The 6 Es: Dan Gutierrez introduces the goal of developing a comprehensive guide to equitably address the “6 Es” for bicycle driving: Equality, Education, Enforcement, Engineering, Encouragement, and Evaluation.
Sunday, February 24 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.
This day was spent establishing the American Bicycling Education Association as the host organization for the CyclingSavvy instructional program.
Twice a month since 2006 I’ve taught a course for the local safety council on “alternative” transportation to adults with suspended driver’s licenses. The students routinely recognize the benefits of bicycling when prompted: improved health, reduced environmental impact, reduced transportation costs, increased sociability, and of course, simple fun. To varying degrees they also believe cycling to be slow, dangerous, uncomfortable, physically demanding, and impractical if one needs to carry things. So encouraging people to bicycle is more a matter of removing barriers (practical or psychological) than convincing them of the benefits.
The psychological barriers to bicycling are often more common than the practical ones, so helping people to see the possibilities is a key strategy. People are influenced and encouraged in different ways and through different channels, including the social realm, finances, urban planning and engineering, and the practical aspects of the bicycle and its accessories.
Social
In November of 2012 BicycleRetailer.com writer Ray Keener dug up some data from a 1990 Bicycling Magazine survey. While shops and manufacturers might have wondered at the time if an easier-to-use shifter system might have been the answer to getting more people on bikes, only 12% of “infrequent” cyclists said so. The top motivator the “infrequents” reported was “If I had someone to ride with (46%).” That was followed by:
If I had a more comfortable seat (37%)
If I had a safer place to ride (33%)
If I were in better condition (29%)
If I had a more scenic place to ride (28%).
A good riding partner, or better yet, an entire group of friendly, supportive riding partners can do more to show a new cyclist the possibilities and joys of cycling than anything else. Too often cycling groups have themselves placed limitations on cycling. “We go fast.” “You need a road bike.” “We only ride trails.” “Helmets required.” “Our rides are 30 to 60 miles long.”
I believe the most effective thing experienced cyclists could do to encourage others to ride is simply to ride with them in a place and manner that the newcomer would find comfortable. That may initially mean on a trail or quiet local streets. Don’t set any preconditions. Each ride is an opportunity to share your knowledge and expertise. But take care to open up the floodgates of information. Find just a few things to make improvements on each time — get that saddle at the right height; teach proper mounting, starting, stopping and dismounting; get her generally in the right cadence range but don’t fuss about it; etc. — and spend the rest of your ride simply enjoying the trip. Your task is not to make your friend into an expert rider in a day. It’s to show him that cycling can be enjoyable and that there are lots of things he still needs to learn to make it better. If you agree to give the ride a purpose — to go to a restaurant, a park, another friends place — anyplace they’d routinely go by car — that’s even better.
I’d really like to see each cycling club start a serious new-rider program. Each weekend there should be rides designed for absolute beginners. This doesn’t mean going 15 mph instead of 20. It means taking the one-on-one approach I outlined above and adapting it to a group.
A CommuteOrlando social ride.
In Orlando we’ve been running rides through CommuteOrlando.com and Bike-Walk Central Florida that appeal to those riders. These rides are set up to show new riders the possibilities. Our First Friday rides are social rides of about 10 miles in length that are run all on multi-lane roads. We maintain a well-controlled double pace line at about 10 to 12 mph and controlling the right lane. Ride leaders manage it in such a way that everyone is comfortable and knows exactly what to do. Ice cream rides are held on summer evenings. New riders get to see that there’s no need for exceptional speed or extreme skills to use a bicycle around town. Eliot Landrum in Dallas, Texas has some good ideas on this as well. [link to come]
A woman walks into a marketing and public relations firm and sits down to talk with their lead strategist.
“Our organization has a fun, safe and healthy activity we wish to promote, but we’re struggling to figure out the right approach,” she says.
The strategist thinks for a moment, then responds, “I recommend the approach bicycle advocates have been using for the past 20 years: reinforce the public’s fears about your activity.”
The woman is taken aback, pauses for a moment, then says, “Oh! You had me going there for a moment!”
“What do you mean?” asks the strategist.
“Well, you were joking, right?…”
We must stop being our own worst enemy. While on the one hand we tout the benefits of cycling, too many “advocates” feed the belief that cycling is dangerous.
Finances
Money can be either a motivator or a hindrance in convincing people to bike, or to bike more. For the person of average means, a bicycle can save money, particularly when replacing auto trips. Illustrating the full costs of auto use can be effective with them.
A Get Active Orlando bicycle giveaway for low-income adults.
For some lower-income persons an auto is essential, and the extra expense of a good quality bike is beyond their means. Further down the economic ladder, many very low-income workers use bicycles, but are limited to poor-quality “big box” bikes. Helping lower-income people gain access to good quality bicycles while also providing good cycling education could cast “bicycle advocacy” in a much more positive light.
At the community level, a bicyclist-friendly business program can help in many ways. Businesses that provide discounts or other bonuses to cyclists make people feel good about the businesses and themselves, and such programs tend to interest local businesses rather than chains. Business owners also come to recognize cyclists as customers, rather than just strangers out on the road. Employers and cyclists can also take advantage of federal tax incentives that that allows bicycle commuting costs to be paid for with pre-tax earnings.
A more challenging strategy is removing some of the hidden subsidies for auto use. Parking, for example, is a valuable service that motorists don’t pay for directly in suburban areas (for retail parking, all customers pay for parking as the overhead portion of goods and services), and often pay a subsidized less-than-market rate in city centers. Reducing the supply of parking where feasible and getting motorists to pay for parking both out-of-pocket and at its true cost will get people to consider cycling for shorter urban trips (though it really must be done in conjunction with significant improvements to the public transit system).
Planning and Engineering as Encouragement
An inverted U rack; the can’t-miss default for quality bicycle parking.
Of course, along with reducing subsidies for and dominance of auto parking, communities also need to improve the availability and quality of bicycle parking. In a 1995 survey of Orlando area residents, respondents identified good bicycle parking as a more important incentive than trails or bike lanes. Forgotten in the discussion of bikeways and increased bicycle use in New York City is the fact that the city also changed its codes in 2009 to require commercial buildings to accommodate bicycle-driving employees. Bicycle theft has long been a serious deterrent to cycling in New York. Leaving a bike locked along the street – even with the best of locks – has always been a risky proposition for cyclists there. It’s quite possible the bike parking code did more to encourage cycling than the bikeways did. Local governments should require quality short-term parking for customers and more secure long-term parking for employees.
Many Americans live in far-flung suburbs, in which important destinations are beyond comfortable cycling distance. Combining bicycling with transit can overcome this challenge. Planners need to provide good connections to and good bicycle parking at transit stops, bicycle accommodations on buses and trains, and other useful amenities, such as bike-sharing systems and shower and locker facilities.
A short path connecting cul de sacs in California.
Trails, bike lanes and other types of separated facilities are often pitched as encouragement as much as they are for safety or mobility. I will leave discussion of the validity of such claims for the Engineering section of this site, but there are engineering treatments that can serve as productive encouragement without compromising the principles of integrated bicycle driving.
Trails in their own rights-of-way and short connector paths can help cyclists stay on neighborhood street networks and avoid busier arterial and collector roads.
Shared lane markings (“sharrows”) and “Bicyclists May Use Full Lane” signs can make it clear to cyclists and motorists alike that bicyclists are normal and expected users of the roadway, and that a centered lane position is usually the preferred position.
Shared Lane Marking or “sharrow.”
Ensuring traffic signal detection systems detect bicycles not only improves safety, but demonstrates that a community cares about the details.
Practicality
Many non-cyclists and inexperienced ones make assumptions about the practical aspects of cycling: that bicycles are inherently uncomfortable; that one can’t carry very much; that bike thieves can’t be foiled; that bicycling requires a high level of athleticism. No doubt many who hold such opinions are simply expressing rationalizations to excuse themselves from having to consider cycling at all. Those people are probably not the “low-hanging fruit” of potential new cyclists.
CommuteOrlando and Bike-Walk Central Florida “S-Cargo” ride.
But others simply haven’t been exposed to the practical solutions to those challenges. On the personal level, we can offer to check that our friends’ bikes fit well and have appropriate saddles. Advocates for cycling can work with their local shops to encourage them to carry accessories like panniers and trailers if they don’t already. Cargo bikes could be an element of a bike-sharing system. CommuteOrlando and Bike-Walk Central Florida lead “S-Cargo” rides, in which the group rides to a local farmers’ market with cargo bikes, trailers and panniers. Those without such accessories also ride along and get to see the practicality of these tools first hand, as do many of the market or store customers and employees.
All of the Above
It should be clear that there is no single silver bullet for encouraging people to bike. Some of these strategies can be advanced by us as individuals; others require organization and sustained effort. Communities that take such an all-of-the-above approach are likely to see real progress.
Washington, DC, USA is a planned city, with a north-south and east-west street grid, overlaid with a number of diagonal avenues. These add to connectivity and offer vistas of important landmarks. The street plan, laid out In the horse-and-buggy era, showed little concern for any resulting complication in traffic movements. Bicycles and motor vehicles came along a a century later; and even more recently, traffic signals including special bicycle signals.
New Hampshire Avenue is one of the diagonal avenues, and it has a 6-way intersection with 16th Street and U Street NW. Since 2010, there have been special bicycle signals. at this intersection.
The image below, from Google Maps, gives an overhead view of the intersection.
Intersection of U Street, 16th Street and New Hampshire Avenue in Washington, DC with special bicycle signals, August, 2010.
U street (east-west) and 16th Street (north-south) are both major arterial streets. New Hampshire Avenue runs between northeast and southwest, and carries less traffic. Decades ago, the blocks of New Hampshire Avenue nearest the intersection were made one-way away from it. That way, there would be no need for traffic on 16th Street or U Street to wait for entering traffic from New Hampshire Avenue.
The interruption at 16th Street and U street improved cycling conditions along much of New Hampshire Avenue, diverting motor traffic to other streets. Cyclists liked to ride New Hampshire Avenue. They rode the last block before the intersection opposite the one-way signs, or on the sidewalk, and crossed the intersection in the pedestrian crosswalks.
Special traffic signals and contraflow bike lanes also were installed, in an attempt to regularize and legalize bicycle travel through the intersection. The illustration below is from a sign which the Washington, DC Department of Transportation posted at the intersection. The sign describes how the intersection is intended to work. You may click on the image to enlarge it so you can read the instructions.
Diagram of the six-way intersection showing intended use of the bike boxes.
The bike boxes at this intersection are a variation on the two-stage turn queuing area, as it is sometimes called. They facilitates “box turn” — a left turn in two steps. Bicyclists are supposed to go straight ahead, stopping a the far right corner — then turn left and proceed when the traffic signal changes. A two-step left-turn usually involves more delay than a left turn from the normal roadway position, but it doesn’t inherently violate any of the principles of traffic movement. Timid or inexperienced cyclists may prefer a two-step left turn. It can work for any cyclist at an intersection where normal left-turn movements are prohibited, or if an opportunity to merge does not arise.
So, what’s the problem with these special bicycle signals?
When I first saw the plans for this intersection, I regarded them positively. I even wrote about this and published my comments. As I already said, a two-stage turn queuing area violates none of the fundamental rules of traffic flow.
But , there is a saying:
“In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in practice, there is.”
– Yogi Berra or Jan L. A. van de Snepscheut or maybe Albert Einstein
If I couldn’t laugh, I think I’d weep.
In an ordinary four-way intersection, a cyclist can execute a two-step left turn using the same traffic-signal phases as other traffic. The cyclist will get a green light for the first step, wait on the far right corner and then get the green for the second step.
Bicycle traffic — entering from New Hampshire Avenue, needed traffic signal phases which it had been avoiding. For this reason, the bike boxes here are not quite the usual two-stage turn boxes.
Cyclists go to investigate
I was one of several cycling advocates who converged on Washington, DC in May, 2011 to examine cycling conditions. We discovered that theory and practice differed at this intersection. Cyclists were not using it according to plan. Instead, they were using it as shown in the video here.
Keri Caffrey’s illustrations below show cyclists’ preferred lines of travel. Let’s look first at what cyclists do if U Street (left -right in the image) has a green light.
When U street has the green light, cyclists cross 16th street on the concurrent pedestrian signal phase, as shown by the solid green lines. This does not mean that the cyclists have the green light with the special bicycle signal. The cyclists are in conflict with right-turning traffic from U Street. As the cyclists are not stepping directly off the corner like the pedestrians, and travel faster, motorists have a harder time seeing and yielding to the cyclists.
On reaching the far corner, the cyclists turn their bicycles left. As shown in the video, most wait in the crosswalk rather than in the designated bicycle waiting area. When the light changes, the cyclists proceed across U Street and bear right onto New Hampshire Avenue, as shown by the dotted green lines.
Now let’s look at what cyclists do when U Street has a red light.
When U Street has the red light, cyclists travel around the intersection clockwise. They start by riding opposite traffic, then cross U street from right to left in the near-side crosswalk as shown by the orange arrows in the illustration. The cyclists wait on the far left corner, then cross 16th street and continue on New Hampshire Avenue as shown by the dotted orange lines.
The video below shows three expedition participants riding through the intersection on the designated route, and obeying all the signs, signals and markings the best we could. Bear in mind that I have edited out most waiting for the special bicycle signal.
Why doesn’t everyone ride like us?
Why do few cyclists, other than our expedition participants, obey the special traffic signals and follow the designated route? There are several reasons:
Before reconfiguration of the intersection, cyclists developed the habit of crossing it along with pedestrians. A habit is harder to break when the proposed new behavior doesn’t offer an advantage.
The special bicycle signals are supposed to be triggered automatically when cyclists are waiting to cross. Triggering is unreliable.
The special bicycle signals are green for only 6 seconds of a 90-second signal cycle, and yellow for another 4 seconds. For most of the remaining 80 seconds, one or the other crosswalk is in the walk phase, and cyclists can get a start across the intersection along with pedestrians. The temptation is hard to resist.
The designated space to wait for the special signals on New Hampshire Avenue is very tight, delimited by a barrier on one side and a curb on the other. There is only room for three or four cyclists to start on the green or yellow phase of the special bicycle signal.
Extended yellow signals for cyclists are a well-known concept, yet the yellow signal for cyclists is not long enough to allow a decision whether to stop, or to cross 16th Street.
16th Street gets the green light only 2 seconds after the special bicycle signals turn red. Motorists behind cyclists in the bike boxes expect to be able to proceed on the green light. More than three or four cyclists will “accordion” in a bike box, when the first ones stop but the later ones do not have time to stop.
Motorists regularly encroach into the bike boxes. Some motorists harass cyclists with horn blasts and close passes.
The bike boxes are very small. There is hardly room for one cyclist to turn and wait — not to speak of several cyclists at once. This, and the encroachment problem, account for cyclists’ waiting in the crosswalk.
What lessons does this hold?
Design issues:
Attempting to accommodate two new directions of travel traffic with minimal impact on the previous four-way traffic results in cramped space and extremely short signal phases for the two new directions of travel.
The bike boxes at this six-way intersection differ from two-way turn queuing boxes at a four-way intersections, in requiring an additional signal phase.
That results in delay and unwillingness to use the installation as intended, but it also imposes a severe capacity limitation. The special installation can never accommodate more than a low volume of bicycle traffic.
Two-way turn queuing boxes at a four-way intersection are between the crosswalks and the street. Because the cyclists come from different directions at this six-way intersection, the bike boxes are behind the crosswalks.
Because the bike boxes are behind the crosswalks and are small — also because of motorist encroachment and the convenience of starting closer to the intersection — cyclists who more-or-less follow the designated route (going around the intersection counterclockwise), wait in the crosswalks, partially or entirely blocking them.
Behavioral issues:
Clearly, Washington, DC motorists are not accustomed to the bike box concept. The type of bike box used here — unlike the inline bike box — does not require X-ray vision or even unusual attention of motorists to avoid colliding with cyclists, yet motorists often encroach. In most cases, they probably encroachunknowingly or carelessly rather than maliciously.
Some motorists also have an attitude problem, manifesting itself in the horn blasts and close buzz passes.
Some cyclists operate carelessly or obliviously. This is especially the case with those who go around the intersection clockwise. The first stage of this route necessarily requires crossing New Hampshire Avenue, often followed by crossing U street at speed from right to left before the intersection –the statistically most hazardous way for a cyclist to enter an intersection. .
There is widespread illegal parking, especially by truckers, who often have no practical alternative. Illegal parking is common in the contraflow bike lanes leading to the New Hampshire Avenue/16th Street/U Street intersection. Illegal parking belies the presumption that cyclists can operate simply by following painted lines.
Political and planning issues:
If a special bicycle accommodation does not offer the space or signal-phase time needed to make it practical or safe, is it worth the trouble to build at all?
Should bicycling advocates be praising a city government for an installation which, in practice, simply doesn’t do what it is supposed to do?
What can be said about a city government with a photostream that posts photos showing:
Should cyclists be expected to wait longer to use a special accommodation than to take an undesignated and mostly legal route across the intersection?
What happens at this intersection if bicycle traffic volume increases?
Can the long-term goal of improved bicycling conditions citywide be achieved through installations that, in practice, don’t do what they are supposed to do? What is the political calculus here? Do we have to look forward to tearing all this down and starting over, like with public housing projects of the 1950s?
Might a larger scope of planning be looking at alternate routes, or a bolder solution (for example, a grade separation? Yes, they’re expensive, but Washington, DC has numerous grade separations on major streets — many times more expensive. This and following photos on the DC Department of Transportation photostream (click left on “newer”) show what kind of effort and expense went into those.
Peripheral:
I rate contraflow bike lanes on whether they meet the same safety standards as other lanes. The one north of U street: OK — the back-in angle parking avoids sight-line issues. The contraflow bike lane south of U Street: not OK, It is in the door zone, and with wrong-way parking, motorists pulling out of parking spaces can’t see cyclists.
Shared-lane markings for cyclists proceeding away from the intersection are painted in the door zone of parked cars.
The one-minute video below is a series of satellite views showing evolution of the intersection from 1999 through 2003. There were crosswalks, then contraflow bike lanes and two-stage turn queuing boxes with special bicycle signals. You may want to watch the video more than once to focus your attention on different parts of the intersection. Clearly, the city government grappled repeatedly with how to configure the bike boxes. Clearly also, the problem of motorist encroachment has not gone away.
We have not yet checked on any changes to traffic signals and timing since 2011. Stay tuned.
DC DOT evaluation of bicycle facilities showing an increase in crashes following this installation. (Executive Summary is now available in the Internet Archive; report still on the city Web site as of 2024.
John S. Allen cycles for transportation and recreation, averaging 2000 to 3000 miles per year. He has made a career as a writer about bicycling; he is author or co-author of several bicycling books and has contributed to several magazines; his work may be found on the Internet at john-s-allen.com, bikexprt.com and sheldonbrown.com. He is a former president of the Boston Area Bicycle Coalition and member of the Board of Directors of the League of American Bicyclists. He is a certified League Cycling Instructor and CyclingSavvy Instructor.
https://iamtraffic.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/16UNHGoogle-e1357184976399.jpg513528John S. Allenhttps://iamtraffic.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/iat_fb_profile2-300x300.jpgJohn S. Allen2013-01-06 23:11:362025-01-11 11:15:47The 6-Way, Washington, DC
