Originally Posted by
spare_wheel
I strongly believe that cyclists should have, as much as possible, equal access to our roads. The idea of removing bike lanes to funnel traffic into a limited set of cycle tracks is, IMO, a huge step backward. And the implicit assumption that bike lanes are inferior infrastructure is simply unfounded. Safety data and mode share data from europe shows that this is hardly a settled matter.
The current iteration of the Foster proposal dropped the cycle track. Votes at community meetings heavily favor the buffered bike lane option. Given that this will involve complete removal of parking, which is something that PBOT is very loathe to do, I expect Foster is about to get caught up in a Williams-esque drama.
Depending upon the type of rider it is that it's hoped will start biking and make biking a regular practice, depending on a given road/traffic situation, bike lanes most certainly may be considered by such persons, and also...advocates, cities and many people besides those that ride...as inferior to cycle-tracks located separate from the main roadway. Many people apparently need that physically separated distance away from passing cars that cycle tracks provide, for them to feel that a bike can be a viable choice of transportation for them.
Because it seems they may take a lot of land and money to build, the cycle-track design doesn't seem likely to replace bike lanes on all thoroughfares around the U.S., or even in Portland. Paralleling some thoroughfares though, cycle-tracks could be a wonderful thing for many people. I'll give bikeportland's publisher-editor a little pitch here...he's been in the NL and Copenhagen the last couple weeks, writing articles with accompanying photos showing some of that cycle-track infrastructure with people using it; they...people and pics...make a strong case that cycle-tracks well sited, work well.
Even if cycle-tracks were built parallel to some thoroughfares in Portland, that in no way would necessarily mean the City Club committee's thought about possibly removing bike lanes from thoroughfares to somehow encourage use of cycle-tracks/discourage use of bikes on thoroughfares, would become city policy.
Some of you reading here, might be interested in googling a map of the section of Foster Rd in question. It's a two and a half to three mile section of four lane thoroughfare...fast moving traffic...ugly...closest point is about the same distance from Downtown. Street runs at a diagonal to the square block grid, leaving no secondary streets parallel to Foster for an easy, alternate bike route. A cycle track would be kind of 'choice' on this street. Putting one in would be a big deal...require moving all kinds of obstacles...curbs, utilities, trees, etc...expensive...no surprise people in the neighborhood don't want to risk or delay the bike lane project by pursuing that idea. If the neighborhood somehow were able to get a cycle-track paralleling Foster, I bet residents would like it a lot.