On The Road Again: A Prosoal on Bicycle Safety

Submitted for the consideration of the University Administration

By Harrison A. Wendelken

8 April 2018

Abstract
The bicycle is a cheap, low-maintenance means of transportation, making it the college student’s

best friend. It is no surprise, then that thousands of Penn State students have registered their

bikes with the school to give them access to easy commuting. But, with this there comes a

problem: all too often, bicyclists will deviate from official school policies and take their bikes

onto the sidewalk, rather then ride them on the road. To combat this, the author proposes more

stringent enforcement of the already existing bike law and expansions of reserved bike lanes

across campus.

Issue
Bicycles are an obvious alternative to cars, being cheaper and easier to maintain. It is no surprise,

then, that over 52% of households in America own bikes (Breakaway 28). College-aged students

make up a significant proportion of this demographic, which makes sense: college students often

need to commute to and from class while being hampered by the cost of a university education,

so bikes can fill the role of a cheap car. 27% of bike college-aged bike riders say they ride their

bike primarily for commuting purposes-- the highest proportion of any age group (Breakaway

34).

4,493 Penn State students have registered their bike with the University, not to mention those

that have neglected to do so-- the school estimates this latter figure to be somewhere around

11,200, according to their correspondence with the author of this proposal (“Correspondence”).

Penn State has been generally supportive of its bicyclists, being named a Silver Bike Friendly

University in 2016 thanks to the projects it’s undertaken to ease cycling on campus, such as the

building of covered bike racks and the erecting of small bike repair stations (“Penn”).

While the economy of bikes (not to mention their environmental friendliness and the opportunity

they provide for exercise) is certainly worthwhile, the ubiquity of bikes on the Penn State

Campus has come with a downside: bicyclists on the sidewalk. All bicyclists on University Park

are required to bike either on the road or designated bicycle lanes/paths. In short, it is against the

rules to ride on the sidewalk (“Rules”). If you have spent any amount of time on the sidewalks of

University Park, however, you would know that this regulation is seldom held to or enforced,

with cyclists often whizzing dangerously close to pedestrians.

In order to better understand this issue, the author of this proposal conducted a brief

observational study where he watched the passage of bicycles at one particular intersection. By

his estimates, roughly 48.2 percent of bicyclists sampled rode on the sidewalk (“Journal” 2). But

you do not have to take his word for it: according to a study conducted by the bureau of

transportation statistics, a full 27.3 percent of cyclists prefer to ride on the sidewalk or on the

shoulder rather then on the road or designated bike paths (Bureau). Assuming this holds true

generally across Penn State, there could be as many as 3,058 students illegally riding their bikes

on the sidewalk (their being no shoulder on many Penn State roads), going up to as high as 5,398

by the author’s observations.

Combine with this the issue of many cyclists being “disconnected” from the world, opting

instead to listen to earbuds or even their phones, according to representatives from Penn State

Transportation Services who responded to the author’s inquiries (“Correspondence”). Though

this is already against the rules (“Rules”), it would seem that a good deal of students believe they

will be able to get away with it.

Indeed, University Police have noticed an uptick in the numbers of rule violations in recent

years, with Sgt. Monica Himes of the University Police noting “We’re getting a lot of complaints

that bicyclists are operating against the rules of the road, more than in recent years,”

(“University”).

Though one may think bicycle crashes with pedestrians are trivial, they are anything but: in New

York State alone, nearly 8,000 patients checked into hospitals from cyclist-pedestrian collisions
(Tuckel). And though they are rare, fatal accidents can and do occur. While numbers are difficult

to come by due to the rarity of such events, the average hovered around 10 per year in Germany

between the years of 1997 and 1998 (Graw), and anecdotally many fatal incidents have occurred

in the US (Freedman)(Alpert). While one may point out that such collisions generally occur in

big cities where there is significantly more foot traffic, it is salient to note that Penn State

sidewalks can be host to an equivalent amount of foot traffic during the transition between

classes. Still, the road infrastructure in Germany and New York City is vastly different from

Penn State. This example is not intended to demonstrate that we will be in precisely the same

situation as regards bicycle fatalities: rather, it is meant to demonstrate that it is a real

phenomenon that can and does happen.

The human cost of such collisions is plain to see for all, and certainly ought to be avoided if they

can be. More practically, however, is the monetary cost of such collisions: if a pedestrian was

struck by a cyclist riding on the sidewalk on the Penn State campus, then that student would have

a good case to file a lawsuit: not only did the incident occur on University property, but it

occurred thanks to active nonenforcement of University transportation regulations, making the

University doubly at fault. Worse still, if someone were to die in such a collision, not only would

you have to deal with an even greater lawsuit, but it would be an absolute PR nightmare. Penn

State is a school that is in large part built upon its identity and its reputation: it can seldom afford

blows to it.
Proposal

The author’s proposal to solve this issue is two-fold, and relatively simple: 1) To more

stringently enforce the University’s policy regarding cyclists on the sidewalk, and 2) to build

more bike-paths and bike lanes to ensure it doesn’t become necessary in the first place.

The first section is simple: a more active enforcement of the University’s bicycle policy would

serve as a greater deterrent for cyclists who intend to trounce the law and ride on the sidewalk.
 This will likely require an uptick in the number of officers on patrol, and bicycle officers.

Luckily, representatives of the University police department have informed the author that

already plans to raise the number of the latter (“Correspondence”), meaning that effectively all

that is required is more active enforcement.

One may counter that this has not worked many times, and active enforcement of the law will not

necessarily stop Penn Students from doing illegal activities. The author would counter that

bicycling is not a social activity and thus not subject to the social pressures involved in other

activities that may encourage individuals to trounce the law, and cyclists are generally of sober

mind. And, even if they do try their luck, more active enforcement and more officers on patrol

mean they will have a higher risk of being caught and having to pay a ticket.

Nevertheless, the prior paragraph raises another advantage of this approach: ticketing. Ticketing

is famously an excellent means of generating revenue for any organization, and this would be no

different. Busting the occasional rogue cyclist could create a steady stream of relatively small but

nonetheless nice to have income for the University that it can put towards any number of

programs or projects.

One such project would be the secondary element of the proposal: the building of more bike

paths and lanes. Only 40% of cyclists say they will regularly ride on the road (Bureau of

Transportation Services). While the author can only speculate, it is not inconceivable to

speculate that apprehension about being so close to automobiles could be the culprit, and the fear

is hardly irrational considering as many as 722 cyclists were killed by drivers in 2012 alone
(“Deadliest”). Additionally, it has been demonstrated that there is a strong correlation between

the building of improved bike infrastructure and reduction in injuries, even as the number of

cyclists rise.

By building more bike lanes and paths, cyclists would have little reason to ride on the sidewalk

at all, not to mention that reducing the number of bikes on the road would allow a smoother flow

of traffic, as cars can move more safely and swiftly without having to be constantly on the

lookout for cyclists. Smoother flow of transport would mean an easier time of getting to classes,

and generally make operations around the University go quicker and more efficiently. In

addition, getting cyclists off of the road could reduce the number of cyclist-vehicle accidents,

thus reducing the number of injuries and potential lawsuits. Towards this end, studies have

shown that bike lanes can reduce such incidents by as much as 90% (Schmitt). Additionally, the

school could bump itself up to a “gold” Bike Friendly School.

Two downsides to this latter approach are difficulties in on-campus construction due to the

limited space and cost. To the former point, it is true that space is limited on campus. To this, the

author would say that it is not necessary to cover the entirety of the school in paths, just to build

enough to reduce the number of cyclists on the road at any given time.

Perhaps the greatest impediment to the implementation of this section of the proposal is the most

obvious: the cost. Bike routes can be quite expensive, going up to as high as $536,680 per mile

in some cases (Bushell 12). It most certainly does not have to go this high: the higher prices tend

to be for protected “bicycle lanes”. For a “signed bike route”, which is essentially just a section
marked out on the roadway for bikes and is predominantly used on lightly trafficked road ways,

the price can be as low as $5,360 per mile, with a median of $27,240 per mile (Bushell 12).

Considering the streets of University Park are relatively lightly travelled compared to a big city,

this latter, cheaper design would be preferable. And while it is still a pretty penny, keep in mind

that the entirety of the school does not have to have bike lanes. To some extent costs are offset

by ticket revenue.

Conclusion

Bicyclists taking to the sidewalk is a real problem here at Penn State, and one with the potential

for real consequences, both physical and monetary. To avoid such incidents, the University can

not only punish such activities through punitive ticketing measures, it can prevent them from

happening in the first place by expanding it’s bike infrastructure. Getting bikes off the sidewalks

and onto lanes and paths means a safer and more efficient Penn State.
Bibliography

Alpert, David. “Cyclist Kills Pedestrian; Does Calling ‘on Your Left’ Not Work?” Greater
Greater Washington, Greater Greater Washington, 12 June 2012,
ggwash.org/view/28013/cyclist-kills-pedestrian-does-calling-on-your-left-not-work.
This source records the death of a pedestrian jogger in the Washington DC metro area thanks to a
collision with a cyclist. I only used it to provide an anecdotal instance of someone being killed
by a cyclist. As an anecdotal source, it is obviously not a particularly strong one.

Breakaway Research Group. “U.S. Bicycling Participation Benchmarking Study Report.” People
for Bikes. Mar. 2015, b.3cdn.net/bikes/7b69b6010056525bce_ijm6vs5q1.pdf.
An extremely important study for my purposes.This report was compiled at the request of a pro-
bike advocacy group, which hoped to do a comprehensive survey of the current demographic
landscape of cyclists. Using it allowed me to understand the demographic makeup of cyclists,
especially as regards the number of college aged individuals who ride bikes, and the reasons they
do. Invaluable for my purposes and very rigorously conducted, by all appearances.

Bureau of Transportation Statistics. “BICYCLING.” Department of Transportation, June 2002,

poll.orspub.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/document.php?id=quest02.out_1985&type=hi
tlist&num=76&action=addfav&.
A telephone poll conducted by the Bureau of Transportation Statistics. Cyclists were asked from
a list of several different options what sort of medium/roadway they preferred to ride on. Using
this data, I was able to make extrapolations regarding the preferences of bicyclists, and approach
an explanation as to why cyclists ride on the sidewalk. As it was conducted by a government
agency and has quite a large sample size, I am satisfied with both the quality of the source itself
and my use of it.

Bushell, Max A, et al. “Costs for Pedestrian and Bicyclist Infrastructure

Improvements.”Pedbikeinfo.org,
www.pedbikeinfo.org/cms/downloads/Countermeasure%20Costs_Report_Nov2013.pdf.
A comprehensive analysis on many different forms of bicycle-related improvements and
constructions and their prices. I used this source to help inform me as to just how much it would
cost the university to build bike routes. The sample size for this source is highly variable from
data point to data point, so it’s difficult to say how representative it is. Still, it’s one of the better
sources out there on just how much these things cost.

Freedman, Samuel G. “A Bicycle Crash Kills Another Pedestrian in Central Park.” The New
Yorker, The New Yorker, 20 June 2017, www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/bicycle-
crash-kills-another-pedestrian-central-park.
This source records the death of a pedestrian jogger in the Central Park area thanks to a collision
with a cyclist. I only used it to provide an anecdotal instance of someone being killed by a
cyclist. As an anecdotal source, it is obviously not a particularly strong one.

Graw, M, and H.g Konig. “Fatal Pedestrian Bicycle Collisions.” Forensic Science International,
vol. 126, no. 3, 2002, pp. 241–247., doi:10.1016/s0379-0738(02)00085-3.
My main empirical source regarding pedestrian-bicycle deaths, based on observations from
Germany over a three year period. This is perhaps the weakest source in the paper. It’s not a
large sample size, and it took place in a country completely different from ours. I intentionally
chose not to put too much stock in this in the essay, leaving the troubles surrounding deaths
intentionally vague.

“Penn State Named Silver Bicycle Friendly University.” Penn State University, Penn State
News, 29 Nov. 2016, news.psu.edu/story/439418/2016/11/29/campus-life/penn-state-
named-silver-bicycle-friendly-university.
A brief blurb regarding the University’s bicycle-friendliness from the University’s official news
source. I used this source to demonstrate that the school is generally a bicycle friendly
environment.

Schmitt, Angie. “Study: Protected Bike Lanes Reduce Injury Risk Up to 90 Percent.” Streetsblog
USA, 22 Oct. 2012, usa.streetsblog.org/2012/10/22/study-protected-bike-lanes-reduce-
injury-risk-up-to-90-percent/.
A write-up on a bicycle interest blog that describes a study that shows that bike lanes can reduce
injury risk by up to 90 percent. A very good study, as it shows the efficacy of bike lanes for my
purposes.

Tuckel, Peter, et al. “Pedestrian Injuries Due to Collisions with Bicycles in New York and
California.” Journal of Safety Research, vol. 51, 2014, pp. 7–13.,
doi:10.1016/j.jsr.2014.07.003.
A small study on the number of pedestrians injured in New york and California by cyclists.
These numbers were useful in establishing the existence of a problem with cyclists striking
pedestrians, albeit in states with a totally different demographic makeup to Pennsylvania, and
certainly to University Park alone.

Wendelken, Harrison. “Journal 7: Fieldwork Report”. Mar. 18 2018

My own personal observations regarding the number of cyclists that rode on the sidewalk.
Though it does make it seem like there is a real problem with this on University Park campuses,
it’s important to take with a grain of salt: it was conducted in an unscientific manner with a small
sample size, no control, and no degree of precision.

Wendelken, Harrison. “Correspondence”. Mar. 26 2018

Correspondence between myself and University Police. Helped to establish the current
University policy and the extent of the problem.