Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [carfree_network] Cycling Legislation

Expand Messages
  • Ian Fiddies
    I m not sure if I agree totally. The demand for cycle lanes is a bit vague. You haven t defined what you mean by cycle lane but I assume Lela means a painted
    Message 1 of 1 , Apr 22, 2007
    • 0 Attachment
      I'm not sure if I agree totally. The demand for cycle lanes is a bit vague.
      You haven't defined what you mean by "cycle lane" but I assume Lela means a
      painted lane on the road reserved for cyclists.

      There is a certain paradox about cycle infrastructure. The incidence of
      accidents is highest on a segregated bike path, slightly lower on a, on
      carriageway bike lane and lowest on the road. This is because of the
      conflicts that arise where the bike path/lane crosses roads. Another risk
      with bike paths is that it gets the slow bike out of the way of fast cars.
      The demand made here is also a bit risky because it suggests that cycling is
      dangerous, this can both put off potential cyclists or their parents, or
      worse where the city deems it impractical to put a bike lane they might just
      close the street for cyclists.

      All this said I am a great supporter of bike paths. The single factor that
      appears to have the greatest impact on cycle safety is the number of
      cyclists. The more cyclists there are the fewer accidents with bikes. One of
      the major factors that persuade people to cycle are segregated bike paths
      because people feel safer on them. Thus the paradox, bike paths are more
      dangerous but they fool the public into feeling safer, thus making them
      cycle more, which in turn makes it safer to cycle.

      I agree with you proposal but feel that you might justify the need of
      cycling infrastructure with claims that it would encourage more cycling. The
      health benefits of cycling, reduced pollution, fewer cars less congestion,
      better social safety with more people moving around, climate change.

      The reasons to promote cycling are many and sound, but demanding bike paths
      for safety reasons is a dangerous path to take. This doesn't mean it won't
      work, rather that I'm not sure it's the best approach.

      I hope this wasn't too confusing.

      Ian Fiddies

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: <lela@...>
      To: <carfree_cities@yahoogroups.com>; <carfree_network@...>
      Sent: Saturday, April 21, 2007 9:51 PM
      Subject: [carfree_network] Cycling Legislation

      > Hello,
      > I am forwarding the initiative: Cycling Legislation, for your info.
      > http://www.ecopolitics.ca/transport/cyc/cycling_legislation.php
      > Cycling groups in other cities, especially in the North America where
      > auto-mentality prevails, could propose legislation in order to make
      > cycling infrastructure mandatory. The principles based on Rights are
      > the same.
      > Lela Gary
      > [carfree_network] list guidelines and unsubscribe information are found at
      > http://www.worldcarfree.net/listservs/. Send messages for the entire list
      > to carfree_network@.... Send replies to individuals off-list.
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.