<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Can Bike Lanes cause pollution?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://bikemichiana.org/2008/08/20/can-bike-lanes-cause-polution/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://bikemichiana.org/2008/08/20/can-bike-lanes-cause-polution/</link>
	<description>resources, news, observations and ideas about bicycling in the Michiana area</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 15:52:39 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Henry Scott</title>
		<link>http://bikemichiana.org/2008/08/20/can-bike-lanes-cause-polution/#comment-425</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Henry Scott]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 29 Aug 2008 00:31:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://southbendbikes.wordpress.com/?p=626#comment-425</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[This struck me as an interesting, yet misguided, argument.

Pragmatically, I see the writer&#039;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&#039;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.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This struck me as an interesting, yet misguided, argument.</p>
<p>Pragmatically, I see the writer&#8217;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.  </p>
<p>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&#8217;m aware, people DO bike in large numbers&#8230; are there any examples of communities with a good network of bicycle routes that tend to go under-utilized?</p>
<p>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.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Paul Taylor</title>
		<link>http://bikemichiana.org/2008/08/20/can-bike-lanes-cause-polution/#comment-385</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Paul Taylor]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2008 19:52:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://southbendbikes.wordpress.com/?p=626#comment-385</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[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 &quot;Courteous Mass&quot;. 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.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great minds! Now I know why I respect your posts so much.</p>
<p>There was a group at Notre Dame a few years ago who held rides similar to what you call &#8220;Courteous Mass&#8221;. 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.</p>
<p>If you organize it Adam, count me in.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adam Bee</title>
		<link>http://bikemichiana.org/2008/08/20/can-bike-lanes-cause-polution/#comment-383</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Adam Bee]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 21 Aug 2008 16:34:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://southbendbikes.wordpress.com/?p=626#comment-383</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[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&#039;re surely a net loss.  If a ton of people used them, they&#039;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&#039;ve done a few Critical Masses in Minneapolis, and I&#039;d agree that the video sums it up well.  Extremely fun but also extremely rude.  On the whole it&#039;s a major net loss for cycling.  If it were to happen here, whatever meager support and goodwill we&#039;ve worked to build up would vanish in months.

That&#039;s why I&#039;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&#039;s with me?]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just read the same article literally 30 seconds before reading this post!  Great minds think alike, eh?</p>
<p>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&#8217;re surely a net loss.  If a ton of people used them, they&#8217;d be an environmental slam dunk.</p>
<p>So basically, the whole report hinges on a variable that will be very difficult to predict, especially with a project of that magnitude.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve done a few Critical Masses in Minneapolis, and I&#8217;d agree that the video sums it up well.  Extremely fun but also extremely rude.  On the whole it&#8217;s a major net loss for cycling.  If it were to happen here, whatever meager support and goodwill we&#8217;ve worked to build up would vanish in months.</p>
<p>That&#8217;s why I&#8217;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&#8217;s with me?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

