I’m with Claire. Riding “against” traffic is dangerous. Cars coming in who want to turn right are going to look left for oncoming cars and not see you until it’s too late. The same situation exists on West Lake Sammamish, and for that reason I will not ride in that bike lane going north, it’s just too dangerous. Better to be in the lane where cars are looking and can SEE you than riding in the wrong direction.

If you think that a bicyclist is a second class road user, then this is perfect.
If you think a bicyclist is a vehicle operator, like the law says, then this thing is dangerous.
Claire is spot on.
The place people get killed isn’t from being hit from behind, it’s INTERSECTIONS, this thing makes it MORE DANGEROUS.
Washington State isn’t Oregon, we don’t have a mandatory bike lane law, we can use the streets lawfully and as vehicle operators without having this separate but unequal marginalization to try to herd us into gutter bike lanes and toy roadways. Ride in the road like a grown up.
This does more harm than good.

Well, that makes Linden one more street I’ll have to avoid while on bike. This just isn’t going to work. If you look at what works other places, it isn’t infrastructure like this at all.

And yes, I’ll will have to avoid Linden now, because I won’t ride where it’s dangerous, and now that that cycle track is there, I have been effectively deprived of the roadway. If I try to use to roadway, drivers will take it away from me by force. I know this, because it has happened.

SDOT, stop trying so hard.

It’s difficult to get past the egregious and annoying overuse of the word “awesome” to garner any information from this post. (don’t get me started on the grammar and obvious lack of proof reading)

Looking at this photo, my first question would be, if you are going against traffic in one of these things, how do you safely get out of it and continue your ride?

Nora, Spandex warriors, really?
I’m 60 years old. Have been an adult cyclist since 1972. Taught my now 30something children how to ride a bike in traffic using the law and best practices, now teaching my grandchildren.
It’s really easy to ride in traffic on the road, and after you learn ou’ll find you don’t need or want anything but the road. Traffic signals that work for bikes would be nice though.

I’m comfortable with and often share the vehicular mindset and behavior, and I agree that it’s safer in many contexts to ride as part of traffic. But I think vehicular cyclists need to realize that they are an exception, and that much of their viewpoint derives from experiences with poorly done bike-specific infrastructure that is not representative of what is possible.

The more people who are on bikes, the safer we all are, and the better our communities are. We need to follow policies that will encourage as many people to ride as possible. The fact is, far more people won’t ride in traffic than will ride in traffic. We shouldn’t look down on those people–there is more than one way to ride a bike, and anyone willing to get on two wheels is an ally.

So what we need is a mix of infrastructure. Regional trails are great for those who can use them. So are cycle tracks. So are traditional bike lanes where the money doesn’t exist to put in a track, but where enough users want some separation. And yes, riding as traffic is always an option, and the majority of streets will have no bike infrastructure and will continue to be navigable in the vehicular style. In fact, nothing keeps you from riding vehicularly on a street with a cycle track if you really prefer it.

I understand the fear that when there’s an (inferior, at least to you) separate facility for bikes, drivers might resent anyone who opts out of that facility and engage in dangerous behavior towards cyclists on the road. But that only makes sense when you’re talking about a low-quality facility that doesn’t attract many riders, like the all-too-common bike lane that directs you into the door zone and over dangerous grates and into sudden walls. If you provide quality separated infrastructure, people use it, and that changes the overall traffic culture to be more accepting of bikes, whether they are part of mixed traffic or not. Real world experience shows that good cycle tracks change the culture, and even vehicular-style cyclists become more accepted.

One more thing: there is a sneer of elitism in anyone who advocates a single way of cycling. That mentality does not represent cyclists well and alienates the broader community, and keeps people from riding. Whether someone thinks that bikes are vehicles and only vehicles, or toys and only toys, or hipster style choices, or insert any faction or stereotype here, they’re wrong, and they are making riding less safe for everyone.

I’ve read and absorbed Forester’s vehicular cycling methodology. It has certainly come in-handy, particular at intersections and particularly if I’m biking solo. If I’m on my cargo bike with kids, heavy cargo, or oddly shaped cargo I find the vehicular cycling approach is rather impractical. I can’t maintain 18 miles per hour (hell, I can’t do that on our cargo bike that has an electric assist either.) mostly because the weight of bike + cargo makes it physically impossible. I’m a fit person but there’s just things that you can’t do. I appreciate the cycle-track concepts for the ability to cargo bike with confidence again.

As a cargo biker I get stopped a lot to chat with people new to biking or cargo biking. Usually it is a lot of “Wow, I had no idea that was possible on a bike!” and then after a test ride they’ll most often say “It was great! Although, I can’t imagine riding in traffic with kids on this sorta bike, especially up hills.” Now, I do it all the time but I’ve been cycling *way* longer than they have and no amount of comforting or “It works for me!” is going to persuade these nice folks to put their family at risk (even if the perception of risk isn’t justified or grossly blown out of proportion.) I’d like to think cycle-tracks are potential avenue to these folks on the road consistently for certain kinds of trips. And then we let the magic of biking take over and they’ll pick up Forester’s book one day and figure out on for themselves how to integrate both means of cycling.

In my word I build and ship products but in order to do that I need prototypes vetted with real people in their normal everyday context. Cycle-tracks have worked in other cities but those cities aren’t Seattle – will it work here? Hell if I know, but we need a pilot project w/ usage data before we can shoot this thing down or promote it as the tool to win-over the next generation of cyclists. I’m willing to see how this plays out and then make an assessment as to whether bi-directional, uni-directional, or none of the above is going to do it.