People need to realize that there is a vast network of avid bikers who oppose safe trave lanes for bicycles, because they believe that you 'just need to learn how to bike with cars, bicycles belong properly on the same lanes with cars.." The writer of this article seems to be one of those bike fanatics...These types put a huge block in the way of more timid bicyclists, and refuse to budge - "just take their classes, and you will be able to bike with the cars easily and safely", they insist..

I think this is causing a huge block in providing safe bike lanes for the public. Bike parking - feh! I have been in planning for thirty years, and for ALL THIRTY OF THOSE YEARS bike parking is required for all office and commericial development - and that is in localities from new york State, to virginia, to california..It is easy to provide, and the developers are happy to do it..Maybe New york City has a separate problem - is that where this writer is from?

We need separated bike lanes, so an eight year old or an eighty year old can bike at night and feel good about it..Europe has done this for years...

Bike parking - pleeeze! It is snobbery, intolerant of timid bikers, and is putting a huge wrench in the advancement of bike culture in America..You have no idea how arrogant and intolerant these avid bikers are about how the bike properly belongs WITH the cars..I say FEH! ?We need separated, even elevated bike lanes, everywhere across America..

A- Freaking- MEN.

My partner's work has bike access from a wonderful bike path that she would be on for 4.5 miles of the 9 mile commute.

But because the OTHER 4.5 miles are terrifying, she never rides to work. Meanwhile, I would never ride with my child on my bike on those roads, so as long as I'm taking my daughter to daycare, I'm in a car every day.

mhoney, you state that there is a "huge block of bikers" when you mean cyclists who are both skilled and experienced in riding in and with vehicle traffic. I'm qualfiied and I've done it and I don't like it a bit. Life is too short and there are way too many other ways to shorten your life expectancy. Maybe I'm not as insane as the others. Who knows?

Still - about planning - you've spent 30 years putting bicycle parking in office and commercial developments for people who can't get to and from those developments on their bicycles. It's your cohorts in the transportation planning business at fault there. They put bike lanes on city streets that abruptly end or get interrupted to provide turning lanes or parking for vehicles. They put multi-use trails in places where bicycle trails are needed because grandma and the kids might want to take a walk or worse, ride a horse.

So get your transportation planners in line with the land-use and development planners and work out something more practical. Don't dink around with the details and then complain about the people who would be your clients if they only could.

NO, you don't get it dear..This block of bikers raises huge objections to the planning of bike lanes..Believe me, they have the power and the loudness to stop bike lane development with their insistence that bikers can bike with the cars...

Planners continue to try to co-ordinate, but the debate, as far as I can tell, has been skewed by the avid cyclists who insist we do not need separated bike lanes..

Or maybe you are just looking to be disagreeable about something..sort of sounds like it- you obviously did not read what I wrote..

It depends on the situation. If you are talking about biking long distances out of the city center where roads are mainly multilane, highways, etc. Then yes, separate bike lanes are definitely needed.

If you are talking about more urban areas, yes bike lanes can be helpful, but the argument against them makes sense. Roads are unsafe for bicyclists for 2 reasons 1) drivers don't respect bicyclists 2) some bicyclists don't have a clue how to ride with cars, making it worse for everyone. Adding bike lanes can exacerbate these problems as it insinuates that bicyclists should be relegated to a separate space and not allowed to "mingle" with the roads. It reinforces the idea that many drivers have that bicycles don't belong on the road.

Plus, bike lanes and paths don't necessarily make things safe. There are a couple major bike paths around here that go out to the suburbs, but they are usually so crowded with walkers, runners, young children, elderly people, large groups, etc. that it's virtually impossible to a ride a bike through them. In terms of bike lanes, they are usually positioned in the road in a manner that is pretty unsafe. They run alongside parked cars, and many cyclists don't know well enough to ride on the outer edge of the lane. Parked cars are FAR more dangerous than any moving cars- 1) doors can open and hit you 2) cars can pull out and hit you 3) they obscure the line of site so another car turning onto the street will hit you. Bike lanes can reinforce the idea that bikes are relegated to the far right shoulder, where it actually unsafe to be.

Biking in traffic can be very dangerous, I agree. And I am by no means one of these completely anti-bikelane people, but I do understand their position. The one thing I will say though, is that it does get a lot easier with practice, and the less "timid" you are, the safer it seems to be. The important thing to remember is that you bike defensively just like you drive defensively. If you don't feel comfortable going fast, go slowly. I don't feel comfortable using clipless pedals in traffic, so I don't. I stop at all lights because that makes me feel safe. You just have to remain alert at all times and aware of what's going on around you.

Afraid not, sunshine. I really am one of them.

Here's a good analysis of the feud between the two cycling groups.

<link>

Here's what happened in Missouri when the legislature tried to require the state transportation department to take responsibility for fully accommodating cyclists and pedestrians.

<link>

Way too many times we hear from some bombastic functionary who expects to tell us how bicycle policy ought to be done. Like this:

<link>

You should understand that I can name names but I won't do it here.

On the other hand, take a look at what's going on in Columbia, Mo. The bicycle folks can get behind a project when some thought and money goes into it. You''d find my name here and there on some lists.

<link>

<link>

I also might add that bike lanes can create a false sense of security, when, for the reasons I mentioned above, they can actually be really dangerous. Cars and buses still have to cross the bike lane, and I've never seen a single one check for oncoming bikes before edging into the lane. The only bike death I've heard of in the Boston area recently was a woman riding in the designated lane in Cambridge- a bus hit her.

yep..no bike lanes is better, right..just like I said...SEPARATED BIKE LANES, even elevated please. the bike cluds are bike lane haters, and it is stopping the production of bike lanes cold in some place..

I read about a great idea in the NY Times a while back; the idea was to put the bike lane right next the sidewalk, then a row of concrete planters/barriers, then parking, and finally the street. The bike lane would still be at street level, about 6-8" below the sidewalk (so there would still be a feeling of separation), but the cyclists would be safe(r). It sounds good on paper, but I am left with a few questions. 1)How do you keep pedestrians out of the bike lane when it is separated from traffic? My fear is that many pedestrians would treat such a bike lane as just being another place to walk, which would then replace one hazard for cyclists with another. 2)How does the cyclist turn left? Currently, cyclists are supposed to move to the left turn lane when they are turning left; having a completely separated riding area (with a row of parked cars and concrete barriers between them and the turn lane) makes this difficult. 3)How do you prevent motorists from cutting off cyclists when they (the motorists )are turning right? With everything separate it becomes very hard to see cyclists that may be heading straight at an intersection when the car is turning.

The idea might be appealing, but I can't see a good way of making safe cycling lanes a reality without massive infrastructure expenditures.

...Or we could ban private vehicle use and cap the number of taxies/private livery in cities... :D