On Sat, 07 Jun 2008 11:01:33 +0100, Colin McKenzie
<
[email protected]> said in
<
[email protected]>:
>> And of course I mean *good* bike paths; the kind they have in Holland.
>> Wide, continuous, straight, easy-to-use bike networks, designed for
>> safety and high throughput, and that give priority to cyclists at
>> junctions.
>And which, IIRC, are compulsory for cyclists, like those in Germany.
Indeed, and for the same reason (the rules were introduced during
the occupation).
>On-road cycling came to be perceived as dangerous because of driver
>behaviour. It will be, and will be seen to be safe if the driving
>culture is improved. France has shown what can be done, with radical
>casualty reduction following a decision to enforce existing laws better.
Yes. But the rural French are less obsessed with speed than the
typical Brit anyway. I have never experienced a French driver
showing impatience when reduced to cycling speeds for a couple of
minutes. Not to say it doesn't happen, but the speed imperative
does not seem to have infected them to the same extent.
It's also not clear to me where these supposed cycle lanes will go.
Looking back at the heated arguments in the 17th Century when London
tried to widen its strategic thoroughfares, I don't think this is a
new problem. Unfortunately, the private car is a grossly
space-inefficient and highly dangerous mode of urban transport. Any
solution which fails to recognise that will probably not be
effective.
To quote Douglas Adams: "Many solutions were suggested for this
problem, but most of these were largely concerned with the movements
of small, green pieces of paper, which is odd, because on the whole,
it wasn't the small, green pieces of paper which were unhappy."
We are the small green pieces of paper in this equation.
Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
85% of helmet statistics are made up, 69% of them at CHS, Puget Sound
