Bike Lanes, Revisited
A few months ago, I published an article on bike lanes. My conclusion was that they are impractical because cars park in them, and because drivers don't know how to react around a bike lane—they either use it as an alternate lane, or as a parking lot, so why bother.
Then I spent a week in Portland, Oregon. Portland is known for a lot of things. They are staunch free speech advocates, and have prevailed in court on the right to ride bikes naked (yikes). They were ranked by one magazine as the most depressing city in America. They are sometimes called "Pornland" because of the numerous all-nude strip clubs that dot the city. It is cloudy 222 days a year there, and can be a pretty depressing place.
But they are also a huge bicycling town. Recently Portland was ranked the #2 bicycling city in America. They have great mass transit. There is bike parking at every store, restaurant, and bar. Bicycles are a major part of ad campaigns for things that are completely unrelated to cyclists. 6% of the population of P-town commutes to work by bicycle.
Oh, and they have MILES and MILES of bike lanes. They are everywhere. There are signs reminding motorists to watch for cyclists. There are also signs on certain roads, which prohibit cyclists from riding there (usually they are major highways).
One of the reasons I have objected to bike lanes is that there are places where bike lanes have to intersect with car lanes. When you approach an intersection, for example, what happens when a car has to turn right? He has no other choice but to roll through the bike lane.
I spent some time visiting with some locals about bike lanes, and something they said cleared the whole thing up for me. In Portland, the law requires all drivers of cars to yield to riders of bicycles. Did you catch that? I ask, because you may have missed it. All drivers of cars are required to yield to bicyclists, all the time.
In Oklahoma, we have structured the law so that drivers of cars and riders of bicycles are treated the same. We have hammered home the theme "same road, same rights, same rules." But there is one problem with that. We are not the same. We aren't even close. Someone told me that when a car and a bicycle collide, the only laws that count are the laws of physics.
I think it is a mistake to treat cars and bicycles the same. Bike lanes work when laws are changed (and enforced), and people are educated. Riders will feel safer when they have a lane of their own.
I think I have the perfect solution for Tulsa. Follow Portland's example. Build bike lanes on major throughways—all of them. Then change the law, and give cyclists the right of way in every situation. If the laws aren't changed, bike lanes will not make things safer and more convenient. Law enforcement has to get on board, fines have to increase to get the message across. Public transportation needs to improve (translation: light rail) so people who live too far from work can still bike to work.
One long-time Portland resident told me that thirty years ago, there was a mayor who was an avid cyclist. He got the ball rolling, and it has taken years to get to the place they are now. Our mayor and city council fight over the smallest issues, so we still have a long ways to go.
Meanwhile, another cyclist was hit and seriously injured this week in Tulsa. Something has got to give.
Then I spent a week in Portland, Oregon. Portland is known for a lot of things. They are staunch free speech advocates, and have prevailed in court on the right to ride bikes naked (yikes). They were ranked by one magazine as the most depressing city in America. They are sometimes called "Pornland" because of the numerous all-nude strip clubs that dot the city. It is cloudy 222 days a year there, and can be a pretty depressing place.
But they are also a huge bicycling town. Recently Portland was ranked the #2 bicycling city in America. They have great mass transit. There is bike parking at every store, restaurant, and bar. Bicycles are a major part of ad campaigns for things that are completely unrelated to cyclists. 6% of the population of P-town commutes to work by bicycle.
Oh, and they have MILES and MILES of bike lanes. They are everywhere. There are signs reminding motorists to watch for cyclists. There are also signs on certain roads, which prohibit cyclists from riding there (usually they are major highways).
One of the reasons I have objected to bike lanes is that there are places where bike lanes have to intersect with car lanes. When you approach an intersection, for example, what happens when a car has to turn right? He has no other choice but to roll through the bike lane.
I spent some time visiting with some locals about bike lanes, and something they said cleared the whole thing up for me. In Portland, the law requires all drivers of cars to yield to riders of bicycles. Did you catch that? I ask, because you may have missed it. All drivers of cars are required to yield to bicyclists, all the time.
In Oklahoma, we have structured the law so that drivers of cars and riders of bicycles are treated the same. We have hammered home the theme "same road, same rights, same rules." But there is one problem with that. We are not the same. We aren't even close. Someone told me that when a car and a bicycle collide, the only laws that count are the laws of physics.
I think it is a mistake to treat cars and bicycles the same. Bike lanes work when laws are changed (and enforced), and people are educated. Riders will feel safer when they have a lane of their own.
I think I have the perfect solution for Tulsa. Follow Portland's example. Build bike lanes on major throughways—all of them. Then change the law, and give cyclists the right of way in every situation. If the laws aren't changed, bike lanes will not make things safer and more convenient. Law enforcement has to get on board, fines have to increase to get the message across. Public transportation needs to improve (translation: light rail) so people who live too far from work can still bike to work.
One long-time Portland resident told me that thirty years ago, there was a mayor who was an avid cyclist. He got the ball rolling, and it has taken years to get to the place they are now. Our mayor and city council fight over the smallest issues, so we still have a long ways to go.
Meanwhile, another cyclist was hit and seriously injured this week in Tulsa. Something has got to give.
Perfect solution for Tulsa notwithstanding getting the so called cycling community on board might prove to be very difficult
Just got done reading "Joyride: Pedaling Toward A Healthier Planet" by Mia Birk, who was the bicycle coordinator for Portland before bicycling was big there. "Joyride" is a very inspiring book that makes it seem like Tulsa can make it happen too. It may take time, but I believe bicycling for transportation in Tulsa can become accepted and normal, in a way that motorists expect to see bikes around town, which will make everyone safer.
The great thing about Portland is they have established more than 300 miles of bike lanes and other infrastructure for the cost of ONE mile of urban freeway. To me, that's a smart investment. Riding a bike reduces congestion and pollution (Ozone Alerts?), improve health (Oklahoma has the fastest growing obesity rate in the U.S.), and saves money (AAA puts cost of car ownership at nearly $9k/year).
I am relatively new to bicycling for transportation (5 months - 1,600 miles), so I have waited to make up my mind on bike lanes. The more I read about them, the more I am convinced we need bike lanes and other infrastructure to assuage the fears of those who wouldn't otherwise cycle because most people will not get out on the roads with cars on their own like me. And we want everyone, not just the hardcore cyclists, to get out and about on their bikes. Plus, the mere existence of the bike lanes, bike boxes and bike signage communicates a sort of "legitimacy" for bikes; it sends a message to motorists that bikes belong on the street. And we know all too well that many motorists don't even think it's legal for a bicycle to be on the street.
There are drawbacks to bike lanes, but I think the positives outweigh the negatives if they are designed properly using best practices and standards, including granting bicycles the right-of-way at intersections to prevent right hooks. Both motorists and bicyclists will definitely need education when more bike lanes arrive in Tulsa.
Interesting article Jason. I read a couple of other articles recently that you and other readers might enjoy as well:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/31/opinion/sunday/the-dutch-way-bicycles-and-fresh-bread.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/06/opinion/of-bikes-bread-and-the-dutch-way-of-life.html?ref=opinion