I hope you will all have a look at MARC's TRANSPORTATION OUTLOOK 2030, particularly the chapter on bicycling. You can see it at http://www.marc.org/transportation2030.htm and send feedback to lrtp@marc.org.
I won't bore you with my lengthy ramblings to MARC, but here are the points I made about the plan:
1. Off-street bike paths seem to receive more space and emphasis in the document than on-street cycling. I think this should be reversed.
My points in regard to this:
1a. Each mile of Bike Route enables cycling on approximately 20 miles of nearby streets. Thus we will end up with a couple hundred miles of greenway routes but about 20,000 miles of on-street routes plus "enabled streets" connecting with them.
1b. The value of a network is proportional to the square of the number of connections it enables. Thus, the value of the on-street bicycling network is roughly 10,000 times the value of the greenway network.
1c. Greenways are shared-use facilities (in intent and fact) and thus should be listed in a separate section and not lumped together with bicycle facilities. I suggested something like "Pedestrian/bicycle element". With the Greenway section removed, the bicycling chapter starts to look pretty sparse . . .
2. It should be explicitly acknowledged that we already have an extensive network of bicycle facilities in every area city and county (they're commonly known as city streets).
One of the reasons encouraging vehicular cycling is such an attractive option is that so much of the needed infrastructure is ALREADY there.
3. It strikes me that AT LEAST as much of the impediment to cycling in our area is culture/education as infrastructure. (The plan does mention this.)
4. I would advocate a minimum facility of wide curb lanes on all newly constructed or re-constructed roadways. I wish MARC could/would explicitly recommend this but I am not sure if they can or will.
5. I especially like this: Encourage communities to "implement mixed-use developments and neighborhoods that are more conducive to bicycling."
posted by Brent Hugh at
Sunday, August 25, 2002 |
permanently archived here
