Originally Posted by
Chris L
There's more to it than that. Building facilities won't stop people getting flat tyres, for example. The fact is, most people have no idea how to fix a flat, or perform any other basic repair, yet the ability to do this relatively quickly on a bicycle is one of the main advantages of cycling. In the last two years I have been averaging one flat tyre every two weeks, yet haven't been terribly impeded because I have the knowledge of how to fix them. Again, this is something else that people need to be trained in and informed about if they are going to consider cycling as a realistic transport option.
Flat tires are to me a minimal issue. I seldom get them. If we had a sizable cycle commuting population a couple of people could be outfitted with "service" bikes to ride along the heavily used routes to provide assistance. Similar to the current trucks they use along the interstates for motorist assistance. Or we could even develop something along the lines of AAA. Or
a person COULD assist a fellow cyclist.
Originally Posted by
Chris L
And once again I'll ask the question: Do you really want to be sharing "facilities" with untrained, incompetent cyclists who will put you in danger?
I would rather ride around incompetent cyclists than incompetent motorists...
Originally Posted by
Chris L
It's the old chicken and egg dilemma. Neighbourhoods like this are only built that way because it's what people want. People want the "gated" community miles from nowhere, that's why they all bought houses there. We hear all sorts of talk from "advocates" about needing "more people cycling" so that we get "more facilities", then we hear talk about needing "facilities" or "friendly neighbourhoods" to "encourage cycling". So which is it?
I don't want them and I am sure there are many others, I suspect if we didn't build them people would live where the housing was. But that is just me. But by NOT having ANY form of cycling facilities, like racks and access other than high speed arterials to shopping centers is not helping. Give equal access to ALL forms of transportation including walking. Problem is a matter of scale...if walking is a 1, a bicycle is +3 and cars run from +15 and up. This means a facility for a single pedestrian needs to be increased by a factor of 15 to make it work for a single car. Think access roadways, parking lots, etc.
Originally Posted by
Chris L
I tend to think that for all the whining about it on fora such as this one, the reality is that in most places, these "facilities" are a long way off, if they're ever going to happen at all. If people are ever going to consider the bicycle as a realistic transport option, they need to learn to deal with gated communities, roads without facilities, and flat tyres. Until this happens, and more importantly "advocates" start to realise the importance of it, most people will continue to consider cycling as nothing more than a fringe recreational activity for a few die-hards.
I think that the Americans in particular and many other nations will hang onto their cars until the pumps either run dry, or a single fill up costs more than the monthly car payment. Facilities of some sort will come, all it takes is vision. I hold up Copenhagen, Denmark as a working example (there are others). The Danish goverment made a conscious decision to support bicycle infrastructure. Today upwards of 65% of the Copenhagen population commutes to work by bike. The numbers vary by the season, and they have some miserable winter weather, but even then over 1/3 of the people still commute by bike. They are in the process of closing down a major roadway in the heart of Copenhagen to cars...to make rooms for the bikes. There are less than 15,000 cars a day using that road and over 25,000 bikes a DAY! So the bikes are getting more room.
Aaron
