<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"> <head> <meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"> <meta name=ProgId content=Word.Document> <meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 9"> <meta name=Originator content="Microsoft Word 9"> <link rel=File-List href="cid:filelist.xml@01C7A75C.82912A90">  <style>  </style> </head> <body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple style='tab-interval:36.0pt'> <div class=Section1> Slight apologies to all, but based on the very good feedback received thus far on my yesterday’s note (see below for a sample), I am afraid that my introductory comments to the note on the proposed conditions checklist for your comments were not clearly enough explained.  Let me try this again.<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> What I am proposing here for your attention and comments is not, I need to stress, intended as a set of criteria for general cycling safety and well-being in the city, but rather looks specifically for this new-ish phenomenon which we call “city bikes”, or public bikes if you wish. We define them as follows in both the “Reinventing transport in cities” volume on New Mobility in Paris, and the second volume  currently in process on city bike systems:<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> “City Bike” -  City-wide public bicycle systems Definition:. 24/7 service, mainly for people living and working in city.  Fully automated.  Street-based system. Requires partnership with local government. Pick up/drop off at many convenient locations. Open to all registered clients. Free or almost free for very short periods (i.e., half hour or enough for a fast hop).<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> So with this in front of us and in the interest of clarity and usefulness, I have now recast the benchmarks into two groups, the first set aiming at guiding future city bike projects, and the second more generally a reminder based on our experience both here in Paris and in other cities about some of the key factors that it takes to make city cycling work for all.   In this we need to bear in mind that our target user is the “ordinary cyclist” who uses her/his two wheels to get around in the city, and not the leisure or sports cyclist. <o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> I.          Quick introduction – Preparing for a city-wide public bike program:<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> Cycling in cities has until very recently, and in almost all cities world wide, been considered barely a detail as a daily mobility form. But, and suddenly and strange enough for most of us, it is starting to pierce into the mainstream of transportation, let’s call it new mobility policy and practice. In a fast expanding number of cities, it is no longer trivial, and because of rapid evolution in terms of our knowledge of what needs to be done to create safe cycling environments as well as new forms of organization and intermodal collaboration, we now are seeing its emergence as significant means of getting around in our cities in our day to day lives.<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> Are you going to be ready for a city-wide public bike program? Does your city offer a good prospective environment for public bikes of the sort that has recently come into plan in the world of new mobility and whose potential transformation potential is something that I believe we are only now starting to scratch with the new 20,000 free bikes Paris Velib’ project that is to open on 15 July.<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> My thought is that if we can work up something along the following lines and then share it and make it known, we will have a small but possibly useful tool to advance the cycling agenda in our cities. That would be a great thing to help make happen.<o:p></o:p> II          City Cycle System Checklist – (w/ my Paris scorecard, ver. 1.0)<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> <ol style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm' start=1 type=1> <li class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:4.5pt;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo3; tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>City size/density:  2.1 million people living in 105 sq. kms, with more than half a million more pouring in from the suburbs every working day, and most often by public transport:  – i.e., yielding a compact central city that is as such potentially well suited to cycling.  If we were to put it on a quasi-arbitrary scale of 1-5, I would give it close to 5. <o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;margin-bottom:4.5pt;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo3; tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>Mixed use:  The city must offer a good diversity of land uses and desirable and cycle-convenient destinations. Paris does very well here: 5 of 5. <o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:4.5pt;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo3; tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>% city easily cyclable (mainly topography): ca. 90% (my personal estimate, to be cross checked with more informed sources) So call it between 4 and 5. <o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:4.5pt;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo3; tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>Cyclable days /year: ca. 90% (personal estimate), ditto, between 4 and 5.<o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:4.5pt;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo3; tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>Cycle paths, protected space: 370 (planned to 500 kms). I’d give it something between 3 and 5. (But that said it’s the kind of situation that most North American cities can for now only dream about)<o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:4.5pt;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo3; tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>Vandalism/public facilities: Not too bad, with some exceptions in troubled areas. Let me go for 3+ for now, and we will know a lot more about it after a year of Velib’.<o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo3;tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>Public information program: Must be on continuing basis. Aimed at improving skill levels of cyclists, motorists, truckers, transit – and pedestrians – to behave positively in a more complex, tighter multimodal mobility environment.  Guessing 2 out of 5.<o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;mso-list:l4 level1 lfo3;tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>Image/cool: t a necessary condition of success. The image of cycling, long poor, has gone way upbeat in the last few years. I’d say we are at 3 moving toward 4. <o:p></o:p></li> </ol> If your city does pretty well in these six areas (and let me know if anything here is missing or wrong), then you will probably do well to have a closer look.  But before you rush off, you may want to have a look at the following additional points which while they have their main relevance in terms of cycling programs of all sorts, are important to keep in your sites as you plan, implement and maintain you public bike program.<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> III.         Other important cycling success points, criteria:<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> <ol style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm' start=1 type=1> <li class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:4.5pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo6; tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>Transit system coverage: Excellent/dense. (Sure this is subjective, but I an neither selling nor abusing the city, so let’s try for  4.5 in this important bikeability context)<o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:4.5pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo6; tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>Cars:  ca. 0.5 per household – Nice. Maybe 3.5 and working on it. (Availability of carsharing might be another good car indicator. After all if you share you are not likely to own and that makes you a prime candidate for other ways for getting around in the city.  However in Paris we are still in early days. But fast developing. 1.5 out of 5.)<o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;margin-bottom:4.5pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo6; tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>Slow streets or zones: ?? kms. (got to find it) – and expanding quite rapidly.  2 out of 5 for now, but fast gaining.<o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:4.5pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo6; tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>Driver skills: Gradually getting better as the density of cyclists increased, but still plenty room for improvement. At best 2 eventually going on 3. <o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;margin-bottom:4.5pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo6; tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>Safe cycle parking: 29,000 places currently available and increasing steadily at about 1000/year.  If you cannot leave your bike safely and near to your destination (schools, stations, work, shopping, leisure), you just won’t take it. Current supply may look ample, but with expansion of cycling supply is not keeping up with demand.  Guessing it at 2.5 <o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;margin-bottom:4.5pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo6; tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>Cycle services: Purchase, repairs. Not too bad. I’d give it a 3. <o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:4.5pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo6; tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>Cycle clubs/voice: Strong/active, plugged in to policy. 3 close to 4 I would say, not least because of their role and performance in the Mobilien and Velib’ projects)<o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:4.5pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo6; tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>Police on bikes (and skates) –Great feedback mechanism for city. I’d say 3 going on 4. <o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:4.5pt;mso-list:l0 level1 lfo6; tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>Continuity: And this is the essential shared condition for success in all cases . We must never lose sight of is that for all this to work and for cycling to take its full place in our cities, everything on this list needs to be followed closely, executed and fine-tuned every day.  Continuing of attention and effort is the key. Much like bringing up a family. After all, the city is our family<o:p></o:p></li> </ol> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> IV.        Selection of comments received since yesterday on this:<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> From: Michael Koucky [mailto:michael.koucky@koucky.se]<o:p></o:p> Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 12:17 PM<o:p></o:p> Subject: Re: Local cycling environment indicators: Let's have a look at .. <o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> Hello Eric<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> The indicators look ok, what I’m missing though is an indicator for cycle parking facilities for comfortable and (reasonably) theft safe cycle parking. The lack of safe cycle parking is a major deterrent for cycling in many cities.<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> Michael Koucky [mailto:michael.koucky@koucky.se]<o:p></o:p> Koucky & Partners AB - <a href="http://www.koucky.se/">http://www.koucky.se/</a><o:p></o:p> Consultants for Sustainable Development<o:p></o:p> Arvid Hedvalls Backe 4 b<o:p></o:p> SE-411 33 G�teborg Sweden<o:p></o:p> Ph.: +46-31-20 76 83 Cell: +46-702-10 12 17<o:p></o:p> ---------------------------------------------<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> From: Saskia [mailto:snmhermans@hotmail.com] Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 2:10 PM Subject: Re: Local cycling environment indicators: Let's have a look at . . .<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> Hello Eric,<o:p></o:p>  <o:p></o:p> Thank you for your inspiring mail! I would like to react on your bikeability indicators, as a Dutch urban designer specialized on cycling and cycling infrastructure. <o:p></o:p> <![if !supportLists]>1.       <![endif]>City size and density: In the Netherlands we reckon that medium sized towns and cities ( 50.000 to 200.000 people) are more bikeable than big cities. In big cities the urban transport tends to get that well that it becomes a serious competitor for cycling (which means less cyclists, which often leads to less infrastructure etc). In that respect I would give Paris a 3 to 4. The same holds good for density I guess, as soon as a city is dense enough public transport can flourish and people can "avoid" cycling.<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportLists]>2.       <![endif]>Cars: Nice indicator but what about bicycles?? In Holland as a whole we do have more bicycles (almost 20 Million) then people ( 17 Million), and about 7.2 Million cars. In terms of households in Holland we do have 77.3% with a car, but we do cycle a lot more than the average Parisian.<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportLists]>3.       <![endif]>Transit system coverage: If you mean public transport in Paris it certainly is a 5! But like I said, public transport is a competitor to cycling so should you give it a 5 in this context as adding to bikeability?<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportLists]>4.       <![endif]>Kms of cycle path, protected space: Important BUT let's not forget that every trip has a starting point and a destination. If there are no parking facilities they are of little use. The chain is as strong as the weakest part! So I would like to add Bicycle Parking facilities as an indicator, both at home and at destination points (at schools, stations, at work, shops etc). In Holland 45% of the people sometimes do not use their bike because they are afraid it will be stolen. <o:p></o:p> <![if !supportLists]>5.       <![endif]>Slow streets or zones: maybe to take together with the km of cycle paths?<o:p></o:p>  <o:p></o:p> On the following six points I would say that you know Paris better then I do. They seem reasonable indicators to me<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> <ol style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm' start=1 type=1> <li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l2 level1 lfo11;tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>% city area easily cyclable: <o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo11;tab-stops: list 36.0pt'>Cyclable days /year: ca. 90% (personal estimate), ditto, between 4 and 5. <o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo11;tab-stops: list 36.0pt'>Cycle clubs/voice: Strong/active, plugged in to policy. 3 close to 4 I would say, not least because of their role and performance in the Mobilien and Velib’ projects) <o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo11;tab-stops: list 36.0pt'>Vandalism/public facilities: Not too bad, with some clear exceptions in troubled areas. Let me go for 3+ for now, and we will know a lot more about it after a year of the Velib’. <o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='color:black;mso-list:l2 level1 lfo11;tab-stops: list 36.0pt'>Driver skills: Gradually getting better as the density of cyclists increased, but still plenty room for improvement. At best 2-3. <o:p></o:p></li> <li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l2 level1 lfo11;tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>Police on bikes (and skates) – Yes, and a great feedback mechanism for the city. I’d say 3 going on 4. <o:p></o:p></li> </ol>  <o:p></o:p> An other point to add might be cycle services. In the south of France where I live it is difficult to find a place where you can buy a decent bike, let alone have it repaired or get spare parts. This discourages people to invest in cycling here. You have to be part of an in-crowd to be able to find the right places, if they exist at all.  Just think of cycling as of car driving; without parking facilities or mechanics you would not use your car either.<o:p></o:p>  <o:p></o:p> A last indicator to add might be Sexiness of cycling or Image if you like. Again, cars are a lot about image and status, so is clothing and your address or house. It is not so different for bicycles. In Holland we do have several ministers that do cycle to work, five generations of Royalty by bike. At the Eurotop in Amsterdam Wim Kok, then our Prime minister, gave away bikes to Tony Blair, Chirac, etc in Amsterdam. The picture went all over the world. The sales of bikes had been stagnating for a long time in the 70 and 80, but began to pick up when you finally could choose between more models, notable the all terrain bike, and between more colours then black, brown and blue. As long as cycling is seen as a poor mans solution to travel, the great masses will not be attracted to it.<o:p></o:p>  <o:p></o:p> You are all welcome to comment on my reaction,<o:p></o:p>  <o:p></o:p> Saskia Hermans<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> ---------------------------------------------<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> From: Andy Clarke [mailto:Andy@bikeleague.org]<o:p></o:p> Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 4:09 PM<o:p></o:p> Subject: RE: Local cycling environment indicators: Let's have a look at .<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> Eric et al<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> Yes, I read the report you sent a week or so ago and understood the goals – and I agree that it will be important for cities to have a few key indicators in place for a city bike program to work well. <o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> I have always had the same thought in relation to TravelSmart or inidividualized marketing programs – there are a lot of cities in the US where such a program would be a disaster because there just isn’t the infrastructure (transit, bike lanes and trails, even sidewalks) to make it work.  But equally there are some where it would work well.<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> In the US I think one of the key factors for city bikes is having a well defined geographic area that is intuitive and well-engrained already in people’s minds. Our metro areas are so spread out a system for the DC metro area, for example, would be incredibly hard – but a system might work in the Mall area or Monumental Core, or Old Town Alexandria, provided the boundaries are well established and easy to identify or know. European cities are typically so much better defined with a real edge to them. <o:p></o:p> Maybe these existing tools will be of some assistance to you:<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportLists]>1.       <![endif]>Bikeability checklist. Pretty basic, but a good start and great for getting people to do self-assessments of their community or neighborhood. http://www.bicyclinginfo.org/cps/checklist.cfm <o:p></o:p> <![if !supportLists]>2.       <![endif]>Bicycle Friendly Community program (US version) – more detailed survey with about 75 questions spread over engineering, education, enforcement, encouragement and evaluation topics. http://www.bikeleague.org/programs/communities/ <o:p></o:p> <![if !supportLists]>3.       <![endif]>Bicycle Friendly Community program (European version) – self assessment tool for cities focused on planning and policy elements. http://www.goudappelcoffeng.nl/Velo/InfoIndex.php <o:p></o:p> <![if !supportLists]>4.       <![endif]>BFC Action Plan – a more political statement with ten key elements outlined. http://www.bicyclefriendlycommunity.org/symp_actionplan.htm <o:p></o:p>  <o:p></o:p> Andy Clarke<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> ---------------------------------------------<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> On Behalf Of Chris Bradshaw<o:p></o:p> Sent: Monday, June 04, 2007 5:16 PM<o:p></o:p> Subject: Local cycling environment indicators: Let's have a look at . . .<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> Eric,<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> > Bikeability indicators - Quick introduction:<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> Since I don't think we are leaders in this field, I think it would be useful to look at the 'bikeability' scales that have already been developed, both to get ideas and perhaps to see if we might wholly import.<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> <ul style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm' type=disc> <li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l5 level1 lfo16;tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>http://www.velomondial.net/ has a four-level system -- based more on municipal policy than on on-the-ground results -- for "bicycle friendliness". They also have an on-line "city characteristics questionnaire" that cities can fill in. They also discuss a concept called 'car-sparse areas.'<o:p></o:p></li> </ul> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> <ul style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm' type=disc> <li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l5 level1 lfo16;tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>www.bicyclinginfo.org/de is a site of the Washington DC-based National Center for Bicycling and Walking. It uses the term "bicyclability" and has an equal interest in walking (although the group started out as a cycling org.).<o:p></o:p></li> </ul> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> <ul style='mso-margin-top-alt:0cm' type=disc> <li class=MsoNormal style='mso-list:l5 level1 lfo16;tab-stops:list 36.0pt'>http://www.bicyclefriendlycommunity.org/ is the site of the League of American Biocyclists (was League of Am. Wheelmen). It has an award program for qualifying Am. cities.<o:p></o:p></li> </ul> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> > Parking<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> I find bike parking missing from your list. How much? How do bylaws support it?<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> > City size/density:<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> Size is not as important as density, but to keep trips short (to bicycle distances, without the cyclist, as you point out, having to be an 'enthusiast'), land use is also a factor. Are neighbourhood retail sectors strong? And are such neighbourhoods 'complete'? (as in do they have a full set of destinations to support living on at least a daily-weekly scale? This implies a planning process that is pro-active, such at as property becomes available locally, first consideration is given to what local area _needs_ as to what land use should be chosen to locate there)<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> Chris Bradshaw<o:p></o:p> Ottawa<o:p></o:p> <![if !supportEmptyParas]> <![endif]><o:p></o:p> </div> </body> </html>