Chris516

Across the board(applies to any state or country), I totally agree.

MMACH 5

I can't figure out why you think BikeDFW is a VC group. Nearly all of our board members are LAB LCIs. We capitalize on our training to help everyday folks navigate the city on a bicycle. In the few places that there are bike lanes, we promote and use them.

As I mentioned before, Dallas and Fort Worth are changing for the better, in regard to bicycle infrastructure. It will take time for the cities to evolve further. It would be a shame for so many folks, who could be riding to just be sitting around, waiting for more bike lanes.

CrankyOne

It's more what's not there than what is. A quick glance through the site gave me no indication that they support any kind of protected infrastructure. Just now, digging in a bit more I did find some stuff about protected infrastructure though I'm not sure what level of support it has. Is this something that the organization is fighting for and really wants to see happen or a tepid response to calls for protected infrastructure so we better add something. My overwhelming sense is the latter.

The about page talks about rides, vulnerable user legislation, and education. Nothing about protected facilities. The vision says 'bicycling for all' but is this bicycling for all by teaching them how to drive their bicycles like cars or bicycling for all by building infrastructure that they will feel and be safe riding on? I'd guess the former not the latter.

Photos throughout the site are overwhelming of people wearing lycra (and helmets), mostly MAMILs (though at least a fair number of women included) not of normal everyday people wearing normal everyday clothes riding normal bikes on protected infrastructure. If I'm an average person visiting the site I get the message that if I want to ride a bike or be a part of this group then I need to wear lycra.

Agree.

CrankyOne

Let's start with the dichotomy in your first two sentences. LCI's teach vehicular cycling. For the most part that is not so bad except where they tell children to never ride on sidewalks.

Your advocacy page is 100% vehicular. Nothing that I can see about any advocacy for protected or even unprotected infrastructure.

What are you (BikeDFW) doing to get protected infrastructure built in DFW? Zero from what I can tell.

In the past 2 years there was only one blog post about any kind of infrastructure and that was last June about a bike lane having been built. And this wasn't a celebration of your accomplishment but surprise that there was suddenly a bike lane.

Agree. What will get them riding? 40 years of teaching people to ride in vehicle traffic hasn't accomplished much. 4 years of advocating for and building a very few facilities in New York, Chicago, Minneapolis, and Indianapolis has resulted in significant increases in riding. Where will DFW be in 4 years?

daihard 

How about this page? They seem to have classes for "all age and skill levels." The first one, Pronto Street Skills, is particularly interesting to me. Cascade is working with Pronto, our local bike-share organization, to provide this introductory class.

As for their promotion of protected bike infrastructure, we have gotten four major protected bike lanes in Seattle in the last few years - Linden Ave North, Dexter Ave N, 2nd Ave and Broadway. Cascade has been one of the driving forces behind the accomplishment. I wonder why they don't advertise it more on their website.

MMACH 5

I think you'll find that LAB LCIs are not hardcore VC by any means. From what I understand, Cycle Savvy instructors tend to lean more that way.

I can tell you that in the classes I've taught with other LCIs, we don't tell children or adults to never ride on sidewalks. We've been asked whether cyclists can ride on sidewalks and our answer is always, "It depends..."
This explanation is is followed by instructions that any sidewalk riding (and MUP riding) requires slower speeds and has different challenges than riding on the street.

Again, this is a young group and so far, it has focused on its strengths of having LCIs available to teach. I did mention that our members are also involved in numerous planning committees.

We aren't the only cycling advocacy group in the area. We're probably the newest. There are more localized groups pushing for changes in their neighborhoods.
I suppose we'll see where we are in 4 years.

I'm a fairly new board member of BikeDFW and I'm speaking strickly from my impression of your concerns. I'm not speaking for the organization.

CrankyOne

Here's an example of an organization who are clearly fighting for better and safer facilities: Cycling Embassy of Great Britain | Making riding a bike as easy as riding a bike.

daihard 

In Seattle, it's not just private organizations that strive to create a safer environment for people who bike. The City of Seattle itself does.

Seattle hires Boston Bikes head to lead Active Transportation Program.

CrankyOne

I think classes are of limited use. Not bad, but they don't really change anything for the better. Kind of like saying we're not going to fix a leaky pipe above your desk but we'll educate you on how to not get so wet. And then we'll educate the next person sitting there and the next after that.

If they've been active in getting good infrastructure built they should say so. More importantly they should say what further infrastructure they're fighting for if they are doing so and what kind of infrastructure. Are they fighting for painted lanes of limited benefit or are they fighting to get good protected infrastructure that will be safe enough for kids to ride their bikes to school on? What do they want Seattle to look like in 5 years and 20 years? What specifically are they doing to accomplish that?

CrankyOne

What are these people doing on these committees? Are they fighting to get well designed protected infrastructure that will serve everyone from 8 to 80 or are they making sure that infrastructure is compatible with vehicular cycling (e.g., a painted bike lane that is more easily exited vs a parking protected cycletrack)?

kickstart

Go to cascade.org , its there under infrastructure projects.

MMACH 5

Based on the link you posted to the Cycling Embassy of Great Britain, we're clearly not doing enough. We never will. I'm just sorry this thread was so successfully trolled and I was such a willing participant.

mconlonx

Bicycle Coalition Maine.

[h=1]York mulls new committee focused on bicycle, pedestrian pathways[/h]

Looigi

I think it's kind of self evident that if people learn about the rules of sharing the road and come to expect bicycles on roads and understand how cyclists are supposed to behave with things like taking the lane in appropriate circumstances (like avoiding door zones, preparing to turn left...) etc., that will be an improvement over them not knowing that. Many motorists are prejudiced against cyclists, and one tool to fight prejudice is education.

CrankyOne

Thanks. Finally found it. Doesn't appear to be much of a priority.

CrankyOne

Rather confused by your troll comment. As to comparison with the Great Britain website, why will you never do enough? Why can you not do what they're doing?

daihard 

It's one thing to infer something from a website. It's another to actually interact with the people behind it. I live in Seattle. I've met and worked with a few people from Cascade in person. I know promoting a safe bicycle environment including protected/safe bike infrastructure is one of their top priorities. They helped elect Mike McGinn as mayor in 2009 who is a huge bike advocate. I already mentioned the four new protected bike paths built in Seattle in the last few years. Cascade has played a significant role in making that happen.

I've given you pretty much all the information I know about Cascade. I'm not affiliated with the organization in any way and have no reason to spend any more time trying to convince you that they are not what you may think they are. I know what they do and as someone who rides a bike for a lot of purposes, I deeply appreciate their hard work for the city I live in.

GP

It sounds to me that you have a very narrow view of bicycle advocacy. In this thread at least, your position is that if the organizations mentioned are not spending all or almost all of their resources supporting your views, they're wrong.

What have you done in your locality?

kickstart

I think its politics in play as Cascade, being one of the biggest cycling organizations in the country, is heavily into candidate endorsement and seems to avoid taking too much credit.

CrankyOne

Very true. It's interesting how different what the website says about them is apparently from reality. If I'm a parent with children who I want to be able to ride to school the website tells me that this is not the organization for me or my kids, reality is apparently quite different.

CrankyOne

Perhaps. Should they say what they stand for though? If my interest is in safe paths and riding to the grocery or my kids riding to school rather than a sweatfest in lycra then they don't appear to be the right organization for me.

CrankyOne

Not wrong, but also not supporting the things that I want for me, my family, and friends like protected cycletracks that I and others are comfortable riding on and having our kids and one day our grandkids ride on.

daihard 

I personally don't see separate bike paths as the only solution for safe cycling. As I stated earlier, protected bike lanes make sense on the highways and arterial roads that carry a large volume of high-speed traffic. For residential streets, effort should be made to design them so that people can safely use them together. Lower the speed limit to 20 km/h and enforce it. Design them so that using an arterial road is much more attractive for vehicle operators. Somewhat like the "greenway" concept - that should be doable. As a kid, I used to ride my bike everywhere in the town I grew up. There was no bike lane. We just rode on the streets.

CrankyOne

Agree. This is also what has worked well for The Netherlands.

mr_bill

Nicole Freedman interview:

-mr. bill