3 ms·

I don't think solving the 5 points here will help people get off cars and on bikes. I don't care if there are no bike lanes or secure parking spots (go find a

I don't think solving the 5 points here will help people get off cars and on bikes. I don't care if there are no bike lanes or secure parking spots (go find a street sign ;), I bike everywhere because it's pure fun. First, we must show people how awesome biking is. Only then would nice bike lanes and racks and a rental program be useful. Actually, #4 is a chicken and egg problem. Maybe free/cheap rentals would get people to enjoy biking, but what incentive do they have to try when they can just drive?

RyanMcGreal 17y ago
> I don't think solving the 5 points here will help people get off cars and on bikes. It will. The correlation between how much cycling infrastructure a city builds and how many people ride bikes is extremely high. Those cities that we now consider to be bicycle meccas didn't get that way until they decided to invest aggressively in making it easier and more comfortable to cycle. Quote: "As documented in this article, cycling was not always thriving in the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark. Cycling levels plummeted in all three countries from about 1950 to 1975. It was only through a massive reversal in transport and urban planning policies in the mid-1970s that cycling was revived to its current successful state. In 1950, cycling levels were higher in the UK than they are now in Germany: almost 15% of all trips. Just as in these other countries, cycling in the UK plummeted from 1950 to 1975, but British cycling never recovered. It continued to fall to its current level of 1.3% of trips, only slightly higher than the 0.9% bike share of trips in the USA" http://www.sfu.ca/city/PDFs/PUCHERMakingCyclingIrresistibleJune2008.pdf http://www.sfu.ca/city/PDFs/PUCHERMakingCyclingIrresistibleJ... Remember: what attracts hard-core cyclists (and I'd consider myself a hard-core cyclist - I commute by bicycle year-round in a northeastern city) is not what attracts the average person.

RyanMcGreal 17y ago

> I don't think solving the 5 points here will help people get off cars and on bikes. It will. The correlation between how much cycling infrastructure a city builds and how many people ride bikes is extremely high. Those cities that we now consider to be bicycle meccas didn't get that way until they decided to invest aggressively in making it easier and more comfortable to cycle. Quote: "As documented in this article, cycling was not always thriving in the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark. Cycling levels plummeted in all three countries from about 1950 to 1975. It was only through a massive reversal in transport and urban planning policies in the mid-1970s that cycling was revived to its current successful state. In 1950, cycling levels were higher in the UK than they are now in Germany: almost 15% of all trips. Just as in these other countries, cycling in the UK plummeted from 1950 to 1975, but British cycling never recovered. It continued to fall to its current level of 1.3% of trips, only slightly higher than the 0.9% bike share of trips in the USA" http://www.sfu.ca/city/PDFs/PUCHERMakingCyclingIrresistibleJune2008.pdf http://www.sfu.ca/city/PDFs/PUCHERMakingCyclingIrresistibleJ... Remember: what attracts hard-core cyclists (and I'd consider myself a hard-core cyclist - I commute by bicycle year-round in a northeastern city) is not what attracts the average person.