Originally Posted by
spare_wheel
Do you have data demonstrating that there is a large group of cyclists who will use cycle tracks but not buffered bike lanes. I'm not at all convinced. Moreover, bike lanes and bike boulevards have facilitated mode share as high as 40% in some Munich neighborhoods.
Given that Maus' trip was planned and sponsored by the cycle track advocacy group, bikes belong, this is hardly surprising.
Cycle tracks are desirable when speed or traffic density can only be mitigated by increased separation. Given the high-speed of vehicle traffic on Foster, a properly-designed cycle track would have been a good option. It was dropped due to funding limitations. That being said I still favor traffic calming, speed limitation, and non-separated infrastructure in dense urban areas with lots of intersections. Cycle tracks work best in situations where there are high speeds and few intersections.
Data...for Portland or one of its' neighborhoods for which a NL style cycle-track might be considered, that indicates interest on the part of residents in using a cycle-track, if one existed in their neighborhood? If there's apparently no data of that sort, you'll perhaps feel that lack of information of that type indicating support for a type of active transportation infrastructure that Americans generally do not have first hand experience using in their own country, city or neighborhood...means that if Americans had a cycle-track available, they wouldn't use it in numbers significant to make building one worth the effort.
Other than the suggestion presented by pictures of cycle-tracks in Netherlands and elsewhere as well it seems, and much that has been written about them, I have no real way of knowing whether, if they had one available, people in the Portland Metro area would ride a cycle-track. The sense I get though, is that if they were designed well and built well, people would cycle-tracks. I think interest in using them would build up slowly, if some neighborhood or town-employment center in the area actually had a cycle-track available for people to try out first hand. The expense and effort to build one likely would not force the city where it was sited, to go into bankruptcy. Portland has survived complications associated with constructing the Tram, Streetcar, Max. A first class cycle-track on Foster would be miniscule in comparison to those projects. If the city built a cycle-track, and it didn't work out, the city could rip it back out.
Apparently, having to ride right alongside motor vehicle traffic, is a big reason many people in the U.S. won't even consider riding a bike very far on a road where motor vehicles travel also. Cycle-tracks, generally being distance separated from main lanes of a road, address this issue. I think they're how it's possible to get riding, the kinds of people that just want to pedal along a short distance to wherever they're going, without having to constantly be on the watch for motor vehicles rushing past them.
Somewhat unconventional ideas can really grab hold of the public's interest, if people have a chance to try them out...for example, Sunday Parkways, which despite considerable expense to put them on, and a share of criticism, seem to be fabulously popular. Then there's the Eastside Esplanade (for those not familiar with Portland, it's a long pedestrian-bikeway along the Willamette River Downtown), roundly poo-pooed when conceived of, for the money it cost...which has turned out to be hugely successful and popular.