46 replies to this topic

[BlueMound]

Bike Highway - Dedicated bike lanes next to key streets so that bike commuters from urban core neighborhoods can make the commute into the central business district. I think Atlanta, Nashville and Austin are trying to figure out how to do this.



Here's a thread on a forum that discusses the concept.
LINK to thread on skyscrapercity forum

[Doohickie]

The two streets I would like to see this on are Hulen from I-30 to Granbury Rd. and Bryant Irvin from I-30 all the way down to Dirks Road. I'm sure there are other similar streets around town that could use the same treatment, but those two stand out to me.

As it is, I believe the new Hulen bridge over the train tracks/river will have dedicated bike lanes; crossing that area is key to navigating the west side.

[BlueMound]

http://www.gizmag.co...-shakeup/26574/

 

London to spend 1 billion euros on a bike highway system

The system will include:

 

-15-mile (24-km) "Crossrail for the bike," substantially segregated from road traffic, connecting the suburbs of East and West London

 

- semi-segregated cycle paths along certain streets

 

- signposted "Quietways" along back streets

 

- extensions to London's recently-added cycling Superhighways.

 

- all routes will be joined up to create a "Central London Grid" of cyclist-friendly routes

[BlueMound]

A 137-Mile ‘Cycling Utopia’ Floating Above London’s Rail Lines

http://www.wired.com/autopia/2014/01/skycycle/

 

named SkyCycle

dedicated biking highway built above London’s rail lines.

stretch 137 miles in and around the city

12,000 riders per hour on a cycling superhighway 50 feet wide

200 on- and off-ramps

[Dylan]

We have plenty of rail lines that we could easily build bike trails next to.

[BlueMound]

Copenhagen's new bike skyway makes commuting look fun

http://www.wired.com...uting-look-fun/

[Volare]

Well, who would want anything like that?!

 

Besides, what's with all the pedestrians on there? Maybe they'll plaster "slow zone" signs and speedbumps all over it to keep them "safe."

[JBB]

I thought you out-of-control urbanists wanted to tear down highwa...oh, wrong thread.

[johnfwd]

We have plenty of rail lines that we could easily build bike trails next to.

Nice idea, but not TOOO close to the rail lines.  Somehow the thought of bicycling within five feet of and parallel to a charging freight train doesn't appeal to me.

[Doohickie]

There are several rail lines that are no longer used; most rails-to-trails project are conversion of dormant rail routes to bike trails.  In west Ft Worth, there is a spur that runs from the line south of Vickery to Lockheed that is no longer used.  It would make a great bike commuter route for Lockheed employees.

 

Here's a rough outline of that route; it was done years ago while the tracks were still in place.based on some of the notes.

 

I found this years ago.
 

 

There was a whole thread about that particular spur.

[Not Sure]

Bomber Spur would be a great bike trail. As for active lines, well, I don't like being very close to moving freight trains myself, and I get paid to do it. Too much can go wrong.

[Doohickie]

The rail companies are private entities and they don't like cycles riding along their lines either.

[Doohickie]

If anyone cares, here's the whole spur. Looking further north from the map above, you can see how it would be handy for Lockheed bike commuters.

 

 

There's also a branch following Alta Mere that would easily connect with Roaring Springs road very near Airfield Falls.

[JBB]

The Cottonbelt Trail through NRH, Colleyville, and runs parallel to the active FW&W (and future Tex Rail) line for much of its length.

[Not Sure]

The Cottonbelt Trail through NRH, Colleyville, and runs parallel to the active FW&W (and future Tex Rail) line for much of its length.

 

I'm looking forward to a time when the Cotton Belt trail continues farther to the south, maybe through or alongside the Iron Horse golf course. Connections to the Fort Worth trail system would really help make it a viable transportation alternative for northeast Tarrant County.

[Doohickie]

I think a lot of the time, people see bike infrastructure as "recreational".  But if you put enough recreational trails together end-to-end, before you know it you can use them for transportation.

[johnfwd]

I think a lot of the time, people see bike infrastructure as "recreational".  But if you put enough recreational trails together end-to-end, before you know it you can use them for transportation.

About twice a week I'm reminded that the best bicycle "highway" in Fort Worth at present are the Trinity River trails, mostly along the west bank from southwest Fort Worth and north beyond the West Seventh Street bridge.   My concern is getting to and from the river trails to the south edge of downtown near Lancaster where I work.  This is commuter talk, not recreational whimsy.  I don't want to climb onto the Lancaster bridge and go east, it's too scary because of the auto traffic.  Could go further north to the W7 bridge (can you get on it from the trails?) and then go east.  But W7 bridge is still more for autos than for bikers or pedestrians.

 

So, instead,  I enter downtown from the west river trail at the new pedestrian bridge, then go north along the east river trail to NW 10 at Forest Park Boulevard.  Problem with that is having to cross dangerous Forest Park Blvd and having to slog up the steep climb on NW 10th.  I wish there were bike/pedestrian spans linking the river trails into downtown, maybe one to the south DT and one to the north DT.   But that would mean $$$$ and political will to accomplish.

[Volare]

W7th bridge is directly connected to the trail and is separated from traffic by the arches. That's the way I would go!

[djold1]

Financing all this is really pretty easy.  Simply direct a small portion of the B Cycle revenue to a building & maintenance fund for new bridges, accessibility and maintenance.  And then go directly to the source of those benefiting by licensing all bikes with a a wheel size of 22" and larger.  

 

The fee structure should cover the cost of the bike highways and their maintenance, proportional to the percentage use of the surface by those on bikes.  I think the local bikers associations would immediately go for this since it is to their benefit and would eagerly help sell the idea of the b-highway funding to others.  And after all, what could be more fair?  An improved and maintained biking ways supported directly by those who use it.  

 

I'm  surprised that the local biking groups haven't voluntarily proposed something like this already to the Mayor who I think would immediately start things in motion....   

[Volare]

B-cycle WHAT?

 

B-cycle is not a City function. It is a non-profit that has seen very little investment from the City (in contrast to most cities where bike sharing exists). In fact I think the extent of Fort Worth City funding support was the waiver of some permitting costs for the stations.

 

Betsy likes to ride in on a B-Cycle to her Blue Zone meeting- a great photo op, but the fact is the City has proposed ZERO dollars of funding for bicycles and infrastructre in the 2015 budget.

 

http://www.star-tele...es-default?rh=1

 

Not sure how you get to the Blue Zone theory while allocating zero funds for things like bikes.

[John T Roberts]

I find the 7th Street Bridge is about the easiest way to get into town from the Trinity Trails. As Volare stated, the trail makes a direct connection and the wide sidewalk on both sides for bicycles and pedestrians is separated from the traffic lanes.  Not using 7th Street Bridge forces a cyclist to climb up the Trinity River Bluff on a steep hill.  I have never found any of these hills that difficult to climb, but I do realize that for the average cyclist, these hills are a big challenge.  

[johnfwd]

One of the good things about the Trinity River trails as a "bike highway" is that the surface is relatively smooth and free of glass and other clutter that can puncture the tire and cause a flat.  Unfortunately, I can't say that about the stretches of regular roadway that serve as ingress and egress to the trails.  People without thought or consideration leave broken glass, nails, etc., on the sides of the roads in the path of my bike.  Because I start out for work on my bike in the dark of early morning, I can't see this dangerous clutter, even with a headlight.  Have had more than one flat, of late (can't tell whether any were pinch flats).

 

I also wish the city would complete the trail pavement along a brief stretch of the trails adjacent to the new Forest Park Medical Center.  They are working on it.

[djold1]

From an earlier post:

 

" And then go directly to the source of those benefiting by licensing all bikes with a a wheel size of 22" and larger.  The fee structure should cover the cost of the bike highways and their maintenance, proportional to the percentage use of the surface by those on bikes.  I think the local bikers associations would immediately go for this since it is to their benefit and would eagerly help sell the idea of the b-highway funding to others.  And after all, what could be more fair?  An improved and maintained biking ways supported directly by those who use it.  "

 

The absolute silence as a response to my earlier suggestion is very interesting.  Especially for those who want expanded capabilities and well maintained bike paths of all kinds. Is there something written somewhere that bike riders should get... excuse this.. a free ride.. ??    Who pays for the planning, lane painting, fixing and building, etc., etc.?   I personally think a lot of this work on bike paths and trails is good.  But shouldn't those who use it have to directly pay for at least part of it, just as motorists pay licensing fees to cover part of their usage of rights of way?

[John T Roberts]

I think it may be the mentality that it used to be free, now they want me to pay for it; therefore, I'm not going to support it.

[djold1]

That's honest.. at least..  

[johnfwd]

From an earlier post:

 

" And then go directly to the source of those benefiting by licensing all bikes with a a wheel size of 22" and larger.  The fee structure should cover the cost of the bike highways and their maintenance, proportional to the percentage use of the surface by those on bikes.  I think the local bikers associations would immediately go for this since it is to their benefit and would eagerly help sell the idea of the b-highway funding to others.  And after all, what could be more fair?  An improved and maintained biking ways supported directly by those who use it.  "

 

.

I appreciate your suggestion about bicycle licensing and funding for bicycle highways.  FYI, this blogger website states that Los Angeles requires bikers to get license plates.  http://la.streetsblo...in-los-angeles/  But the rationale for licensing is to help identify stolen bicycles, not to earmark the fee proceeds for bicycle lane maintenance.

 

The fact is, because the bicycle lanes in Fort Worth are part of the roadways devoted to motor vehicle traffic, obviously the cost is borne under the city's street maintenance budget.  Now, a separate bicycle lane would also probably be used by pedestrians.  Is it fair to charge bicyclists a user fee but not pedestrians?  And, should we tax pedestrians in order to maintain sidewalks?  Of course we all pay taxes directly or indirectly to support our city and all its magnificent works.

[Doohickie]

The absolute silence as a response to my earlier suggestion is very interesting.

 

I took the whole thing as satire.  I didn't think you were serious.

 

How 'bout this for a proposal:  For whatever the share of cycling is of the overall mode share, that much of the city transportation budget goes to cycling.  If it's .1%, .1% supports cycling infrastructure.  If it's 3%, 3% goes to bike lanes and stuff.  It's only fair, don't you think?

[BlueMound]

London to build 2 new cycling superhighways

http://www.gizmag.co...way-2015/35814/

[johnfwd]

The two images show an expansive bicycle lane running parallel to a spacey "median" reserved for intermittent bicycle parking racks, all of this parallel to existing lanes for motor vehicle traffic.  This is great for downtown Londoners, who evidently have sufficient right-of-way.  Not sure any large U.S. city could do as much for bicycle riders other than drawing a white line  separating the shoulder of existing streets downtown.  I believe there's a separate thread featuring a discussion of where in Fort Worth to construct a bicycle highway.

[BlueMound]

Paris will build 5 bike highways

http://www.citylab.c...cycling/389724/

[BlueMound]

San Francisco to raise bike lanes

'It's a minimalist form of what's known as a protected bike lane, and one that's not as in-your-face'

http://www.citylab.c...e-lanes/392492/

[johnfwd]

I like the concept.  It might work here in such heavily trafficked thoroughfares as West Berry and Hemphill roads, provided the city desires to spend street construction money for bike riders.

[McHand]

It's not really necessary along those streets. Parallel residential streets provide a pleasant and safe ride.  

It would be especially useful in suburban far north and south Fort Worth.

[johnfwd]

South Fort Worth certainly needs a bike lane.  Forgot to mention Seminary Drive, based on my own experience of trying to ride my bike from southwest FW to the TCC South Campus recently.  There is no alternate to Seminary Drive in that neck of the woods.  The first leg of the trip is through the Overton Park neighborhoods and their steep hills. Further east there's nothing besides Seminary Drive but I-20, railroad tracks, and fields.  Regarding far north suburban, I'm not sure what streets you are specifically referring to.

[McHand]

Tarrant Parkway in Keller, for example. 

 

You're right about Seminary.

[johnfwd]

My thought or two about bike "highways."  Traditionally, a highway is less encumbered than a street, wider and no signal lights, etc.  In Fort Worth, I believe the closest thing to a bike highway is the Trinity Trails, even though it's shared with pedestrians.  Some of the discussion in this thread appears to relate more to bicycle lanes, than highways.  The scheme of raising a lane for bicyclists to separate it from motorists is an example.  A big problem with a bike lane is the same with buses, both have to stop at signal lights or other obstructions that may be inherent in the public street itself.  That's why all the talk about less-obstructive transit via commuter rail lines.  And, too, there is resentment among motorists about having to put up with a bike rider (I experienced that when I tried to bicycle on Seminary Drive and was told by police to get back on the sidewalk).

 

Back on a bike highway itself, I suspect it won't get built here or anywhere else unless their is political consensus favoring bicycling as a necessity rather than a recreation.  I believe bicycling is still viewed as more of a recreational rather than work commuting mode of transportation.  It's mainly for the young millenials and the health baby boomers out for exercise and doing a social activity.  Added to these downside considerations is the fact that prioritizing transportation projects because of the need to allocate limited resources may leave a bike lane out in the cold, so to speak.

[rriojas71]

This could possibly happen in the distant future, but I don't see city funding going to a project of this magnitude any time soon. I believe we are on the way, but there are just not enough cyclists for this to be feasible. I just moved back from SF/Bay Area and the amount of bicyclists there is unmatched compared to what I have noticed here. People here mainly ride for sport or excercise in SF they ride for everything (work commute, groceries, etc); it's a part of everyday life. For most people, that is their only means of private transportation. The car-centric culture here, the lack of truly dense urban neighborhoods and the extremely hot summers will unfortunately keep many people from making the conversion anytime soon.
I love the direction Fort Worth is heading though and I'm happy to be back.

[BlueMound]

Bike Autobahns could be coming to Munich
http://www.citylab.c...-munich/399410/

Munichs proposal imagines a new 14-path network of broad, two-way, entirely segregated bike highways that have neither crossroads nor traffic lights to hold up circulation.

[Urbndwlr]

I think the City/ Downtown Fort Worth Inc are working on the City's first protected bike lanes that will connect the Trinity RIver Trails via 10th Street to Downtown.  I dont know how far the "protected" part is supposed to run, however think is designed to make the connection to Downtown more comfortable and direct. 

Details might be on Bike Fort Worth or Downtown Fort Worth web sites. 

[Fort Worthology]

I'd be very interested to learn more - may have to contact a few people.  Exciting to hear!  The lack of logical links between the trail and the bike lanes has always bugged me - I did a post on the Weekly not long ago that talked in part about this exact item, in fact (how the east/west bike lanes on 10th & Texas don't connect to the trail while the trail has a signalized crossing to 5th street where there are no bike lanes).

[Doohickie]

I think the City/ Downtown Fort Worth Inc are working on the City's first protected bike lanes that will connect the Trinity RIver Trails via 10th Street to Downtown.  I dont know how far the "protected" part is supposed to run, however think is designed to make the connection to Downtown more comfortable and direct. 

Details might be on Bike Fort Worth or Downtown Fort Worth web sites. 

 

Good stuff.  I imagine it will run from the Trinity Trail/Forest Park Blvd. to Burnett Park.  Burnett Park is essentially downtown (at least from a bike transport perspective, imo).

 

Now if they could just flatten out the Trinity Bluff....

[BlueMound]

Germany launches its national 'Bike Autobahn'
http://www.citylab.c...network/422451/

[Urbndwlr]

Three things that are important regarding cyclists and pedestrians:

 

1) Each time a person walks or ride their bike to a destination, that REMOVES ONE CAR from the road. It might "inconvenience" a motorist however that cyclist or pedestrian is HELPING: a) lower car traffic congestion, improve air quality, c) lower carbon pollution, and d) improve the health of the people doing the walking and cycling!!

 

2) Cars impose a SIGNIFICANTLY higher maintenance cost to our infrastructure versus cyclists and pedestrians.  So when people gripe about the up front cost of building sidewalks, crosswalks, and bike lanes, remember, the cars we all drive (including me) tear up the roads much faster, which require expensive repairs and replacement every few years. 

 

3) Its good for our economy.  People are attracted to cities that have pedestrian and bike friendly environments.  Younger, well educated people in particular, show strong preferences for moving to cities that offer these environments - where people have the option of walking and riding bikes comfortably. 

[Austin55]

More money put into the Dallas-Fort worth connector. 

 

http://keranews.org/...rt-worth-dallas

 

Edit- Disregard, old article. 

[Volare]

More money put into the Dallas-Fort worth connector. 

 

http://keranews.org/...rt-worth-dallas

 

That article is from October 2014.

[Austin55]

Ah my apologies, it was making the rounds yesterday I was thinking it was something new. Thought it sounded familiar. 

[BlueMound]

Norway will almost $1 Billion on Bike Highways
http://www.citylab.c...dollars/472059/