The Prescott Bike Plan will soon be updated by the PBAC. This update will probably reflect the cities new attitude towards bike facilities. This new attitude is evident by the Prescott City Council's decision to include bike lanes on the Watson Woods Bridge. In my opinion the Current bike plan is very wishy-washy in its language. It currently says things like "bike facilities will be considered."  I do not blame the previous authors of the Bike Plan in any way.  Things have changed for the better since then. We have a new openly pro-bike facility Mayer and a new City Council that appears very supportive. This presents a new opportunity that should not be missed in the updated version of the Prescott Bike Plan. We should write a Bike Plan that guarantees that things will happen.

I have several convictions about bike facilities that I would like to share. This is no holds barred and aiming high. These are my personal opinion, based on 20  years of serious riding in several different settings. I do not speak for the Chain Gang or the PBAC in this article. This is not my proposal to be voted on or exactly what I think that the Bike Plan should look like. These are my ideas and beliefs.  If you agree or disagree please come to the PBAC meetings at City Hall the first Weds. of each month 5:30 PM. and voice your opinion or write it down for a future edition of the Chain Mail.

Sweeping could be the most important aspect to any bike facility. A lot of road bike wrecks have something to do with sliding on small debris or dirt on the road. Especially in the turns. A bike used for commuting usually has a tire that is pretty narrow.   Commuting tires are much narrower than Mt. Bike tires that are meant for rough dirt trails.  A bike used for riding to work or other transportation will have a tire just slightly larger than a road racing bike and  road racing bikes will have tires as narrow as one finger and pumped hard as a rock. 120psi. This makes dirt on the road feel like ice for bikes with narrow tires and extremely dangerous.   I have seen bike lanes in other cities that were rendered useless by too much dirt in the lane.  Monthly or at least quarterly sweeping should be a component of any bike facility.  

In the past the limited bike facilities in town have been geared towards mountain bikes because of the expectation of riding on a dirt path or a dirty shoulder.  Telling me that I have to ride a mountain bike on the road to get around town is like telling a motorist that they have to drive a 4x4 truck instead of a small car.  Its my choice.   I think that when we update the Bike Plan we should accommodate every type of bike.   Just like the paved roads are designed to accommodate all forms of motor vehicles.

Bike lanes are by far the best option when they are economically possible and meet AASHTO guidelines. I have lived in many towns that have bike lanes everywhere and it was much safer for car and bike. I saw no disadvantages to either car or bike. The advantages for bikes are obvious (to us bikers) but the advantages and clarity that it brings to cars is equally important. When I am driving my RV and I come up to a cyclist I can have a real problem unless there is a bike lane. If there is a bike lane I just drive the beast between the lines. All motorists are well practiced in staying between the lines. The fact that there is a bike lane would also serve as warning that bikes are common on this road and to look out for them, bike lanes also create a park like atmosphere which improves everyone's quality of life. I even hear that it increases property values. You can not lose with bike lanes.  WIN-WIN

For these reasons I think that any road that can economically have an AASHTO approved bike lane added to it should have a bike lane added as soon as possible. All new roads can economically have a bike lane included from the beginning of it's design. Existing roads that are getting widened or other major construction could economically receive a bike lane as well. There are many other existing roads that may already have enough room and may just need paint and signs.

The only reason I can think of that a bike lane is not the best facility for any road is if it can not meet AASHTO standards or the cost to retrofit a road is unreasonably high.

A new city policy or ordinance should state that all brand new roads and roads getting widened or other major construction automatically get an (AASHTO approved) bike lanes.   This city Policy would ensure that bike lanes would be built for years to come.  It seems like most roads around here get widened sooner or later and we would eventually wind up with a bike lane on most roads. 

Prescott will soon be erecting bike route signs on some of the logical back ways of getting around town.  This is part of Phase 1. There appears to be a misconception, with some, in the Prescott bike community, that bike route signs will divert all bike traffic from the busy arterial roads and because of this we have no need to put a bike lane (if possible) or other facilities on these arterial roads other than a wider outside lane. I believe that no matter how many signs are pounded into the ground or maps with bike routes are distributed there will always be a considerable amount of bike traffic on all of the main busy arteries. I bet that the amount of existing bike traffic on busy streets remains nearly the same even after completing the bike route network.  I believe that the main reason for this is the same reasons that most of the cars prefer the main artery roads. The main arteries are usually the shortest and fastest way of getting from one place to another. Most of the stoplights are timed out so that car and (sometimes) bike alike can sail to their destination without stopping much. Coming to a complete stop is frustrating and much more tiring when on a bike.  Stoplights are always faster than a stop sign where you are required to come to a stop every time. A bike lane has a tremendous advantage over Bike Route signs in that it actually has a stripe and at least 4 or five feet of room depending on the type of shoulder. 

With all of the above have been said I do not dislike bike routes and signs. They do no harm unless they keep arterial road from receiving a bike lane or at least something better than just a wider outside lane. I see the biggest advantage to bike route signs to be a warning to motorists that bikes are common. I have even seen signs in Colorado specifically warning cars that lots of bikes are present. Bike routes (without Bike Lanes) should only be used when a bike lane is not possible.  An example would be an existing road that is not wide enough for a real bike lane but still ridden a lot.

That's my opinion, that's how I'm going to vote during the PBAC meetings when these issues come up.  I invite you to email your opinions for future Chain Mail articles or come to the PBAC meetings and vote.

Tim