Originally Posted by mnemia

Having read Commute Orlando for quite a while, I do not believe that that is an accurate characterization of the site. It's true that they are generally of a VC bent, and it's true that they do oppose putting bike lanes everywhere (though I don't think they're 100% opposed to all bike lanes). It's totally false that they are against all types of bike infrastructure. They're very much for things like commuter trails, connector paths, bike racks, multimodal mass transit, and so on. All of those things are bike infrastructure, too, and I've seen Keri and the others on that site post supportive comments about all those things multiple times. Their main focus is on cyclist education rather than putting paint on the road, and while you may disagree with that approach, it doesn't mean that they are "hardcore vehicular".

The only thing they really seem to oppose is mindless application of bike lanes where they aren't appropriate, and I agree with them on that. Way too many bike lanes get put in on streets that don't need them (because they are already low speed/low traffic volume) while the places that could benefit from them (huge, high-speed arterials) don't get them. There are sometimes some comments there that go a little further in the VC direction than I would, but they're generally quite thoughtful and insightful and not nearly as rigid as someone like Forrester.

I don't agree that that is the main reason folks don't commute by bike in the USA. I believe that it is one reason out of many, but it's not really the biggest one. Actually, I think you have the cause and effect reversed: we have bad or nonexistent bike infrastructure *because* not many people ride bikes, rather than the other way around. Our governments don't build good bike infrastructure because there isn't a strong constituency behind bicycling. This is a bit of a chicken and egg thing, but I think the main reason people don't ride bikes in the USA is cultural. Our culture is very car-centered, and so everything else people do revolves around that. People here just don't think of the bike as a practical form of transportation, because the car has filled that role throughout their lives. Instead, they think of bikes as children's toys or sports equipment, and don't even consider the idea of trying to commute by bike or the idea of trying utility cycling. So I think that the real reason people don't ride bikes outside of parks and so forth is because they are so attached to their cars. This attachment to cars feeds into a mentality that makes them fearful about riding a bike on the road, even when that extreme fear isn't really warranted. It isn't so scary to ride on a slow speed limit, low traffic road with no bike lanes, but most people who don't ride bikes don't know that because they don't even try it.

Protected infrastructure can be nice in some cases, but it's not necessary for people to ride their bikes safely and comfortably. And outside of a few places, it's not really a practical possibility for it to become widespread in the US, either. Making space for that kind of infrastructure usually involves additional right-of-way or taking space away from cars or parking, and local governments are often loathe to even consider doing any of those things until there is a critical mass behind bicycling in the area. So again, I think the real impediment is the car-centric culture of the United States, more than anything else. If cars end up becoming very expensive to operate due to gas prices or whatever, I think then we'll see real movement in the numbers of people biking. Until then, the nice bike lanes will remain very lightly used like the ones near me.