baltimorespokes

Children riding a bicycle to school are more active and fitter than those who rely on other modes of transport, says a new research.
The findings are based on a study of 6,000 children, aged 10 to 16, from the eastern region of England. The children’s cardio-respiratory fitness and travel habits were assessed during 2007 and 2008.
Gavin Sander*censored* and Christine Voss, biological scientists, University of Essex, who led the research, said such active transportation can be a gateway for lifelong fitness in children.
Students from 23 schools completed a school-travel questionnaire and completed a 20-metre shuttle-run test (a speed and agility exercise) to assess their fitness levels.
Researchers found boys who walked to school were 20 percent more likely to be fit compared with those using motorised transport such as bus and automobiles, and girls who walked were 30 percent more likely to be fit.
Boys who cycled to school were 30 percent more likely to be fit, but there was an even more dramatic difference in fitness among female subjects, who were seven times more likely to reach the minimum fitness standard than girls who were driven to school.
Girls who bicycled to school were seven times more likely to reach the minimum fitness standard than girls who used motorised transport.
In all cases, children who were driven to school had the lowest levels of physical fitness, being less fit than walkers, cyclists and even children who took the bus.
Cyclists were also found to be more physically active at other times of day when compared to children using other transport modes.
Although cyclists and car users were most different in terms of physical fitness, the distances they travelled to school were very similar.
Cyclists rode for about 1.5 miles to school, and average car rides were about two miles. Half of these car journeys were less than two miles and 15 percent were less than a mile – both easily walkable or bikeable distances.
In all cases, children who were driven to school had the lowest levels of physical fitness, being less fit than walkers, cyclists and children who took the bus.
Cyclists were also found to be more physically active at other times of day when compared with children using other transport modes, says a release of the American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM).
"Children need to be active and stay fit in order to stay healthy. Encouraging them to walk or cycle to school is one great opportunity to help achieve this," Voss said.
These findings were published in the journal of ACSM.
Continue reading “Fittest kids ride a bicycle to school”

Transportation Freedom Day is the day by which the average Dallas household had earned enough to pay for a year’s worth of transportation costs, which was March 17. If you lived in a mass transit friendly area then that day was Feb 17 and if you biked… well we are not going to talk about that.
Continue reading “Happy Transportation Freedom Day!”

I’ve been called many things as I ride to and from work every day in our nation’s capital, but a harbinger of economic catastrophe…now that’s a first!
As I think back to major economic catastrophes of the last 40 years, I am having a hard time finding any tell-tale trace of bicycle tire tracks. On the contrary, my recollection of significant recent economic crises is that they are invariably caused by our predeliction for foreign oil – the 1973/74 oil embargo; 1988 oil crisis; 2008 gas price increases quickly followed by the mortgage and foreclosure crisis that piled unsustainable housing costs on top of budget-busting suburban commuting costs.
In terms of economic competitiveness, I would suggest that the crippling – and rapidly rising – health care costs associated with physical inactivity and obesity among the US workforce is a crisis worth worrying about. This adds significantly to the cost of everything produced here in the United States, making us less competitive abroad. Getting people moving through daily physical activity is a national priority – enabling people to bike and walk as part of everyday routines is a remarkably cost-effective way of achieving that goal, and surely something that manufacturers and employers would be behind 100 percent. The fact that it would also reduce congestion and increase discretionary spending on goods and services seems like a pretty good deal for the business community.
Keith Laughlin referred to the recently introduced Active Community Transportation Act, which would provide a major boost to cities in completing networks and programs to encourage and enable people to walk and ride for everyday transportation. The cost of the program is just 0.5% of the estimated price tag of the next surface transportation bill – and an amount similar to bridge program funds left on the table by state DOTs for recent rescissions – and would result in voluntary and much needed shifts in mode choice.
Economic calamity is regularly predicted to follow highway improvements that favor the creation of more livable communities. Closing two blocks of Pennsylvania Avenue outside the White House to motor vehicle traffic was going to bring the nation’s capital to its knees. Opening Times Square in New York City to pedestrians last year was presaged by similarly dire predictions of chaos. Removing the Embarcadero Freeway in San Francisco after the 1989 earthquake has hardly stunted the growth of vibrant waterfront development and economic activity.
Let me be clear. We need roads; we need highways. We need cars and trucks. But they don’t work for everything and everyone all the time. We need choice, we need alternatives, we need balance. That’s what the Secretary’s new policy gives us a chance to achieve. The most vibrant, livable communities in the world – which also happen to be economic powerhouses – are those in which there is an equitable and rational balance between car, truck, transit, bike and walk modes. That’s a vision we need to achieve together.
Continue reading “Andy Clarke takes on Bill Graves, President and CEO, American Trucking Associations”

While at a conference in Buffalo last year, Dom Nozzi corrected me. Biking and walking are not alternative transportation. Alternative transportation is an auto-centric term which implies that only motor vehicles are mainstream transportation.

It’s a loaded term and one worth dropping, especially given the U.S. DOT’s recent policy statement that encourages government agencies to consider “walking and bicycling as equals with other transportation modes.”
…

This great opening by M-Bike get’s one thinking, all car trips begin and end with walking. Car’s for personal trips are essentially motorized wheels and a seat for those who are physically unable to move under their own power. Cars are the lazy alternative to getting somewhere.
Continue reading “Biking is not alternative transportation”

[The same can be said for Maryland.]

by David Alpert  

Photo by Don Fulano.

At Friday’s oversight hearing on the Metropolitan Police Department, Councilmember Phil Mendelson asked some tough questions about prosecution against drivers who kill pedestrians or cyclists.

The exchange starts at 4:53:45 on this video recording.

Mendelson asked about a particular incident where a driver killed a pedestrian on Wisconsin Avenue while allegedly talking on a cell phone. He said, “There have been a couple of these incidents where a pedestrian or bicyclist was killed… and there’s no prosecution, even though we have a reckless driving law. It’s as if, as a government, we are too easy on the driver, too forgiving of the driver, even though an individual has lost their life.”

Chief Lanier responded that the driver has to have committed a specific violation before the police can bring any charges. Assistant Chief Patrick Burke then said that MPD did submit that particular case to a grand jury, but wasn’t able to definitively determine whether he was on a cell phone, and the grand jury refused to bring an indictment.

After some further discussion, Mendelson concluded by saying, “I just think we’re being too easy on drivers who re hitting individuals and killing them, and there’s no charge.”

Certainly not all drivers who kill pedestrians or cyclists deserve to be prosecuted. Sometimes the driver really wasn’t distracted or speeding or otherwise being reckless, and sometimes pedestrians do suddenly jump out into traffic without enough opportunity for drivers to see them and stop. However, MPD also seems to refuse to bring charges except in the most egregious of cases, such as when witnesses see the driver on a phone. We haven’t seen proseuctions if the driver is speeding, for example.

Furthermore, a source familiar with safety prosecution said that MPD’s policy is to assign fault the pedestrian if the pedestrian or cyclist violated any laws at all. It appears, therefore, that if the pedestrian or cyclist violates the law in a small way and dies, the victim is responsible, but if a driver breaks a law in a small way and kills someone, the driver isn’t responsible.

It’s tough to provide evidence for these generalizations because we have little information on MPD’s conclusions in fatal crashes or subsequent prosecutions. MPD generally refuses to provide copies of the police reports in these cases; for example, years after Alice Swanson’s death, attempts to get that police report have been unsuccessful.

The first step to determining whether MPD is being too easy on drivers is to get information on how easy they are being. What did they conclude in the recent fatal crashes? If they assigned fault to the dead pedestrian or cyclist, was that based on real evidence? How often did they bring charges or issue tickets? Mendelson could help shed light on these questions by pushing MPD to release these police reports and information on prosecutions.

Thanks to Michael Neibauer for watching the hearing and highlighting this exchange.

Continue reading “Mendelson: "We’re being too easy on drivers" who kill”

[Click on the link in the read more section to see the experts responses. You may want to come back during the week to see how the conversation is progressing. ]
With all the attention last week focused on extending the surface transportation law and Federal Aviation Administration programs, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood’s announcement of a major policy change regarding the way bicyclists’ needs are treated in the transportation planning seems to have received little notice.
"People across America who value bicycling should have a voice when it comes to transportation planning," LaHood wrote on his Fast Lane blog March 15. "This is the end of favoring motorized transportation at the expense of non-motorized. We are integrating the needs of bicyclists in federally-funded road projects." LaHood’s blog post includes recommendations for how states and communities can accomplish this, such as "treat walking and bicycling as equals with other transportation modes" and "set a mode share target for walking and bicycling."
LaHood called the new policy a "sea change," but is it a good one? Should non-motorized modes of transportation be treated as equal to other modes, particularly when modes like driving and mass transit are at least partially, if not primarily, self-funded? Or is it the essence of DOT’s evolving 21st-century mission to give people more mobility options that, according to LaHood, are relatively fast and inexpensive to build, are environmentally sustainable, reduce travel costs, improve safety and public health, and "reconnect citizens with their communities"?
Continue reading “Should Bikes And Cars Be Treated Equally? – What the experts say”