The city of Bodø in the County of Nordland in northern Norway wants to become a bicycle city. NPRA and the municipal of Bodø have suggested to build in a foot and bicycle path between the College of Higher Education and the city centre to make cycling easier and more attractive.
Bodø is situated with the rough open sea right outside. With the slogan “Bodø in the wind” the city has created its image as a place of heavy weather. Nevertheless the citizens of Bodø often must stand heavy wind.
– Perhaps this is the reason for the low interest in using bicycle in the area, says Deputy Mayor Kirsten Hasvoll, who is happy for a possibility to neutralize windy weather.
Some years ago a glass roof was constructed over a part of the main street and the experience with the project was so positive, now the inhabitants of Bodø gladly look forward to the tube being built. The idea, which was introduced by the City Plan Director, Jørn Roar Moe, is to construct a framed structure covered with transparent plastic plates. The bicycle tube will have a number of roofed openings for
access and ventilation. There will also be internal illumination. The tube will hold physical separated roads for cyclists and pedestrians.
– The tube can be placed on the existing foot and bicycle path, but the best solution would be to construct it parallel to the existing foot and bicycle path, says Torbjørn Naimak, Regional Director, NPRA. The bicycle tube has to be ended before crossings or, if possible, be lead over or under the roadway. The project is at the starting line, but
has already passed its first milestone after consideration and decision in Bodø Town Council, which allocated EUR 12,500 to a preliminary study. But the road towards realization is long. However, before anybody can rejoice at indoor cycling in Bodø, the idea must be furtherdeveloped on the paper. If the conclusion is positive a pilot model for
testing can be ready in 2008. The bicycle tube will cost approximately EUR 1,875 per metre. Consequently the 8 km long distance between the College of Higher Education and the city centre will cost about EUR 15 million.
– This is a manageable sum of money, and we think the idea is fully realizable, says Naimak.
Giselle Jensen and Thorbjørn Chr. Risan, NPRA, Norway
Jeeze, Norway is building covered bikeways and we can't even get simple decent bike paths here in the US.
But then our "cycling advocates" think like this: "It may even be that motoring is more healthful than not motoring; death rates were certainly higher in the pre-motoring age." Originally Posted by John Forester. (http://www.bikeforums.net/showpost.php?p=5705982&postcount=158)
justin70
Those tubes would give the bums a good place to sleep.
gcottay
Those tubes would give the bums a good place to sleep.
And might even keep me riding through an Illinois winter. Especially if nice radiant heat and a few food stops were added to the project. A gently flowing stream would be nice too. Perhaps the bums could help with that last.
randya
Those tubes would give the bums a good place to sleep.
you're thinking inside the tube, dude.
Seriously, sleeping bums seem to be the greatest of american fears, especially when it comes to new bicycle infrastructure. Fear of sleeping bums is the standard argument used against providing covered bike parking in Portland, as well. What I want to know is why the Holland tunnel and parking garages for cars aren't viewed as magnets for sleeping bums.
:rolleyes:
Maybe if we as a nation addressed the issue of homelessness in a forthright manner instead of ignoring it, fear of sleeping bums wouldn't be an issue anymore.
syn0n
This is awesome. Isolation from wind and traffic, that'd make for some pleasant cycling.
littlewaywelt
This is awesome. Isolation from wind and traffic, that'd make for some pleasant cycling.
...and if they built one in each direction they could be setup with a nice strong tailwind.
Allister
Maybe if we as a nation addressed the issue of homelessness in a forthright manner instead of ignoring it, fear of sleeping bums wouldn't be an issue anymore.
There's nothing to fear from sleeping bums. It's the awake ones you need to watch out for. ;)
bmclaughlin807
There's nothing to fear from sleeping bums. It's the awake ones you need to watch out for. ;)
Not necessarily true... the sleeping ones become a problem if you're not using a bright light, and they're sleeping on the trail....
I saw one passed out on the sidewalk one time... broken bottle on the ground right next to him... when I came by again, an ambulance and several police cars were there... :(
Lecterman
Those tubes would give the bums a good place to sleep.
Or a place for Alex and his Droogs to beat up the bums.
Seriously though. A neat idea. I'd love to see it up here in New England.
knirkekne
Sleeping bums is not a common problem in Bodø, or the rest of Norway in general :-)
I got my MBA in Bodø, and think the tube is an exelent idea. Mostly because of the wind and rain. Considering that bodø is way north of the polar circle, the weather ìs not always "outdoorfriendly"
http://www.bildelagring.no/images/N4u06991.jpg
Tom Stormcrowe
Or a place for Alex and his Droogs to beat up the bums.
Seriously though. A neat idea. I'd love to see it up here in New England.
Heck, I'd like to see it in Indiana!
justin70
But why a tube, why not a covered path? It seems unsafe to have long stretches without access. And wouldn't a covering be cheaper than a tube? Come on Norway, wake up, you're almost as dumb as the Swedish.
noisebeam
But why a tube, why not a covered path? It seems unsafe to have long stretches without access. And wouldn't a covering be cheaper than a tube? Come on Norway, wake up, you're almost as dumb as the Swedish.
I think the concern is wind. Per the report a covered path was done, now the issue is wind.
Considering it's far northern location, Bodø does not seem to have severe temperature extremes, but wind perhaps is strong. That area is pretty open and exposed to ociean winds.
I do wonder about having long stretches of covered path being good, but there will be places where there is or can not be a long path. The cyclist will still need to dress appropriately for those areas and 'undress' or overheat while using the tube.
I also wonder if a clear tube is artist conception. Seems more costly that wind brakes/walls on a covered path.
Al
Brian Ratliff
@justin70
Look at the map again (post #11) and you'll see that the weather is not as kind and mild as it is in Corvallis.
noisebeam
Here is a picture I took from a train in Norway while crossing the Arctic Circle in June. I was traveling from Trondheim to Narvik. This is of course is inland and higher elevation than the coast.
http://www.optionnz.com/users/afs/images/12419%20Arctic%20Circle%20Norway.jpg
tomg
widen the existing roads for bicycle inclusion.
educate the drivers, and bicyclists on how to share the road. reflect awareness in annual compitancy test for license-dmv generated for every other year (check point for vision and awareness).
tubeway bicycling sounds good at first, but clearly not practicle, yet!
noisebeam
I really enjoyed traveling around Norway (for my honeymoon in 2003). I liked hiking in Rondane, but we were there a bit early before many of the huts opened for the summer, but with keys could still access some.
A Rondane panorama and picture:
http://www.optionnz.com/users/afs/images/14171%20Rondane.jpg
http://www.optionnz.com/users/afs/images/14252.jpg
A year later and I could have met Pete!
Al
Chris L
widen the existing roads for bicycle inclusion.
educate the drivers, and bicyclists on how to share the road. reflect awareness in annual compitancy test for license-dmv generated for every other year (check point for vision and awareness).
tubeway bicycling sounds good at first, but clearly not practicle, yet!
And what happens to all the people who live in suburbs not accessed by the tube?
buzzman
Those tubes would give the bums a good place to sleep.
brilliant! let's get rid of all highway overpasses immediately.:rolleyes:
bmclaughlin807
And what happens to all the people who live in suburbs not accessed by the tube?
They ride to the tube as fast as they can?
tomg
And what happens to all the people who live in suburbs not accessed by the tube?
i guess they would be "tubeless" :-) !
again, in all seriousness, this concept of tube bicycling needs to be "sewn-up' to practicality. the areas pictured above this post would be illexperienced if in a tube. part of the tour-commute-sportride-errond would be cut short in a tube, for me.
bmclaughlin807
i guess they would be "tubeless" :-) !
again, in all seriousness, this concept of tube bicycling needs to be "sewn-up' to practicality. the areas pictured above this post would be illexperienced if in a tube. part of the tour-commute-sportride-errond would be cut short in a tube, for me.
The areas pictured above wouldn't be serviced by the tube. It's for getting around the town.
The locals seem to be for it... I like how people from all over the world are willing to shoot it down for whatever their personal reasons are... weather, not able to access ALL of the town, whatever.
As it is, it seems that a sizable amount of the time the weather conditions in the named town are such that 90% (or likely a lot more!) of the participants on Bike Forums wouldn't consider riding a bike.
Chris L
They ride to the tube as fast as they can?
Well, maybe if they don't mind riding the 5-10km out of their way to go to one of the access points while trying to get from point A to point B in time to meet a deadline.
Oops, sorry, forgot. These facilities aren't meant from transportational cyclists. How naive of me!
The locals seem to be for it... I like how people from all over the world are willing to shoot it down for whatever their personal reasons are... weather, not able to access ALL of the town, whatever.
Are they? So you're drawing conclusions about the opinions of a city of "locals" from a couple of quotes in an on-line article? My experience of cycling "advocates" is that they tend to ignore objections from locals (especially from local cyclists) in order to draw such conclusions, and it wouldn't surprise me if the same was happening here.
Sure, a few people might benefit from it, but the money that will be spent on this project could be better utilised on others that would benefit a far greater number of cyclists.
bmclaughlin807
Well, maybe if they don't mind riding the 5-10km out of their way to go to one of the access points while trying to get from point A to point B in time to meet a deadline.
Oops, sorry, forgot. These facilities aren't meant from transportational cyclists. How naive of me!
Are they? So you're drawing conclusions about the opinions of a city of "locals" from a couple of quotes in an on-line article? My experience of cycling "advocates" is that they tend to ignore objections from locals (especially from local cyclists) in order to draw such conclusions, and it wouldn't surprise me if the same was happening here.
Sure, a few people might benefit from it, but the money that will be spent on this project could be better utilised on others that would benefit a far greater number of cyclists.
Yeah, well... if you go by your posts, nothing was EVER meant for transportational cyclists in the history of the world. You seem to have a very bitter and pessimistic view of any cycling project that you ever comment on.
noisebeam
The areas pictured above wouldn't be serviced by the tube. It's for getting around the town.
The pictures were just for fun. Kind of like if someone posted a link about a new MUP with wind barriers in Chicago and some Norwegian posted pictures of the the Grand Tetons.
Here is an aerial view of Bodø :
http://www.inovus.no/images/stories/bodo_fra_lufta.jpg
Al
Chris L
Yeah, well... if you go by your posts, nothing was EVER meant for transportational cyclists in the history of the world. You seem to have a very bitter and pessimistic view of any cycling project that you ever comment on.
You spend 18 hours a day on this site, and that's the best retort you can come up with? :lol:
FYI, my city already has the best facilities in the world for transportational cyclists. They're so good, they've even been duplicated in every other city in the world, too. They're called "roads". If "advocates" were really concerned about doing anything for any cyclists other than themselves, that's where they'd be pushing to have the money spent.
jaxgtr
I was in Bodø when I was in the service and all I can say is Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr. They have some nasty weather and I think this is pretty cool idea, but have a hard time seeing it being functional.
ParkingMeter
Wow, can you say pie-in-the-sky?:D I wonder how much that will cost. Furthermore, I wonder how much money worth of covered bike parking areas, changing facilities at places of employment and general road improvements this will cost. Haha, I can see it now, a proposed plan to place glass canopies over all of Eugene's MUTs. Maybe, FINALLY, that will get everyone in this town to commit to bicycle commuting (IT HAS TO!!!). Forget that, let's just build a giant glass dome over all of our cities so that the weather is always a comfy 70 degrees. Make-believe is fun :lol:.
ParkingMeter
Are they? So you're drawing conclusions about the opinions of a city of "locals" from a couple of quotes in an on-line article? My experience of cycling "advocates" is that they tend to ignore objections from locals (especially from local cyclists) in order to draw such conclusions, and it wouldn't surprise me if the same was happening here.
Sure, a few people might benefit from it, but the money that will be spent on this project could be better utilised on others that would benefit a far greater number of cyclists.
Heh, yeah these "surveys" always seem to question the "potential" cyclists that might sorta kinda maybe cycle a couple times a month if a multi-million dollar covered MUT with rest stops and McDonald's cycle-throughs were provided along with a tax break, government-provided bicycle and free taxi service for those bad weather days. :rolleyes: This seems to be the case in Portland, where plenty of wacky bike lane designs are being put in place to cater to peoples' "comfort" (engineering be damned) and the "potentials", while they never seem to inquire with the most dedicated cyclists to see what they need or how they're doing it. Regular, well-paved wide roads and civilized motorists are all I need and want for most of my trips.
GreenGrasshoppr
I'm sure that if we had a bike tube around here, some parts might get bums.
There's a pedestrian overpass downtown that's quite popular as a begging/sleeping spot with the summer-street-kids. And the pedestrian underpass remnant of a bridge was demolished a few years ago because it had become a bum camp (but it also happened to be pretty close to a bum shelter)
Elsewhere around the city where the MUP goes under bridges, I've never seen any bums.
ParkingMeter
Oh, I just read the whole article, 15,000,000 Euros to build an 8 km path. WOW!:eek:
genec
Oh, I just read the whole article, 15,000,000 Euros to build an 8 km path. WOW!:eek:
Any idea what a 6 lane hiway costs?
joejack951
Any idea what a 6 lane hiway costs?
What's the throughput on a 6 lane highway? A glass tube?
randya
Oh, I just read the whole article, 15,000,000 Euros to build an 8 km path. WOW!:eek:
The fact that they are willing to build it despite the high cost of this project just shows that some societies have a completely different set of values than the US does when it comes to funding cycling infrastructure.
OTOH, the US doesn't even sneeze when it comes to the cost of building a single new interchange on the interstate system, which often costs significantly more that this entire project.
Chris L
Any idea what a 6 lane hiway costs?
Now compare the prices after working out the number of people who will use the six-lane highway compared to the number who will use the tube. I think it's fairly safe to say that the highway turns out to be a better investment on a dollars per person basis.
Chris L
The fact that they are willing to build it despite the high cost of this project just shows that some societies have a completely different set of values than the US does when it comes to funding cycling infrastructure.
That isn't the point. The point is that you have one project which is only going to benefit a very small percentage of the total number of cyclists in the city, for 15 million Euros. Now give this some thought and ask yourself if that money couldn't be better expended in areas that would benefit a far greater number of cyclists, such as paving the shoulders of some of the city's arterials (if they aren't already), or perhaps hiring a police force that might actually investigate cyclists' complaints with motorists and actually prosecute where appropriate.
LittleBigMan
What I want to know is why the Holland tunnel and parking garages for cars aren't viewed as magnets for sleeping bums.
I've seen individuals sleeping in the daytime on MUP's in Atlanta.
I've also seen entire encampments of troops of homeless people huddled in sleeping bags inside overpasses at night, especially well-lit ones.
;)
LittleBigMan
How can you pontificate...?
I love the way you Poofed up Chris L's red-letter post with pink letters.
It's my favorite color, too.
:lol:
randya
...ask yourself if that money couldn't be better expended in areas that would benefit a far greater number of cyclists, such as paving the shoulders of some of the city's arterials (if they aren't already), or perhaps hiring a police force that might actually investigate cyclists' complaints with motorists and actually prosecute where appropriate.
it seems like you are describing your problems as a cyclist and transferring them to Bodø. I believe Pete's right, the main problem cyclists in Bodø face is the weather, and despite all the naysaying here, they've come up with an ideal solution for their problems. Same goes for everyone who seems to think sleeping bums are a problem in Bodø.
LittleBigMan
BTW, you're wrong. It's not pink, it's magenta.
Of course, it's "magenta."
Sorry, I'm not as good with colors as you are.
Chris L
Which part of the local weather situation in Bodø are you having trouble understanding? Pavng shoulders doesn't do anything to insulate cyclists and peds from the very cold, very windy weather that they have to deal with during much of the year.
Nor will building a tube do anything to insulate the majority of the cyclists or peds in the city who don't live in a place where they can actually access it conveniently.
Seems you don't know what you're talking about anymore than I do.
LittleBigMan
Please don't paint me with your assumption brush.
You're right, this is pink.
:cry:
Here's a hanky, BigFella.
:)
LittleBigMan
No crying, and no hanky needed.
Good for you, keep that chin up!
:beer:
ParkingMeter
Any idea what a 6 lane hiway costs?
I think 15x10^6 Euros was just for the canopy (looks like the path is already there). So its that, plus the cost of the path, plus maintenance, whatever that may be. Who knows, maybe cyclists in Norway will use it to the extent that the economics involved with said cyclists using it justify the astronomical cost. I personally doubt it will be used for much more than recreation, but that's just me.
I was being more cynical and musing at the possibility that this could be the next bandwagon bicycle planners jump onto with the justification that it will attract that unsatisfied cycling demand that we just can't figure out how to tap into. It might not be long before this is proposed at the next bicycle coalition meeting here, cycling under a glass canopy where ever I need to go, that's the bicycle transportation network of the future! We already built a redundant bike/pedestrian bridge right next the Ferry St. bridge that crosses the Willamette (at a few million), somehow something like this doesn't seem too implausible for Eugene.
Chris L
How do you know that? That's pure speculation on your part, colored by your admitted facilities phobia.
"Facilities phobia"? :lol: Good one!
You're pwning yourself now. I've never even mentioned anything of the sort, but simply pointed out the limitations in such facilities. But hey, if using cliches like that makes you feel good, don't let me stop you.
Please don't paint me with your assumption brush.
I understand the harsh climate in that city. I understand that the local planners are looking out for the local cyclists, as opposed to someone like you who is on the other side of the globe spouting knee jerk reactions simply because you have a facilities phobia.
:roflmao: Pot, kettle etc.
It's nothing to do with knee jerk reactions. Go and read the posts this time around and you'll understand that. Yep, they're looking out for "local" cyclists alright. Too bad that "local" doesn't include anyone doesn't live on that side of the city, or indeed anyone who doesn't live within a few hundred yards of either end of the tube.
ParkingMeter
If read the posts and your wild claims about it not helping local cyclists or anyone within a few hundred yards of either end are really dumb.
First, regarding the "either end" dumbness:
"The bicycle tube will have a number of roofed openings for
access and ventilation."
So yes, the tube can be accessed along its length, not just at either end. Go and read the original post if you're still confused.
Second, why don't you take a look at the layout of the city center and the university that they are trying to connect with the tube.
http://paradigmhosting.net/images/bodo.jpg
Good luck!
That's interesting, that layout looks kind of similar to some of the MUTs in Eugene. They more or less radiate north, west and to a lesser extent east to Springfield providing access from some of the suburbs to downtown. They see very little use, except for in the summer, when they are filled with throngs of pedestrians, dogs, children and mostly recreational cyclists.
The essential problem with them is that they act like a mass-transit line, only slower, with a few outlets to some main arterials. I think this is one of the reasons they don't see a whole lot of commuter/transportation use (and one reason arterials are more desirable for me, access to everything, smoother surfaces, faster speed, less time, etc.). The rough surface (mostly on the West/East bank paths and the ones going to Springfield) and slow speed during the summer when they're clogged with pedestrians can almost double my trip time, and they're a huge detour for trips in between downtown and where I live north of downtown.
I would prefer to use River Road that parallels the MUT into town, but it unfortunately was a "prime" candidate for bike lane striping (oh yay), and the bike lanes are mostly unusable because they're filled with leaves and trash most of the fall and winter (trash lanes as I call them), even between sweepings. That's really the only reason that road sucks so much; the bike lane is unusable and I have to use the right hand travel lane most of the way, which pisses off speeding motorists. The bike lanes essentially narrowed the road and increased conflicts for me, but oh well, bike advocacy at work.
The point I'm trying to get to is if this tunnel parallels a main arterial, it may become undesirable for people like me that desire reasonably quick trip time and accessibility. If the tube has peculiar maintenance issues of its own and there's difficulty maintaining it and if pedestrian traffic uses it, it will be much slower compared to a well-maintained street. As less people use it, maintenance will be given less priority (a very apparent consequence of the MUTs here, they see little use in the winter, so why be so prudent to maintain them?). If there is a simultaneous neglect to accommodating bicycle traffic on a parallel-traveling main arterial (throwing more lanes in, increased vehicle speed, low motorist tolerance for cyclists, etc.) because cyclists are expected to use the tube, then you might end up with few cyclists, because there are few desirable options.
If there happens to be a whole lot of people on one end of the tube that regularly need to get to the other end (commuting to work), then maybe it would be useful (essentially a bicycle subway). There may also be something peculiar to Norway that is unlike conditions here (well, weather of course), but the layout is strikingly similar to Eugene's bikeways, which have been a failure as far as I can tell. As part of a larger bicycle transportation network, this could be a nice addition. But proposing it as the backbone of a bicycle transportation network is questionable. That is what was intended for Eugene's MUTs, but no significant commuter traffic has come of it, at least from I can tell (and for obvious reason in my experience).
But again, different part of the map, the fully-enclosed nature of tube may make it low-maintenance and maybe pedestrian traffic would be barred from using it. It would be interesting to see how many cyclists it actually attracts.
genec
The point I'm trying to get to is if this tunnel parallels a main arterial, it may become undesirable for people like me that desire reasonably quick trip time and accessibility. If the tube has peculiar maintenance issues of its own and there's difficulty maintaining it and if pedestrian traffic uses it, it will be much slower compared to a well-maintained street. As less people use it, maintenance will be given less priority (a very apparent consequence of the MUTs here, they see little use in the winter, so why be so prudent to maintain them?). If there is a simultaneous neglect to accommodating bicycle traffic on a parallel-traveling main arterial (throwing more lanes in, increased vehicle speed, low motorist tolerance for cyclists, etc.) because cyclists are expected to use the tube, then you might end up with few cyclists, because there are few desirable options.
Interesting set of reasons NOT to build this thing... the only problem is your reasons are American, not European... the very list of things you post tend to NOT happen where people really care and use bicycles as transportation, and transportation agencies design and maintain paths.
The junk you mention happens to paths in America as the bicycle is viewed as a toy, and paths tend to fall under the jurisdiction of parks departments.
Bicycles as transportation are not taken seriously in the US... Cycling IS part of the transportation picture in some European cities and countries. So put your American objections away, and try looking at this from their perspective. And imagine how life would be here if this sort of thinking was the result of your local transit agency trying to make life better for cyclists, rather than just shunting us to the side of the road.
SSP
But why a tube, why not a covered path? It seems unsafe to have long stretches without access. And wouldn't a covering be cheaper than a tube? Come on Norway, wake up, you're almost as dumb as the Swedish.
Posted from a state that sees it own citizens as too dumb to pump their own gasoline. :rolleyes:
randya
That's interesting, that layout looks kind of similar to some of the MUTs in Eugene. They more or less radiate north, west and to a lesser extent east to Springfield providing access from some of the suburbs to downtown. They see very little use, except for in the summer, when they are filled with throngs of pedestrians, dogs, children and mostly recreational cyclists.
The essential problem with them is that they act like a mass-transit line, only slower, with a few outlets to some main arterials. I think this is one of the reasons they don't see a whole lot of commuter/transportation use (and one reason arterials are more desirable for me, access to everything, smoother surfaces, faster speed, less time, etc.). The rough surface (mostly on the West/East bank paths and the ones going to Springfield) and slow speed during the summer when they're clogged with pedestrians can almost double my trip time, and they're a huge detour for trips in between downtown and where I live north of downtown.
I would prefer to use River Road that parallels the MUT into town, but it unfortunately was a "prime" candidate for bike lane striping (oh yay), and the bike lanes are mostly unusable because they're filled with leaves and trash most of the fall and winter (trash lanes as I call them), even between sweepings. That's really the only reason that road sucks so much; the bike lane is unusable and I have to use the right hand travel lane most of the way, which pisses off speeding motorists. The bike lanes essentially narrowed the road and increased conflicts for me, but oh well, bike advocacy at work.
The point I'm trying to get to is if this tunnel parallels a main arterial, it may become undesirable for people like me that desire reasonably quick trip time and accessibility. If the tube has peculiar maintenance issues of its own and there's difficulty maintaining it and if pedestrian traffic uses it, it will be much slower compared to a well-maintained street. As less people use it, maintenance will be given less priority (a very apparent consequence of the MUTs here, they see little use in the winter, so why be so prudent to maintain them?). If there is a simultaneous neglect to accommodating bicycle traffic on a parallel-traveling main arterial (throwing more lanes in, increased vehicle speed, low motorist tolerance for cyclists, etc.) because cyclists are expected to use the tube, then you might end up with few cyclists, because there are few desirable options.
If there happens to be a whole lot of people on one end of the tube that regularly need to get to the other end (commuting to work), then maybe it would be useful (essentially a bicycle subway). There may also be something peculiar to Norway that is unlike conditions here (well, weather of course), but the layout is strikingly similar to Eugene's bikeways, which have been a failure as far as I can tell. As part of a larger bicycle transportation network, this could be a nice addition. But proposing it as the backbone of a bicycle transportation network is questionable. That is what was intended for Eugene's MUTs, but no significant commuter traffic has come of it, at least from I can tell (and for obvious reason in my experience).
But again, different part of the map, the fully-enclosed nature of tube may make it low-maintenance and maybe pedestrian traffic would be barred from using it. It would be interesting to see how many cyclists it actually attracts.
D-
Once again you're substituting criticism of the bike facilities in your city for an entirely different type of facility in a different city with a completely different set of circumstances.