Old 06-23-14, 05:29 AM
  #65  
jyl
Senior Member
 
jyl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Portland OR
Posts: 7,644

Bikes: 61 Bianchi Specialissima 71 Peugeot G50 7? P'geot PX10 74 Raleigh GranSport 75 P'geot UO8 78? Raleigh Team Pro 82 P'geot PSV 86 P'geot PX 91 Bridgestone MB0 92 B'stone XO1 97 Rans VRex 92 Cannondale R1000 94 B'stone MB5 97 Vitus 997

Mentioned: 146 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 48 Times in 30 Posts
Originally Posted by kickstart
Its encouraging that many cyclists do understand the big picture. I agree most roads don't need bicycle infrastructure, but some do. Unfortunately some "advocates" are like spoiled children kicking and screaming when they feel threatened that they might not get to do exactly what they want, whenever and wherever they please, the needs or desires of anyone else be damned, or are so mesmerized by their own fanciful theories they no longer comprehend reality.
If these "advocates" were really interested in getting more folks to ride for transportation beyond their own neighborhoods, they would wouldn't be so against bicycling infrastructure.
I observe another behavior. Advocates of elaborate "Dutch style" bike infrastructure, insistent on gold plated separated cycleways and signals, which are unproven and unaffordable in US cities, who complain at every road improvement that doesn't live up to those supposed gold standards.

In Portland, an experimental separated cycle way was installed, as a pilot project, for several blocks on NE Multnomah. It is a curbside bike lane, buffered from the traffic lanes by parking and/or big pieces of concrete, merging with the right turn lane at intersections. As far as I can tell from the comments on our local bike blog, the most common reaction from those advocates is - complaining.

Complaints like:
The cycle way isn't cleaned enough.
Pedestrians cross it. They need to keep out.
Sometimes cars encroach.
Driveways cross it. How can this thing call itself a real cycle way when cars are driving across it all the time?
There's no special intersection treatment. Can't be a real cycle way without a protected route for cyclists to cross intersections!
It doesn't connect to anything. How can we call this a real cycle way if it isn't part of a interconnected network of similar routes?
In the Netherlands they'd laugh at this pathetic excuse for bike infrastructure.
Etc etc.

Meanwhile, we haven't seen large numbers of "interested but concerned" flocking to the NE Multnomah cycle way. Most times I ride there, I'm the only cyclist on the block.

Why hasn't this separated cycle way drawn out all those "timid but desired"?

To be clear: I'm in favor of installing a couple more short stretches of separated cycle ways in my city, and then stopping. Stop, install bike counters, and measure the results for a few years. Assess the effectiveness of a dollar spent on separated cycle ways versus a dollar spent on conventional bike lanes, in generating additional bike trips. What sort of infrastructure has the lowest $/additional rider? The lowest accident/rider rate?

Last edited by jyl; 06-23-14 at 06:18 AM.
jyl is offline