[sustran] Re: [sustran] Cycling in cities

[Ramon]

Francis wrote:

"Often, experienced cyclists appear to know more about cyclists'safety than
so-called transport experts who never travel by bicycle: some key points are
developping road skills of cyclists, providing a smooth surface and a wide
curb lane, and enforcing parking restrictions. Often, separate facilities
appear to be a way of pushing cyclists off the way of motor vehicles."

The "theoretical" benefits of cycling are well known. What matters is how to
promote it on the ground. I've had "transportation (even sustainable
transportation) experts" telling me what's good for me -- separate cycleways
or a mix of paths and lanes -- even if all they do is cycle the perfunctory
8 km per year in order to feel "integrated".  And until late last year I was
naive enough to
believe them, or at least gave them the benefit of the doubt, even
when I had been cycling on the road with MVs for over a decade, and feeling
none the worse for it. But my
involvement with the Marikina Bikeways Project forced me to do in-depth
research on bike safety, and after looking at the major arguments, I believe
that I, and most of the cyclists I've met or observed on the roads (ok, on
the roads of Manila and New York City where I've done most of my cycle
commuting -- can't properly speak for other cities), are best served by
riding on the road, not relegated to a separate or segregated facility. I
also believe
that we should rather advocate that those $hundreds per km., or whatever is
the cost for building "cycleways," be put to better use, such as training
and
education for proper riding, parking and shower/changing facilties, widening
the outside lane, fixing the potholes,  "sharing the road" campaigns, better
law enforcement, and other practical measures that actually matter to
cyclists' wellbeing. No more useless
infrastructure!

Hey, and Brendan's right, weather does matter -- at least for those who need
to keep their collars clean.

Ramon