My reflection in the shiny bell while riding through Central Park (on a roadway closed to cars – imagine that!).

The bike I borrowed and rode over 100 miles on in three days during my four day trip to New York City this past weekend came without a bell (it’s required by law). I headed over to a store that sells Dutch bikes (where else?) to buy a pretty and loud bell.

After I installed this $8 beauty on my Trek Something Undersized, I couldn’t stop ringing it. For fun and for warning others.

People getting around this city are insane. I think that’s because there’re so many people going every which way, insanity is the only way to cope.

Looking through photos of other huge (by population) cities around the globe, it seems a similar transportational insanity exists. Think of the thousands of motorcycles and jitneys in Delhi, India, or the 1,000 people who cross this intersection in Shibuya, Tokyo, Japan.

Delhi, India, traffic by Chris Brunn.

Pedestrian crossing in Shibuya district of Toky, Japan, by Pasutadoll Pseangsong.

Related posts:

1. I saw all the movie and photo shoots in New York City
2. Travel grief
3. A diversity of transportation

Every street has been captured at some time or another in a shoot for photos, music videos, or movies.

Two simultaneous photo shoots. I couldn’t tell if they were related. The one on the right might be pointed in the wrong direction and feature the people in the left. Right above this was a movie shoot on the High Line.

I saw one movie shoot, five photo shoots, and this music video shoot all while riding and walking around New York City. Just in three days!

A rap music video shot across the street from Recycle-A-Bicycle.

Everything in New York City is normal.

Related posts:

1. It helps to be loud
2. Travel grief
3. Bridges of Portland

The conclusion: When it’s warm and clear, the bikes are in use!

Photo by Charlene Lam.

The most bikes recorded in use over the 4 days for which data is shown was 1,650. If Chicago suddenly had 1,650 new bikers*, it would make the bicycle mode share jump by 11 percent!

*It would be interesting to know exactly how many users of bike sharing programs did not prevoiusly ride a bike. See statistics on Chicago commuting modes on the American Fact Finder, a service of the U.S. Census Bureau.

The first thing I did when I arrived was imagine all the things that I want to change based on what I saw and learned in New York City. Someone told me this is travel grief, states of emotion and motivation in order to effect change.

What was the first thing I saw?

The Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) has three types of ticket vending machines (TVM) in the O’Hare Blue Line station. One is the common TVM that can create cards with cash value, add value to existing cards, or add value to Chicago Cards (with cash). The second TVM did all of this and accepted credit cards. The third TVM issued single or multi-day passes (I don’t remember if it took credit cards).

The vending machines in the New York City subway perform the functions of all CTA three machines AND all accept credit cards. Since 1999.

There’s more. I tried to keep a list. As I process my 500+ photos, I’ll be reminded of the ones I forgot to write down.

Related posts:

1. I saw all the movie and photo shoots in New York City
2. It helps to be loud
3. Circle Line brings out the public’s comments to the CTA

I’m the Bicycle Parking Program Assistant at the Chicago Bicycle Program, in the Chicago Department of Transportation’s (CDOT) Division of Project Development.

According to the Chicago Municipal Code, I tag abandoned bikes. After 7 days, a CDOT crew removes them to Working Bikes Cooperative.

I arrange for…

• The installation of bike racks, including at Chicago Transit Authority train stations
• The maintenance and removal of bike racks
• The removal of abandoned bikes

I also manage the Chicago Bicycle Program website, Facebook Page, Flickr account & group, and Twitter.

Related posts:

1. Non-auto construction projects in Chicago
2. Igniting the discussion on equity
3. Benefits of bike parking

Were these opportunities because the community had indicated their desire for slower turns, shorter crosswalks, additional landscaping, or they needed space for bike parking?

Or did someone think, “A bumpout would fit here, let’s install one.” (In other words, “because we can.”)

This post is less about questioning the rationale behind constructing bumpouts (also called curb extensions), but about questioning why and how we decide to build stuff.

Do we build things because there’s a need for that thing, or because someone thinks that thing is needed? This discussion leads us to talking about the role of public participation in planning. Often I see public participation used as a way to measure support for an idea that seems like it will become real regardless of which way the vocal public feels. Organizations should measure, instead, the demand for a solution of a problem, from which they can attempt to discover, understand, and propose fixes or improvements to the problem.

Related posts:

1. I think I finally figured out the purpose of making plans
2. Can we use location-based services to make urban planning “rise”?

A new breakwater and new piers will be built. I really want to know what the floating eyeballs are for. I imagine they’re markers for construction.

I was counting people entering the Lakefront Trail from the 31st Street access point yesterday for an Active Transportation Alliance project. Afterwards, I moseyed over to get a glance at the construction.

This photo shows how the pier has been closed for construction. I hardly see anyone using the pier except just to walk down and back – it seems few people fish here.

Related posts:

1. Non-auto construction projects in Chicago
2. That Lakefront Trail
3. Randy Neufeld’s 10 ideas for bicycling in Chicago

SeeClickFix has mobile apps (and a website) that enables users (in participating locales) to report issues (like graffiti and potholes) in their neighborhoods.

Augmented reality apps for smartphones overlay the virtual world (of yellow pages and restaurant reviews) on the physical world depending on where you point your phone’s camera.

Is there something (an app, a concept, a teaching) that we can develop that uses these apps or the same technology to raise awareness of “urban planning” in all of our cities’ citizens? Such a scheme would attempt to educate and involve more people into the city’s social, cultural and built environments, the urban fabric (buzzword alert!), as well as the history of their surroundings.

Possible scenarios

1. While riding the train through a neighborhood, the new location-based service that encompasses everything about urban planning might aggregate information relevant to the location and activity. Perhaps the application would display to the user information about the history of this particular elevated train’s construction on this branch as well as pull up information on upcoming schedule changes. Lastly, the transit operator may ask the user to take a survey about this particular trip, looking for information on how the user accessed the station (via bike, walking, car, or bus?).

2. My friend Brandon Souba created a proof-of-concept app called Handshake that tells you about nearby app users with similar interests. But this hardly raises civic or urban awareness. Maybe non-profit organizations who need volunteers could create profiles in Handshake and when you’re near a staff member or the headquarters, your phone alerts you to a possible volunteer opportunity.

3. What are your ideas?

Related posts:

1. The woman or family side of bicycle planning
2. Randy Neufeld’s 10 ideas for bicycling in Chicago
3. Placemaking roundup

From the University of California Transportation Center comes new research on paying for roads with congestion versus paying for roads with sales taxes and their respective burden on poor residents.

Will research show that more people will benefit from paying sales tax to support a transit system than from paying (all kinds of) taxes to support a highway?

Their finding is that funding transportation with sales tax is less fair than funding with congestion pricing. In the latest issue of Access, Lisa Schweitzer and Brian Taylor write:

This analysis has focused on one side of the ledger: the question of who pays. But transpor tation systems have both costs and benefits. Indeed, the access benefits of travel are transportation’s raison d’être. So while regressivity can be viewed as a cost of road pricing (and of most other ways of paying for roads), pricing confers transportation benefits that other transpor tation finance mechanisms do not. Tolls and taxes can both pay to build a road. But congestion pricing can also reduce traffic delays, fuel consumption, and vehicle emissions, often to a surprising degree. Sales tax finance for transportation, by comparison, does none of these things.

I think the appropriate direction of this research should next discuss and examine the fairness of using sales taxes to provide operational and capital funding for transit. In Chicagoland, the Regional Transportation Authority is partially supported by a local sales tax. While sales tax financing for road building may not reduce traffic delays, fuel consumption, or vehicle emissions, supporting a reliable, robust and expansive transit network can do all of those things by reducing the number of single occupant vehicles on the road.

*Oddly I haven’t posted any of them here.

Related posts:

1. Why Amtrak’s not on time
2. The truth about Wal-Mart’s contribution to the tax roll
3. For a fair division of commuting space

No, not plans with friends for dinner at Ian’s Pizza in Wrigleyville (which was great last night, by the way).

I graduated in May 2010 and I’m just now figuring out why we should make plans. What did I come up with?

Plans are to give a basis for the future so that the future is shaped from what people collectively need and want. They keep you on track so you focus on what’s most important and not the things that will derail the path to the plan’s stated goals.

(You can quote me on that. But I wouldn’t rely on that statement to stay the same – it’s still a work in progress.)

For example, you go out and survey the bike parking situation at all transit stations in your city. You collect data on how many bike parking spaces are available, how many bikes are present (both on bike racks and other objects), and bike rack type.

You then gather information like ridership, access mode, and surrounding residential density. From this you can list the stations in order of which ones need attention now, which ones need attention later, and which ones won’t need attention. Talking to people who work at the stations, who use the stations, and others will help you fine tune the ranking.

That’s the plan. The plan might also include narratives about the rationale for having high quality, sheltered, upgraded, or copious bike parking at transit stations (hit up the Federal Transit Administration for that).

Then the plan sits. Two years later, someone reads the plan and decides to apply for funding to build bike parking shelters at the transit stations in most need.

What stations are those? Oh, the plan tells us.

Related posts:

1. Comparing the Portland and Seattle bike plans
2. Improving bicycling to airports
3. Non-auto construction projects in Chicago