I'd say a bit more analysis should be done before we copy the Portland "bike boulevard" model.

First, it is very easy to write a survey where lots of people check that they'd bike more if conditions were "better." This alone does not prove that bike boulevards are the way to go.
In Philadelphia and Lancaster we already have low-volume streets/alleys adjacent to collectors/arterials where speeds are low-as-a-bike, such as Salmon Street (parallel to Richmond) or Water Street in Lancaster (parallel to Prince). What they lack is good crossings of the major streets they intersect with: possibly traffic signals (not curb extensions!) which are coordinated with current signals could be added when such  minor streets/alleys cross a major street.
 
I noticed some of the Portland bike boulevard streets are slowed by speed humps (I'm hoping these are for the motor vehicles only and not the bikes). These are about the only reliable way to obtain such slow auto speeds, as curb extensions do not do it (we spent millions on them in Ephrata and got no speed reduction effect at all, part of the reason I generally oppose curb extension projects, besides their tendency to squeeze the bikes and motorists together). The usual method of speed control (stop signs and signals) are largely being removed from the bike boulevards to allow the bikes to flow, and I was thinking the speed goal was unreal until I saw that Portland did use speed humps. I still think it is unreal, however, that they plan to reduce auto traffic on the bike boulevard and they do not expect auto traffic on the neighborhood streets parallel to the boulevard to rise. The commentary from the California town which implemented bike boulevards indicated that such traffic diversion did in fact happen, and might be a source of neighborhood anger at the project.

Two aspects of the bike boulevard idea really bother me, though. First is the implication that bikes will be channeled onto these special streets, when so often the home or destination of the cyclist isn't on these special streets. In Portland they seem to be planned every half dozen blocks, but would we go six blocks out of the way just to catch a "boulevard"? I think rarely. And remember they will be shared with vehicles, as will the streets to and from the boulevards, so boulevards may not solve all the anxieties of the hesitant bikers of the survey anyway.

And there is a major concern about negative impact on residents who live close to the "bike boulevard" projects. The model even admits they will endure negative impact although they will try to "minimize" it. I think it shows a lot of insensitivity on the part of the biking community to ask residents to endure such inconvenience just for the sake of some of us (I don't say all of us because many of us would continue to bike the shortest distance between two points rather than make detours to catch a "boulevard"). And in the current reality of tight municipal budgets, such a fight between bike advocates and community residents is exactly what we do NOT need. Consider this: even a single dollar spent on  bike boulevards is a dollar NOT spent on converting an abandoned railbed into a trail, or building a consistently-usable bikeable shoulder on our 10,000-plus vehicle-per-day state highways. I would be ashamed to request any funds to supposedly make residential streets perhaps a tiny bit better, raising the wrath of car-driving residents, when we can actually add to our biking infrastructure in ways that make the general public (both cycling and motoring) happier by adding to our miles of trail and paved shoulders.

I am curious if you have a specific street in mind for a bike boulevard--I am not saying it is impossible that some improvements could be made to some residential streets somewhere, as I mentioned if we signalized crossings of minor streets it would help. It would be interesting to debate the pros and cons of changes to a specific street, but to charge forward in Pennsylvania with this Portland boulevard model when we have more pressing needs seems to me to be a misdirection of funds and energies.  
Richard
Ephrata, PA

From: biker.hans@...
Date: Sun, 17 Jan 2010 18:05:10 -0500
Subject: Re: [PA Bikes and Walks discussion] Bike Boulevards Portland 	Engineering Goals
To: pabikewalk-discussion@...

Thanks Larry. Their model is wonderful

HansJoin and Help Make Bicycling Better.  
www.bikeleague.org - Nationwide


www.PAWalksAndBikes.org - Pennsylvania
www.bicyclecoalition.org - Greater Philadelphia



On Sat, Jan 16, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Larry Shaeffer <larryshaeffer@...> wrote:


off TRB's Traffic Calming listserv:

Portland has begun to work on the alternate bike boulevard system with
the first 15 miles of work to be completed this FY and 15 new or
improved miles each year for the next five years.

visit http://www.portlandonline.com/ and search for 'bike 2030' for more details or 'bike 15 miles' for current projects.



The bike boulevard draft engineering goals are:



Goal 1: Maximize Safety for Cyclists



1.      Reduce cyclists' stress on bike boulevards and increase safety for cyclist by:

a.      Limiting the number of motor vehicles on bike boulevards to 1,000 vehicles per day.

b.      Reducing vehicle speeds (85%) to below 25 mph (preferably 20 mph).



2.      Increase crossing safety at high volume/high speed crossings (barrier streets) by:

a.      Shortening crossing distance or exposure to motor vehicle streams.

b.      Increasing the visibility between pedestrians/cyclists and motorists.

c.      Reducing vehicle speed on such cross street, if possible.



Goal 2: Minimize Delay for Cyclists



1.      Reduce delay for cyclists using bike streets so that such
streets are time-competitive with adjacent Neighborhood Collector
streets by:

a.      Eliminate, to the maximum extent possible, the number of times a cyclist on a bike street is required to stop.



Goal 3: Minimize Negative Impacts of Changes



1.  In our efforts to achieve a better environment for cycling
activity, some inconveniences will be imposed on local residents.
 Greater impacts are expected on residents that live closer to specific
diversion projects.  These impacts should be evaluated and minimized:

a.      Maintain as much access for emergency responders as possible

b.      Minimize or mitigate diversion onto adjacent Local streets as a result of diversion on the bike boulevard.

c.    Seek to not increase auto traffic on bike boulevards.



The sought outcome is to have a parallel arterial system for cyclist
that supports mode shift toward cycling and encourages the 'interested,
but reluctant' population to use the bicycle for more trips.



Scott Batson, PE

Portland Bureau of Transportation



Every intersection is a crosswalk



--
Archive: http://www.livablestreets.com/[…]/1263677869620


To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to pabikewalk-discussion@....  Please contact pabikewalk-discussion-manager@... for questions.






--
Archive: http://www.livablestreets.com/[…]/1263769554302
To unsubscribe send an email with subject "unsubscribe" to pabikewalk-discussion@....  Please contact pabikewalk-discussion-manager@... for questions.
 		 	   		  
_________________________________________________________________
Hotmail: Free, trusted and rich email service.
http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/196390708/direct/01/