Originally Posted by
Bekologist
Oh, its much more than that, Robert. If cities have road networks that encourage close passing and there is not much room for bike traffic, there is a social barrier to greater bicycling participation.
If a city develops or leaves in place a road network where close passes are the norm, less people will bicycle.
The formula repeated in city after city is clear : plan for bike traffic in the transportation mix, and more people bicycle. Minimizing the potential for close passes removes a primary disincentive to travelling by bike.
New York City's transition from the 1980's to today is a prime example of this dynamic.
leave roads so messenger types and messenger wannabes and gung ho young men are the only ones that feel okay traffic jamming amidst close passes, see rider share stunted in communities.
Cycling tends to be easier on wider roads. I'm not exactly blown away by this concept.
Keep in mind though if passing distance is your windmill that the addition of a bike lane stripe to 35-mph-plus roads (I know you like the idea of bike lanes on high speed roads) seems to decrease passing distance.
And I doubt it is wise to install infrastructure that is designed to attract fearful beginners first, and provide improved utility for all cyclists second. So the trick is to attract beginners while not throwing them and all the current cyclists under the proverbial bus. I think it can be done. But some of the more "attractive" designs are outright dangerous in my opinion and rather silly. Now let's see what Forester has to say...