Bike-friendly Indy
Indianapolis Mayor Greg Ballard is serious about making his city a bicycle-friendly place.
He has added miles of trails and lanes and helped create a bike hub in Downtown Indianapolis, not far from where the Super Bowl will be played Feb. 5 in Lucas Oil Stadium.
Yet the real proof of his bike zeal came last week as he led several hundred serious bikers on a 12.2-mile ride on the new lanes through town. Facing light snow, bitter winds, and 25-degree temperatures, the bikers celebrated the city’s progress.
Similar to some other cities, Mayor Ballard has caught on to a trend that promotes a subtle change in the city’s transit culture. More than their parents’ generation, 20- and 30-somethings like to bike to work or ride for fun. For some, it’s about physical fitness or the environment. Others want an alternative to the high price of gasoline.
Ballard’s administration has built 64 miles of lanes in the past couple of years and has plans for 200 miles by 2020. He’s bumped up the mileage of the greenway bike trails to 61 and wants that number to reach almost 100 by 2015. The greenways are separate from auto travel, whereas the bike lanes are marked on the streets shared with cars.
Connecting trails and lanes can create a full-scale alternative for getting around town, and serious commuters can get a locker and shower at the Indy Bike Hub YMCA at the City Market.
“I think you’re going to see an explosion in commuting in the spring,” Ballard noted in an interview before his ride.
Working in downtown Indianapolis, Elizabeth Sparrow has taken her commute an extra step with a long-tail bike, which features extensions for her children. Living about three miles away from downtown, she delivers her children—ages 9, 6, and 4—to school and then uses the Monon and Cultural trails to ride to work at the YMCA Downtown.
She grew up in Quito, Ecuador, where her parents were missionaries. Biking was just a normal means of transportation when she was growing up there. She returned to her childhood ways once she had children in Indianapolis. “It gives me freedom to clear my head and for us to get out,” she said. “It really started when I became a mother.”
She and friends also have an informal club, Ladies Take the Lane, organized through Facebook.
A 30-year local biking advocate, Richard Vonnegut credits Mayor Ballard for pushing a bike-friendly culture. “Mayor Ballard has done more for bicycling and walking than all the three previous mayors,” he said. “And they all did something—Bart Peterson, Steve Goldsmith, and Bill Hudnut. But Ballard has created a hub for bicycles. He’s created bike lanes and sidewalks, such as the Michigan Road project. He has events like the mayor’s bicycle rides.”
Cities get rated for everything from the qualities of their nightlife to excitement generated by their sports teams. Ballard is making the intriguing assumption that some people also will check about the bike commuting friendliness as well in trying to determine where to live.

















Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top32 Comments to “Bike-friendly Indy”
I wonder how this story would read if, instead of being the Republican mayor of Indianapolis, Ballard were the Democratic mayor of San Francisco.
Government meddling, hindrance to developers, demonizes automobiles, wastes taxpayer money, panders to bike-riding environmentalist hippies.
Report comment to moderator
BG, Instead of being negative, why don’t you bring to our attention where other mayors have been effective at creating a bike riding culture in their cities. Perhaps one of the reasons Indianapolis is being effective is because they are somehow minimizing the polarizing of the community.
Report comment to moderator
Russ Pulliam, are you related to Dan Quayle and Eugene Pulliam??
Report comment to moderator
The mayor of Portland has embraced a bike lanes uber alles approach. The Bike Riders are practically a political lobby. Since the weather in Portland is often wet and cold it seems a bit harsh to push bike riding off on everyone.
Report comment to moderator
Making cities bike-friendly isn’t exclusively a liberal idea or Democratic policy, and I applaud Mayor Ballard for doing his part to break the association. This is public infrastructure, and few conservatives would dispute that this category of spending is a legitimate application of city funds. While a liberal mayor might sponsor a project like this out of antipathy toward internal combustion engines, maybe Ballard wants to enable commuters to choose the mode of transportation that serves them best. Republicans are still the ones who defend economic freedom, right?
Report comment to moderator
BuddyGlass just needs some more fresh air and exercise, Neil Evans…he’s sounding like such a grump! Maybe a nice bike ride through the streets of San Francisco? Sundays they block off Golden Gate Park to traffic– biker bliss!
It’s wonderful to see the mayors of major cities waking up to bike commuting. My husband rides to work, every day, and has done it for over ten years. It keeps his spirits up and helps him maintain his boyish figure!
And he’s training our older boys to ride safely through the streets too, which makes my part-time job of chauffeur so much easier. They love the independence they have in our city of safe bike lanes and excellent public transport.
Report comment to moderator
18 degrees with blowing ice and snow. Think I’ll take a ride down town tonight! My work as a service tech takes me all around town. Expensive miles. Rarely do I see them being used, just like the buses. Typical big government, lets spend more on is already not working. It’ll mean we’re green and we can feel good about ourselves and fleecing the taxpayers.
Report comment to moderator
I think it likely is a waste of money. Several hundred bikers — what’s the population of Indianapolis?
Report comment to moderator
US Census Bureau 2010- 820,445.
Report comment to moderator
What a great guy Mayor Greg Ballard is? Did he use his own money?
It sounds like it.
I’m tired of POLITICIANS wanting a pat on the back like it was THEIR MONEY used in making a donation to society.
Maybe they’ll put up a statue or build something expensive with his name on it.
Report comment to moderator
Again, if there’s nothing wrong with spending taxpayer money on roads for cars, what’s wrong with spending it on roads for bikes (which, being smaller, are much cheaper)? “Few bikers”? haha, you’d have few drivers too if our country lacked roads and gas stations.
Come on, people. Let’s not be reactionary conservatives.
Report comment to moderator
“The mayor of Portland has embraced a bike lanes uber alles approach. The Bike Riders are practically a political lobby. Since the weather in Portland is often wet and cold it seems a bit harsh to push bike riding off on everyone. ”
I have question to ask, though, which I think is a fair one, since most communities favor motorists (with which I don’t have a problem; part of a city’s mission ISTM is to facilitate getting around in it):
If a community has a large constituency of bike riders, what, exactly, is wrong with favoring that constituency? There is nothing inherently more constitutional or conservative about favoring motorists over favoring bikes, and if a city’s climate and culture lend themselves to the promotion of biking, why is that objectionable? Every city ALREADY promotes driving!
Report comment to moderator
Ah, Publius beat me to it.
Report comment to moderator
@Pentamom: what, exactly, is wrong with favoring that constituency?
I’m guessing the opposition stems from folks equating the bike riding constituency as anti-car environmental activists. Refusing to meet their demands then becomes a political “slap-down” of their environmental activism.
Report comment to moderator
Buddyglass — I, too, could speculate on people’s motives. But I’d like an answer, instead.
Actually I don’t think that fear is wholly unreasonable. But such concerns as encroaching anti-car environmentalism are better met with direct opposition, than by opposing a perfectly reasonable policy that you think *might* be a proxy for it.
Report comment to moderator
I’m not sure we have to speculate. See posts #7, #8 and #10 on this thread. They seem to argue (in a roundabout way) that:
1. The number of bike riders is very small,
2. consequently the lanes won’t be utilized,
3. ergo their cost is way out of proportion to their benefit, so
4. they’re a waste of taxpayer money and,
5. they’re just a means for the mayor to beef up his “green cred”.
I’m just surprised these arguments weren’t advanced by WMB in the original article.
Report comment to moderator
And they are probably getting the money for the bike lanes from the people who drive cars. Tax the bikers and then go ahead and build all the bike lanes you can afford.
Report comment to moderator
“And they are probably getting the money for the bike lanes from the people who drive cars. Tax the bikers and then go ahead and build all the bike lanes you can afford. ”
They ARE taxing the cyclists. And they tax the cyclists and the people who don’t own cars to build the roads. There is still no logical reason why it’s okay to build roads and not okay to build bike paths.
If they’re pouring a ton of money into something wastefully, then sure, it should be looked at. But the opposition here seems to be to the concept that people who don’t use bikes should have to pay for bike lanes, when nobody protests against people who don’t fly paying for airports or people who don’t drive paying for freeways. If it’s a worthwhile thing to promote for the community — and promoting biking lanes takes both bikes and cars OFF the road which makes it BETTER for motorists — then it’s just as valid as saying we need to build roads so people can drive on them.
Report comment to moderator
Most roads are supported by the gas tax, vehicle registration fees, taxes on car sales, etc. Even people who don’t drive depend on the roads — you got buses, freight, mail, etc. all using the roads to help those who don’t drive. Who do bikers help? No one.
I highly doubt the cyclists are paying anywhere near what it costs to support the bike path development (which I’m sure was taken from a car lane) and maintenance. You got snow removal, signage, etc. Are the cyclists paying a toll to use the bike lanes?
I’m not opposed to bike lanes, but at a minimum they ought to be putting this stuff to a public vote.
Report comment to moderator
“Who do bikers help? No one.”
That’s short-sighted. They reduce traffic congestion and pollution. Putting in bike lanes makes it safer for the motorists, since cyclists already have the right to be on the roads in traffic; getting them OFF makes it safer for everyone.
Report comment to moderator
They don’t reduce congestion because typically they steal a portion of the road from the cars and the number of people that bike is likely to be relatively small. The same is true with pollution — not enough bikers to have any measurable effect. Will more people bike if there are bike lanes — probably, but probably not a significant number. I’ve seen some of the bike lanes and I’m not always convinced they are real safe for the bikers, but I guess the statistics will be available for that.
Report comment to moderator
“They don’t reduce congestion because typically they steal a portion of the road from the cars and the number of people that bike is likely to be relatively small. ”
First, they don’t always “steal” a portion of the road; bike lanes are often extensions of the existing roads.
Also, I specifically referred to it making sense to do this in communities where biking was quite common, so there actually *are* enough people on bikes to reduce congestion and pollution, and increase safety. Large numbers of bikes sharing traffic lanes with cars is less safe than bike lanes.
Maybe Indy isn’t one of them, but the concept shouldn’t necessarily be shouted down everywhere as inherently foolish or not benefiting anyone but a few cyclists. It depends on the situation.
Report comment to moderator
This is why I suggested a public vote. If the public is willing to spend the money on it then go for it. (Perhaps they had one in Indy.)
Report comment to moderator
I like the idea. More bike lanes may encourage more people to become “bikers”.
However….Indy can get pretty chilly and snowy in the winter. A one time bike ride “facing light snow, bitter winds, and 25-degree temperatures” doesn’t paint a realistic picture of an Indy winter.
Report comment to moderator
Sawgunner (3): Russ Pulliam, are you related to Dan Quayle and Eugene Pulliam??
Frank: Having lived in Phoenix for 26 years, I wondered the very same thing.
But there’s this thing called Google, see … ?
Found this in about a minute:
Go Pentamom! You done good.
And Publius is right too, some of you sound a bit reactionary. When the infrastructure is there, the public is eager to try the benefits of bike commuting–and it is not just a movement located in the balmy West Coast. Minneapolis made the cut of “Best Bike City” in 2010, and is second only to Portland in the percentage of regular commuters, 5.9 to 4.3 percent, “thousands of whom insist on pedaling around (their) frozen, windswept corner of the tundra in the dead of winter.” Man-points earned there, for sure!
Another benefit from bike commuting to the community, besides less traffic and pollution, is increased productivity from the greater health of its citizens and lower health care costs–would that all cities embraced this vision, which is not solely the domain of rabid enviros, and we had bike commuting percentages of Amsterdam’s 40% of citizens, and city planners like that of Copenhagen–check out their bike superhighways, aimed at getting suburbanites out of traffic jams and in on the fun.
Report comment to moderator
I was an avid cyclist for many years until I got back problems. I didn’t need a bike lane to go from point A to point B. There was this thing called a road. I stand by my comments in #7 and the fine summation in #16. There should come a time when ideas which are nice but not necessary get told no. There is no money.
They want to foist an expanded public transportation system upon us. If you look at the public information on Indy-Go, the bus system is bleeding red. Ridership per capacity is appallingly low. How to fix it? Spend more money and make it bigger! “It’ll only cost the taxpayer…”
We are still paying a ‘temporary’ 1% tax for the Hoosier Dome which has been demolished. Oh, did you know it was demolished before it was paid for? And another ‘temporary’ 1% was added to fund the new Lucas Oil Stadium. Did you know that somehow they ‘forgot’ to add in operating costs for the new stadium. Cha-ching. More tax dollars.
I am sick of working three jobs and having my pocket picked again and again and again for the ‘King’s’ pet projects. If any of these projects are great ideas, let those who are proposing them find the private funds to capitalize these worthy things. Why not? They are a perpetual financial drain which can only be funded with more legalized theft.
Report comment to moderator
Other (fun) reasons not to promote biking to work!
1.) The cyclist workers are smelly.
2.) They use more water because they take more showers.
3.) They have to get up earlier in the morning to get to work so they are sleepier in general.
4.) They have to buy an expensive bike, speedos, special shoes, aerodynamic helmets, and water bottles in addition to owning a car.
5.) They “drive” everyone else nuts b/c all they can talk about is their health and heart rate.
6.) The company has to provide them bicycle racks close to the front door because they are too tired to walk from the back 80 of the parking lot.
I could go on, but you would all just call me grumpy!
Report comment to moderator
I am sick of working three jobs and having my pocket picked again and again and again for the ‘King’s’ pet projects.
Those were most likely approved by local referendum. So if you want to blame someone, blame your fellow citizens. It’s not as if “the people” had this forced on them; they chose it.
Report comment to moderator
No, it was not local referendum. The Lucas Oil stadium was approved at the County Commissioner level. (I wasn’t here for the Hoosier Dome.) There was huge opposition in our County, but they passed it anyway. (Remember Obamacare?) Of the seven doughnut counties, only one turned the tax increase down.
Report comment to moderator
Well, you did elect the county officials. If the outcry was genuine then I’ll assume they were voted out. If they weren’t voted out then maybe the outcry wasn’t that great.
Report comment to moderator
NOPM,
I am outraged! My husband does not smell!
Grumpily yours,
Karen
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDmag.com's Community section to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!