Urban bicycle friendly clusters


As an avid bicycle commuter, it was pleasing to see the rapid growth in communities being designated as “bicycle friendly” by the League of  American Bicyclists. Likewise, it is nice to see numerous college campuses and a growing number of businesses also participating.

Source: thepathbikeshop.com

As a planner and one who enjoys studying statistics and trends, the most intriguing aspects of the growth in participants to me are the clusters that are developing around the country. This is important for several reasons:

  • It shows that more people are “getting it” and not just in certain progressive enclaves.
  • It shows that coordinated efforts are taking place in a variety urban areas, not just lone islands of bike friendliness.
  • It shows healthy participation by the public sector, private sector, and by non-profits.
  • It shows that some smaller urban areas that deserve special recognition for the extent of participation in their community, especially La Crosse, WI/MN and Fort Collins, CO.
  • It shows that much of metropolitan Washington, DC understands the importance of providing non-motorized infrastructure, even when some members of Congress are totally clueless.
  • It shows a number of major metropolitan areas are missing from the cluster list, including New York City, Houston, San Diego, San Antonio, Dallas-Forth Worth, Austin, Nashville, Memphis, Atlanta, Cleveland-Akron-Canton, Louisville, SE Florida, Tampa Bay Area, Milwaukee*, Buffalo, St. Louis*, Albuquerque, Rochester, Lexington, Fresno, Oklahoma City, Tulsa, and El Paso.

* A number of businesses participate in these metro areas, but do not have participants in at least two categories.

Source: roanokeoutside.com

The following is a list of bicycle friendly clusters that have developed around the United States that have participants in at least two of the bicycle-friendly categories (this particular list only includes platinum, gold, silver, and bronze recipients and does not include honorable mentions):

  • (59) Washington, DC/MD/VA/WV – three communities, two universities, and 54 businesses
  • (32) San Francisco Bay Area, CA – fifteen communities, one university, and 16 businesses
  • (29) Twin Cities, MN – two communities, one university, and 26 businesses
  • (27) Portland, OR/WA – four communities, one university, and 22 businesses
  • (25) Boston, MA/NH – three communities and 22 businesses
  • (18) Denver-Boulder, CO – six communities and 12 businesses
  • (18) Pittsburgh, PA – one community, one university, and 16 businesses
  • (15) Indianapolis, IN – three communities and 12 businesses
  • (15) Kansas City, MO/KS – two communities and 13 businesses
  • (15) Madison, WI – two communities, one university, and 12 businesses
  • (15) Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia, WA – five communities, one university, and nine businesses
  • (14) La Crosse, WI/MN – one community and 13 businesses
  • (13) Boise, ID – one community, one university, and 11 businesses
  • (11) Chicago, IL/IN/WI – three communities and eight businesses
  • (11) Fort Collins, CO – one community, one university, and nine businesses
  • (11) Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA – six communities, three universities, and two businesses
  • (10) Greenville-Spartanburg, SC – two communities and eight businesses
  • (10) Research Triangle, NC – five communities, two universities, and three businesses
  • (10) Philadelphia, PA/NJ/DE – two communities and eight businesses
  • (9) Sacramento, CA – four communities, one university, and four businesses
  • (9) Salt Lake City-Provo-Ogden, UT – two communities and seven businesses
  • (8) Anchorage, AK – one community and seven businesses
  • (8) Mesa-Scottsdale-Tempe, AZ – five communities and three businesses
  • (8) Tucson, AZ – one community, one university, and six businesses
  • (7) Lincoln, NE – one community and six businesses
  • (7) Roanoke, VA – one community and six businesses
  • (7) Spokane, WA/ID – three communities and four businesses
  • (6) Bloomington, IN – one community, one university, and four businesses
  • (6) Cedar Rapids-Iowa City, IA – two communities and three businesses
  • (6) Columbus, OH – one community, one university, and four businesses
  • (5) Champaign-Urbana, IL – one community and four businesses
  • (5) Detroit-Ann Arbor-Flint, MI – one community, one university, and three businesses
  • (5) Grand Rapids, MI – one community and four businesses
  • (5) South Bend-Elkhart, IN/MI – two communities and three businesses
  • (4) Burlington, VT – one community, one university, and two businesses
  • (4) Greater Lansing, MI – one community, one university, and two businesses
  • (4) Santa Barbara, CA – one community, one university, and two businesses
Advertisements
This entry was posted in Bicycling, cities, climate change, culture, entrepreneurship, environment, geography, health, history, infrastructure, land use, new urbanism, placemaking, planning, spatial design, sustainability, trails, transportation, urban planning and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Urban bicycle friendly clusters

  1. Nike Schuhe says:

    Awesome blog post, sweet webpage layout, carry on the great work Sneakerfriends

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s