For months we witnessed workers squeezing traffic on First Avenue S from four lanes to three as they built out the easternmost part of the Pinellas Trail in downtown St. Petersburg. So just how is this all working out for cyclists biking through the urban setting?
Times editor and bicycling enthusiast Jim Verhulst wrote a piece for the July 27 Neighborhood Times assessing the new route. He also came up with the idea to do a helmet-cam and film what you'll see on the ride. It's a little bumpy, but then so is the ride. Here's the view:
"When I see an adult on a bicycle, I do not despair for the future of the
human race." - H.G. Wells
The downtown part of the Pinellas Trail is OK(?) for an 8mph bike commuter, but that's it. Whoever designed it has NEVER ridden a bicycle seriously! They've placed "traffic furniture" jutting out into the bike lane at every intersection, making the cyclist take a 6' jog to the left just before the intersection, then a 6' jog to the right just after.
Even if the light is green, you are forced to slow to below 10mph to negotiate these hazards safely. With rare exceptions, cycling enthusiasts will never use them.
This system is as ridiculous as Sgt Kinchen of the Clearwater PD who insists on placing school crossing cones in the ridable, striped-off shoulder of Drew street! He says cyclists should veer into the traffic lane at rush hour if the cones are in the way!
His reasoning? He doesn't want his officers to have to chase the cones if a car should accidently graze one. Yes, you read that right! Making sure his officers never get any exercise is FAR more important than endangering of the lives of a few cyclists!
Now, can somebody tell me what the reasoning was for the traffic furniture on the trail in downtown so we can all have a good laugh too??!!
Posted by: Bill Cotney | July 26, 2008 at 09:40 AM
Great coverage by the Times on the new Pinellas Trail Extension in St. Pete! Thanks! We're already working to address the concerns that Jim presented. I might add that the video he did was pretty cool!
The jogs in the trail at the intersections downtown were designed to intentionally slow the trail users at the intersection approaches so that they have time to negotiate the intersections safely. A bi-directional trail adjacent to a one-way street is complicated, so we want trail users to slow to a speed that allows them to be on the lookout for any potential hawards.
Please also remember that the Pinellas Trail is for all cycling enthusiasts, including those whose skill level or interest involve cycling at speeds less than 12mph.
I'd be glad to answer any additional questions regarding the new section of the Pinellas Trail, or any of the bicycle or pedestrian projects in St. Petersburg. You can email me at cheryl.stacks@stpete.org.
Cheryl Stacks
Bicycle Pedestrian Coordinator
City of St. Petersburg
Posted by: Cheryl Stacks | July 28, 2008 at 09:51 AM
Cheryl, thanks for joining the on-line dicussion. Actually, if bicyclists have questions, it would be good for them to add them to this blog. Then, we could all hear the questions.
Posted by: Kimberly | July 28, 2008 at 10:06 AM
Also it would be a good idea for us to all hear the responses. It would be educational.
Posted by: Kimberly | July 28, 2008 at 10:20 AM
Thanks Kimberly. I certainly don't want to stymie the discussion here; I'm just offering up my contact information should someone have a question that they'd like to ask in a different format. Feel free to keep posting your thoughts about the Trail extension.
Take care!
Cheryl
Posted by: Cheryl Stacks | July 28, 2008 at 11:30 AM
I appreciate Jim Verhulst noting that educating motorists and bicyclists will be important. I've talked to a lot of bicyclists (same lane as cars, bike lane, sidewalk). They all say the same about needing to educate motorists. Of course that doesn't mean bicyclists don't need education, too.
Sidewalk bicyclists keep getting cut off by cars when they ride into the crosswalk and constantly complain that, "motorists don't respect you!" I've explained that it's not that motorists don't respect them, it's that sidewalk/crosswalk bicyclists are bicycling where motorists aren't looking.
I've found some motorists try to intimidate me when I try to make eye contact. So what I do instead is bicycle where the motorists are looking. That's in the road and far enough from the curb so it's obvious I'm there.
Posted by: Kimberly | July 28, 2008 at 05:42 PM
If motorists reduced their speed sufficiently, they would be able to do a better job of scanning the road. Research shows that, the faster you drive the narrower your field of vision. Driving slower enables you to scan back and forth, left and right, farther than when you drive faster.
That would help motorists have a better chance of scanning for sidewalk users.
Also, driving slower gives you more time to notice motorcycles and other cars and more time to react safely when you notice them. Slower speeds prevent crashes.
Time traffic lights to the speed you want people to drive and the lights will enforce the speed limit.
Posted by: Kimberly | July 28, 2008 at 05:49 PM
Cheryl,
"The jogs in the trail at the intersections downtown were designed to intentionally slow the trail users ..."
I knew I'd get a laugh out of the reasoning. Question: Why didn't you do something to slow down the motorists? Never mind ... rhetorical question.
"Please also remember that the Pinellas Trail is for all cycling enthusiasts, including those whose skill level or interest involve cycling at speeds less than 12mph."
"For ALL cycling enthusiasts!" Not now! This section is ONLY for those who ride at under 12mph, NOT for all enthusiasts! I can guarantee it will not be used by most enthusiasts.
"A bi-directional trail adjacent to a one-way street is complicated ..."
No, a bi-directional trail adjacent to a one-way street in a busy, metropolitan downtown area is a DEATH TRAP. Period. Traffic furniture notwithstanding, the single biggest hazard with this section of the trail is the routing of cyclists against the flow of traffic across driveways and intersections.
When motorists approach from the south, be it from a downtown parking lot, business drive-thru or intersecting street, if they want to turn right the vast majority will look left, and when it's clear proceed to pull out some distance before they finally look back to the right. It's a bad driving habit but everyone does it because no one expects traffic from the wrong direction.
By then, however, it's too late for the wrong-way cyclist. He's already been hit, knocked over, or run over. It happens all the time which is why experienced cyclists DON'T RIDE AGAINST THE FLOW OF TRAFFIC!
Again, the comparison to Clearwater. Their section of the trail thru downtown is just like what you've created, i.e., riddled with hazards and, (when heading north), against the flow of traffic.
What's the net result? It's virtually unused. Don't believe me? Grab a few cohorts and go do a trail traffic study on a nice weekend. I believe you'll find the trail traffic in downtown Clearwater to be less than 25% of what it is on other areas of the trail. Such will be the fate of St. Pete's downtown section of the trail.
Now, all that having been said, the extension between US 19 and downtown has lots of possibilities. When the landscaping is finished I'd expect it to be quite pleasant along that stretch. I think the warehouse docks in the surface tunnel have limitless possibilities. I can see trailside coffee houses and ice cream shops opening up in there, the whole of which might add a new flavor to the area, or perhaps even become a "destination" in and of itself. The advantage to the city there being that if the trail user has gone that far, they may as well see downtown!
But for myself and, I think, most cycling enthusiasts, next time I ride that way I'll be exiting the trail around the stadium and going right back to mixing it up with the motorists on 1st Avenue South. Only now, that road is narrower and more dangerous, and the motorists will be angrier because I'm doing 25 on the road instead of 12 on the trail.
P.S. Please excuse the occasional use of caps. I am not yelling at you, but this interface lacks the ability to simply "bold" for emphasis.
Posted by: Bill Cotney | July 28, 2008 at 08:16 PM
It would be interesting to compare the the number of users on the section of the trail thru downtown Clearwater with the number of users of other areas of the trail that don't have the "sidewalk aspect".
Actually, the best time to examine the safety of the downtown St. Petersburg Trail is during morning and evening rush hour traffic. Bicycle back and forth on the Trail over a five or so days to see if there are any hazards bicyclists encounter during rush hour traffic.
It's easy to avoid getting hit by a car when you bicycle on sidewalks and similar facilities when there are no cars on the road.
Posted by: Kimberly | July 28, 2008 at 09:16 PM
Bill Cotney stated:
"But for myself and, I think, most cycling enthusiasts, next time I ride that way I'll be exiting the trail around the stadium and going right back to mixing it up with the motorists on 1st Avenue South. Only now, that road is narrower and more dangerous, and the motorists will be angrier because I'm doing 25 on the road instead of 12 on the trail."
That's why it's important to write a letter to the editor. Explain what you are doing and why you are doing it. Also, explain the benefits of bicycling so motorists know why bicycling is so important.
On Saturdays, I bicycle with the slowest group. Part of the route goes past bike lanes next to parked cars (Door Zone Bike Lanes, DZBLs). I let other bicyclists do what they want. But, I explain to the new people the many reasons why I don't bike in DZBLs. They understand and can pass it on to motorists that they know.
Also, I willingly talk with motorists about DZBLs and other issues anywhere I go.
A couple of times a few years ago, a couple of motorists gave me a hard time because I wasn't in the DZBL. But, I don't have any problems any more.
The gas prices have removed a lot of motorists from the roads. So, there shouldn't be too many angry motorists out there with all that excess room.
Posted by: Kimberly | July 28, 2008 at 09:29 PM
I think we should just be lucky we have a city that is dedicated to this - focus on that instead of griping about the small stuff. The trail should have been oriented more towards the weakest riders, which I believe it was. If you want to ride 25mph, stick to the roads and hook back up with the Pinellas Trail further down.
Even though I'm a cyclist myself, I have a very poor opinion of the lot - wherever they're riding, be it roads or paths, they seem to think that stretch of road is for them and them alone. As far as I'm concerned, if I'm wearing spandex, I should just be lucky no one is purposely trying to run me down for dressing so retarded.
My kudos Cheryl to you and your team for your work on developing this trail.
Posted by: Kenneth | July 29, 2008 at 10:04 AM
Thank you Kenneth for solidifying everything that goes along with your "lot".
Cynicism, criticism and stupid comments made on a board of anonymity in order for you to be able to hide behind your computer keyboard and call other cyclists names and put them down. You are so funny. I've seen your "lot" hundreds of times. You are NO BETTER than any of us who take up the roads or disobey traffic signals. Oh, and news flash - you look just as "retarted" in your size XXXXL, floppy white t-shirts and baggy shorts with your fruit of the looms showing, dude!
You attempt, unsuccessfully, to point the finger at everyone else riding a bicycle when you're the one who (when riding alone mostly) are the biggest & worst traffic offenders on the roads!
We see you all the time out there riding on the WRONG side of the road, riding your bikes in pedestrian crossings, darting out from blind corners, between cars and also not stopping at traffic signals or signs!
Give me a break! Do you honestly think that any of this (including this blog)would be in place if it weren't for the cyclists that you speak of in your post who take up the roads and who look so "retarted" in spandex pants?
The "retarted" spandex crowd carries the numbers, are influential and have the financial backing, have made huge impacts on the bicycling communities here and all over this country, are backed & supported by working professionals everywhere. If you don't think so, take a good look around. But before you do, make sure to take off those blinders you're wearing!
Posted by: Mel | July 29, 2008 at 12:19 PM
"That's why it's important to write a letter to the editor."
Why Kimberly? Do you really think they'll fix it? How? The only "fix" is to remove it, and they just spent all that money to create it! That would be tantamount to an admission of error, and politics does not allow for that!
I'm afraid that in the forseeable future it will just have to remain an unused an inconvenient obstruction!
Oh, and speaking of "obstructions", I just re-read Jim Verhulst's article. He wrote:
"Observation No. 1. From M.L. King to the bay, the new trail requires eastbound cyclists to pay a great deal of attention at intersections to car traffic BEHIND them. Drivers routinely will turn right and cut off both cyclists and pedestrians."
Let's see now. In order to pay attention to something BEHIND you, you have to be looking backwards. Unfortunately, the time you need to be doing this is when approaching an intersection, which is precisely the SAME TIME you need to be looking forward to safely negotiate the traffic furniture they've installed! Fabulous! (Anyone else getting the mental image of the guy who flipped over some traffic furniture in a televised race earlier this year?)
That means the only safe way to handle these intersections is to come to a complete stop at every one. We could've done that just riding the sidewalks, and the city wouldn't have had to waste all that money!
For what it's worth, Jim's observation is quite valid. Motorists are not going to afford cyclists on this trail the same respect they'd afford another vehicle on the road because, in their mind, they are not ON the road. They are pedestrians on a sidewalk. If the light is green, they will turn right in front of anyone who wasn't already in the street and in their way.
For what it's worth, this is NOT the first MUP, (Multi-Use Path), adjacent to a busy thoroughfare in a metro area. They have all been rife with these kinds of problems and more, to the point that many states' DOT's recommend NOT placing MUP's adjacent to busy roadways, and Oregon's goes so far as to recommend not placing them next to ANY roadway!
AASHTO, (American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials), wrote the book, (literally), on designing bike lanes and paths, but I guess the city of St. Pete knows better than the combined wisdom of all these guys. Here's a link to the AASHTO manual, (http://www.sccrtc.org/bikes/AASHTO_1999_BikeBook.pdf), and if you'll look at the bottom of page 33, (the Shared Use Paths section), you'll find a list of most of the points I've made and a few more!
AASHTO guidelines have been recommended/adopted by virtually every state including Florida, (google "Florida and AASHTO") Just not, apparently, by the city of St. Pete.
In summary, Kimberly, a letter to the editor will do no good. St. Pete planners knew or should have known that this was a bad idea from the beginning, but for whatever reason, they chose to go ahead with it anyway. As such, I'm quite sure they will defend it as long as they're in their office or position, and we'll just have to live with it!
Posted by: Bill Cotney | July 29, 2008 at 12:32 PM
Dude, Mel - reach down and pull the panties out of your crack - seriously. Obviously you lack basic reading comprehension skills, so I'll clarify it for you once again - I'm criticizing a group that I myself belong to.
I too wear bike shorts and a jersey when I ride - in fact, I've done organized rides and compete in triathlons. The only difference between you and I is that I'm not coming online, anonymously complaining about having to slow down when I come to an intersection, or having to share a bike path with folks who don't take themselves quite so seriously on a bike as you folks do. It's folks like you who are to blame for negative opinion towards cyclists - insisting on riding busy roads, clogging traffic, when there's an easily accessible side street one block over.
I ride for fun and for my health - could care less if I have to stop for a car, or if I have to drive up and down side streets to avoid busier roads. I slow down for folks on the Pinellas Trail because they have just as much right to it as I do. You and your "ON YOUR LEFT!" crowd can shout at the wind all you want - in the end you'll just end up as an expensive hood ornament like those before you.
Posted by: Kenneth | July 29, 2008 at 07:58 PM
Hey Kenneth,
We don't say "on your left." That would be nice. We just blow by you like you are standing still. Just ask Mel. She knows what that is like. I can't wait until Mel points you out to me.
Posted by: Red Light Runna | July 30, 2008 at 11:16 AM
Kenneth, I don’t think that wearing spandex while riding their bike. Makes one look like a “retard.” Unless it’s a VERY short trip I wear my spandex shorts and jersey. I do so because it is more comfortable, and because it helps to wick the perspiration away from my body. IF you think that it makes one look like a “retard” that is your opinion and you’re entitled to it, but if you ride as much as you claim to then you know what I have already said. Also it’s not what we’re wearing that makes us a “target” for motorists, but rather what we’re riding.
Posted by: Herman | July 30, 2008 at 04:08 PM
Bill, it's important to write letters not only to the editor’s of the local newspapers, but to all of the local media as well as our elected officials in order to let them know when there are problems that need to be corrected. As well as letting other’s in the community know about options that are open to them to use in order to get around.
Posted by: Herman | July 30, 2008 at 04:16 PM
Kenneth, if you wear "bike shorts and a jersey" like you just said you did, then why did you call US retards? Perhaps you ran out of your prescription of Loratab? Gee, if so I apologize and completely understand the reason for your obvious confusion!
Oh and P.S - like all the other girls on the ride, I don't wear panties when I ride. It's all a-- under there!
Posted by: Mel | July 30, 2008 at 08:34 PM
jesus! if we picked any more less traveled roads we'd be riding in the grass Kenneth!! We DO ride on back streets. Do you even know the routes we take? I doubt it. At least 30% of the roads we typically ride on have bike lanes. The other 70% are small two lane and four lane roads in a town no bigger than 15 miles long and 10 miles wide. Give me a break!
The truth is, the streets are over crowded by ignorant, uninformed motorists who feel entitled to get from point A to point B without having to slow down or without having to abide by the speed limits or to have any courtesy for anyone, even fellow motorists!
Posted by: | July 30, 2008 at 08:42 PM
Re: Bicycle shorts
It doesn't matter to me what people wear while bicycling. It's personal choice, like your hair style, etc. What someone else wears doesn't effect me.
I spent many years bicycling in office clothes because I lived in a place that was cold enough that you didn't sweat.
In Florida, the sweat starts quickly. I wore regular shorts. But, the shorts kept getting caught on my saddle whenever I jumped off or on my bicycle.
So, I switched to bike shorts. In addition to not catching on my saddle, they are seamless in certain areas and have a pad to prevent chafing and give a cushion. The pad is called a chamois. For the 20+ mile trips to Clearwater, I bought a pair of shorts with a gel chamois to give even more cushion.
As for looking retarded in bike shorts, you would have to see them from the women's perspective. Guys, who bicycle a lot, usually have nice derrieres and legs. Drafting behind a guy wearing Spandex is the "scenic route".
So, feel free to wear whatever you wish. It's your body, your choice.
Also, feel free to keep insulting people who wear Spandex and bike shorts. There are some people on this blog who love talking smack. Instead of insulting them, you're throwing them a nice, juicy bone. Now, I'll step back and let you all enjoy yourselves on the bike shorts and Spandex topic! :)
Posted by: Kimberly | July 30, 2008 at 08:51 PM
Re: Writing letters to the editor
Writing letters to the editor is important and successfull.
Ten years ago, you'd be lucky to see one commuter bicyclist once a week in St. Petersburg. Now, you'll see three bicyclists in one block.
That changed because:
1) People like me got out there and started bicycling to work, shopping, etc. We didn't give up no matter how badly we were treated.
2) We talked with bicyclists, pedestrians, motorists, and everyone else to understand what they were thinking.
3) We read the newspaper, especially the letters to the editor, to understand what everyone was thinking.
4) Then, we started writing letters to the editor, distributing bicycle education fliers, and talking with everyone we could about the topic.
Go to http://pqasb.pqarchiver.com/sptimes/advancedsearch.html
In the From field, put Jan. 1, 1993.
In the Search For field, put "chip haynes" (include the quotation marks) and click Search to find all the letters Chip Haynes has written to educate people.
There are other things you can put in the Search For field:
"kimberly cooper"
bicycl*
road* AND safety
There are probably a lot of other words you can use to search for all the bicycle safety education we've been doing in the St. Petersburg Times.
After we fought the government long enough and enough citizens started bicycling, the City of St. Petersburg government finally understood that bicycling is important to us and hired the first city Bike/Ped Coordinator. St. Petersburg was the first Pinellas city to hire a Bike/Ped Coordinator.
If you are able to bicycle with relative ease in St. Petersburg, it's because of the letters and efforts of those bicyclists who refused to be discourage by all the people telling them that it was impossible.
Yes, writing letters to the editor is important and....it is effective.
If you still disagree with me, you might want to get checked out by a doctor to see if you need to be treated for clinical depression. Clinical depression is a brain chemical imbalance (a physical thing, not mental) that makes people think only the worst, and there are drugs to correct it.
Posted by: Kimberly | July 30, 2008 at 09:19 PM
Whooooo-eeeee. Sure glad I don't have a dog in this fight. Look, folks, the Pinellas Trail (or any bike trail for that matter) is a recreational trail. The key word there is "recreational", which here means "for the sort of average person". Any recreational trail is going to be too fast for the slow ones and waaaay too slow for the fast ones. The Pinellas Trail actually has a speed limit of 20 mph, in case you were wondering. (I know your weren't.)
I see the Pinellas Trail as a great place for riders to build up skill and confidence that they can take with them wherever they ride. The one thing I do not want it to be seen as (and neither do you) is a replacement for street riding. It is an additional facility, an alternative- not a replacemnt. Use it if you like, but if you don't like it, don't use it.
Last time I checked, we still had the streets. We need to keep them, too.
Posted by: Chip Haynes | July 31, 2008 at 07:14 AM
Kenneth, as for the streets one chooses to ride on, don't forget that those side streets that you're a fan of aren't always as well maintained as the "busy" streets are and they also lack the street lights that the "busy" streets have as well as generally lacking traffic signals.
So I'll stick with the "busy" streets while you stick with the side streets.
Posted by: Herman | July 31, 2008 at 04:32 PM
I also have to agree with Kimberly on what she said about bike shorts/spandex they have extra padding where it's needed and they DON'T have stitches where one doesn't want or need them rubbing/pinching.
And like Mel I don't wear "panties" under my shorts either. That would defeat the purpose of wearing 'em.
As Kimberly pointed out writing letters to the editor does work. Because it brings it to the attention of the people so that they can work to change them.
Posted by: Herman | July 31, 2008 at 07:06 PM
Ok since we're way off the subject here, I feel like it wold be OK to say this:
Does anyone else agree with me out there? - this weather we're having this summer really blows! Rain in the a.m., rain in the mid day and rain in the p.m. We get one day of nice weather and then three days of crummy rain or clouds. Maybe I moved to Portland and forgot that I moved....
OK I'm done....
Posted by: Mel | August 01, 2008 at 01:39 PM