This Just In: googlemaps for bikes!

[Mr. Bloom]

We've got it...let's start using it!


Google Announces Google Biking Directions at the
League of American Bicyclists'
2010 National Bike Summit

Washington, D.C. - March 10, 2010 - The League of American Bicyclists is proud to be the forum for Google to announce what all bike riders have been waiting for - Grab Your Bike and Go with Google Maps. Google is announcing at the Opening Plenary Session at the National Bike Summit that they are adding biking directions in the U.S. to Google Maps."This new tool will open people's eyes to the possibility and practicality of hopping on a bike and riding," said Andy Clarke, President of the League of American Bicyclists. "We know people want to ride more, and we know it's good for people and communities when they do ride more - this makes it possible. It is a game-changer, especially for those short trips that are the most polluting,"

Users can now choose biking when deciding how to get to their destination, starting today, March 10, 2010. If you're one of the 57 million Americans who ride a bike, mapping your daily commute, and planning recreational or trail rides just became easier. According to Google this has been the most requested addition to Google Maps, and the League is delighted that they have chosen the National Bike Summit to unveil this new feature. Google's announcement further proves the importance of the Summit and the bicycle movement in helping our nation become a more Bicycle Friendly America. The Google biking directions will make it that much easier for bicyclists to get to work, school or play.

This new feature includes: step-by-step bicycling directions; bike trails outlined directly on the map; and a new "Bicycling" layer that indicates bike trails, bike lanes, and bike-friendly roads. The directions feature provides step-by-step, bike-specific routing suggestions - similar to the directions provided by our driving, walking, or public transit modes. Simply enter a start point and destination and select "Bicycling" from the drop-down menu. You will receive a route that is optimized for cycling, taking advantage of bike trails, bike lanes, and bike-friendly streets and avoiding hilly terrain whenever possible.

Visit http://maps.google.com/biking to try out this new feature. Biking directions for Google Maps is currently in Beta. Follow the League's news feed on the new Google feature on the League's Blog, Facebook and Twitter. If you have any further questions, contact Meghan Cahill at 202.822.1333 or meghan@bikeleague.org.

[Mr. Bloom]

Note: this seems to be a green overlay of trails...

[tulip]

While indicating trails is nice in areas that have trails, it's not going to cut it for most cyclists because we ride on the roads because there are alot more roads than trails. I will take a look at the google maps for bikes; I hope it's more than a trail overlay.

I suggest they adopt a road classification system based on the Michelin maps. I am familiar with the Michelin maps of France. Autoroutes (interstates) are blue and not open to bikes. National Routes (like highways) are red and are typically too heavily travelled by cars to be very bike friendly. Departmental Routes are yellow and are generally very good for cycling. Roads indicated in white are the smallest (and often the most interesting) roads, and are excellent for cycling, although sometimes a circuitous.

With Michelin maps, I can go to a part if France that i've never been to before and confidently travel by bike for errands or touring.

That's what we need in the US. That's what Google maps should provide. US roads are already classified type, so the baseline us already done.

[OakLeaf]

I just googled the addresses I used to commute to and from in Columbus, OH, 25 years ago. The green overlays in Columbus, at least, the dotted green lines are bike routes designated by the city over roads open to cars, the solid green lines are trails. All of the commute is over roads that are open to all vehicles (then and now); while it didn't return exactly the route I used to take, traffic has changed a lot in 25 years, too. It does go through one pretty sketchy neighborhood that I might not want to ride through alone, or outside commuter hours even with one or two others, but I really wouldn't expect Google Maps to take the neighborhood into account.

W/R/T the road classifications, honestly, if I'm planning a long trip in an unfamiliar area, I prefer paper maps, which all do have that kind of legend. Paper maps let me see the big picture the way no computer screen can. Obviously the final routing I'll do with Street Atlas or the like. Unfortunately, the Michelin routing software isn't sold in the USA, and I don't need it enough to buy it grey-market. I guess if I were planning a bici trip anywhere in Europe, I probably would. I've bought grey-market software before (back when they first came out with the Petit Larousse in CD-ROM and weren't selling it in the USA) - it's expensive, but it's available.

[tulip]

I was referring to the paper Michelin maps. I am not familiar with their software. I prefer paper maps, too, but Google maps makes getting directions from A to B so easy. I'm getting spoiled, I'm afraid.

[OakLeaf]

Also... one thing I often do when mapping an unfamiliar running route on mapmyrun, is to go to the aerial/satellite view. That not only gives me a pretty good idea of the level of traffic/whether a road is a major artery, it tells me what the neighborhood looks like and whether I would enjoy being there, whether there's a shoulder, and if so, how wide it is, and also where the stop lights are when I need to cross a major road.

[Biciclista]

6 cyclists from Seattle designed this thing in 5 months.

Fantastic I've just tried it. It even has a place for us to report routes that are inappropriate for bikes.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ABPub/2010/03/09/2011300020.jpg

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/businesstechnology/2011300605_brier10.html
Google engineers who built the company's new bicycle-route mapping service didn't need to look far for inspiration.

The team is based at the Fremont office right alongside the Burke-Gilman Trail.

Bike commuters at Google offices around the country helped the Seattle-based team build and refine the new feature for Google Maps, which is launching Wednesday. That coincides with the National Bike Summit cycling advocacy event this week in Washington, D.C.

The small team built the feature in just five months, adding a new map layer that provides suggested routes for bicyclists in 150 cities across the U.S. It joins the walking and transit directions already provided by Google.

It also comes as maps move to the forefront of the battle between Google and Microsoft. Mapping underpins new locally targeted advertising efforts that may provide the next wave of growth for the search giants, especially as more computing is done on mobile devices that transmit users' location.
snip....

[tulip]

I checked it out, and I like it. It is not just a trail overlay as I feared. I will try out some of their routes and report back. In fact, I'll start today on a series of short errands I have to run (by bike--it's going to be 73F!)

Thanks, Mr. Silver. And thanks, Google!

* * *
EDIT: I just checked their proposed route from my house to a conference center that I frequent for work, and the route could be better. It has a long stretch on a very busy road that has shopping center after shopping center for miles and miles. I would not ride my bike on that road, but there are alternate routes through adjacent residential areas (not as direct). I think in some cases this will be most useful in conjunction with a paper map or iPhone google map to explore alternates while on the road. But it's a start and I appreciate that.

[Pedal Wench]

Cool! I'm doing a fleche in a few weeks and had just spent time yesterday mapping out our route -- it's in SC and NC, and I'm not at all familiar with the roads. I just loaded up the Google map of it and switched it to route by bicycle, and sure enough - it shifted the route to smaller roads in many places. Nice!

[OakLeaf]

Definitely look at the satellite view, often you can zoom in far enough to tell whether or not the road is paved, a definite issue in Appalachia. In my area, also, there are some inaccuracies in Google maps (roads are shown connecting when they really don't, roads have been realigned but the maps haven't been updated yet, etc.), and satellite/aerial pictures can help with that, too, especially if they're recent.

[tulip]

Be very aware of any bridge crossings. I mapped a familiar route to the Chesapeake Bay, and it suggested a route that goes over a bridge that is definitely not bikeable.

[SadieKate]

Sorry, but I would NEVER trust Google Maps. They have suddenly decided they can't find our house or neighborhood. They suddenly can't label the streets in our neighborhood. When I emailed to ask them about the change, their answer was a very snooty, "We can't discuss that at this time."

When I mapped a cycling route from another city to our house, not only do I get the above problems, it takes you onto unpaved and unmaintained gravel roads.

Those are mistakes I identified in the comfort of my home. I wouldn't want to be identifying these mistakes while on a bike.

It's a waste of time as far as I'm concerned. Too many other methods to get better information.

[OakLeaf]

Too many other methods to get better information.

Having bicycled and motorcycled through a good part of the eastern US, I'm not aware of any better method to determine whether or not a road is paved or even exists. AAA isn't reliable, Navteq (who I believe is where Garmin gets their maps from) isn't reliable. It's definitely worth checking the aerial maps on Yahoo and Bing as well as Google, since each one is updated on a different schedule, and you want the most recent one. You could write the county engineer in every county you plan to travel through and maybe get a timely answer, but that gets cumbersome pretty quickly.

I mean, your neighborhood is still on the images, right? Or have they taken those down, too?

This is no different from the stories that went around a year or two ago about people who drove through barriers because their GPS told them to. You still gotta use your eyes...



ETA: It's true that Google is going through some growing pains right now w/r/t their wanting to avoid paying for intellectual property. I'd guess that's probably what's going on in your neighborhood.

[SadieKate]

Oh, and Google maps frequently gets the names wrong. While the planners for this area obviously have great fun changing street names over 1/2 mile, it doesn't help for Google to rarely get the street labels in the right place so that you'll know the correct name to look for.

[ny biker]

Here is a write-up and quick review from the Washington Post's personal techonology columnist:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fasterforward/2010/03/google_adds_bicycle_directions.html


It's interesting that they prioritize trails over bike lanes and on-street routes and also try to avoid hills.

[SadieKate]

Having bicycled and motorcycled through a good part of the eastern US, I'm not aware of any better method to determine whether or not a road is paved or even exists. AAA isn't reliable, Navteq (who I believe is where Garmin gets their maps from) isn't reliable. It's definitely worth checking the aerial maps on Yahoo and Bing as well as Google, since each one is updated on a different schedule, and you want the most recent one. You could write the county engineer in every county you plan to travel through and maybe get a timely answer, but that gets cumbersome pretty quickly.

I mean, your neighborhood is still on the images, right? Or have they taken those down, too?

This is no different from the stories that went around a year or two ago about people who drove through barriers because their GPS told them to. You still gotta use your eyes...In this part of the world, it is very difficult to tell from Google images whether a street is paved or not. Everything shows as varying widths of gray. Pavement, dirt, gravel, rocks, everything. An old FS road over boulders still looks like a standard old chip seal road in the images. I experienced this on a run just a few weeks ago. Maps, images and reality didn't jive. But I bet a cyclist, runner, equestrian family with the area could have told me. AAA, gazetteers, FS maps, at least state the type of road so you can err on the side of caution.

Yes, our neighborhood is still on the image but so what? If someone else tries to map to our house, they'll end up in a gravel pit over half a mile a way. They also won't get turn by turn directions.

Google also provides incorrect info about connecting roads (our street is not continuously connected) and directions on roads that haven't existed in years. You can also be directed onto private gated property (as in the incorrect mapping to our house).

Why contact each county engineer? There are plenty of internet sites where people ask and receive info about recommended routes from people who use the route. These could then be manually mapped on Google but I sure won't trust Google to create the route from scratch. I will take AAA over Google every time.

BTW, Bing has far more up to date images for our area.

Feel free to do whatever you want, but don't use Google Maps in Central and Southern Oregon unless you want to hear from me "I told you so."

[ny biker]

Definitely look at the satellite view, often you can zoom in far enough to tell whether or not the road is paved, a definite issue in Appalachia. In my area, also, there are some inaccuracies in Google maps (roads are shown connecting when they really don't, roads have been realigned but the maps haven't been updated yet, etc.), and satellite/aerial pictures can help with that, too, especially if they're recent.

Unfortunately I find that Google's satellite view is not always up to date. If you look up the intersection of N Glebe Rd and Fairfax Dr in Arlington, VA, you see a photo that is very old. There's been a lot of development in this area over the last 10 years and none of it shows up in this photo. They overlay the names of businesses that exist today, but they're on empty fields, construction sites and parking lots that no longer exist.

Maybe this is the exception, but having no way of knowing which shots are current and which are out of date, I have to take it all with a big grain of salt.

[jobob]

Well, dump on it all you want (not like you need anyone's permission to do so :rolleyes: :D).

I think this is a great start and a very admirable endeavor on Google's part.

Sure, like any mapping program, it's nowhere remotely near perfect. Ummm, maybe that's why it's a beta release?

What it does that I think is really good is that it shows were off-street bike paths are located. This is something that many mapping programs simply don't do.

Many of my own tried & true bike routes don't show up, especially the ones that involve hills or narrow roads or roads with moderately heavy traffic. This makes sense to me, since the biking directions are more aimed towards novice or occasional cyclists.

There are going to be routing glitches (it's beta, remember) -- hopefully people will have enough sense to not take the directions as a guaranteed sure thing, but to use them as a planning guide. OK, maybe I'm underestimating the gullibility of the average person here. :rolleyes: Maybe Google should overlay the directions with a big "beta" stamp with lots of "use at your own risk" labels. And if you don't like it, ignore it.

Call me a dorky optimist, but I for one am not going to dump on it on day one and throw up my hands and exclaim "why bother?"

[GLC1968]

Feel free to do whatever you want, but don't use Google Maps in Central and Southern Oregon unless you want to hear from me "I told you so."

Don't use it in north western Oregon either. I've given up on it. Seriously, directions that are flat out wrong - turns in the totally opposite direction (and this is on long established roads in urban areas!), incomplete information, directions to drive where roads not only don't exist, but never have... I mean, one time, Google maps had us riding a route that we just didn't believe so we choose our own way. When I went out to drive the same route later, it became immediately obvious that we were right to ignore google maps. It directed us to drive what was essentially up someone's driveway and there was a house directly in the path of what google said should be road (and that was not a new house or one that looked to be in danger of being torn down anytime soon). Nuts.

I've gone back to mapquest for driving directions and they've been spot on the last 3 times I've used them.

One other warning, I don't know if this new site has banner ads, but I lost my computer to a virus from 'mapmyrun' and their banner ads last week. I will no longer even go to mapmyride or mapmyrun. If you have an account, then you can probably avoid it, but it happened immediately to me the time I went, so I will not take the chance ever again even if it's to try and sign up for an account!

Does this new tool use banner ads? Does anyone know?

[jobob]

It's interesting that they prioritize trails over bike lanes and on-street routes and also try to avoid hills.

I think Google is trying to make cycling more accessible to the average person. The people who think a five-mile ride is HUGE. Face it, most of the women (excuse me, posters) on this forum fall waaay outside of the norm.

Sure, it might be of limited us to many of us here, but maybe giving people an easy way to find local bike trails might get more of them off the couch and onto those trails and give cycling a try. And some of them might become more interested in cycling. That doesn't seem too awful to me. :cool:

[SadieKate]

Sure, like any mapping program, it's nowhere remotely near perfect. Ummm, maybe that's why it's a beta release?Jo, I'm not talking about the beta or even the bicycling program. Google just doesn't provide accurate maps, directions or recent images in Oregon, period. Doesn't matter whether you're driving, walking, or biking. I have a hard time believing this is unique to Oregon.

[tulip]

I have found google maps to be quite accurate in Virginia, DC, Maryland, North Carolina, and Tennessee.

Just proceed with caution, a backup map, and a bit of humor, as you would in any unfamiliar area.

[GLC1968]

I have a hard time believing this is unique to Oregon.


It might be. Google was our tool of choice when we lived in NC and we never had an issue - ever. That's why we were so shocked how lousy it was when we moved here...

[NbyNW]

Cool feature! Played with some SF routes since that city came up in the OP's link . . .

No Google bike love up here in Edmonton, tho :(

[ny biker]

I think Google is trying to make cycling more accessible to the average person. The people who think a five-mile ride is HUGE. Face it, most of the women (excuse me, posters) on this forum fall waaay outside of the norm.

Sure, it might be of limited us to many of us here, but maybe giving people an easy way to find local bike trails might get more of them off the couch and onto those trails and give cycling a try. And some of them might become more interested in cycling. That doesn't seem too awful to me. :cool:

That was pretty much the conclusion of the columnist from the Post.

[MartianDestiny]

Well, dump on it all you want (not like you need anyone's permission to do so :rolleyes: :D).

I think this is a great start and a very admirable endeavor on Google's part.

Sure, like any mapping program, it's nowhere remotely near perfect. Ummm, maybe that's why it's a beta release?

What it does that I think is really good is that it shows were off-street bike paths are located. This is something that many mapping programs simply don't do.

Many of my own tried & true bike routes don't show up, especially the ones that involve hills or narrow roads or roads with moderately heavy traffic. This makes sense to me, since the biking directions are more aimed towards novice or occasional cyclists.

There are going to be routing glitches (it's beta, remember) -- hopefully people will have enough sense to not take the directions as a guaranteed sure thing, but to use them as a planning guide. OK, maybe I'm underestimating the gullibility of the average person here. :rolleyes: Maybe Google should overlay the directions with a big "beta" stamp with lots of "use at your own risk" labels. And if you don't like it, ignore it.

Call me a dorky optimist, but I for one am not going to dump on it on day one and throw up my hands and exclaim "why bother?"

+1

To add something about the satellite imagery. A lot of times there isn't much Google can do about this. They don't own the satellites. This means a few things:

1) Targets aren't picked based on what is needed for convenience views in mapping software. Hi-res (enough to do the near street view and see individual cars and houses) mapping of residential/commercial areas in the US is simply NOT high priority. Once they are imaged once (if that) they don't get re-imaged at high res (hence the fact that 10yr old data really is sometimes the best that you can do).

These are military and scientific satellites. Target priority has nothing to do with street view level mapping and that kind of resolution puts a large load on the spacecraft (they are BIG files) which limits "mission critical" data downlink.

2) Google simply may not have access to up-to-date reasonable to hi-res shots even if they exist. These images are typically either OUTRAGEOUSLY expensive or government classified. As a scientist wanting maps for research purposes I can expect to pay $5,000 up to 10's of thousands for up to date hi-res area maps (of not very big areas)!!! Commercial use release of this private data comes at a very hefty fee (if at all). Government lag can be months or more if they are even imaging the area at high-res (see above).

To update the grey outline of a newly built store on a FREE mapping utility, well I can see their reasons for not buying it even if available, and waiting for the cheaper/free stuff to come out.

3) All that "Street View" stuff is shot by Google (or Microsoft, but something tells me they aren't exactly sharing data) with special vehicles with special 360* camera mounts. Think about how much money and time it takes to drive through every single residential street in America. They haven't been at it that long either (a few years).

4) Different private maps could be in different formats/data types/etc. that make them more difficult to work with than it's really worth even if they are available and reasonably priced.

So while company A may be more up-to-date in one area than another they are almost certainly behind in another area. That's just the way it goes for any of a number of reasons.


Yes, Google maps has its bugs, it also has its many conveniences and attributes. Personally, I find the latter far outweighs the former.

[Sylvia]

I hope that Google eventually includes their Trike view with this.
It's like Street View but can show places not accessible by car, like bike paths.

http://www.google.com/intl/en/press/pressrel/20091016_street_view_trike.html

[WindingRoad]

OK some of you girls from the Philly area let me know if I can trust Google on atleast some of their routes. As you know I will be moving there soon and I'm already planning my routes.... :D:D:D I'm mapping routes from Mt. Airy to Elkins Park. I always drive a route before I ride it for the first time but that's a bit of a commute right now ;)

[OakLeaf]

Actually, a lot of the imagery nowadays is aerial, even though they still call it "satellite." Much less expensive at the resolutions they have. (You can see the horses in my neighbor's pasture, 30 miles from nowhere.)

And as I said, they all update on different schedules, so I always use Bing and Yahoo as well as Google when it's important to get it right.

I forgot to mention them in my earlier post, but the gazetteers are also inaccurate as to which roads are paved.

No, you can't always tell from the imagery. But often enough to make it worthwhile to zoom in and compare the color of the road surface with the color of people's driveways and intersecting roads, etc.

[jobob]

I hope that Google eventually includes their Trike view with this.
It's like Street View but can show places not accessible by car, like bike paths.

http://www.google.com/intl/en/press/pressrel/20091016_street_view_trike.html

LeeBob, my DH, rode by the Google Trike one day a few months ago out on the Alameda Creek Trail. So maybe he'll be immortalized on Google Street (Path?) View someday. :cool:

[Tuckervill]

You can see my son on the trampoline in our back yard in our street view. He's a blur, because I'm sure he was jumping.

I recently spent 6 days in Boulder, using only my Google-based Droid phone for directions. The only hiccup was when it led me to the BACK of my hotel which was in a neighborhood, and there were houses between me and the hotel. In G-maps defense, Boulder had some one-ways and frontage roads and no-u-turns that they couldn't have anticipated. But I had my eyes for that!

Karen

[IFjane]

I have found google maps to be quite accurate in Virginia, DC, Maryland, North Carolina, and Tennessee.

Just proceed with caution, a backup map, and a bit of humor, as you would in any unfamiliar area.

What Tulip said! Also, note that, just as with Google maps driving directions, the bike maps also let you drag & drop to change your route. Very helpful if you already have some idea of the area you are in.

My recent experience with Mapquest is that they don't know where I live - yet Google does.

As for the comment about Mapmyrun/ride: did you let them know about the virus? Shouldn't that ad be removed? I am a member so don't have to worry about ads, but still, it could happen somewhere else. ack!

[Mr. Bloom]

I routed a ride to Indianapolis from Bloomington.

It took me straight up Highway 37 (the location of the drafting incident in Breaking Away). Suffice it to say that "that ain't gonna happen"...right Indysteel???

But, I found the trails and bike routes to be accurate and appropriate. Personally, I think it's a great start and I'm glad that they're doing it - even if it's not perfect yet.

Perfection will be achieved when a small group of more knowledgable local riders in each community start contributing to improving it from good to great.

[Tri Girl]

I just googled the route I take downtown, and it had me going on two VERY busy (and totally inappropriate) roads. The way I go isn't even on there and while it might be a couple miles longer, it's on residential streets with little to no traffic.
I think it's a great concept- and perhaps with a little input it will be even better. I mean- they can't know EVERY community in America. That's where we come in to suggest better routings. :D

[andtckrtoo]

I just routed the ride I did from San Jose to Santa Cruz last week and it had me doing pretty much the same route. It took me the back way out of my neighborhood across a busy street where there is no traffic light (but there are bike lanes), but hey, it's pretty accurate. Although, as Google's HQ is here in the Bay Area, the accuracy here is not surprising.

I've never had issues with GoogleMaps here in California either. Although, my tool of choice is my iPhone map because that goes with me on rides - wish they had the same feature. :D I do like the "You are Here" on the iPhone which has saved my butt many a time. :D

[OakLeaf]

Google's model is moving more and more toward wiki, so user contributions are everything. That'll be especially the case with the bicycling routes. Did you see the box to report problems, including "streets that aren't suited for cycling" and "turns that are difficult or restricted"? I'd encourage all of us to contribute! I am.