I’m confused by the recent column describing “lessons learned” from this summer’s protected bike lane project downtown. I was initially very excited to hear about this project. I was less excited when I saw the white plastic posts marking the route, which are not aesthetically appealing and don’t really provide any protection. But I figured that if the project succeeds, something better-looking and safer could be put in.
The real problem is usage. I drive by some part of the route two or three times a day, and I think that this summer I have seen a total of about 10 riders.
Having fewer lanes and not seeing many bikes just irritates a lot of drivers.
The recent column was short on data points. Were there ever fixed criteria for success in this experiment? If so, what were they, and were they met? The only data point I saw was that there is an organized ride every Tuesday evening. But that is not really a lesson, is it? Because I have a hunch those rides were planned before the project was even implemented.
I am all for more bikes and fewer cars — not only downtown but in Anchorage as a whole. I am a member of the Public Transit Advisory Board. I would love to see something big, like making part of Fourth Avenue a pedestrian mall. But I don’t think the cause is advanced by projects without fixed criteria, announced in advance. And unfortunately, I don’t think this bike lane is an “if you build it, they will come” situation. It is not, for example, like the Tony Knowles Coastal Trail, which had its own natural constituency.
Give us a project we can really get behind.
— Doug Miller
Anchorage
Have something on your mind? Send to letters@adn.com or click here to submit via any web browser. Letters under 200 words have the best chance of being published. Writers should disclose any personal or professional connections with the subjects of their letters. Letters are edited for accuracy, clarity and length.