My doctor tells me to drive!

I visited my long-time primary care doctor the other day for my Welcome to Medicare physical.  I arrived by bike, of course.  My doctor tells me my bike riding is keeping me healthy.  Then why do I say my doctor tells me to drive?

From the time when I made my appointment until I rode away on my bike, I received many messages from my doctor telling me that I should be driving.

1. On the web: I go to the Group Health website to find directions to the Capitol Hill Clinic and find this map:

The map shows the freeway and the arterial roads near the medical center, and it features big bold circles showing me where I can park a car. It offers no information of any use to me if I arrive by bike or by bus: it doesn't show bike routes, bus stops, sidewalks or crosswalks. 

Below the map are three paragraphs of detailed, turn-by-turn instructions for driving to the clinic from the freeways, and a sidebar details parking rates. There is no mention of biking or walking routes to the medical center, and no mention of bike parking, 

There's a link labeled "elsewhere on the Web" connecting to Metro Transit's Trip Planner, but you have to follow the link to discover the three bus routes that serve the medical center. 

Through this web page, my doctor tells me that driving is the best way to get to the clinic.  If I choose any other means of transportation, I'm on my own.

2. When I arrive at the clinic, I see big signs at each approach to the building telling me where to find car parking.  To find bike parking, I have to search the grounds (see my earlier post for more about bike parking).  I happen to know there's a bike parking area in the garage, but there's no sign to tell me where to find it.  The outside of the building tells me I should be driving.

3. When I'm ready to leave, I find bold signs inside the building pointing me to the parking garage.  If I had arrived by bus, I would not find any signs reminding me where to find the bus stop or telling me which buses serve the clinic.  If I look closely at one of the big facility maps on the wall, I can find a small icon indicating bike parking - but there's no icon for the bike parking inside the garage.  The inside of the building tells me I should be driving.

I'm using Group Health as an example, since that's where my doctor works. I suspect you'll find similar messages encouraging driving wherever you go for healthcare.

My doctor tells me I should stay active.  Your doctor probably wants you to stay active too. The websites our doctors use and the buildings where our doctors work should be reinforcing that message, not telling us we ought to drive.

Safe Routes to Health, Part 2: Riding a Wheelchair to Health

Terry and Vickie Hoefer running (LEE GILES III/The Peninsula Gateway)

In Gig Harbor, you can get to the local Starbucks in a wheelchair - but not to the local hospital. Can this be true?

A few days ago, I noticed this headline in the Tacoma News Tribune:  Wheelchair training along roads in Gig Harbor area creates a stir.  Terry Hoefer, a young man who uses an electric wheelchair for mobility, has been training for a marathon, driving his wheelchair along the roads of Gig Harbor accompanied by his mother Vickie, who runs alongside. His dad followed in the car, blinkers flashing. Terry trains in order to build up the strength and endurance to sit upright and operate the wheelchair controls for the long duration of a marathon.  Training was going fine until the family was pulled over by the State Patrol for "obstructing traffic."  It turns out the laws governing electric wheelchairs on roadways are confusing and restrictive:

“Basically, we can ride on the designated bike lanes all over, but we can’t ride on a street that doesn’t have a white line,” [Terry's mother] learned this month.

This means Terry's training route needed modification:

Pierce County helped make a local sidewalk wheelchair-accessible, which means they can still run along Burnham Drive Northwest to the local Starbucks, one of their favorite outings. They’ve stopped using another route, to St. Anthony Hospital, because it doesn’t have a legal shoulder or bike lane. Terry Hoefer has spent a lot of time sick at St. Anthony, and it was fun to see him healthy there on their runs, his mom said.

This story is sad and shocking on so many levels.  Why does a person who uses a wheelchair have to study obscure laws and prevail on local authorities just to make a trip out in the community?

And how is it that you can ride a wheelchair to the local Starbucks - but NOT to the local hospital?

Mobility is essential to health.  Everyone who works in that hospital knows that's true.  Shouldn't everyone be able to get to the hospital - or wherever they want to go - on their own power, whether it's walking, rolling in a wheelchair, or riding a bike?  I hope St. Anthony Hospital takes a look at what Children's Hospital in Seattle has done to create safe routes for walking, biking and wheelchairs near the hospital!

I can relate to Terry's story on another level as well.  I've been caring for my mother-in-law, who needs a wheelchair to get around outside the house.  A few days ago she read in the newspaper about the grand opening of the relocated Museum of History and Industry.  "I'd love to go!" she told me.  So we went.

I helped her into her wheelchair, wheeled her down the street to the bus stop, rolled the wheelchair onto the bus, transferred to the South Lake Union Trolley, and got off half a block from the museum.  We had a great time.  This trip didn't involve any exercise for my mother-in-law - I pushed the wheelchair - but it gave her a chance to be out in the community.  She loved the misty rain on her face and the bustle of the crowds at the museum. And for me, the caregiver, it was a refreshing opportunity to get some exercise and have a change of scene.

I'm sure that Terry's mom benefits as much as Terry does from their outings together. Isolation and lack of exercise are huge challenges of caregiving.  Streets that are safe and accessible for people in wheelchairs are critical for the health of caregivers, too.

Hey Drivers! Did you know you're supposed to YIELD to buses?

Mike Siegel/The Seattle Times

Dear Seattle Times

I'd like to thank your reporter Mike Lindblom for pointing out that bus bulbs are necessary because people who drive cars so frequently fail to yield to buses as the law requires.

Shortly after reading this article, during a 15-minute drive across Capitol Hill, I observed the following:

- a person driving south on 15th Ave. East attempted to pass the #10 bus as it pulled into traffic on 15th. The driver eventually pulled back to avoid crashing into the bus.

- a person driving south on 16th Ave. E. turned left onto eastbound East Thomas as a #43 bus started to pull out from a stop. The driver took up the entire westbound lane to get around the bus, causing oncoming traffic to abruptly stop.

- as the #11 bus dropped off passengers at 23rd and Madison, a person driving a taxi pulled around the bus, crossing the double-yellow center line to do so. Six more people driving cars followed the taxi as the bus started to pull out.

I should mention that I did observe one person driving a car who did in fact yield to a bus. 

Sincerely,

The Transportation Nag

Safe Routes to Health, Part I: Bike Parking

It's healthy to walk and ride bikes, right?  I'm a nurse, and I've never heard anyone in health care argue that it's better to sit in a car.  So it seems to me that health care institutions should be leading the way in making sure there are safe, convenient healthy ways to walk and ride to the places people need to go. And lots of people need to go to health clinics, pharmacies and hospitals - people who work there and people who go to get care.

Seattle Children's has developed an ambitious Transportation Master Plan that not only encourages people who work there to ride bikes and walk, but also invests in Neighborhood Greenways to make walking and biking safer, more convenient and more comfortable for visitors and people who live in the neighborhood.

One highly visible component of Seattle Children's plan is bicycle parking.  The plan calls for 600 bike parking spaces - and at least 100 of those are right at the main entrance to the hospital, almost completely full at my most recent visit.  A prominent sign by the entrance directs visitors to other bike parking areas, and the big neon sign for the parking garage includes a bike icon.  I didn't have my camera along at my last visit, so I'll leave you to imagine the highly visible bike facilities there.

How do Seattle's other healthcare institutions compare with Children's in supporting active transportation?  In this post I'll look at bike parking at two health care campuses near where I live:  Virginia Mason on First Hill and Group Health on Capitol Hill.

This "Patient Bike Rack" sign is at Virginia Mason Medical Center on First Hill.  Nearby, there's a large caged employee bike parking area at the entrance to the main parking garage; this shot shows about half of the many bikes parked there:

 Bike parking is visible from every entrance,  even the Emergency Room.

(I don't mean to imply that EVERYONE should get to the ER by bicycle!  Virginia Mason devotes a lot more space by the ER entrance to ambulance parking than bike parking!)

Signs by outdoor bike racks direct visitors to secure indoor bike parking:

None of the racks I could see as a visitor were completely full, but still it's obvious when you visit Virginia Mason that bikes are considered normal transportation for patients, visitors and employees.

Next I checked out the Group Health main campus on 15th.  Here's one of several small outdoor bike racks. All are barely used (that's my bike!) and inconspicuous from the main clinic entrance:

Small bike icons on campus maps at various locations show where outdoor racks are located - but how would anyone know there's also bike parking in the garage?

I rode into the garage to explore - but first I had to ignore this warning:

The bike parking area is low-ceilinged, dimly lit and sparsely occupied - and to get there I had to wind my way across car lanes:

There's no bike parking at the Urgent Care entrance - but that didn't stop one visitor from parking a bike there anyway:

Group Health is a very visible supporter of bicycle recreation, most notably as the primary sponsor of the annual Seattle to Portland ride - but there is little evidence on the Capitol Hill campus that bicycles are seen as normal transportation, whether for staff, for patients or for visitors.

Active, healthy transportation includes provisions for walking, bike riding, wheelchairs and other mobility aids, and safe, comfortable access to transit as well.  I'll be looking at other ways our healthcare institutions either promote or discourage these components of active transportation in a future post.

STOP! You on the bike - STOP!

If you've ever ridden a bike on the Burke Gilman trail through the University District, you've seen the giant stop signs with flashing lights warning you to stop before you cross Brooklyn Avenue.  You're a law-abiding careful bike rider, so you probably stopped - while all the other reckless people on bikes whizzed on through.  And then one block farther on, you've caught up with all those reckless people again, since they've dutifully stopped at the red light at University Way.

If you were riding the Burke last week, you may have even seen a friendly police officer give a kind but stern warning to one of those other bicyclists:  next time, you'll get a ticket if you don't stop!

I rode the Burke Gilman again today, thinking about this intersection as I rode.  The more I thought, the less I understood WHY there would be a stop sign there at Brooklyn.

Travelers on Brooklyn see this dramatic signage as they approach the trail:

Most people who drive along Brooklyn here seem to think this means they are supposed to yield to bicyclists  - so when I actually stop at the big red stop sign, people approaching in cars impatiently wave me through.

Yesterday, as I rode east from Fremont, I passed through quite a number of other intersections - and at every other intersection between Stone Way and Brooklyn, the Burke Gilman has the right-of-way. Cars crossing the trail must stop at stop signs, even at the busy crossings by Dunn Lumber and the roads that give cars access to Gasworks Park.

I remembered hearing that the 2007 Bicycle Master Plan included something about intersections, so I went on line and looked it up.  You can read the whole section for yourself if you like; it's Appendix H: Roadway Crossing Design for Bicycles.

The relevant section is titled "Mid-block Trail Crossings."  This is a bit geeky, so bear with me. Bicycle trails and roadways are classified according to their importance for transportation.  The Burke Gilman Trail falls in the category of "regional trail."  Brooklyn Avenue is classified as a "minor arterial" - you can look that up for yourself, too if you want.  Here's what the Bicycle Master Plan says about the mid-block crossing of a Regional Trail with a minor arterial:

Regional Trails are effectively principal arterials for bicyclists, but trail user speed
is generally lower than that on Principal Arterial streets. Therefore, Regional
Trails should generally be given priority over Minor Arterials, Collector Arterials,
and Access Streets. However, if the traffic volume on the street being crossed
exceeds the traffic volume on the trail by 20% or more, the street should be given
priority.  

Doesn't this mean that the Burke Gilman - Seattle's number one bicycle arterial - should be given priority over a dinky little "minor arterial" like Brooklyn?   I haven't measured the traffic volume on Brooklyn, but every time I've been on the Burke Gilman, I've seen way more bikes at this intersection than cars.

Both the people driving cars who yield to trail users, and cyclists who ride across this quiet "minor arterial" without stopping, act AS IF the guidelines in the Bike Master Plan were being followed; that is, they act as if people traveling on the trail had priority over people driving on Brooklyn.  Just one block farther on, the same people who rode on across Brooklyn without stopping wait patiently for the light to change at University and again at 15th.

Rather than ask Seattle Police to ticket people riding bikes across Brooklyn, it would make more sense - and be more in line with the guidelines of the Bicycle Master Plan - to redesign this intersection to give priority to travelers on the trail.

Meanwhile, there are a few people, both on bikes and driving cars, who recklessly roll through the stop lights at University and at 15th. Those are the folks who need to be reminded to share the road safely.

What if you can't walk?

Last week I gained a new perspective on active transportation in my neighborhood: my mother-in-law got a wheelchair to help her get around outside the house.

Just a few years ago, she walked everywhere, up and down the steep hills, carrying her groceries in her backpack. Then she started using the bus to manage the hills. When walking to the bus stop was too much she took the Access van or a cab - and just recently, she stopped going out by herself entirely.  I used Zipcars to take her to her doctor's appointments, and afterwards we'd go out to lunch - but otherwise she stayed in the house with her cats.

With the wheelchair (and someone to push it, mostly ME!), plus our Seattle buses all equipped with wheelchair ramps, I thought she should be able to go everywhere again. Here she is waiting for the #48 to take us to the Arboretum.

But it hasn't been all that easy.

Here are some of the challenges we face:

1. Sidewalk bumps. Uneven spots that I barely notice when I'm walking can stop us cold with the wheelchair.  I'm getting better at anticipating these spots but even so, we ran into a  bump today that knocked her hearing aid out!

2. Terrible curb cuts - or none.  Some corners reach a real dead-end in a wheelchair: no place to go, except turn around and look for another route.

3. Terrifying street crossings. In order to get to or from the bus headed East, we have to negotiate this daunting expanse of pavement.  Drivers generally don't realize they are supposed to stop for people walking (or in wheelchairs) at unmarked intersections.  And why is this intersection unmarked?  People are getting on and off the bus on both sides of the street here.

4 . Bus stops on steep streets, combined with terrible pavement.  The #8 and the #11 stop just down the hill from the stop sign you see in the photo above.  The hill is very steep, and the sidewalk at the bus stop is broken up.  Bus drivers sometimes have to try twice to find a spot to lower the ramp.  It takes a strong steady assistant to get a wheelchair on or off the bus without sending it careening down the hill.


5. Steep hills. Negotiating hills pushing a wheelchair is not the same as walking or riding a bike. On a bike, I can get off and push the bike up just about any hill.  With my mother-in-law in the wheelchair, there are some hills that are just too steep. I evaluate the hills with a different eye.  Going down is worse than going up; I can't risk losing control and having her sail down on her own!  For an elderly person alone in a wheelchair, these hills would be impossible.

But the biggest barrier at the beginning was simply that I didn't know where we might encounter these uncharted obstacles.  There's no map that shows the broken sidewalks or the missing curb cuts or the hills too steep to manage.  We had to figure this out by trial and error.

I've now taken my mother-in-law on several outings with the wheelchair with no major mishaps.  I'm confident we will be fine going anywhere Metro can take us on the bus.

But if I were on my own in a wheelchair, I think I'd probably sit at home with my cats. We citizens have a lot of work to do before our streets are safe and accessible for people who depend on wheelchairs for transportation.

Transportation: Is it really all about cars?

Yesterday I attended a City Council briefing on design choices for the west end of the 520 replacement bridge. As currently designed, a shared use pathway for people on foot and on bikes will cross Lake Washington, but will not continue across Portage Bay to the junction of 520 with I-5.

One of the people who testified in favor of completing the pedestrian and bicycle connection pointed out this statement in the Draft Community Design Process Final Report handed out at the hearing:

"A well-designed transportation project can go much beyond its primary purpose of moving motor vehicles by positively influencing the futures of communities and the health of their residents."

"This is wrong," she stated. "The primary purpose of transportation is to move people and goods - not to move cars."  She went on to argue that it would be inexcusable not to complete the pedestrian and bicycle path.

This got me wondering what our transportation professionals have to say about their role. Are they really all about cars?  I looked up the mission statements of the Seattle, King County, Washington State and United States departments of transportation.  Here they are:

SDOT Mission:

To deliver a safe, reliable, efficient, and socially equitable transportation system that enhances Seattle's environment and economic vitality.

King County DOT Mission:

Our mission is to improve the quality of life for people in King County by providing mobility in a way that protects the environment, helps manage growth, and reduces traffic congestion.

WSDOT Mission:

The mission of the Washington State Department of Transportation is to keep people and business moving by operating and improving the state’s transportation systems vital to our taxpayers and communities.

US Department of Transportation:

The mission of the Department is to:
Serve the United States by ensuring a fast, safe, efficient, accessible and convenient transportation system that meets our vital national interests and enhances the quality of life of the American people, today and into the future.

These are all good sentiments, but these agencies continue in various ways to act as if their primary goal was to move motor vehicles. People who travel by bike or on foot are rarely acknowledged as part of "transportation" at all.

For example, this summary of the Washington State Department of Transportation budget for 2011-2013 does not mention non-motorized transportation at all, and this lengthy report on the State of Washington Transportation mentions pedestrians and bicycles only once (on page 5) as an isolated line item, not as a critical component of the transportation system.

This summary of findings from a study of transportation around the Seattle sports arenas does not mention pedestrians or bicycles at all, despite the critical importance of limiting car trips to this area.

The mission statements give me hope - and if you want to explore further, you'll find that each of these public agencies has goals and objectives that suggest at least a beginning recognition that transportation really is about people, including people who walk and ride bikes.

But meanwhile, whenever I see a reference to transportation (including parking, driving directions, transit) that doesn't include people on bikes or on foot, I'm the Transportation Nag: so I'll nag.