|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Build it and they won't come
Build it and they will come? Sorry, no.
Here's a new article dispelling the myth that segregated facilities generate tremendous bike mode share. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2...ped-stevenage? Unless motoring is actively dissuaded, almost all people who have cars will drive cars. -- - Frank Krygowski |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Build it and they won't come
On Thu, 21 Sep 2017 09:32:50 +0700, John B.
wrote: One might speculate on how many of the posters here, who are gainfully employed, do not own a car, do not use public transportation, and rely solely on a bicycle for transportation? I'm giving serious thought to joining the "drive someplace to ride a bike" crowd. Driving my own vehicle a long distance on a straight road is right out because of the rotator cuff -- oh, rats, I rode right by the KABS office *twice* today, and didn't think of stopping in to ask whether I could take my bike with me on the "bus". -- Joy Beeson joy beeson at comcast dot net http://wlweather.net/PAGEJOY/ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Build it and they won't come
On Wed, 20 Sep 2017 21:47:25 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: Build it and they will come? Sorry, no. Here's a new article dispelling the myth that segregated facilities generate tremendous bike mode share. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2...ped-stevenage? Unless motoring is actively dissuaded, almost all people who have cars will drive cars. One might speculate on how many of the posters here, who are gainfully employed, do not own a car, do not use public transportation, and rely solely on a bicycle for transportation? -- Cheers, John B. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Build it and they won't come
On Wed, 20 Sep 2017 21:47:25 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote: Build it and they will come? Sorry, no. Here's a new article dispelling the myth that segregated facilities generate tremendous bike mode share. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2...ped-stevenage? Unless motoring is actively dissuaded, almost all people who have cars will drive cars. I remember seeing period BBC footage about this, describing the innovations in place at the time. Now, maybe it's what you're used to; I grew up in a very bikeable suburb of Chicago and all us kids just got around on bikes. So I looked at infrastructure like this and was puzzled as to why. Apparently I wasn't alone. In the Minneapolis-St Paul area we have been building out both on-street and separated bike facilities. While I find much of the design of the on-street facilities to be objectionable and even downright stupid, there has been a noticeable increase in bike riding. Most of them are young uns and are not wearing the pseudo-pro clown suits (I'm still wearing mine, although I've reached an age and a body composition where that's probably ill-advised). The separated facilities- which are pretty extensive- get a whole lot of use; the on-street facilities seem to get a lot of use too although not quite as much. But this doesn't seem to work everywhere. Denmark made it work by taxing cars at an astonishing rate- owning a car is an economic hardship for many if not most Danes due to the tax structure- and pairing that with extensive on-street bike facilities. There would be no way to accomplish something like that in the US, where owning a car and having cheap fuel is effectively part of the Bill of Rights. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Build it and they won't come
On Thu, 21 Sep 2017 09:32:50 +0700, John B wrote:
One might speculate on how many of the posters here, who are gainfully employed, do not own a car, do not use public transportation, and rely solely on a bicycle for transportation? LOL. My two person household owns three cars, eight bikes. My wife walks to work practically every day (3 miles each way) and takes the bus if she doesn't walk. She probably drives to work less than 5 times a year and that is for a specific reason like having to leave from work to do something for which the bus, riding or walking is impractical. I ride to work or walk to work about 25% of the time (I work in two locations a day- the closest are less than a mile from home and the farthest are 30 miles from home; several are within feasible riding distance from home and from each other so I *could* ride to work more than I do). |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Build it and they won't come
On 21/09/17 11:47, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Build it and they will come? Sorry, no. Here's a new article dispelling the myth that segregated facilities generate tremendous bike mode share. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2...ped-stevenage? Unless motoring is actively dissuaded, almost all people who have cars will drive cars. This is a hot topic in Australia at the moment. The largest recreational bicycling organisation (Bicycle Network), is conducting a review of their helmet policy which currently is in support of mandatory helmet laws. The helmet law supporting researchers (Jake Olivier, Raphael Grzebieta, Soufiane Boufous, Rebecca Ivers, Royal Australian College of Surgeons, etc.), are all trying to "move on" from discussing helmet laws, spouting the need for protected biking infrastructure. They know the health benefits of cycling, but reject the evidence that the helmet law stops many people from cycling. They think that by building infrastructure that somehow cycling will blossom regardless. Fools. -- JS |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Build it and they won't come
On Wed, 20 Sep 2017 22:57:09 -0500, Tim McNamara
wrote: On Wed, 20 Sep 2017 21:47:25 -0400, Frank Krygowski wrote: Build it and they will come? Sorry, no. Here's a new article dispelling the myth that segregated facilities generate tremendous bike mode share. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2...ped-stevenage? Unless motoring is actively dissuaded, almost all people who have cars will drive cars. I remember seeing period BBC footage about this, describing the innovations in place at the time. Now, maybe it's what you're used to; I grew up in a very bikeable suburb of Chicago and all us kids just got around on bikes. So I looked at infrastructure like this and was puzzled as to why. Apparently I wasn't alone. In the Minneapolis-St Paul area we have been building out both on-street and separated bike facilities. While I find much of the design of the on-street facilities to be objectionable and even downright stupid, there has been a noticeable increase in bike riding. Most of them are young uns and are not wearing the pseudo-pro clown suits (I'm still wearing mine, although I've reached an age and a body composition where that's probably ill-advised). The separated facilities- which are pretty extensive- get a whole lot of use; the on-street facilities seem to get a lot of use too although not quite as much. But this doesn't seem to work everywhere. Denmark made it work by taxing cars at an astonishing rate- owning a car is an economic hardship for many if not most Danes due to the tax structure- and pairing that with extensive on-street bike facilities. There would be no way to accomplish something like that in the US, where owning a car and having cheap fuel is effectively part of the Bill of Rights. Singapore tried the "tax it out of existence" scheme years ago and it did work for a while but as the economy grew so did auto sales. Today a new Toyota Corolla Altis 1.6 Standard will cost you, including the first 6 months road tax, US$78,509, and traffic is a major problem. -- Cheers, John B. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Build it and they won't come
On Thu, 21 Sep 2017 14:27:18 +1000, James
wrote: On 21/09/17 11:47, Frank Krygowski wrote: Build it and they will come? Sorry, no. Here's a new article dispelling the myth that segregated facilities generate tremendous bike mode share. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2...ped-stevenage? Unless motoring is actively dissuaded, almost all people who have cars will drive cars. This is a hot topic in Australia at the moment. The largest recreational bicycling organisation (Bicycle Network), is conducting a review of their helmet policy which currently is in support of mandatory helmet laws. The helmet law supporting researchers (Jake Olivier, Raphael Grzebieta, Soufiane Boufous, Rebecca Ivers, Royal Australian College of Surgeons, etc.), are all trying to "move on" from discussing helmet laws, spouting the need for protected biking infrastructure. They know the health benefits of cycling, but reject the evidence that the helmet law stops many people from cycling. They think that by building infrastructure that somehow cycling will blossom regardless. Fools. (big smile) When we were working at the Freeport copper mine we staged through Darwin and a bloke I worked with had to spend a week in Darwin as the crew change airplane broke or something. Anyway he rented a mini moke and met a Sheila (in a pub I guess) and the next day they are motoring around Darwin (pre hurricane) and he sees a sign Alice Springs - and Says "Hey! Want to go to Alice Springs" and the Sheila says O.K. and off they go. An hour later he hasn't seen anything but bush and says "how far is this Alice Springs?". They turn around and go back to Darwin :-) Now... if there had only been a bike path... -- Cheers, John B. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Build it and they won't come
On Wednesday, September 20, 2017 at 6:47:30 PM UTC-7, Frank Krygowski wrote:
Build it and they will come? Sorry, no. Here's a new article dispelling the myth that segregated facilities generate tremendous bike mode share. https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2...ped-stevenage? Unless motoring is actively dissuaded, almost all people who have cars will drive cars. That's hardly an example now is it? It's ALWAYS raining in England and people will always opt for comfort over convenience. I will only on very seldom occasions go to San Francisco by car because it's such a pain in the ass. But if it's raining there's no way I'm riding a bike. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Build it and they won't come
On Thu, 21 Sep 2017 13:59:29 +0700, John B wrote:
On Wed, 20 Sep 2017 22:57:09 -0500, Tim McNamara wrote: But this doesn't seem to work everywhere. Denmark made it work by taxing cars at an astonishing rate- owning a car is an economic hardship for many if not most Danes due to the tax structure- and pairing that with extensive on-street bike facilities. There would be no way to accomplish something like that in the US, where owning a car and having cheap fuel is effectively part of the Bill of Rights. Singapore tried the "tax it out of existence" scheme years ago and it did work for a while but as the economy grew so did auto sales. Today a new Toyota Corolla Altis 1.6 Standard will cost you, including the first 6 months road tax, US$78,509, and traffic is a major problem. -- Holy crap! That's what my house cost in 1993. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Can Women Build Big Muscles? Why Women Cant Build Big Muscles Easily | [email protected] | UK | 0 | February 16th 08 09:41 PM |
Anyone looking to build a bc? Free hazard hub with a Stockton build! | Evan Byrne | Unicycling | 5 | September 14th 06 09:59 AM |
Anyone looking to build a bc? Free hazard hub with a Stockton build! | Evan Byrne | Unicycling | 0 | August 25th 06 11:05 PM |
Disc Wheel Build Build Suggestions | osobailo | Techniques | 2 | October 5th 04 01:55 PM |
? - To build or not to build -- a bike - ? | Andrew Short | Techniques | 16 | August 4th 03 04:12 AM |