in Mineapolis, at its store at Hampton and Chippewa (and elsewhere) has appropriate bike racks; the Schnucks across the street does does not (they do it old school, with a comb rack). Yes, laws can force more appropriate behavior, but it really boils down to a mindset, how local people think, consciously and subconsciously about how they live their lives every day. Seattle and Minneapolis have more serious cyclists than we do, so their designs seem to be inherently more cyclist-friendly. We, in contrast, seem to be solely focused on the private automobile, so both public transit and bicycling as a viable means of transportation are barely funded or respected, and then, only grudgingly.
So it remains an interesting chicken-or-egg discussion, which comes first? Does it take better infrastructure or more people choosing to ride to change the mindset and the power in numbers? The parts of Chicago where I’ve seen a huge increase in cyclists seem to coincide with gentrification, a return to the city and limited vehicle parking. In Denver, favorable weather combined with a robust, off-street and, many-times, grade-separated, trail network, seem to have helped. There is no one answer, no silver bullet. This legislation is a step in the right direction, but a lot more needs to be done with identifying and connecting the missing links and with improving the attitudes and actions of both drivers and cyclists, in addition to providing better parking.
It takes infrastructure from the studies I’ve read and people I’ve talked to who know more than I do. Parking requirements for zoning need to be changed. We shouldn’t require auto parking for these small projects you list. The cost of promoting cycling is way lower than cars. It would be a good idea to talk to business owners about this as many probably have no idea.
Bike parking is an important step but St. Louis’ bike lanes are disconnected, too few, and some are too narrow. Infrastructure all around remains essential to get people biking. Most people don’t get training and want separation before they adopt cycling. It’s cheap and doesn’t slow down traffic.
I agree. And drivers will adapt.
It takes infrastructure from the studies I’ve read and people I’ve talked to who know more than I do. Parking requirements for zoning need to be changed. We shouldn’t require auto parking for these small projects you list. The cost of promoting cycling is way lower than cars. It would be a good idea to talk to business owners about this as many probably have no idea.
In Toronto we have a lot more cyclists and streetcars. People manage. Every cyclist that doesn’t drive gives you more on street parking and more space on the road.
The fact that there’s often a speed disparity between cyclists and motorists – unless traffic stop and go – is not usually an issue, provided the cyclist rides predictably and is conspicuous to drivers. Brightly colored clothing, e.g. yellow for daytime, and most importantly, lane position, are relevant. (I also use a flashing high powered strobe front light during daytime rides.) On a multi-lane road. being highly visible typically means controlling the curb lane by riding down its middle. If there’s parking alongside, that requires moving further left to avoid the door zone + “flinch” zone. There’s an excellent illustration of this on-line by League Cycling Instructor, Dan Gutierrez, at http://tinyurl.com/895hglwÂ
The fact that there’s often a speed disparity between cyclists and motorists – unless traffic stop and go – is not usually an issue, provided the cyclist rides predictably and is conspicuous to drivers. Brightly colored clothing, e.g. yellow for daytime, and most importantly, lane position, are relevant. (I also use a flashing high powered strobe front light during daytime rides.) On a multi-lane road. being highly visible typically means controlling the curb lane by riding down its middle. If there’s parking alongside, that requires moving further left to avoid the door zone + “flinch” zone. There’s an excellent illustration of this on-line by League Cycling Instructor, Dan Gutierrez, at http://tinyurl.com/895hglw
Great, both legally and in theory, but would you do it on Manchester west of I-270? On Gravois? Taking a lane is always a judgement call. Just like how a fire truck or an ambulance always has the right of way when its lights and siren are activated, emergency vehicle operators are trained to look out for other vehicles who either aren’t paying attention or just freeze. Motorcyclists face similar challenges as cyclists (in being “seen”), even though they’re travelling the same speed as the rest of the traffic – you can be totally right legally, and still end up injured or worse . . . .
Regarding your query, yesterday I checked out a route prior to a doctor’s visit on Wednesday. The doctor’s office is on a busy part of Lindbergh in North St. Louis County, a little over a half-mile north of I-270, and I arrived there at around 4 pm. The traffic was bumper to bumper in both lanes as I arrived and I had to wait, but eventually a motorist allowed me into the curb lane ahead of him, and then I merged into the inside lane. When I got to the doctor’s office I did a U-turn from the center-turn-only lane into the inside lane to return the way I had come, and motorists passed me in the curb lane. When I got to my left turn I waited only a short time behind a motorist for a safe gap. (There are quite a few stop lights along this section and they do produce gaps in the traffic.)
I met only one irate motorist who pointlessly honked at me as he moved right into the curb lane to pass. That happened after my U-turn but it wasn’t obvious that I’d actually delayed him/her.
One thing I would suggest is that if, when controlling the lane, motorists start to build up behind and you start to feel stressed, unlike when driving a car you can readily pull over briefly (and even stop) until another gap opens up.
Great, both legally and in theory, but would you do it on Manchester west of I-270? On Gravois? Taking a lane is always a judgement call. Just like how a fire truck or an ambulance always has the right of way when its lights and siren are activated, emergency vehicle operators are trained to look out for other vehicles who either aren’t paying attention or just freeze. Motorcyclists face similar challenges as cyclists (in being “seen”), even though they’re travelling the same speed as the rest of the traffic – you can be totally right legally, and still end up injured or worse . . . .
Regarding your query, yesterday I checked out a route prior to a doctor’s visit on Wednesday. The doctor’s office is on a busy part of Lindbergh in North St. Louis County, a little over a half-mile north of I-270, and I arrived there at around 4 pm. The traffic was bumper to bumper in both lanes as I arrived and I had to wait, but eventually a motorist allowed me into the curb lane ahead of him, and then I merged into the inside lane. When I got to the doctor’s office I did a U-turn from the center-turn-only lane into the inside lane to return the way I had come, and motorists passed me in the curb lane. When I got to my left turn I waited only a short time behind a motorist for a safe gap. (There are quite a few stop lights along this section and they do produce gaps in the traffic.)
I met only one irate motorist who pointlessly honked at me as he moved right into the curb lane to pass. That happened after my U-turn but it wasn’t obvious that I’d actually delayed him/her.Â
One thing I would suggest is that if, when controlling the lane, motorists start to build up behind and you start to feel stressed, unlike when driving a car you can readily pull over briefly (and even stop) until another gap opens up.Â