When discussing the subject with people who are less optimistic about the bicycle’s urban mode share potential, there is usually one and only one reason cited for cycling’s enviable success in Amsterdam and Copenhagen: those cities are flat.
A city’s relative lack of hills is often mistakenly thought to be the deciding factor on whether or not the bicycle can be successful as a legitimate mode of transportation. And sure, while a lack of hills is certainly helpful for a robust and diverse cycling community – especially when it comes to cargo biking and elderly cycling – it is not the end of the story. In fact it is only the beginning.
The current bicycle-oriented concepts of planners and architects in many urban places are usually developed between the parameters of attractiveness for the user and (perceived) traffic safety. The focus is on providing a "forgiving infrastructure" as well as generating the enthusiasm that the planners want to trigger in the cyclist. We should all be much more willing to use our bikes and motivate non-cyclists to do the same.
A city’s relative lack of hills is often mistakenly thought to be the deciding factor on whether or not the bicycle can be successful as a legitimate mode of transportation. And sure, while a lack of hills is certainly helpful for a robust and diverse cycling community – especially when it comes to cargo biking and elderly cycling – it is not the end of the story. In fact it is only the beginning.
The current bicycle-oriented concepts of planners and architects in many urban places are usually developed between the parameters of attractiveness for the user and (perceived) traffic safety. The focus is on providing a "forgiving infrastructure" as well as generating the enthusiasm that the planners want to trigger in the cyclist. We should all be much more willing to use our bikes and motivate non-cyclists to do the same.
No comments:
Post a Comment