Jerry Hinnefeld
Henry Scott
judithrobert
Jeff Nixa
memooney
Adam Bee
bspitzer
Nate Barnett
Paul Taylor
Danny Graber
lhierony
Phil G-E
petercolan
Jim Moffitt
Judy Lee
2wheelpeddler
dickkuehl
Can Bike Lanes cause pollution?
Posted by Paul Taylor on August 20, 2008
In today’s Wall Street Journal:
Famously progressive, San Francisco is known for being one of the most pro-bike cities in the U.S., offering more than 200 miles of lanes and requiring that big garages offer bike parking.
New York is wooing cyclists with chartreuse bike lanes. Chicago is spending nearly $1 million for double-decker bicycle parking. South Bend is developing at least 10 miles of bike routes per year, and installing bike parking racks. Goshen, a leader in bike/ped side paths is planning striped bike lanes. Mishawaka and Elkhart are moving forward with improved bicycle infrastructure.
Meanwhile, according to the Wall Street Journal, San Francisco can do nothing: not even install new bike racks. All because of a local gadfly, arguing that urban bicycle boosting could actually be bad for the environment. The gadfly sued the city, and now all bike-plan activity is on hold until an environmental review is completed.
You may want to read the full article here.
Even if you don’t read the full article, don’t miss the video on the San Francisco “Critical Mass” rides.
Adam Bee said
I just read the same article literally 30 seconds before reading this post! Great minds think alike, eh?
I imagine the environmental impact review (EIR) will hinge on forecasting the degree to which they encourage the substitution of cars for bikes. If absolutely nobody uses the lanes, they’re surely a net loss. If a ton of people used them, they’d be an environmental slam dunk.
So basically, the whole report hinges on a variable that will be very difficult to predict, especially with a project of that magnitude.
I’ve done a few Critical Masses in Minneapolis, and I’d agree that the video sums it up well. Extremely fun but also extremely rude. On the whole it’s a major net loss for cycling. If it were to happen here, whatever meager support and goodwill we’ve worked to build up would vanish in months.
That’s why I’ve been thinking about an alternative to Critical Mass which I call Courteous Mass. Same time, same pace, same total lack of governance, but founded with the social norm that riders be generally respectful and polite. Stop for red lights, stay mostly to the right, try not to block traffic for too long, and generally have a great time. All the fun with none of the in-your-face smugness. Who’s with me?
Paul Taylor said
Great minds! Now I know why I respect your posts so much.
There was a group at Notre Dame a few years ago who held rides similar to what you call “Courteous Mass”. They had a ride every Saturday morning, where they rode on the well travelled urban streets, following all the rules of the road. Their objectives were to be a visible, be courteous, and raise awareness that bikes belong.
If you organize it Adam, count me in.
Henry Scott said
This struck me as an interesting, yet misguided, argument.
Pragmatically, I see the writer’s point, and on my most pessimistic days wonder if he is correct. Yet, his argument is predicated on the notion Americans will not adopt cycling in significant numbers, despite the fact that citizens DO cycle in significant numbers in other countries, AND in a handful of American cities.
Are most Americans uniquely unwilling to bike when when a safe environment is provided? That does not seem to be supported by the evidence. In all well-known bike-friendly towns of which I’m aware, people DO bike in large numbers… are there any examples of communities with a good network of bicycle routes that tend to go under-utilized?
Perhaps each community with good bicycle infrastructure developed the infrastructure after a critical mass were reached, but certainly developing such an infrastructure would help to attract more cyclists.