Here’s the thing: These are serious issues. We should be concerned about them. But [...]]]>

I’ve been on a wee bit of a spree lately about the continual state of Defcon 11 every time there is federal hiccuping about restricting funds for Transportation Enhancements, or cutting Safe Routes to Schools, or classifying bicycles as vegetables instead of vehicles.

Here’s the thing: These are serious issues. We should be concerned about them. But freaking out every time it happens and having all the bicycle advocates write and call their congresscritters is a cute little bandage on a much larger problem — one that I don’t know that the active transport community is really prepared to deal with as yet.

To wit: The problem isn’t that these programs are under attack. The problem is that they are considered low-hanging fruit because the active transport lobby is considered a fringe segment, a small special interest group who wears funny spandex and don’t shower enough. The problem is that “cutting spending” is a big issue for a lot of people, but “safer biking and walking” is not.

Part of this is just the limitation of advocacy. Part of it is a failure to reach out from the circle of the converted and widen the scope of support. Part of it is that some of the advocates are unwilling to put the issues in a framework that a lot of people can support.

In general, biking and walking are not considered by a lot of people to be valid modes of daily transport. And that’s the problem. And to those people, when the advocacy community is represented by the militant car-free, or people who don’t have to buy diapers by the case, or people who can’t tie a tie and heavens knows don’t have to wear one to work… they get written off by the people who do have all of those issues.

The People For Bikes campaign from Bikes Belong has its heart in the right place — anyone who has ridden a bike should care. But even for P4B, a lot of the outreach has come at big bike races or other specialty events where the attendees are predisposed or already part of the community. Preaching to the converted is easy. This may be why, after launching the site in 2010 to try to get a million people to sign their pledge, they still haven’t hit half the goal.

Becoming sympathetic to people who perceive biking as “nice, but not for me because of time/family/commitment,” and showing them how offering added options helps them in their daily life even if they do not themselves embed their buttocks on banana seats is a lot harder. And it’s not necessarily happening enough.

As a result, TE is going to be on the block every 3-6 months for a long time. Until bicyclists convince Main Street America that bikes and pedestrians matter, that they are not merely a fringe contingent, those programs are easy targets to attack.

So ask yourself, if you support bicycling and walking, how you can help make it sympathetic to the woman working full-time with 2 kids in diapers. How street calming makes sense for an immigrant family who perceive bicycles as something children and poor people ride, and who aspire to join the car culture. How providing options that can increase community cohesion is not about special interests, but about providing freedom of choice as current options force a single modal selection. Can you back off of “bicycles as transportation!!” and expand the circle to emphasize the bicycle as a leisure activity that can and should be accommodated, and that it’s okay to maybe drive to the store for 4 gallons of milk, but bike out for some ice cream with the family — an activity that requires safe routes and traffic calming? And then get out there and try to do it.

It’s not that the lifestyle cyclists are wrong. But if the movement cannot expand and accept a broader base of people who benefit from transportation options and traffic calming, we will never get beyond a state of Save Cycling! Panic! Write your Congressperson Now! If we’re going to be expending all this energy, maybe we should do it fixing the disease, instead of slapping band-aids on gaping head wounds. And at the end of the day, the problem is that the circle isn’t yet big enough.

So go forth, and be friendly. Accept that multiple transport modes work for different situations in different families. Sympathize. And try to bring them into the movement.

I offer today a tale from close to (my) home of good intentions gone awry.

Blaine, Minnesota has been a fast-growing burbclave for some [...]]]>

I’ve talked quite a bit recently about how incremental change to encourage active transportation is very much dependent on working to improve existing poor development that can’t just be blown up with a do-over.

I offer today a tale from close to (my) home of good intentions gone awry.

Blaine, Minnesota has been a fast-growing burbclave for some time, with continued addition of new housing units. As part of some development, land was set aside to create a new city park. After last year’s opening of Lakeside Commons Park, it became wildly popular. It’s a pretty nice park — there’s a beach, there’s a splash pad, there are picnic shelters, you can rent canoes for the lake. Very pleasant.

This year, Blaine is trying to address the problem of parking at said park — there simply isn’t enough. One of the reasons is because it is next to impossible to get from one piece of Blaine to another. In the entire suburb, there are limited sidewalks. Crossing MN65 is a horror. Many major streets lack sidewalks, sidepaths or shoulders, and tend to roll in the 40 mph+ zone.

Per the local paper, even the more conservative parking lot extension plan amounts to about half of Blaine’s parks development funding budget for 2011. Half. All on more parking spots.

If you don’t live in the development the park is located in, or one of the developments along Radisson Road, which offers a shoulder and a sidepath along a 55mph roadway, it is nearly impossible to get there via bike. I’m an LCI, an experienced cyclist, and I’ve ridden on roads that would make some people need new pants, and I’m challenged to come up with a route from my house to this park — and I can’t do it if I have the Chariot or Trail-A-Bike along, frankly. They extend my total length such that at some points where I might otherwise use natural elements and medians for protection, I am unable to do so, and at some risk to my kid. Bad plan.

Blaine does know that the ability to walk and bike is an issue, and it’s addressed in the city plan. I don’t know that how to fix it or pay for it is addressed. I’m fairly certain that the Parks Development budget cannot be used to improve ways to cross MN65 or deal with all the streets that an experienced adult would fear.

So there goes $400,000 to build another sheet of asphalt, encouraging pollution and issues with run-off… so that people can enjoy a beach and walking paths. It makes no sense, but there’s your reality.

Data suggests that men outnumber women on bicycles in the United States by a ratio of two-to-one. In many European nations, the ratio [...]]]>

On this International Women’s Day, I thought I’d address one of the skeletons in the room when we discuss bicycle-friendly infrastructure and the interested-but-hesitant cyclist: A pretty good portion of that 60% is female.

Data suggests that men outnumber women on bicycles in the United States by a ratio of two-to-one. In many European nations, the ratio is far closer to one-to-one.

One reason for a lower incidence of women on bikes: Women generally have a greater share of responsibility for care of children. Women do more of the household shopping. The study in Scientific American suggests that bicycle routes need to be structured around “practical” destinations to support this gender role behavior. It’s hard to see a lot of average suburban moms hitting Costco on a bike. As I’ve said before: I get it. You won’t be bringing home diapers for two kids, a turkey, and several gallons of milk on a bike while also caring for a child regardless of infrastructure. (SA suggests this can be addressed via education. What?)

Another reason for women to bicycle less than men: Safety concerns. Women are typically found by studies to be more risk averse. The Association of Pedestrian & Bicycle Professionals did a survey in 2010 about women on bicycles. The report is very clear that the sample was not representative of population and also self-selecting — which is to say drawing strong conclusions on the data is fraught with issues. However, the data collected supports assertions that women are risk-averse: Women cited such concerns about cycling as motorist behavior, distracted driving, and stranger attacks.

The APBP study also asked respondents what would get them cycling more. The answers? More than 60% said bike lanes, and another 46% responded with completely separated bike paths/tracks. Better direct routes was also cited by more than 40% of respondents.

I’ve written about this before. Many special facilities lead inexperienced cyclists into a false sense of safety, and actually guide them into hazardous scenarios. I’ll quote myself, here:

Under most state laws, roads are bicycle facilities. We need to find ways to empower the 60% of reluctant cyclists to feel safe on these facilities, and we need to educate drivers not to be jerks. Additional segregated facilities need to be developed based on context — because, yeah, there are some routes on which they make lots of sense — and not based on a knee-jerk belief that they are “safer” or “better.” Segregating cyclists as a matter of policy doesn’t productively further a goal of having bicycling be considered a transport mode, and not a cute little way to get around for hipsters, hippies and people who just aren’t cool enough to have cars.

The challenge is how to calm streets so that all potential users — cyclists, pedestrians, women, kids, the elderly, dogs, etc. — can use them safely and confidently. An additional challenge is continued education to these groups. Bike/Walk Twin Cities have done a number of cycling seminars targeted specifically to women, and many other groups have done similarly.

I happen to believe that improving programs like Safe Routes to Schools could help influence women’s participation in cycling. Enabling those who are providing childcare with the means to choose active transport to get to school, athletics/extracurriculars, and even church will help cut down on the number of car trips under two miles.

I think [the bicycle] has done more to emancipate women than anything else in the world. It gives a woman a feeling of freedom and self-reliance. The moment she takes her seat she knows she can’t get into harm unless she gets off her bicycle, and away she goes, the picture of free, untrammeled womanhood. — Susan B. Anthony

Amen.

These clinics are a great place for new cyclists and cyclists who [...]]]>

For people who live in or near Anoka County, Safe Kids Anoka County have announced the dates for their 2011 bicycle helmet sale and fitting events. Bike helmets will be available for both adults and children for a mere $12 each, cash or check only.

These clinics are a great place for new cyclists and cyclists who are getting back on the bike after a hiatus to get a quality helmet on the cheap, and to get expert help getting the straps and everything all proper so that the helmet actually protects your forehead and other notable parts. Kid and toddler helmets are also a great deal via these clinics, especially since kids tend to outgrow stuff or need refitting every spring even when they don’t outgrow the helmet.

Dates and locations for 2011 include:

• Tuesday, April 12 — 4:00 – 8:00 PM, Blaine City Hall (10801 Town Square Drive, Blaine)

• Tuesday, April 26 — 4:00 – 7:00 PM, Anoka County Sheriff’s Office (13301 Hanson Boulevard NW, Andover)
• Tuesday, May 3 — 4:00 – 8:00 PM, Blaine City Hall (10801 Town Square Drive, Blaine)
• Thursday, May 5 — 4:00 – 7:00 PM, Ramsey City Hall (7550 Sunwood Drive NW, Ramsey)
• Wednesday, May 18 — 4:00 – 7:00 PM, Fridley Police Department (6431 University Avenue NE, Fridley)

Come on down and nab thyself a melon cover if you need one, or they make excellent gifts for all gift-giving occasions.

Nearly 175 people from throughout the state of Minnesota joined the Bicycle Alliance of Minnesota at the inaugural Minnesota Bicycle Summit on February 28, 2011. Featuring a mix of politicians, industry organizations, and interest groups, the Summit highlighted current successes and challenges for cycling in [...]]]>

From the Minnesota Bicycle Summit 2011

• Morning Session
• Legislative Agenda
• Lunch & Capitol Rotunda Sessions

Nearly 175 people from throughout the state of Minnesota joined the Bicycle Alliance of Minnesota at the inaugural Minnesota Bicycle Summit on February 28, 2011. Featuring a mix of politicians, industry organizations, and interest groups, the Summit highlighted current successes and challenges for cycling in Minnesota. The current economic climate puts funding for cycling projects at risk both in-state and federally. Summit attendees learned valuable facts to help stand up for bikes in policy discussions, seasoned with a healthy dose of cheerleading from Summit speakers.

Mayor RT Rybak, Minneapolis

We kicked off our morning with Minneapolis Mayor RT Rybak at the podium. Minneapolis was named Bicycling’s #1 city for cycling in 2010, and has benefitted from participation in the Non-Motorized Transportation Pilot Program — as well as from strong support from Minneapolis’ mayor and other politicians!

Mayor Rybak is an engaging speaker, and with a crowd with a significant mix of Minneapolis citizens, the group was receptive to his messages: Saluting the economic power of cycling, and the need for cyclists and friends to keep pushing government officials for infrastructure and investment.

Per Mayor Rybak, cycling is economic because it reduces traffic congestion, which reduces productivity and is a critical business issue. It also is a quality of life issue — left unsaid is the suggestion that quality of life improves productivity, because it attracts talent to live within desirable metro areas. It is also economic because it can create jobs and attract tourism dollars — he cites his upcoming trip to Amsterdam to promote Minneapolis tourism to the Dutch, as there are direct flights between MSP-AMS. The cycling culture and bikeshare system can help attract Europeans used to using cycling as a common transport mode.

Cycling is an example of people leading government in a citizen movement. Programs like Complete Streets encourage the rethinking of infrastructure, and programs like Safe Routes to Schools speak to values, not just transportation options.

Closing on a favorite note, Mayor Rybak exhorted the crowd to continue to push the agenda and make known the views of cyclists and citizens. As ever, he made the popular observation that “Portland is just an avenue in Minneapolis!” to bring his part of the Minnesota Bicycle Summit to a close on a note of laughter.

Senator Julie Rosen (R-Fairmont)

Following Mayor Rybak, State Senator Julie Rosen of Fairmont addressed the Summit. Senator Rosen is Chair of the Energy, Utilities & Telecommunications Committee, Vice Chair of the Health & Human Services Committee, and is also a member of the Capital Investment Committee. An avid cyclist, she told the crowd that while many might ask why they would ride their bicycle on a day like today, she’d ask “Why wouldn’t you ride your bicycle on a day like today?” with its bright sun and reasonable temperature.

Senator Rosen told stories about purchasing her bike (a Serrotta), and riding RAGBRAI multiple times (not a piece of cake — there are hills and wind, but it’s a great party, she says). She also talked about key policy issues facing cyclists and the Legislature. She said that there was “unlikely” to be a bonding bill this biennium, but that ongoing use of Legacy funds would be good for cycling in Minnesota. A key concern for her is Minnesota’s obesity rate. She feels there is a tremendous amount of work to be done for both cycling and health in the state. She loves Complete Streets and says that while it’s been confusing to some, it’s progress for all users of streets. She is concerned by attempts to roll back smoking bans in Minnesota, and encouraged cyclists to speak out against these attempts, as it’s an issue health-oriented cyclists should care about as well.

Her tips for presenting cycling to legislators on either side of the aisle? Zero in on return on investment. Cycling and cycling infrastructure is an investment that creates jobs, reduces health costs, and improves overall quality of life in Minnesota in measurable ways. Such messages will have ongoing merit during budget discussions, even as the economy improves.

Barb Thoman, Transit for Livable Communities

Barb Thoman, Executive Director of Transit for Livable Communities, followed Senator Rosen to discuss the Non-Motorized Transportation Pilot Program and Bike/Walk Twin Cities. She recapped how the pilot came to be in 2005 under the leadership of Representative James Oberstar, and the vision of accelerating bicycle network growth via targeted investment, and evaluation of that investment. Minneapolis is one of four pilot sites nationally, and has received more than $10 million in federal dollars for the program.

As part of the pilot, TLC do regular cyclist counts — monthly in many cases, with daily automated counts on some corridors. Other study has been done throughout the project to quantify results for communication to legislators. Per Ms. Thoman, the pilot is more than an infrastructure program: It includes bicycle education for cyclists, law enforcement, public works officials, and elected officials to better understand cycling, as well as funds to enhance enforcement of bicycle and vehicle law. The goal is to drive a mode shift and encourage cycling as a valid modal choice.

At the same time, much of the money has been spent on infrastructure. The Hiawatha bikeway to downtown will be completed in 2011, and other funds have been used on a variety of on- and off-road routes, sidewalk connections, enhanced pedestrian crossings, and more. A variety of studies to support planning are also underway, including studies of problem intersections.

Ms. Thoman was able to announce three new TLC grants today totaling more than $1 million:

• $62,000 to the city of Minneapolis for improvements to Franklin Avenue through the Seward neighborhood, including crosswalk countdown timers, marked crosswalks, and curb extensions. The project may also include bicycle lanes.

• $110,000 to the city of Fridley to fund new sidewalks and bike lanes on Main Street from 57th Avenue to 61st Avenue. This will help connect the surrounding community to the Fridley North Star commuter rail station, and is part of Fridley’s new comprehensive bicycle/pedestrian plan. Fridley will be contributing an additional $67,000 to the project, and an additional program will implement bicycle parking through the enhanced corridor.
• Finally, an additional $1 million grant will be made to the Nice Ride Minnesota program. With matching funds of an additional $500,000 from Blue Cross Blue Shield and the Central Corridor Funders Collaborative, the funds will be used to expand Nice Ride to north Minneapolis, and across the river in St. Paul.

Ms. Thoman ended her segment on a somber note, noting the interconnectedness of transit, cycling, and pedestrian access. Transit funding, including funding for buses, is under threat at the state and federal levels. She encouraged the audience to speak up for these funds, as they provide important links for alternate transportation and help enable the total network.

Nick Mason, Bicycle Alliance of Minnesota

Nick Mason, Education Director and Technical Program Associate of the Bicycle Alliance of Minnesota, gave a presentation chock full of facts that advocates can use to argue for bicycle investment. Key to his presentation is the notion that bicyclists are NOT a special interest group — more than 2.6 million Minnesotans have ridden a bicycle in the last year, and cycling has an economic impact of more than $1 billion annually in the state.

Some key facts offered included:

• Minnesota has two recognized Bicycle Friendly Communities — Minneapolis and Rochester.

• Minnesota has more Bicycle Friendly Businesses than any other state, employing more than 38,000 people.
• Twin Cities bicycle retail, wholesale and manufacturing is worth more than $300 million annually.
• Minnesota is home to the largest bike tool manufacturer in the US (Park Tool), the largest bike parts distributor in the world (Quality Bicycle Products), and more than 160 small business bicycle shops.
• A recent University of Minnesota Tourism Center study determined that cycling creates more than 5,000 jobs in the state, and generates more than $1 billion in annual revenue — more than hunting and snowmobiling combined. Due to study limitations, it is believed that the study actually understates economic impact!
• Minnesota was named the Best Trails State in 2010 by American Trails.

Nick also mentioned a study in Wisconsin that suggested that more than $318 million in health costs could be saved if just 20% of all trips under 2 miles in Madison and Milwaukee alone that are now made by automobile were replaced by bicycle trips. Given that 40-60% of all trips made in the US are under 2 miles, this suggests the potential for massive cost savings in health and traffic congestion should mode shift be encouraged and occur.

Another topic Nick discussed were findings that 60% of transport cyclists are interested in cycling more, but concerned about safety, compared to 32% of people who are not interested in using bikes for transport, and the 8% of cyclists who are either strong and fearless, or enthusiastic and confident — the core cycling community. He discussed the challenge of describing benefit of cycling investment to the 32% while investing in infrastructure and programs to enable the 60% who are interested but concerned.

Nick’s statistics helped lead in to the portion of the program focused on the legislative agenda, and how to be an effective citizen lobbyist — summarized in a separate post.

Representative Leon Lillie (DFL-North Saint Paul)

State Representative Leon Lillie of North Saint Paul closed out the morning. He told his personal cycling story — how he bought a bike at a pawn shop in early 2009 and became hooked, upgrading his bike and then riding across the United States in the fall of that same year. He feels that cycling is a lifestyle, and believes that we can all play a part in instilling the lifestyle and its values in Minnesota’s youth. He feels a key goal for him in encouraging cycling is to get more kids on bicycles and to start them on a life of better health.

After Representative Lillie finished, the group lined up for lunch, which would include speeches by Rochester Mayor Ardell Brede, and a pep talk from former US Representative James Oberstar.

Personally, I find this a little ridiculous. By 12 months, many children are pulling [...]]]>

If you read the literature that comes with the average bicycle baby trailer, your reaction to actually hooking it up may be one of panic. Industry standard recommendation is not to even put the kid into a trailer until at least 12 months.

Personally, I find this a little ridiculous. By 12 months, many children are pulling themselves to standing positions or even walking. While there are certainly developmental concerns to be heeded before putting a kiddo in a trailer, that level of advancement is not necessary. At the same time, the people who rig up strange accommodations involving their carseats and the trailer are probably jumping the gun, and creating unstable riding situations.

With my first child, he didn’t land in the trailer for cycling purposes until about 10 months — he was born in the spring, so that first summer was not going to happen, regardless. My second child is a winter baby, and depending on her development, she may get into the trailer in time for fall 2011 — or wait until spring 2012, when she’ll be closer to 18 months.

My doctor says the 1-year recommendation is probably lawyer-driven, and based on a conservative expectation of infant development. Here are some physical signs that a child may be ready for a trailer ride:

• Able to sit up under his/her own power
• Good neck strength
• Ability to find a helmet that fits/trailer harness that is secure

Neck strength is probably the biggest factor, as the bike helmet adds some weight/awkwardness that neck strength is needed to deal with. The soft spots (fontanelles) on a baby’s skull are also a potential factor — but 12 months isn’t a particularly solid guideline around the soft spot, as they typically begin to close at 6 months but won’t completely grow together until sometime between the 9th and 18th month.

My recommendation is to speak to a medical professional about your child’s physical readiness for a trailer experience. Keep in mind that even with a nice child trailer, the ride in a child trailer is not especially smooth, even on the nicest trail. Every bump will be felt. When you feel comfortable putting the child in the trailer, try to choose smooth routes that will minimize the jostling of the trailer. It helps to have a doctor who is supportive of cycling, and whose response won’t be to freak out about the general safety of cycling.

Additional tips I offer based on personal experience:

• Build in fun stops, especially as the kiddo gets mobile. Parks are always a good choice.
• Carry snacks.
• Ride with a friend. Even if you have someone to call if you have a major mechanical or the like, it’s good to have a buddy with in case of an emergency where you can’t call or someone needs to hang on to the kiddo.
• Wear your damn helmet. It is not okay to make sure your kid has one and you do not. Being the adult means being a good example.
• Be sure your bike is in good condition. Tune-ups matter.
• Don’t try too long a ride the first few times out, between the kid getting used to stuff, and you getting used to the turning radius and weight.

Once we started with Child #1 in trailer, we found he liked to nap in the trailer, and sometimes sing. In nice weather these days, at nearly 3, he’s been known to march up to either me or his father holding his bicycle helmet to demand a ride in the trailer, and he also loves outings to the Thursday Night Races at the NSC Velodrome. We’re hoping to achieve similar result with his little sister, when she’s able to get on board — probably in early fall 2011.

Nothing is wrong with safety. Effective bicycle drivers exhibit behaviors that add to their safety.

But let’s be honest: The fixation on safety is born of fear. Fear of the road. Fear of [...]]]>

One of the greatest barricades to the success of bicycle education in this country is that the core value proposition marketed for it is ‘safety.’

Nothing is wrong with safety. Effective bicycle drivers exhibit behaviors that add to their safety.

But let’s be honest: The fixation on safety is born of fear. Fear of the road. Fear of cars. Fears that may or may not have anything to do with actual statistics, and fear that can be mitigated though appropriate bicycle driving behaviors.

Safety and fear also end up as poor marketing messages to another whole segment of the biking population: Those who aren’t scared. Unfortunately, for many of these riders, a few tips on effective riding would really be a good thing. However, they see bike education as something for the novices and the hesitant. Safety is boring.

Studies suggest that the confident and/or fearless cyclists make up about 8% of the population. Another 60%, though, rate as “Interested But Concerned.” Finding ways to get these people on bicycles is essential for the growth of active transport in this country, as it provides significant political and social support for the practice.

As well, data from Portland (OR) and New York City suggest that cycling may improve traffic safety overall – not just for cyclists. More cyclists and greater acceptance of their road rights lead to greater caution shown by motorists and others.

There are a lot of challenges in the fear message. As Elly Blue writes in a great piece entitled Don’t fear riding a bicycle, “The real thing that’s killing us is that we continue to create places that impose barriers to actually being able to move your body.”

Roadway design and Complete Streets policies help, both with removal of barriers, and mitigation of fear. Providing a variety of different on- and off-street options for cyclists is typically more effective than trying to convince people that they’re being irrationally fearful, although it can be expensive.

Education, while less expensive, continues to have a lot of marketing barriers and participation issues. Programs like Bikeability in the UK show one model of removing the fear-safety marketing and achieving widespread participation. Various programs in the US take innovative approaches to increasing participation rates. But many programs continue to be marketed with fear as a motivator, and I think that ends up counter-productive to the movement as a whole. While there there is clear basis for the target audience being receptive to a message of fear, fear also prompts people to keep their kids inside, not ride themselves or only ride on recreational trails and not for transport, and other limiting behaviors.

The safety and fear factors should be kept in mind by cycling advocates when working for bikeway development. The interested/fearful population do not think that cycling advocates are ‘like them,’ and really – bike advocates tend to be confident and passionate, and thus somewhat separated from the fear. The confidence can even be off-putting to those who are generally fearful. This is not to say “become less confident,” but consider how to make projects relatable to that group without relying too heavily on perpetuating fear. Together, advocates can come up with positive approaches and achieve greater buy in with less fear.

Generally speaking, every type of bicycle facility has its own drawbacks. Frequently, [...]]]>

Regular readers of this site will know that I can be a bit of a crank about certain types of bicycle facilities:

• Signage alone doesn’t make a route ‘bicycle-friendly.’

• Paint jobs sometimes just indicate what the knowledgeable already know.
• Bike lanes as backfill can create their own hazards.

Generally speaking, every type of bicycle facility has its own drawbacks. Frequently, the choice of implementation is based on familiarity or ease, rather than a real evaluation of the different drawbacks.

That’s why this article on Bikeway Network Recipes is interesting. The author rightly views all of the options as part of a toolkit. She specifically cites the Copenhagen cycling network – often held up as a model by others – and calls out the drawback found by some residents of that city: That inexperienced cyclists (and parents of small children!) are uncomfortable with them and thus don’t use them!

Her recommended recipe is to take advantage of the relatively easy-to-implement bike lanes and boulevards while also working on some of the high-profile, harder to implement and more expensive projects. In the Twin Cities, examples of this kind of split would be the Jefferson Avenue bicycle boulevard in St. Paul (fairly cheap, and really just a paint job indicating what locals already know to be true), and the Cedar Lake Trail extension (years in the making, fiercely expensive, but a needed piece of the network).

I especially like her thought to start wherever you can – and to keep going. The money quote, though:

…if there’s no reaction in the media, business community, or neighborhoods, you probably haven’t done enough – because you need to have the changes be visible enough to provoke a spirited conversation about bicycling as a mainstream form of transportation.

And that’s really what we need – a view of cyclists as the norm, and not freaks or fringe.