“Increasing road width to reduce congestion is the same as loosening your belt to fight obesity.” – Lewis Mumford
Distracted walkers are not the problem
It has become popular recently to blame pedestrians for their own death. Some have always done this, from the beginning of the auto industry and its “jaywalking” campaign, but it is amazing how much law enforcement promotes this blame, how much the media buys into it, and how much transportation and safety agencies (Caltrans and OTS) market it.
So let me share my experience. I walk, a lot, in addition to bicycling, a lot. Every day drivers refuse to yield my right of way when I am making legal street crossings. It makes little difference if I am waiting on the curb (where they are not required to yield, except by common courtesy), or waiting in the street, where they are absolutely required to yield to me. On multi-lane streets, when one driver stops for me, it is quite common for drivers in other lanes to not stop, though the law requires them to. I am never walking distracted, I make the personal choice to not look at my phone while crossing the street. But for anyone to suggest that it is the fault of someone walking distracted when a driver fails to yield right of way to a pedestrian, and kills them, is deeply, deeply offensive. This is similar to someone saying, well, I was just firing my gun and someone happened to walk in front of it. Cars are deadly weapons, and drivers are potential killers. It is time our society grew up and took responsibility for the harm that can be caused, and is caused, by our addiction to driving, and to the imputed freedom to run down someone who is just crossing the street.
… house people, not cars …
“We want to house people, not cars. I hope that other cities notice that when Oakland did this revolutionary, radical thing, which includes zero parking requirements in downtown, as well as a parking cap–not just a minimum, but an actual maximum–these radical, dangerous ideas actually flew through our city council approval process without any controversy.” – Libby Schaaf, Mayor of Oakland
#JustSayNoToAmazon
Within hours of Amazon announcing a competition to create a second headquarters, HQ2, mayors and governors all over the country were saying “Me, me, choose me.” Including Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg. This is a mistake!
I don’t have anything against Amazon, they are a company with a business model that has been remarkably sucessful. I shop there, at least when I can’t easily find an item locally. Their prices are often remarkable. Yes, and I also feel hesitant or guilty each time. But this isn’t about Amazon.
I’m also not against jobs. And I’m also not against development, though I certainly prefer small-scale development to large-scale development. A headquarters with 50,000 employees is something that would overwhelm all but the very largest cities. Sacramento is not among those cities.
What this is about is about a city (and regional and state) economic model that says we can’t get anything good unless we soak the taxpayers for a subsidy. In this case, Amazon is asking for a huge subsidy from whatever locale “wins” the competition.
On the positive, Amazon includes the requirement: “Direct access to rail, train, subway/metro, bus routes”. But they also seem quite willing to be in the suburbs, on a greenfield site, only asking within 30 miles of the city center. In the case of Sacramento, that includes Davis, El Dorado Hills, Roseville. Ack!
The RFP then gets to the heart of the matter, money!
Capital and Operating Costs – A stable and business-friendly environment and tax structure will be high-priority considerations for the Project. Incentives offered by the state/province and local communities to offset initial capital outlay and ongoing operational costs will be significant factors in the decision-making process.
Incentives – Identify incentive programs available for the Project at the state/province and local levels. Outline the type of incentive (i.e. land, site preparation, tax credits/exemptions, relocation grants, workforce grants, utility incentives/grants, permitting, and fee reductions) and the amount. The initial cost and ongoing cost of doing business are critical decision drivers.
In other words, we will consider you if you come up with a bigger bribe than anyone else. I doubt that Sacramento can compete in this arena, but more to the point, no one should be in this competition. Amazon is a very successful company. They don’t need our subsidy to be successful.
So, back to the title #JustSayNoToAmazon. I’m not suggesting that Sacramento decline on its own. I’m suggesting that big city mayors show some true leadership, meet with each other, and, as a unified whole, decline the Amazon offer. This is a chance for Mayor Steinberg to show some real leadership and not just be a booster for failed economic models.
Articles and posts on the Amazon plan are proliferating, but let me suggest two:
- Amazon Plans Second Headquarters, Opening a Bidding War Among Cities, New York Times, 2017-09-07.
- What can I do to make you love me?, Strong Towns, 2017-09-11.
LimeBike in South Lake Tahoe
This weekend in South Lake Tahoe I used the LimeBike bike share for the first time. This system is truly rootless, unlike the SoBi system that allows parking outside hubs but is hub focused. As a result, bikes are everywhere, including out of town. I saw a few parking way out the bike trail northeast of town, on Emerald Bay Rd. I’m not sure if there is some sort of outside geofencing beyond which one can’t ride or leave a bike, but the current use is quite expansive. I don’t know anything about what sort of rebalancing occurs.
LimeBike is app centric, you need an iOS or Anroid phone with the app installed, and an account with credit on it. Each bike has a unique QR code,which is scanned with the app to unlock the bike. The bikes have European style wheel locks, which unlock automatically, but are manually locked at the end of the ride.
The cost is $1 for 30 minutes, not prorated, but a very good deal. The Sacramento Tower Bike Preview is $4 per hour, other SoBi systems $7 per hour, and dock systems like Ford GoBike either are membership based or about $3 for 30 minutes.
The bikes are very simple and inexpensive. The weight is less than half of a typical bike share bike, but that means they are also less robust. I saw several bikes with broken or broken off baskets. The bikes have a rear red reflector, meeting legal requirements, but not what the typical rider would want. Front generator lights are provided, the sort older people will remember from childhood, where power is generated by a wheel that rides on the tire. Some bikes are missing their front light, victims of vandals. Most importantly, the bikes are single speed, no gears to maintain, and no gears to use. Though South Lake Tahoe is flat at least close to the lakeshore, it was challenging heading up a slight hill into a headwind. The bikes have standard disc brakes, that work reasonably well. And a twist bell on the left grip.
Apparently the business model for LimeBike is that by using inexpensive bikes they can offer lower rates, and easily replace bikes when necessary. Regular system bike share bikes cost $1000 to $1600, but I would guess these bikes are about $200.
Bike share in Santa Monica
The Breeze Bike Share in Santa Monica uses the same Social Bicycles (SoBi) bikes that the Tower Bridge Preview in Sacramento does. On a recent four day visit to Santa Monica, I used the system quite a bit, both for transportation and to compare systems. Here is my take:
- Breeze Bike Share is operated by a separate company, CycleHop, rather than directly by SoBi as is the Sacramento system. The company also operates systems in West Hollywood/Beverly Hills, Long Beach, San Mateo, and other cities outside California. CycleHop has a major maintenance and storage facility, which I stumbled across, shown in the photo above. They tried rebalancing with bikes for a while but have gone to using vans as they are more efficient.
- Breeze bikes are green, and the major corporate sponsor is Hulu. As far as I know, Sacramento is still in search of a major corporate sponsor.
- The cost per hour for Breeze is $7, whereas Tower Bridge is $4. This makes a difference! Though I only used up $5 of my initial investment (it costs a minimum of $7 to join), this is only because I spent time every day returning bikes to,hubs in order to gain return credits.
- Return to hub credit is $1 in the Breeze system, $1.50 in Tower Bridge. It makes a difference!
- Outside-hub fees are $2, and outside boundary (geofenced) is $20, the same as Tower Bridge.
- I saw people riding Breeze bikes all over town, at all times of day. I often saw the hub racks fill up and empty out over a short period of time, so I know that bikes in the busiest areas were getting many trips per day, though I don’t have any data. It is rare to see Tower Bridge bikes on the road, and though I think they get used one or two times a day, use per bike is much lower.
- Downtown Santa Monica has a high density of hubs, about every two blocks, but the hubs are much sparser in the more suburban parts of town. The downtown hubs are quite large, up to 16 racks spaces. The advertisement says 500 bikes, 80 stations.
- Several of the hubs are sponsored, which is indicated by a different icon for the hub, but I was unable to find out more about these sponsored stations, and it was not obvious who was sponsoring them. Tower Bridge does not have any sponsored stations at this time.
- Hubs were located close to each light rail station (Metro Expo Line), and at many major bus stops. Tower Bridge hubs are not.
- Breeze has the same problems of geo-location that Tower Bridge has, sometimes bikes shown as in hub were not, sometimes bikes shown as out-of-hub were at a hub, and sometimes the bikes were nowhere to be found at the indicated location. More of an irritant than a major issue, since the next hub or bike is not far away.
- Breeze has a low-income program, but details are only available on request, not on the website.
- Breeze allows users to unlock bikes with a registered TAP card (similar to Connect Card), but charges are to the Breeze account and not the TAP account. I’m using my Connect Card in Sacramento, and also used it in Santa Monica. Using a card is a slight convenience over entering a six digit number.
- Santa Monica has flat areas, and gently inclined areas, similar to Sacramento and West Sacramento, but the rise from beach level to downtown level, and out of the Rustic Creek canyon, is comparable to American River up to Fair Oaks. A lot of bikes get left down by the pier and beach , so I imagine part of the re-balancing effort is getting these bikes back up the hill.
Breeze map below. Green dots are hubs with bikes, grey dots are hubs without bikes, blue dots are bikes parked out-of-hub. You can see the higher density downtown.
Alta on dockless bike share
Alta Planning + Design has an interesting post on dockless bike share: The Dockless Bike Share Revolution; Is Dockless Bike Share Right for Your Community?
The Social Bicycles Tower Bridge Preview is a dockless system. Designated hubs are created both by geofencing (setting up a boundary for hubs and for the system) and designated bike racks, with a $2 penalty for leaving a bike outside a hub, and $20 penalty for leaving a bike outside the system boundary. But it also encourages return of bikes to hubs with a $1.50 credit. These and other issues are discussed in the post, worth a read.
belligerent drivers
I’m back at work and doing one of my job functions, which is to observe and record driver, bicyclist and pedestrian behavior at intersections. I have noticed, at the same locations and the same time of day, that drivers are much more belligerent this year than previous years. Belligerent toward other drivers, bicyclists, and pedestrians, particularly pedestrians. I observed hundreds of incidents of drivers accelerating towards occupied crosswalks, and then stopping at the last moment. The only explanation that fits what I see is that drivers are trying to intimidate walkers out of using the crosswalks, because it causes a tiny delay in driving time. This behavior is not technically illegal, as the law just requires that a driver not enter the crosswalk while it is occupied, but the behavior is immoral, the kind of thing a scummy driver who sees themselves as the center of the universe would do.
So what has changed since a year ago that has created this belligerent driver behavior? I can think of only one thing. Donald Trump. This is typical of the bullying, self-centered, sociopathic behavior that Donald Trump revels in. The safety and climate of the public realm has declined, and it is showing up in driver behavior as in so many other places in our society.
More bike share
The Tower Bridge Preview bike share is going to have some expansion in about a month, up to five new hubs on the Sacramento side. I had heard previously that there would be no expansion before full roll-out, which is no sooner than November and quite possibly far beyond that since a major corporate sponsor has still not been identified.
The best news is that one of the hubs will be at Sacramento Valley Station, the train station, and it will be a large hub. This is mentioned in Melanie’s StreetsblogCal post: Eyes on the Street: Sacramento’s First Cycle Track Appears Near Amtrak, and I also heard the same when I ran into Phillipe at the 18th & Capitol hub, doing maintenance and re-balancing. It was a major oversight to not include a hub at the station, but that will be fixed!
I talked with the other person who is regularly parking a bike at the station, for a commute into the Bay Area a few days a week. That person said they love the system, use it for this and other trips, but wished there were a regular hub at the station. The bike has always been there at the end of the day to be used for the return trip. I’m parking a bike at the station for nearly every Amtrak trip I take (to the Bay Area, to Truckee, and to South Lake Tahoe). Since I’m often gone more than one day, other people sometimes check out the bike, which is fine with me since I live close enough to walk.
If you are using the system, you noticed a few days ago that the display screens on each bike changed, with some additional information and tips. The ability to unlock a bike with a RFID card, meaning the Connect Transit Card, is prominent. But not yet implemented. SoBi and the ConnectCard are working out the details. Card use will initially just be for unlocking, in the same manner that the Clipper Card can unlock a Ford GoBike in the Bay Area system, but you will have to have a Social Bicycles account and bike use will be charged to the account rather than the card. The display also mentions unlocking with a phone number, but I’m pretty sure that is not implemented either.
Please share stories here about your use of the bike share. Since that company, SocialBicycles, and the partners, SACOG and the two cities, have said next to nothing about the success and challenges of the bike share, it is even more important that we talk with each other.
Oh, and if you are looking for employment, SocialBicycles is hiring an Operations Manager for Sacramento.
bike share so far
These SoBi (Social Bicycles) bikes are a combination of hub bikes and park-anywhere bikes. If you return a bike to a hub, you pay only rental time. If you lock a bike up anywhere within the two geo-fenced boundary areas of Sacramento and West Sacramento, you pay an extra fee of $2. If you Park it outside the geofence, you pay $20. Except for one bike that ended up being stolen, I’ve never noticed a bike being left outside the geo-fence, but bikes are sometimes left outside hubs. This was common in the early days, but seems to have tapered off. It was earning quite a bit of credit on my bike share account returning these bikes to hub, which earns a credit of $1.50, but most days now there are no bikes outside of hubs in the morning, when I look, and return.
One of the cool things about the SoBi system is that temporary geo-fenced areas can be set up at other locations, for special events. The only instance of this that I’ve noticed is when one was set up at the Sunday Street at Broadway open streets event, but the capability is intriguing.
Of the six hub locations in Sacramento, four are located near drinking establishments. Most of the bike share use I observe visually and by watching patterns in the app map is bar-hopping. This is certainly a valid use of the bikes, and I’m glad these people are pedaling instead of driving.
In most bike share cities, a prominent service of bike share is as a transit extender, serving as a “first-mile/last-mile” access to and from transit. None of the hubs in Sacramento were located with that in mind. The greatest shortcoming is that there is no hub at Sacramento Valley Station, the Amtrak station. I have been riding a bike to the station at times, for trips where I’m not taking my own bike with me. Someone else has regularly been leaving a bike at the station on weekdays, presumably commuting on the Capitol Corridor train. The station is at least within the geo-fence, so the charge for doing this is only $2, but I do not understand why the station did not get a hub in the original layout. This is just a pilot, and presumably in the formal rollout in November or beyond, there will be hubs at transit locations. SACOG had said that part of the purpose for the preview was to gather information about patterns of use, but no information is being gathered about transit-related use because none of the hubs were located with that in mind. I asked SACOG about hub locations, and they said these had been determined by the cities, but when I asked Sacramento, they said the locations had been selected by SACOG.
So far as I know, SACOG has not provided any use data for the bike share system, at least it has not showed up on any of the meeting agendas. I look forward to seeing what the system has to say about patterns of use during the preview.
When I’m using the bikes, people often ask me questions about how it works. I tell them how easy it is to download the app and set up an account, and go, but most people seem to think this is too difficult and don’t end up doing it. Even young people who are used to downloading apps don’t seem to want to do it. Once your account is set up, you enter you member number and passcode on the GPS unit located on the bike, in order to unlock. I’m not sure how the system gets over that hump of few members. I have noticed that users of the Bay Area Ford GoBike are mostly using their Clipper Cards (equivalent to the ConnectCard) to unlock bikes, rather than using the application, though the charge is to the GoBike account rather than Clipper. Hopefully the SoBi system can be linked to ConnectCard for unlocking, and maybe even charging.
The Ford GoBike system has created a $5 per year low income membership (regularly $149) in order to encourage use by low income but bike dependent members of the community. It is partnering with the bicycle advocacy groups and low income bicyclist clubs such as the scraper bike folks, in order to sell the benefits of bike share to a wider audience. The locations of the stations (GoBike is a station-based system and the bikes are not designed to leave anywhere other than a station) have also been extended into several low income neighborhoods, though certainly not all of them. I do not know what plans the Sacramento system has for meeting the needs of low income users, but I look forward to finding out.
Previous posts: riding the bike share, almost bike share
