“Increasingly, U.S. cities want to make riding a bike a practical and comfortable way to get around for short trips,” said Martha Roskowski, director of the Green Lane Project. “The growing popularity of urban living, the decline in driving by young people and a desire for more attractive public places are inspiring cash-strapped cities to focus on retrofitting existing streets to make them work better for all users.”

Although these protected on-street bike facilities have long been a staple in Europe, they’ve only recently gained traction in the U.S. Between 1874 and 2011, only 62 were built nationwide. The new inventory shows that this number will nearly double to 102 protected green lanes on the ground in 32 U.S. cities by the end of 2012. Building on this momentum, the U.S. is projected to add another 100 green lanes in 2013.

Despite the fact that traditional bike lanes have long been a cornerstone for city planners, they don’t always work well on busy streets. For many riders, the stripe of paint is not enough to make riding a bike for every day travel an attractive and comfortable option.

Sixty percent of Americans say they would bike more often if they had a safe place, like a green lane, to ride. This point was validated by a recent study in Washington D.C. that revealed bicycling increased 200% on Pennsylvania Avenue after green lanes were installed.

“The numbers make it very clear that if we change how the streets work, we change how people travel,” continued Roskowski. “Building safe, appealing places to ride is the number one way we can encourage more people to hop on a bike. You can’t market people into feeling safe; it starts on the ground with the proper infrastructure.”

Up until 2007, according to today’s Green Lane Project inventory, only a handful of protected green lanes existed in the U.S. New York City changed the equation when Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his transportation commissioner, Janette Sadik- Khan, began transforming streets, adding protected bike lanes and public plazas. They were inspired by Danish architect Jan Gehl, known for his visionary work to enhance the quality of urban life by reorienting city design toward those on foot and on bike.

Another milestone was the release of the 2011 Urban Bikeway Design Guide, created by the National Association of City Transportation Officials, which provided the basic toolkit showing cities how to combine existing standards and design elements to build green lanes.

The Green Lane Project, launched in early 2012 by the Bikes Belong Foundation, is working with six leading cities to help them put green lanes on the ground. Over 80 percent of the new protected green lanes built in 2012 are in the Green Lane Project’s focus cities of Austin, Texas, Chicago, Memphis, Portland, Ore., San Francisco and Washington D.C., along with the Green Lane Project’s senior advisor and partner city New York City.

The inventory of protected green lanes is available for download at www.greenlaneproject.org/inventory-of-protected-green-lanes. The full inventory includes additional details about the existing and future protected green lanes, such as the type of separation used between cars and bicycles, and the routes that are two-way versus one-way.

The creation of Portland, Oregon planner Roger Geller, interested but concerned is one of his four classifications for American adults that describes their participation and attitudes about riding a bike for transportation. It’s also the ticket to improving the future of bicycling.

Geller describes the four groups as follows:

To grow bicycling participation in the U.S. advocates have realized we must do a better job of making bicycling appealing to the interested but concerned. That’s why Bikes Belong launched the Green Lane Project—a program that is increasing the number of next-generation protected bicycle networks in the U.S. Since the interested but concerned need more than traditional bike lanes to feel comfortable riding, we must build more of these protected spaces.

Countries like the Netherlands that have appealed to the interested but concerned by building safe, low-stress bicycling facilities have a large population of riders. There, 27% of all trips are made by bike. Conversely, places in the U.S. that don’t appeal to the interested but concerned see low levels of bicycling.

If you concentrate solely on the needs of the strong and fearless, you’ll only see a small portion of people choose to ride—hence the 1% of trips currently made by bike in the U.S. However, American cities like Portland and Chicago that are investing in green lanes have seen the greatest growth in bicycling. During the last decade, bike commuting increased 238% and 159% in those cities respectively. They are appealing to more than the strong and fearless.

Focusing on the interested but concerned can also help get more women on bikes. Currently in the U.S., 25% of all bike trips are made by women. That’s because women are less likely to ride if they don’t feel safe. New research from Portland State University found that 80% of bicyclists classified as strong and fearless category are men. If we concentrate on appealing to the interested but concerned, there’s a good chance we can level some of this inequality.

The interested but concerned label doesn’t apply only to Americans who are contemplating bicycling for commuting or short transportation-oriented trips. Potential recreational riders hold identical safety concerns, and many are also deterred by their lack of knowledge about nearby paths, trails, and loops. They want to bike and will bike, but only if they can do it safety and close to home on a route that is appealing and easy to follow.

Interested but concerned has been a trending topic during the last couple of years. Now, it’s in the spotlight. Geller’s classification is a valuable tool that is helping us better focus our work to improve and grow bicycling in America. Look for the emphasis on the interested but concerned to continue to rise.

Since 2000, bike commuting grew 47% on average in the U.S. It fared even better in large cities, where it increased 73% on average. If you live in a metropolitan area, you can see how your city stacked up in the chart below or by searching the spreadsheet linked in this blog by the League of American Bicyclists.

Shortly after students and their parents gathered to celebrate National Bike to School Day, members of Congress joined business leaders, organizers, and national bicycle advocacy organizations to announce the new data. The national survey, performed by Princeton Survey Research Associates International, asked 1,003 adults in the United States about their opinions on federal funding for sidewalks, bike lanes, and bike paths. The results were astounding — and bipartisan:

• 83 percent of all respondents support maintaining or growing the federal funding streams that pay for sidewalks, bikeways, and bike paths.
• 80 percent of Republican respondents and 88 percent of Democrat respondents think Congress should maintain or increase federal funds for biking and walking.
• 85 percent of Northeastern respondents, 79 percent of Midwesterners, 84 percent of Southerners, and 84 percent of respondents from Western states reported support for maintaining or increasing funding for sidewalks and bikeways.
• 91 percent of respondents between the ages of 18 and 29 support continuing or increasing biking and walking funds.

Download the four-page survey summary here and the full white paper here.

These results add critical perspective to a pressing national debate about transportation, as members of Congress conference to develop a consensus transportation bill — and some propose eliminating dedicated funding for biking and walking.

Infographic by America Bikes.

The Iowa Bicycle Coalition worked with the University of Northern Iowa to produce the report, titled Economic and Health Benefits of Bicycling in Iowa (view full report). Bikes Belong supported the study through our Research Grant program. The report totaled spending by individual cyclists, bicycle retail sales, economic activity generated by bicycle organizations, and health cost savings in the State of Iowa. The result: $435 million per year in economic activity, plus $82 million in annual health cost savings. Not bad for an annual infrastructure investment by the state of approximately $3 million. Here's the breakdown of where the benefits come from:

• $365 million - Recreational cyclists (plus $74 million in reduced health care costs)
• $52 million - Commuter cyclists (plus $13 million in reduced health care costs) 
• $18 million - Bicycle retailers 
• $0.3 million - Bicycle organizations

The report doesn't explicitly include the economic benefit of the popular bike event RAGBRAI, which in a separate study by University of Northern Iowa is listed at nearly $17 million per year.

With a total annual benefit of more than $522 million dollars versus a $3 million investment, bicycling is a great investment for Iowa. Still, we need more studies like this. That's one reason why Bikes Belong created our Research Grant program. If your state advocacy group is in need of an economic impact study, please consider partnering with a local university and applying for one of our grants.

This report comes at a critical moment, with the federal transportation bill set to expire at the end of March. The Benchmarking Report reveals that, in nearly every city and state, bicyclists and pedestrians currently receive less than a fair share of transportation dollars. While 12 percent of trips in the U.S. are by bike or foot, bicycle and pedestrian projects receive less than 2 percent of federal transportation dollars.

The 2012 Benchmarking Report compiles persuasive evidence that bicycle and pedestrian projects create more jobs than highway projects, and provide at least three dollars of benefit for every dollar invested. The report also highlights the health benefits of active transportation, showing that states with the highest rates of bicycling and walking are also among those with the lowest rates of obesity, diabetes, and high blood pressure. "The data points to one conclusion: Investing in biking and walking projects creates jobs, leads to more people biking and walking, and improves safety and public health," Alliance President Jeffrey Miller says.

John Pucher, a professor at Rutgers University, emphasizes: "The wide range of environmental, social, and economic benefits of walking and bicycling, so clearly documented in this report, justify greatly increased investment in facilities and programs to encourage more walking and cycling, and to improve the safety of these most sustainable of all transportation modes."  

 Other highlights from the report include:

• In 2009, 40% of trips in the United States were shorter than 2 miles, yet 87% of these trips are by car. Twenty-seven percent of trips were shorter than 1 mile. Still, Americans use their cars for 62% of these trips.

• While bicycling and walking fell 66% between 1960 and 2009, obesity levels increased 156%.

• Seniors are the most vulnerable bicyclists and pedestrians. Adults over 65 make up 10% of walking trips, yet comprise 19% of pedestrian fatalities. This age group accounts for 6% of bicycling trips, yet 10% of bicyclist fatalities.

• Bicycling and walking projects create 11-14 jobs per $1 million spent, compared to just 7 jobs created per $1 million spent on highway projects. Cost benefit analysis show that up to $11.80 in benefits can be gained for every $1 invested in bicycling and walking.

• On average, the largest 51 U.S. cities show a 29% increase in bicycle facilities since the 2010 report. Cities report that 20,908 miles of bicycle facilities and 7,079 miles of pedestrian facilities are planned for the coming years (much of this contingent upon funding).

Bicycling and Walking in the United States: 2012 Benchmarking Report was funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and made possible through additional support from AARP and Planet Bike. To view rankings of the 50 states and 51 largest U.S. cities, and to download or purchase a hard copy of the report visit www.PeoplePoweredMovement.org/benchmarking.

Bikes are good for the economy

• A University of Cincinnati study estimated that houses within 1,000 feet of Ohio’s Little Miami Scenic Trail are worth an extra $9,000.

• Another study found that three bike paths in Central Florida bring $42 million in annual spending and 516 jobs to the area’s economy.

Bike facilities are good for cities

• After New York City installed protected bike lanes on Columbus Avenue, bicycling increased 56%, all traffic crashes decreased 34%, speeding decreased, sidewalk biking went down, vehicle traffic flow remained the same, and double parking decreased.

• Bicycling in Salt Lake City—which has recently added 50 miles of bikeways—increased 27% from 2010 to 2011.

Biking is good for our health

• University of Wisconsin researchers estimated that if Midwesterners ran half of their short distance errands (less than five miles round trip) by bike instead of by car, they would avoid 1,100 deaths each year and save $7 billion in healthcare costs.

With a new study pegging the cost of obesity-related diseases at an extra $48-66 billion per year by 2030 (thanks to the additional 65 million obese adults we’ll have in the U.S. by then), bicycling’s benefits should warrant attention from everyone—whether they ride bikes or not.

For more statistics on the benefits of bicycling, visit our Stats Library.

Our number one tool for tracking bike commuting is the American Community Survey, or ACS. Conducted annually, the ACS gives us insight into nationwide bike commuting trends. While it is our go-to source for bike commuting data, it also is a lamentably incomplete measure of bike commuting. Because the survey wording only asks about one’s primary mode of transportation to work, the ACS doesn’t count people who combine biking with another, longer mode. It also doesn’t include people who bike commute once or twice a week, or less often. So, even though the ACS puts the 2010 U.S. bike commute share at 0.53%—that’s more than 730,000 Americans (for comparison’s sake, that’s also about 10 times the number of licensed bicycle racers)—we know there are plenty more people out there for whom a bicycle is an important mode of transportation to work. The question is, how many more?

We recently came across a report from the 2003 Omnibus Household Survey that sheds some light on what percentage of workers combine bicycling with a second, longer mode for their commute. The survey found that 7% of all workers usually use a combination of modes to get to work. Of that 7%, 4.2% combine a private vehicle and biking, and 1.2% combine public transit and biking. That means nearly 0.4% of workers (.378%) ride a bike to work most days but combine it with another (almost definitely) longer leg and therefore wouldn't be counted by the ACS.

This doubles the ACS estimate, which was 0.38% in 2000 and 0.4% in 2005. And we’re still not including people that do bike commute but not often enough to be counted by these surveys.

Why is the portion of multimodal bike commuters just as large as bike-only commuters? Well, the average American commute is long—15 miles one-way, with less than one-third of commutes at five miles or less one-way. Thirty miles (think two hours of riding at 15 mph) is a relatively lengthy distance to bike every day, even for a fit bicyclist. But when you combine that thirty-mile bike ride with transit or even a car trip, it becomes much more doable, especially on a daily basis. It shouldn’t be too surprising that many bike commuters choose to supplement their ride with a second mode. More and more transit agencies have been working to make their buses and trains bike friendly (see page 94 of the Benchmarking Report), which helps too.

Although the percentage difference in the estimate may seen small, the important point is that there are about twice as many frequent bike commuters out there than previously known. If multimodal bike commuting grew at approximately the same rate as the ACS bike commuting, we’re looking at a current frequent bike commuting rate of about 1%. That’s well over 1 million Americans who usually ride a bike to work. When speaking to lawmakers about the importance and legitimacy of bicycling for transportation, this is an important number to have in hand. 

Since 2000, the ACS has shown growth in bike commuting. Bike commuting has grown the most in those Bicycle Friendly Community (BFC) cities that are actively investing in bicycling. It has also grown more in large cities than the U.S. as a whole.

For the fifth consecutive year, the bike commuting share (or the percentage of people who commute by bike frequently) grew in the 38 largest BFCs. But for the first time since 2005, the U.S. average share dropped slightly (though not significantly), surprising everyone who has sensed the upward momentum of bike commuting. One reason for the ACS not picking up on this trend may be that it excludes anyone who rides a bike for two or fewer weekdays, or combines a bike ride with a longer leg in a car or transit, from being counted as a bike commuter. With the average American commute at 15 miles one-way and only 29% of commutes at 5 miles or less one-way, the ACS is counting mostly super hardcore bike commuters who can ride a long commute most days of the week, or those with short commutes.

The city with the highest bike commuting share in 2010 was Davis, CA at 22.1%. Boulder, CO came in second at 9.9%. Fourteen cities total had a share of 5.0% or higher. To see how your city ranked (keep in mind that there is a high margin of error for smaller cities), check out this online spreadsheet created by the League of American Bicyclists. You can also read more about the ACS findings over at the Bike Pittsburgh and League of American Bicyclist blogs.

Why this study is significant:

• Bike sharing programs are expanding to new cities every year; this report provides support for planned and existing programs.
• It adds to other studies that find the health benefits of bicycling far outweigh its risks. 
• It looks at the health and environments of an existing system instead of a hypothetical scenario.