Originally Posted by
John Forester
I see that Cranky has imbibed the full flow of American bicycle activism.
Cranky's first comment argues that the Dutch propensity for bicycle transportation has been created by the segregated bikeway system. That's false, putting the car before the horse, because the Dutch used a great deal of bicycle transportation before there were any bikeways.
Hey, just like America, before the motor vehicle... and even during the early days of the motor vehicle, before WWII. Remember the Wright Brothers... You may have heard of them... as Bicycle Mechanics. Yes, Americans largely embraced cycling long before the motor vehicle.
Originally Posted by
John Forester
Cranky asks why I think that the USA will not adopt the Dutch segregated bikeway system. Well, different city designs, different histories, different societies, some of which are impossible to change, others very difficult to change.
And yet so many cities did change... with the advent of the motor vehicle... thus nothing is "impossible to change."
Originally Posted by
John Forester
Cranky argues that the Dutch situation in 1970 was so like the US situation today that we Americans can make the same improvements as the Dutch have since 1970. Cranky's assumption is completely false; the Dutch situation in 1970 is nothing like the US situation in 2014.
What, the Dutch did not have overcrowded inner city streets and poor motor vehicle traffic throughput in the '70s, just as America has today?
Originally Posted by
John Forester
Cranky claims that Dutch policy opposed bicycle transportation until after 1970. I find it difficult to believe that the Dutch government, or Dutch society, opposed bicycle transportation through all the years since 1900 when almost everybody cycled.
The Dutch, as did many societies, adopted the individual motor vehicle as the ultimate transportation solution, only to discover that the drawbacks of such a choice far outweighed the positives. This doesn't mean that motor vehicles should not exist or that it doesn't have a place in the transportation network. However, the Dutch soon realized (as have others) that relying only on individual motor vehicles is not a sustainable system, and such a system would soon collapse under the demands of itself. Therefore the Dutch (and others) have worked to provide alternate transportation solutions, such as the bicycle; such as robust public transit (such as that which American once had) as part of a varied transportation network. Americans are largely still too enamored with "drill baby drill" to fully comprehend all the consequences of our transportation system today... however, some American cities are making changes, with the understanding that using only cars to transport individual humans requires far more resources than we as a society can continue to provide on a sustainable basis.
Originally Posted by
John Forester
Cranky claims that my work in bicycle transportation is what persuaded American traffic engineers to not adopt the Dutch system. This is completely false. Every official governmental or traffic-engineering publication that covers bicycle transportation instructs traffic engineers to design in the segregated manner according to the American bikeway standards. Indeed, while I initiated the first traffic-engineering course, for the University of California, that advocated treating bicycle traffic as normal vehicular traffic, the next thing that the Federal Highway Administration did was to take over my course, by offering it without charge, to promote the use of the AASHTO bikeways instead.
And others are trying to now offer further solutions beyond where you stopped... solutions based on examples provided by other societies. You can either lead, follow or get out of the way. Certainly, while Vehicular Cycling does have some strong attributes, it is not a complete solution... just as the motor vehicle is a fine tool, it too is not a complete solution; a mixed system of transportation is a far better solution for the needs of the general public... which means better public transportation, better cycling support, better walking support and even better ride sharing and other solutions, that are only now being explored.
John, continue to provide and support education for "Effective Cycling" as part of a larger transportation network that consists of various modes of transit beyond the domination of the individual motor vehicle. Vehicular Cycling has a place in the larger picture... as do other solutions. VC is a fine solution, when and where it works, but it is NOT the only solution.