[sustran] Re: [LotsLessCars] Will you let your children cycle to school ? I won't

[Todd Edelman, Green Idea Factory]

Hi Chris,

WALKING is better than cycling in general, no matter what the distance.

I have some other comments on your response, starting in CAPS:

Chris Bradshaw wrote:
> The idea that children should get to school via independent movement, rather
> than being driven in school buses or their caregiver's car is a worthy goal.
>
> However, cycling is a poorer choice than walking.
>
> First, cycling without an adult is not recommended by cyclist-trainers
> before the age of 10, and then only on residential streets.
>   
IN a car city, arterials can have fully separated bike paths.
IN a carfree city or quarter (i.e. an area encompassing both the home 
and school of the child, a child could ride anywhere (though arterials 
might haver surface public transport), and possibly even at a younger 
age, especially if accompanies by older children or older 
children-at-heart (i.e. adults), or there could even be a coloured line 
or signs with some familiar animal to guide them.
> Second, such children need a cycling course first.
>   
I AGREE some kind of course is useful even in a carfree area, but not as 
necessary. It is more about bike control, than defensive driving. There 
are of course pedestrians, animals, people playing in the street, 
children sitting on the street, children lying in the street for no 
reason at all, cycle rickshaws as mobile sales points for ice cream 
causing riots, and so on.
> Unfortunately, children are provided bikes long before their 10th birthdays.
> During that time, they use it as a plaything, usually emulating their
> parents' behaviour towards cars.  Also, they don't learn how to get places
> on their own.  These are bad attitudes that must be changed before letting
> them move about on their own.
>   
I AM no expert on teaching children but I learned to ride through just 
riding, in a relatively calm suburban setting. We did use it for fun, 
but also for getting to close by places quickly. Most stores - but not 
school - were only reachable by crossing big streets. But I don't see 
what is the problem with play, even now:  During Critical Mass rides in 
Prague, a few times I have led the group, and when I do things like 
leading other adults around (and around, and around) a kind of 
circle-square near the traditional starting point of the Mass, people 
get confused and ask me where we are going. I respond of course that we 
are going in circles. And when after that I just ride randomly (but not 
on big streets, or illegally) people still get confused because I am not 
being linear. On the other hand the Mass here - as opposed to most other 
places - usually starts with a man (male) telling us where we are going. 
We are simultaneously told that (in general) driving is unnecessary for 
many trips but that having a geographical goal is necessary for a fun 
bike ride. I hate that. There is no reason to need a reason, and while 
it is essential to know a bike can be used for transport (and to enable 
that as much as possible), it can also be mixed with play (on the same 
ride or just in general, but also on the same streets).
> Since the use of a bike is only an advantage over walking when the trip is
> in excess of about 2 kms, the child should not need using it until their
> cognitive abilities allow them to grasp the specifics of the road-path
> network over a 16-square-km area.  And that is about the time that they can
> survive along the cruel, car-dominated streets they will encounter, and have
> the strength for that length of trip.
>   
WHERE do these 2km and 16km2 rules come from? What kind of density (in a 
car city) are they based on? What about uncruel, fun-dominated streets? 
I am sure there is something to do what you say about strength (and also 
children have to be mature enough to keep their bike secure or in their 
possession, unless of course there are free bikes).
> In any case, within the 2-km distance, I find that children quickly tire of
> bike use for the trip to school, and switch back to walking.  It's far more
> social,
BACK to what I said at the top, walking IS generally better, but bikes 
can open up other possibilities.
>  and it avoids them having their favourite 'steed' stolen.
>   
I THINK there are relatively very simple solutions for that, in a car- 
or carfree city.

IN any city, kids need to be within comfortable walking distance of 
school, but bikes will extend their range, and in a carfree area or city 
this can be done much more easily.

To mention again what I said in an earlier reply, we need to build or 
adapt cities to children, rather than adapt children to car-cities. It 
is necessary of course for interim defensive measures, but if we place 
too much emphasis on them (or only talk about them), we will ALWAYS be 
doing that, for our grandchildren, and so on.

And please remember that I am in Prague, THE most automobilised city in 
Europe, though not the most dangerous, but where I fear that new 
initiatives like "Safe Routes to School" I mentioned in an earlier email 
will limited effect if they focus too much on symptoms. It should also 
be mentioned that the Safe Routes programme here is a project of an 
organisation which takes money from the automobile industry...

T

p.s. This reminds me: I am going to look at the schedule for VeloCity in 
Munich this June (where I am also giving a presentation, as well as a 
few others on this list) and see how many presentations, workshops etc. 
are about defensive cycling, or are in general about cycling in cities 
where cars are a given. VeloCity also has an automobile company as a 
main sponsor.
> Chris Bradshaw
> Ottawa
>
> = = = original message = = = =
>
> - primary school pupils want to cycle to school on their own but parents'
> concerns are stopping them.
>
> - 90% of youngsters have bikes and more than 30% of them would like to cycle
> to school, only 1% actually do
>
> - parents who drive their children to school risk creating a habit of
> dependency that undermines children's confidence and self-reliance
>
> - It's a great shame children are being denied the opportunity to experience
> this (cyling) independence because parents are worried about their safety on
> the roads
>
> All above remarks from THE HERALD (UK) can be applied to Singapore directly.
> I am just wondering how many cities (developing or not) are facing similar
> problems?
>
> Chu Wa
> Commuter cyclist
> Father of two
>
>
>
> The full news:
> http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.1247222.0.0.php
> - 
>   
--------------------------------------------

Todd Edelman
Director
Green Idea Factory

Korunní 72
CZ-10100 Praha 10
Czech Republic

++420 605 915 970
++420 222 517 832
Skype: toddedelman

edelman at greenidea.eu
http://www.worldcarfree.net/onthetrain

Green Idea Factory,
a member of World Carfree Network