Surprisingly, he supports this project (and the Wasson Way).

Surprisingly, he supports this project (and the Wasson Way).

 

Likely because he knows that when gas prices hit $5 or $6 some day, we will all have no choice but to travel via bike thanks to his policies.

Cranley has stated he is in favor of grade separated bike ways but not in favor of bikes in mixed traffic. I am not sure if he is against bike lanes or cycle tracks.

I recall Cranley saying somewhere, maybe it was the east side candidates forum, that he was opposed to the bike lanes installed on Riverside Drive.

I'm pretty sure that was because of the voters he needed to court on that side of town. He's met with representatives of several organizations who have softened his stance on that project.

 

I do agree with Cranley in his support of cyclists and his overall vision. He did leave it somewhat confusing when he said "grade separated bike ways," which implies bridges and ramps and isn't feasible in the inner city. I'm sure that he means dedicated right-of-ways that don't integrate them with traffic, which is a huge step over the hodgepodge of bike lanes.

 

Funding is the other issue. Cyclepaths are more expensive but if done during repaving cycles, can cut the cost down substantially. Imagine if Spring Grove Avenue had a cyclepath instead of bike lanes (where it was recently repaved). The right-of-way existed but it was never brought up, and the city's three options for cyclists all consisted of bike lanes. While the lanes enable basic separation, a dedicated two-way path would have been better. It's not likely that Mill Creek Greenway will be completed at any time soon since the proponents of those types of networks fancy rain gardens, elaborate landscaping and signage over network completion. :/

The Cincinnati BikeShare is taking steps forward with a new director being hired.

 

http://www.bizjournals.com/cincinnati/news/2013/12/20/cincy-bike-share-names-director-looks.html

 

 

The Cincinnati BikeShare is taking steps forward with a new director being hired.

Why is this something the government does? Seems like something for a business to do. I believe there's already bike rental downtown.

The Cincinnati BikeShare is taking steps forward with a new director being hired.

Why is this something the government does? Seems like something for a business to do. I believe there's already bike rental downtown.

 

I don't believe there is any government funding, the article does not make a reference to any. In fact, it is a separate NFP that has been set up to organize and run the system, and they are looking for business sponsorship to cover start-up expenses per the article.

Don't quite know where the bicycle advocates are coming from. Do you have a license on your bike to grant you the privilege to travel on public thoroughfares? If not, what grants you the explicit right to travel there? What are you contributing to maintaining the cost of the infrastructure? I know in some of the oft maligned suburban areas, a portion of the local income tax is apportioned to support bike baths. Seems like the larger percentage of the population supports this. But it this true in the City?

^ You aren't serious are you? 

Don't quite know where the bicycle advocates are coming from. Do you have a license on your bike to grant you the privilege to travel on public thoroughfares? If not, what grants you the explicit right to travel there? What are you contributing to maintaining the cost of the infrastructure? I know in some of the oft maligned suburban areas, a portion of the local income tax is apportioned to support bike baths. Seems like the larger percentage of the population supports this. But it this true in the City?

 

This is America, no one needs to grant you privilege to use public rights of way. Though that's beside the point because a myriad of state and local laws permit bikes to use roads.

 

You need a license to drive because you can very easily kill other people while driving. In general, licenses are given for activities that allow people to take others lives into their hands.

 

As for bike paths, sometimes dedicated bike lanes work in the city on wide enough roads, but there typically isn't enough space to make dedicated bike paths.

Don't quite know where the bicycle advocates are coming from. Do you have a license on your bike to grant you the privilege to travel on public thoroughfares? If not, what grants you the explicit right to travel there? What are you contributing to maintaining the cost of the infrastructure? I know in some of the oft maligned suburban areas, a portion of the local income tax is apportioned to support bike baths. Seems like the larger percentage of the population supports this. But it this true in the City?

 

Are you just joining this century? Since when does the owner of a bicycle need an "explicit right" to use public roads?

look under "roaming rights"

The vast majority of funding for local roads doesn't come from user fees, and none of the funding for sidewalks does.

 

Throwing up a bunch of red tape for cyclists would be anti-environment, anti-poor, anti-public health, pro-congestion, and a whole bunch of other negative things.

Don't quite know where the bicycle advocates are coming from. Do you have a license on your bike to grant you the privilege to travel on public thoroughfares? If not, what grants you the explicit right to travel there? What are you contributing to maintaining the cost of the infrastructure? I know in some of the oft maligned suburban areas, a portion of the local income tax is apportioned to support bike baths. Seems like the larger percentage of the population supports this. But it this true in the City?

 

This is something people should be on the lookout for as bicycle use goes up, if riders are irresponsible it could make people actually consider this kind of legislation.  Though when one alderman in Chicago proposed such rules he was a) demonized immediately b)laughed out of the room. Yeesh.

Thought this was pretty informative on what is going on with cincy bike share.  Hope they come up with funding quickly.

 

http://www.wcpo.com/news/local-news/cincy-bike-share-planners-still-need-funds-to-launch-what-they-say-will-be-a-boon-to-getting-around

The Enquirer has another article about the bike share. Sounds like it is on pace to be rolled out this summer.

 

Bike sharing rolls into Cincinnati

http://quimbob.blogspot.com/2014/02/bike-sharing-insanity.html

Flip the coin... get this.

I really don't get it.

Quimbob, who you callin' a "yahoo"?

Quimbob... you don't have to maintain the bikes, don't have to worry about what to do with the bike if you switch modes while you're out, don't have to carry a lock around, have a newish/reliable bike with no worry of theft, don't have to store a bike at your residence, etc... There are a lot of advantages. There are also disadvantages. But they seem to get use in other cities, so apparently there's a sizable number of people who think the advantages win out.

 

I think they should keep it DT/OTR only, until NKY is also on board. Then if the service is popular enough, expand outside the basin. I think the hills make the logistics of operating too widely too much for an untested system. If NKY is slow to get on board, then a few stations in the West End, Camp Washington, Northside, Columbia-Tusculum, and the East End would be the most sensible Ohio-side expansion locations.

 

These systems attract casual riders, who I suspect will be unlikely to bike uphill and return the bikes, which probably means paying a lot extra in operating costs to shuffle the bikes around. They should also consider offering some incentives for returning bikes from a lower elevation to a higher one, like discounted memberships. Could be a way to keep down the impact on operating costs. It would be worth looking at the impact of hills on San Francisco's, and other similarly steep cities', bike shares.

^I don't know if they've reached out to NKY leaders yet, but I'd be shocked if Newport isn't interested.  There's a burgeoning cyclist community there centered around Reser's, which also now has an OTR location.

You don't have to pay for the bike if it gets jacked? That's not how it works up here.

You don't have to pay for the bike if it gets jacked? That's not how it works up here.

 

The idea is that no one will steal the bikes because no business would purchase them with such a distinct design. Of course if you check one out and don't return it you will be charged for a new bike.

^Makes me wonder what happens if you show up to return your bike and the whole rack is full.  Probably not an issue day-to-day, but could be a problem when riding to a major event like Opening Day. 

You don't have to pay for the bike if it gets jacked? That's not how it works up here.

 

The idea is that no one will steal the bikes because no business would purchase them with such a distinct design. Of course if you check one out and don't return it you will be charged for a new bike.

 

Eh. Some non-profit in Lexington, Ky. rolled out its yellow bike program about 5 years ago and there was a loss rate of nearly 50% because only a drivers license was required. They called that a "success." The thinking was that the yellow bikes were so distinctive that no one would steal them.

 

Well, just duck it in a garage, paint it and it's yours.

 

They did require a credit card the next year but I haven't seen them out in a year or two.

The better bike share companies have specific bicycle designs where parts are not interchangeable with standard bicycles - e.g., different lock-nut distances for wheels, atypical tube diameters, etc.  Thus you can't strip the bike down to sell for parts, and you're less likely to sell a whole bike because every buyer's gonna know it's the bike share's.

^My "commuter" bike has allen wrench sizes that are unusual in order to deter wheel and seat theft. 

Conveniently, there will be a station right next to my home and another right next to my office. I can see myself getting a membership and using it to get to and from work, simply because I would not have to carry my bike up the stairs when I get home (I live on the third floor and have no bike parking or common area on the ground floor).

For $80 you could rig some kind of pulley system outside a window. It'd pay for itself in a year & you wouldn't have to worry about getting a bike before everybody else in the building.

For $80 you could rig some kind of pulley system outside a window. It'd pay for itself in a year & you wouldn't have to worry about getting a bike before everybody else in the building.

 

I don't think that would comply with historic regulations.

Geesh Quimbob, did you forget to take your meds this morning?  I'd expect more from you than the typical "if I can't think of a good reason something will work for me then it must not work for anybody." 

So, you go out to ride your bikeshare buke to work & none are available. You walk, but since you only allocated time to ride - you're late.

Boss asks you why you are coming in late frequently.

You tell him there wasn't a bike lying around waiting for you at the bike rack.

that'll fly

^Makes me wonder what happens if you show up to return your bike and the whole rack is full.  Probably not an issue day-to-day, but could be a problem when riding to a major event like Opening Day. 

 

They try to regularly reallocate the bikes around the city so that it doesn't happen frequently. But on Capital Bike Share here in DC, if your return dock is full, you enter your code at the station and it gives you an extra 15 minutes to find an open nearby dock. Granted, that doesn't help the fact that you might have to walk further, but at least you don't get charged extra fees for going over the time limit.

I don't understand the appeal of bike share in Cincinnati.  The walking distances in the basin are very short, and for whatever reason people keep coming up with excuses to not bike up the hills.  I grew up on the west side and biked up and down the giant hills all the time.  If you got off and walked your bike, you were a wuss.  Now if you call people out for tweeting endless photographs of their bike but never riding the thing up any of the hills, YOU'RE the one with the problem. 

I don't understand the appeal of bike share in Cincinnati.  The walking distances in the basin are very short, and for whatever reason people keep coming up with excuses to not bike up the hills.  I grew up on the west side and biked up and down the giant hills all the time.  If you got off and walked your bike, you were a wuss.  Now if you call people out for tweeting endless photographs of their bike but never riding the thing up any of the hills, YOU'RE the one with the problem. 

 

1) The streetcar is a pedestrian accelerator. The bike share...same sort of thing.

2) Its use is limited in the basin (on the Ohio side), which is why it needs to be expanded to NKY ASAP.

3) It doesn't matter if current cyclists are biking up hills or not. Suppose they are. The more casual riders to which the a bike share will mainly appeal will not be riding up hills. At least that's my educated guess.

So, you go out to ride your bikeshare buke to work & none are available. You walk, but since you only allocated time to ride - you're late.

Boss asks you why you are coming in late frequently.

You tell him there wasn't a bike lying around waiting for you at the bike rack.

that'll fly

 

Maybe that's true for typical 9-5 jobs, but that's not what my job is like.

So, you go out to ride your bikeshare buke to work & none are available. You walk, but since you only allocated time to ride - you're late.

Boss asks you why you are coming in late frequently.

You tell him there wasn't a bike lying around waiting for you at the bike rack.

that'll fly

 

Honestly, when I was living in DC, I never saw an empty bike rack. There were always a couple of bikes available. The only time I could imagine this being a problem is during events downtown like Oktoberfest or Taste of Cincinnati. This is not an issue in other cities I've seen.

If a rack is too popular, I'm sure they could extend it with more bike slots or add another rack next to it. Not being able to park where you want to is probably a bigger concern. But if it works in other cities, why wouldn't it work in at least the flatter parts of Cincy?

I'm not sure that I'd use this personally, but it sounds like something that is successful in other cities and it isn't very expensive (comparatively), so why not give it a shot?  It gives people another transportation option, which I think is always a good investment.

This is technically about Newport, but it's so close to downtown that I'm linking to it anyway:

 

Cycling enthusiasts win bike lanes for Ky. 9

Has there been any motion any of you know of on the bike share? The word is a June launch, but in order to make that I'd expect they should be getting bikes delivered and starting to install racks...I don't know...now-ish?

According to two people, John cranley is opposed to the central Parkway bike path and that he Even stated 'No one rides bikes' and 'It's stupid for bikes to be on streets'

Wait, what?? I thought he campaigned on building bike infrastructure. Especially including dedicated lanes and cycletracks. And I thought he backed that project specifically??

 

I viewed it as one of the consolation prizes of him being elected. Not to mention his support of the bike share, and riding anywhere but the streets (aside from the limited network of shared use paths) being illegal.

Sometimes I wonder if he's mentally ill...he doesn't seem to be doing a very good job of placating the populous, or even wooing the people with money.  WTF is his game plan?  Does he even have a vision for the city, or is he all random opinions?

I distinctly remember Cranky saying NO to bike lanes, etc.

He seems to support bikes as toys.

Wait, what?? I thought he campaigned on building bike infrastructure. Especially including dedicated lanes and cycletracks. And I thought he backed that project specifically??

 

I viewed it as one of the consolation prizes of him being elected. Not to mention his support of the bike share and riding anywhere but the streets (aside from the limited network of shared use paths) being illegal.

 

I heard he said those quotes from 2 different people on monday...

 

Pro,

I thought his gameplan was to divide bike and rail supporters by pinning them against each other.  Now, I'm not so sure.  These statements are bizarre and have no political advantages. My guess is either he was upset by a question asked or just had a temporary honest brainfart

I also recall Cranley saying no to any new bike lanes (they take space away from cars!) but that he was supportive of separate paths.

 

Apparently construction work on Delta Avenue has started with signs to pay attention as a new traffic pattern is coming (bike lanes).  I wonder if Cranley has tried to put the kibosh on this or if he's leaving it alone since it's already been designed and approved by both the Mt. Lookout and Columbia-Tusculum community councils, on top of receiving overwhelmingly positive feedback through the city's outreach program.  Of course that hasn't stopped a few vocal busy-bodies from opposing bike lane projects in Hyde Park and other neighborhoods.  I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if Cranley didn't even know about this project, and a few of those cantankerous types like Carl Uebelacker will come out of the woodwork in opposition to this project and get Cranley's full ear while the rest of the process is ignored.  This is one to stay on top of and be vigilant about. 

He probably heard a group of NIMBYs complaining about bike lanes, and determined it was probably a consensus opinion among his base. Or a policy advisor reported said experience & analysis.

 

We desperately need a goddamn permanent city manager. It seems like Cranley is trying to do that job, in addition to what he was elected to do, and he hasn't the aptitude for it (to put it lightly).

He probably heard a group of NIMBYs complaining about bike lanes, and determined it was probably a consensus opinion among his base. Or a policy advisor reported said experience & analysis.

Hyde Parkers

I've grown used to anti-bike people who are poor & uneducated. They see buying a car as a rite of passage. They see adults on bikes as "playing" while they have to "work hard".

That certainly isn't Cranley but he does court that demographic.