In article <
[email protected]>, Barry Gaudet <
[email protected]> wrote:
> Just zis Guy, you know? <
[email protected]> wrote:
> : On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 00:01:16 GMT, "Mike S." <mikeshaw@coxDOTnet> wrote:
>
> :>one word: convenience.
>
> : Yes, I'd noticed he hadn't mentioned how convenient bikes are - but you're right.
>
> This past summer I went to see Rush at the amphitheatre in Toronto. [five of us in a car] The
> first thing I noted was how many lanes of bikes you could get on the Gardiner Expressway. Then
> once we descended to Lakeshore Blvd we inched along at a snail's pace. [any Torontonian will
> vouch for the agony involved in this particular gauntlet] Beside us on the multi-use path not
> only cyclists but joggers, rollerbladers even walkers were making better forward progress. We had
> to go far beyond the venue to find outrageously expensive parking then walk back to Ontario
> Place. At the entrance I commented on all the bikes chained right at the entrance under the
> watchful eyes of event security.
>
> Where is this chimerical convenience of autos?
It appears to greatest effect about six months after your Summer concert, when your destination is
20 miles away, and you are traveling with less bicyclish members of your family plus cargo.
It also appears when you want to make a trip to the cabin 80 km out of town. Hm... 3+ hours on the
bicycle, or an hour in the car?
I like bicycles. I like them a _lot_. I think almost everyone should own one and ride them often. I
ride one 12 km to work and 12 back every day I can, through noteworthy traffic and up intimidating
(though not otherworldly) hills, and enjoy it. (Well, my commute just got shorter, but that's what
I've done for 8 months.) My attitude towards driving ranges from pleasure (rarely) to deep loathing
(often), and I try to avoid it whenever I can. I even agree that people tend to use cars for some
pretty irrational trips at times, such as 1-mile trips down the road, or going to see Rush.
That said, I think that those who mock the convenience and utility of cars are living in a
fairy-land, or possibly Amsterdam. It is possible for many people, especially singles or bike-minded
couples, to live without an automobile. It gets harder the more equipment and infirm family members
you need to transport and the further afield (up to a certain limit) you want to go. At some point
there are trips that an auto non-user will find dreadfully inconvenient and/or very slow. Depending
on how you live these trips can usually be avoided. I don't want to avoid some of these trips,
because they take me to places I like visiting, accompanied by family members I enjoy bringing with
me, and let me return in time for work on Monday.
This is not true for all places and all times. Were I some doughty Dutchman living in the land of
high population densities and good train service, I might change my tune. But Europe has a
relatively high population density and other quirks of history and development that make it less
car-dependent than North America. Even so, the number of cars in Europe seems to indicate that they
find these cars awfully convenient too, even at gas prices exceeding what we pay for milk.
--
Ryan Cousineau,
[email protected] http://www.sfu.ca/~rcousine President, Fabrizio Mazzoleni Fan Club
