What we know about bike infrastructure: people want it

We know that 90 percent of the people are not going to be cycling to work or around town. But that opportunity and that kind of alternative is something people have said they want.

They said it in a recent study by Transportation For America. They said it last week in Tupelo and Hernando, Mississippi. They've been saying it in Portland, Oregon, for years. They're saying it in Washington, DC.

They said it after an interview I gave in the New York Times earlier this month. And New York bicyclists have said it loudly and clearly with their pedals, increasing their numbers by 28% in the last year alone according to a study by Transportation Alternatives.

And in response to an All Things Considered interview, NPR listeners have been saying it over and over on the NPR website. You can listen to the NPR piece below:

On Facebook, I sometimes have trouble seeing my own wall posts because bicycling fans have been so busy posting their support for DOT's bicycle-pedestrian initiative in such strong numbers.

Even Lance Armstrong, America's 7-time Tour de France winner, has added his voice to the mix, urging his 2+ million Twitter followers to listen to the NPR story about bike infrastructure in America. Thanks, Lance!
 

Why devote resources to a transportation mode that fewer than 10% of the nation is using? Well, bike infrastructure is relatively inexpensive--particularly if you compare it to, say, adding a lane to an existing roadway. Now, imagine if those people who do bike around chose instead to make all of their trips in single-occupancy vehicles. Our already congested roadways would be brought to a halt.

So, even for those folks who have no interest in bicycling, this relatively low investment actually pays dividends for those who still choose to drive. Everybody wins.

And the fact is, as Washington, DC, DOT Director Gabe Klein noted on NPR, "We see a direct correlation between our investment in bike infrastructure and an uptick in usage. When you make it hassle-free and inexpensive for people to use a certain mode, they will use it."

I'll say it again--because I want my online friends in commercial trucking and the people who make their living behind the wheel, to know--we are not out to make their jobs any harder than they already are.

I know they're paying a lot of taxes to use the roads, and I appreciate that fact. But we're talking about making their jobs easier by taking vehicles off those roadways and easing congestion so the trucking community and bus and taxi drivers can deliver their goods and passengers more smoothly.

Look, in the 54 years since President Eisenhower launched the interstate system that connects America, we've committed almost all of our transportation resources to highways. Part of our commitment now should be to create alternatives to congestion.

We know that making biking and walking safer creates more livable communities. It makes Americans healthier at a time when the US military has indicated that 27% of recruits are too overweight to qualify for service. It lowers greenhouse gas emissions. It reduces our dependence on foreign oil.

And it's what Americans have said they want.

Comments

[Andy]

If more jobs had a locker room and shower people might choose to bike to work and home again on nice days provided they have the infrastructure. And more employers might install a shower room for employees if they saw a need.

[Michael E. Bailey]

Improving pedestrian and bicycle safety are both critical needs in many parts of the country. And making it easier to walk or bike will get more people out of their cars. Intermodal transportation is a key area to be looked at. How can we integrate bikes, transit buses and rail together as seamlessly as possible? This could be another role for transportation information technology. Best wishes, Michael E. Bailey.

[Damian]

Just wanted to say thank you. We are battling the state (AK) to get stripes painted for bike lanes on a road extension. They say there is no interest and they don't want pay for the maintenance. It's nice to be able to direct them to recent USDOT policies on non-motorized transportation. You're spot on, it is good for everybody, everybody wins.

[Richard Wharton]

I think you need to take another poll. You want to spend millions for an "uptick"? A fraction of a fraction? I'm a commuting cyclist. We already HAVE access to the roads. You could double, no, treble the number of cyclists who commute to work, and it would have zero effect on infrastructure costs, using common, current roadways. You really need to focus on education. Educate the cyclists! Educate the motorists! Enforce the law equally!!! Cyclists fare best when they act like, and are treated as, the drivers of vehicles! How much does it cost to hold your arm out at a 90 degree angle, signaling a "STOP"? Teach cyclists to stop hugging the curb, to take the lane, to become traffic, not to cause it, and you instantly solve the problems of fear and anxiety! Mr. LaHood, I challenge you to take a Traffic Skills 101 class through the League of American Bicyclists, and then see just what REAL advocacy is all about. DO NOT SPEND MY MONEY ON RE-SEGREGATING ME AND DELEGATING ME TO THE SIDEWALK OR CYCLETRACK! I AM A LEGAL VEHICLE! I DESERVE RESPONSIBILITY AND RESPECT! Education is cheaper, faster, and more effective, AND YET IT HAS NOT BEEN INSTITUTIONALLY IMPLEMENTED IN OVER 3 GENERATIONS!? Don't spend money on stuff that won't make a difference. Spend money on stuff that will. Hold cyclists responsible. Bikes are NOT toys!

[James]

My workplace has showers and a locker room, but very few of my coworkers commute by bike. The logistics of bike commuting, including cleanup, are pretty easy to work out once you get in the pattern. The number one concern that I hear from people is about safely riding with automobile traffic. Friends, coworkers, and even strangers ask me about commuting and the concern about riding in traffic always comes up. Addressing those fears (founded or not) is the only way to get those people who do not currently ride to consider using bicycles for transportation.

[Richard C. Moeur]

As a traffic engineer, I don't have a problem at all with providing properly-designed accommodation for bicyclists on our streets & highways - in fact, it's only equitable. But this is OK as long as they are designed in accordance with what we've learned in 30+ years of studying bicycle crash data in the US. The forthcoming AASHTO Guide for Bicycle Facilities (after a bit of final editing) should be a good definition of "best practice" in the US for the near future.

However, some agencies are still insisting on installing separated pathways parallel to the street and calling them "protected" - when in fact these paths are very likely to have very serious safety problems at intersections & driveways. This puts the most vulnerable users, who have the least ability to react to difficult conditions, into very bad situations, all in the name of "perceived safety". Not a good thing.

[DJ Hughes]

I am all for accommodating bicycles and pedestrians in urban settings and coordinating them with transit use. It only makes sense. However, in the majority of America pedestrians and bicyclists are taking recreational trips that do not take cars off the road and do not reduce emissions. If there has to be a federal policy it should consider a given community, area, etc. The policy should be put into context as opposed to having a blanket policy requiring sidewalks and bike lanes in rural areas where they have little to no transportation value. In non-urban areas, if we are trying to build a recreational network, then please say that. But please don't pass off accommodating recreational trips as having a direct value to the transporation system.

[alli]

A DOT "Complete Streets" mandate for all road projects receiving federal funds would go a long way towards improving bike/ped infrastructure in this country.

[Doug]

Thank you for this! Yes, it is possible to be both pro-car and pro-bike. Investing in biking infrastructure means less congestion for those who simply have to use a car or truck. There's a lot of anti-bike sentiment out there, so thanks for putting us on equal footing.

[Tom]

I love the line "...our commitment now should be to create alternatives to congestion"

You nailed it with that line. It's not about taking away or making life harder for drivers....it's providing options, so that their can be less congestion otherwise, we all end up pay more of our time (in traffic) and more of our money (for roads).

Let's get building some alternatives!

[Colin]

Great post, Secretary LaHood, but I think that your first sentence is off the mark. You are right that bikes are never going to be the primary transportation mode. But as the cost of gas keeps going up and more cities retrofit infrastructure to make biking easier and safer, I wouldn't be against seeing more than 10% of travelers on bikes for at least part of a trip in something besides a private auto (to transit or a shared car, for instance).

[John]

I agree--bicycle infrastructure is something I definitely want! Also, bicycle paths can be multi-use and provide a way for people on foot to be able to travel across a park or where it would be safe to walk alongside the path. People interested in improving walkability or areas for runners are therefore also interested in bicycle paths and the infrastructure needed to support human-powered transit pathways.

[JP]

Cities need to create more bicycle related services like www.BikeStation.org and www.TheBicycleCellar.com

[Doug Price]

Even without showers and locker rooms, short distance bicycle commuting is a good option if there are dedicated, safe bike lanes. I biked in Berkeley, Boston and Manhattan. Berkeley was good with many bike lanes. Boston was decent with only a few bike lanes. Manhattan was treacherous. It's gotten better now with Bloomberg's added bike lanes, but in many areas it's downright dangerous and I gave it up after a few months.

Please, keep up your efforts on bike and pedestrian friendly initiatives. It makes a big difference for all of us regardless of the mode of transportation we use!

[John Faughnan]

We're all concerned about childhood obesity. Safe bicycle and walking routes to schools should be a top priority.

[Bikelawyer]

BIcycles are HAPPENING!

Here in Ohio we have dozens of active clubs, "national" rides all over the state and hundreds of organized rides every week all over the state. Even with our goofy climate [snow, wind,sleet, hail, rain,sun - in one day] we still have hundreds of thousands of bicyclists riding millions of miles each year.

The Dayton and Cincinnati Cycling Clubs have had a competition for many years over commuting miles. Dayton usually wins [it's a LOT flatter...]. But they recently analyzed the numbers. Since 1995 bike commuters in just these two cities have logged more than 1.5 MILLION commuting miles! At 25 mpg, that means cyclists SAVED more than 60,000 gallons of gas!

You can read my "Friends In High Places" post at my Ohio Bikelawyer blog.
http://ohiobikelawyer.com/uncategorized/2010/04/friends-in-high-places/

Steve Magas
The Bike Lawyer

[Allen Muchnick]

"Bike infrastructure" is a pretentious and vague synonym for bicycle "facilities" or "accommodations", including bike parking racks, bike-on-transit access, worksite clothes-changing and shower rooms, and roadway pavement markings such as bike lanes and sharrows.

Moreover, designated bikeways alone do little to increase bicycling without appropriate land use; reduced speed limits and traffic-calming road designs; pro-bicycling traffic laws, enforcement, and adjudication; and bicyclist and motorist education; not to mention appropriate disincentives to excessive and unnecessary personal motor vehicle use in urban centers.

In short, "bike infrastructure" is no panacea, and most bikeways don't make bicycling any safer or decrease the need for comprehensive bicyclist education. Furthermore, America needs a culture change in personal urban transportation that goes well beyond the provision of "bike infrastructure".

[Martin Schönherr]

Nice to hear also from car-addicted USA such friendly words on cyclists and pedestrians. Imagine how far we will come using the the money for e.g. one mile of highway for pedestrian and cycle paths.
One picture to symbolize our future.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_xfGRFikCYmE/S9dFez6GSiI/AAAAAAAAA6k/mk_QgqiGM2c/s1600/P9226845klpaschberg.jpg

[Seamhead]

This post is on the money . . .

[Bike New Haven]

Thank you, Ray!

You nailed it on the head. This notion has yet to be proven wrong: There is only ONE thing known to man that has the potential to single-handedly and simultaneously:

1. Reduce our dependence on oil

2. Reduce the emission of CO2

and,

3. Improve a nation's happiness, health and longevity

all the while serving as a very practical method of transport and recreation.

IT'S THE BICYCLE!!!

[James Hare]

Andy has a good point --- I could easily bike to work, but I'm not sure i'd be presentable when I got there. It would be difficult for businesses to justify it, but it might be a good idea to include requirements for bikers in new building constructions or renovations that require recertification.

[John Forester]

We lawful cyclists understand the national policy of providing facilities that the public believe allow them to cycle without obeying the standard rules of the road.

While implementing this policy, what are you doing to protect the right of lawful cyclists to operate according to the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles? This right is undermined by laws against it, laws that are strengthened particularly where your policy is implemented. It is unjust to work against lawful cyclists in order to encourage the unlawful cycling that the public wants.

[Bill]

I agree that lockers and showers at worksites would be nice. The last 11 years or so before I retired, I rode about 12 miles to work in the morning and had to use a sink in the men's restroom to take a mini-shower before starting work. The ride back was no problem since I could shower at home. Also, there are lots of bike trails around, but only about 3 miles of the commute were on actual trails. I really enjoyed those 3 miles though! Many folks I talked to said they would ride to work if it was safer. (meaning on bike trails, of course)

[Gillian Russell]

Absolutely! I started biking to work just 4 months ago and it was a great decision. I think I'd forgotten how much fun it is.

[Nando Caban-Mendez]

This is a step in the right direction! We have the space and resources, all we needed was the push. The quality of life improvements alone are worth it.