• Follow Us

6 responses to “Can Elected Bike Riders Impel Change We Can Believe In?”

  1. JAT

    Great post. Interesting that you use the word “compete” (A recent study showed that bike lanes are safer for cyclists than is competing with cars on streets and highways,…)

    When I’m a motorist I rarely feel that I’m competing with the other motorists. When I’m a cyclist the sense of competition is keener, but it’s not the motorists I feel that from.

    In any event – while I’m unsold on the value of multi-use paths to transportation cycling, I can see the benefit of some additional bike lanes, the trouble is (and the widespread confusion over Sharrows (see Matt Fickse in Crosscut, for example) illustrates this) there just isn’t enough room on a lot of the streets for another lane.

    Unless,… we took away the on-street parking. It works for me, but imagine the howling in the comments section of the P.I. Ugh!

  2. Art Lewellan

    Here, have a laugh on who ‘can’ lead Seattle…

  3. Art Lewellan

    Since JAT has confessed to being unsold on multi-use paths for cycling, someone ought to do some selling. Bicycling and Pedestrian infrastructure are inextricable and should be studied together. Painted bike lanes next to traffic are in many instances inefficient and dangerous. A lot of curbside parking absolutely must be removed, for adequate curb extensions, bike ways, etc.

  4. JAT

    Hang on, the study cited in the posting above says outright “Results to date suggest that sidewalks and multi-use trails pose the highest risk”

    On my commute there’s a crappy bike lane on each side of the street(recently upgraded from craptastic) along Marginal Way which end at Edgar Martinez or perhaps become the fairly new multi-use path paralleling the rail tracks and eventually the abandoned George Benson trolly tracks (and at one point crossing those tracks obliquely) on only one side of the street.

    This multi-use path intersects a number of crosswalks in a tourist-heavy part of town. My fear is that the City, in it’s infinite wisdom feels it has provided me with a bike facility. I cringe when I see cyclists faster than I abandoning the street where that path begins to take the functional equivalent of the sidewalk.

    I’m not sure what you mean by Bicycling and Pedestrian facilities are inextricable – from each other? I disagree. There are Bicycling Facilities and there are Pedestrian Facilities; they mix well very very rarely. in my opinion, of course…

  5. Great Expectations: Top 10 Bicycling Issues for 2010 « Bike Intelligencer

    […] expansion hold huge promise for the locals. 5. Mayor Mike McGinn’s cycling agenda. We have big hopes for Seattle’s new cycling mayor and the city’s cycling blueprint. Not that everything […]

  6. HH

    I agree with everything except for more bike lanes along Stone Way, 45th Ave, and other major streets. I was at the rally to get a bike lane on Stone Way and now I regret it. We’re putting bike lanes on the busiest streets in Seattle. It creates crappy, unsafe riding conditions and too many bad car-bike interactions. The cyclist killed in Ballard last year was riding down 24th Ave, another bike lane on a busy street. We should follow Vancouver’s lead (and countless European cities) and direct cyclists to adjacent streets, creating “bicycle boulevards.” It’s not just safer, it’s also a lot more pleasant riding.

Leave a Reply