Wednesday, May 23, 2007

[Cyclelicious] New comment on John Forester gave a talk on bicycle transportatio....

Anonymous has left a new comment on your post "John Forester gave a talk on bicycle transportatio...":

Cycle paths are NOT cycle lanes. To spend legal funds to change the original purpose is self-defeating. But of course many things John attempts to support damages the integration of cycling into our transportation solutions.

Forester's perceptions and observations on how history has dictated our transportation layout is accurate in some respects but misleading in others. No doubt STOP signs are overused and thus the CA stop is dominant. His attempts to question with questions or with "have you ever heard of a scientific study on it" would apply to many of his personal observations as well.

John's prescriptions and idea are a product of an era in our history that created some peculiar solutions. His take and interpretations are understandable but misleading... many "counter-actions" were from that period. In the USA, the car culture has become so dominant that it is hard for "experts" like John to think constructively any longer.

Euro-cities are purposely designed to be not auto-centrict. Yes many people there are "in love with cars" and they are becoming more prevalent. However, city planners there continue to favor cyclists and pedestrians as they recognize the value of people and culture in improving quality of life issues.

John also claims that bike lanes don't increase cycling. This is obviously incorrect as proven by Bogota and other cities. As pointed before, leadership exhibited by such men as Enrique Penalosa, has transformed transportation through the use of bike lanes, bike paths and other infrastructure decisions.

Rational policy making benefits all road users. This is the purpose of "complete streets" and I suggest that is what you should be linking to increase the level of debate and understanding.


Posted by Anonymous to Cyclelicious at 5/23/2007 09:37:00 AM