Old 12-15-13, 06:15 PM
  #90  
spare_wheel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: NA
Posts: 4,267

Bikes: NA

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 9 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times in 7 Posts
Originally Posted by Brian Ratliff
Different people have different thresholds of risk, for cycling or for cross country traveling. Let's call them "risk bins". The first bin are the (in the cycling world) hardcore cyclists who will ride regardless of road conditions. These people ride with no infrastructure. People from the second bin see the first bin people riding and take up riding themselves. They learn vehicular cycling methods but don't see them as a be-all and end-all of cycling. They advocate for infrastructure accommodation. The city gives them a little, and the third bin people are willing to come out. These people, along with the second bin people advocate for more infrastructure, allowing people in the fourth risk bin to venture out. And so on.

This is how you solve the problem of which came first: the riders or the bike lanes. The answer is it is more complex. Not all cyclists have the same risk thresholds, and their are pioneers and then there are the people who follow the pioneers. In the cross-country travel analogy, Lewis and Clark were pioneers for a route to the west coast from the east. They cut their own trails. Then came the traders who were willing to take risks who expanded the trails, then the traders who were less willing to take risks who turned these trails to roads. Only then did we get the first "civilian" travelers. Just a trickle at first. Then as roads got better, more people follow. Fast forward a couple hundred years and we now have interstates and literally anyone can travel from one side of the country to the other with minimal risk.
The fact that Geller's "interested but concerned" guesstimate has dominated bike policy in PDX is annoying. When Jennifer Dill conducted surveys to test Geller's "interested but concerned" hypothesis the numbers did not work out as planned. In fact, most respondents stated that they were comfortable riding in old-fashioned door zone bike lanes. I would hope that everyone posting on this thread views DZBLs as deeply flawed infrastructure.

In Portland and surrounding areas, for your typical 5-10 mile commute, you can usually string together a route using bike lanes, paths and/or quiet streets. The ease of this varies in specific locations (some areas, to do this is still fairly convoluted or impossible), but this has only been possible in the last five years.


1. Portland's mode share has been static over the past 5 years.
2. Most of the bike lanes and bike boulevards/green ways in place in PDX today were present 10 years ago.

I'm not arguing that infrastructure is not important. In fact, I think PDX's existing infrastructure facilitated the spike in mode share to ~6% in '07/08 (great recession/gas prices).

A great discussion on this very topic here:
http://bikeportland.org/2013/07/02/w...ing-boom-89491

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycling...gon#Statistics

Last edited by spare_wheel; 12-15-13 at 06:43 PM.
spare_wheel is offline