The Chainlink

Views: 1634

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Bicycle hardparking.

Oh yeah, I took a good look at that bike. I realized how much spaced he took up and laughed...

there's no excuse to lock it this way.  the bike is probably featherweight light and hoisting the front wheel over would've been easy-peasy.  it has no fenders, no racks, so it should work.  it drives me nuts when people do this on the n-shaped racks.  because of my large basket, i can only lock my bike with the front wheel perpendicular to the rack.  i was out of luck at the swap, i locked up at the fence.  but there were so many people (families, btw, which is awesome) milling about the entrance, i wasn't concerned about theft at all.  the pedicab guy was out there, too.  

The Pista to the right had the most gentlemanly parking.  He even leaned it into the snow to make room for others!

Some of the "n-shaped" racks have stickers on them that instruct the cyclist to park that way.  One on each side, parallel to the rack.  I carry two U-locks and use two locking points, so I apologize in advance if we ever need to share a rack. Or if I have to turn your bike in order to lock securely.

yai danche said:

there's no excuse to lock it this way.  the bike is probably featherweight light and hoisting the front wheel over would've been easy-peasy.  it has no fenders, no racks, so it should work.  it drives me nuts when people do this on the n-shaped racks. 

it's unfortunate that they promote locking this way, because it is possible to securely lock a wheel and part of the frame with the bike perpendicular to the rack.  in most situations, i understand why people park their bike parallel to the rack, because the sidewalk is narrow and doing so leaves more space for people to errr walk.  but yeah, unfortunately i'm stuck with using a cable and locking my bike to itself which isn't so secure.  

I guess I don't see why having two bikes locked parallel to the rack is worse than having two bikes parked perpendicular to the rack.  I understand your basket situation, but if you're only going to lock to one side of the rack, can't you just have the bike offset a bit rather than directly alongside?

+1

Ezra H. said:

For once and for all, the last thing Chicago needs is an etiquette posse hunting down every person whose behavior or decisions could possibly be construed as insensitive, oblivious, marginal, or egotistical. There is no "correct" way to use a bike. If there was, we would never have seen the development of mountain bikes, folding bikes, tandems, and any other "non-standard" bike you can think of. 

Do we want more bicycles on the road in this town? Yes. Do we need more non-cyclists aware of the difficulties cyclists face in every aspect of our lifestyle choices? Yes. Do we need facilities and infrastructure that better accommodates cyclists of all stripes? Yes. 

Blaming only the cyclist every time something mildly irritating happens greases the already slippery slope we're on to witnessing cyclist-on-cyclist fisticuffs at the bike rack, in the bike lane, and at the bike shop.

Let's work toward education and not punishment.

Assuming you're referring to the U-racks. Locking parallel to the rack usually blocks less of the sidewalk, since the racks themselves are typically parallel to the street. It's also easier to lean your bike against the rack that way as well. I'm guessing the city promotes this locking method due to the former reason.

h' 1.0 said:

I guess I don't see why having two bikes locked parallel to the rack is worse than having two bikes parked perpendicular to the rack.  I understand your basket situation, but if you're only going to lock to one side of the rack, can't you just have the bike offset a bit rather than directly alongside?

With the U- (or n-) racks, I could see it either way, but I prefer parking perpendicular.  For one, it allows for a third bike to straddle the top of the rack if parking spaces are scarce, as they often are in front of my office.  For another, it avoids the tangle of bars and cables and racks that sometimes occur.  And for another, I think those stickers showing people to park parallel to U-racks leads some to believe that that is the proper way to lock to the wave-type racks as well, when those racks are designed for perpendicular parking, to maximize available parking spaces.

Adam Herstein (5.5 mi) said:

Assuming you're referring to the U-racks. Locking parallel to the rack usually blocks less of the sidewalk, since the racks themselves are typically parallel to the street. It's also easier to lean your bike against the rack that way as well. I'm guessing the city promotes this locking method due to the former reason.

h' 1.0 said:

I guess I don't see why having two bikes locked parallel to the rack is worse than having two bikes parked perpendicular to the rack.  I understand your basket situation, but if you're only going to lock to one side of the rack, can't you just have the bike offset a bit rather than directly alongside?

The title is wrong too because Fixies DO get stolen or parts taken every day. A poor way to lock it but the pic doesn't show a space problem.

And according to the article the bike has 2 flats which is a poor reflection of the community if another biker gave the bike them in retaliation.

ALL bikes have parts taken or get stolen everyday; one kind of bike is not more special than the other.

If you bothered to read the article closely you would see it did not have two flats but they passively advocated that it would be OK to flatten the tires.  The person who wrote the article is a passive aggressive weenie but that does not change that as a selfish way to park a bike.

Mike Zumwalt said:

The title is wrong too because Fixies DO get stolen or parts taken every day. A poor way to lock it but the pic doesn't show a space problem.

And according to the article the bike has 2 flats which is a poor reflection of the community if another biker gave the bike them in retaliation.

RSS

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service