Rebuilding Place in the Urban Space

"A community’s physical form, rather than its land uses, is its most intrinsic and enduring characteristic." [Katz, EPA] This blog focuses on place and placemaking and all that makes it work--historic preservation, urban design, transportation, asset-based community development, arts & cultural development, commercial district revitalization, tourism & destination development, and quality of life advocacy--along with doses of civic engagement and good governance watchdogging.

Wednesday, July 03, 2019

"Ten common myths about bike lanes – and why they're wrong" -- The Guardian

-- "the article"

The piece starts out with a twitter capture of a Conservative Party screed against bike lanes in a London borough, as a way to excoriate the Labour Mayor, Sadiq Khan.

I hate when smart development, sustainable mobility, is made out to a be political thing, rather than "the right thing to do."

The ten myths from the article:

1. Cycle lanes increase congestion (and thus pollution)

(Sometimes they do. Not usually.)

2. Hardly anyone uses them

(Makes a good point that unused lanes are likely an indicator of poor design and/or lack of a network.)

I would argue also an indicator of a need to do programming to assist people in taking up cycling.

3. They’re only used by white, middle-class men/commuters

(Makes the point that when it is true, it's an indicator of poor design and/or lack of a bikeway network.)

4. They’re bad for business

(Research shows this isn't true. Plus, in cities more customers tend to arrive on foot or bike, even if business proprietors don't believe it.)

5. They’re dangerous for pedestrians

This isn't true. But if it were, then we'd have to ban cars and roads altogether. (A point I made in response to a citizen when I was a bike and ped planner in Baltimore County. I joke that the response is one of the reasons I didn't get a permanent position there.)

6. Cyclists just break laws, so they shouldn’t get lanes

Yes, bicyclists break laws. But at rates far less than motor vehicle operators. Again, if the issue of "breaking the law" is foremost, then we have to ban cars.

7. How do I carry work tools/a fridge on a bike?

With difficulty and/or by preparation. And if you have to move a fridge, rent a truck or make friends with people who have one, or use a Ziptruck. (I did this a couple weeks ago, with the next door neighbor...)

8. We’re not the Netherlands/Denmark

What makes the Netherlands and Denmark special isn't culture. It's that in response to the high cost of oil, and the negative impact of cars on cities, they decided to not only make sustainable mobility a priority, but the preferred mobility choice. They didn't say it would be a good thing to do, and then do nothing substantive in terms of policy changes, etc. to make it happen. They said "it has to be done" and they reordered policy and practice in order to "make it so."

E.g., in the US, I laugh when President Trump excoriates automobile manufacturers for closing plants that produce sedans and small cars, while the sales of SUBs and trucks are booming. Clearly, he doesn't understand that as long as gas is cheap, people are incentivized to buy SUVs and trucks. By contrast, a gallon of gas costs about $7 in the Netherlands and Denmark.

9. They cost too much


WTF?

Although yes, retrofitting cycletracks especially can be expensive, since roadways were most often constructed to maximize motor vehicle throughput, not to include high quality infrastructure for pedestrians, bicyclists, and transit simultaneously.

10. There’s no need

See the discussion about the Netherlands and Denmark and add to the conversation climate change.

Labels: , , , ,

3 Comments:

At 8:47 AM, Blogger Mari said...

"Research shows this isn't true."
Care to provide a link? Usually you are chock full of links. What's up?

 
At 12:16 PM, Blogger Richard Layman said...

I know I've mentioned such studies in the past, from Toronto, SF, Long Beach, etc.

https://www.citylab.com/solutions/2015/03/the-complete-business-case-for-converting-street-parking-into-bike-lanes/387595/

 
At 12:19 PM, Blogger Richard Layman said...

thinking more about the refrigerator thing (and stoves)...

I guess in the last 30 years I've bought three refrigerators. Two, delivery was part of the purchase. The third, as mentioned, I got the next door neighbor to help.

I don't think needing a vehicle to get a fridge once over 30 years absolutely necessitates owning a car/truck.

Similarly, in that time, two stoves. Both, delivery was part of the deal.

WRT take away, the most recent example we called the city bulk trash. We just needed to take off the doors. And the oven, a vintage model, we kept. They would have taken it away had we built that into the purchase.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home