Ray,
I agree with you that the commission should represent a balance of values.
Here are a few values that I suggest should be represented on the
commission.
One excellent reason why attached bike lanes make the most sense for
transportation type bicycling is that the attached lanes are much cheaper
and easier to maintain year around then separate paths. Street sweepers
and snow plows can serve these routes where they wouldn't easily serve the
separated routes.
Another issue is the separation of bicycles from pedestrians. When
bicycles and pedestrians are combined on a path, the bicyclist must slow to
yield to the pedestrian to avoid serious injury. This tends to discourage
the use of bicycles as a serious transportation alternative for the
commuter. Young children, of course, will continue to use sidewalks and
other pedestrian routes.
Thirdly, people using bicycles to transport themselves need to make turns
onto other roads just as motorists do. Bikes are used by people to go to
stores, schools, work, and homes...the same places that cars are driven to.
It would be expensive to have a complete pattern of separate bike paths
that would give the bicycle the same latitude as an automobile. On most
roads in the city, bikes can easily share the same lanes as cars. Bike
lanes are usually only suggested where auto traffic is heavier or faster.
Combined bike/ped paths are nice for recreational purposes. However, since
a large portion of the money for both the State 8 and Mountainview road
projects come from the Idaho Transportation Department, we must consider
the transportation uses of the particular road projects.
Tom