Cycling advocates have violently astronaut cycling and separate cycling since the 1970's or even before debated. And as the debate on cycling raged forums the casual cyclists, motorists or pedestrians between academics and infrastructure of geeks, which was largely unaware.
This could guess now thanks to you changes, be it New York City."Still life with bike path and baby," Chinatown, September 2010.
New York makes complete progress with his ambitious plan to 1800 miles of bike lanes by 2030, but not without opposition. (See here, here, here and here for some previous posts on New York.) With such an ambitious plan, and such vocal opposition it is inevitable that would begin Thunder to one usually oblivious audience (i.e. outside the insular world cycling advocacy) to be heard.
Is it a good thing more stakeholders become drawn into the discussion, right? Or does it bear the risk that the media, reductive trends the different sides of the debate in grotesque caricatures as such as equating cycling infrastructure to paint a "war on cars?"
New York published five represents a series of editorials, times, include ' 'em, five perspectives on the city plans and efforts until now: work are New York's bike lanes?
The five debaters make some good points, bad points, obvious points and stupid points:
Promote on normal roads, and thus to avoid, "ghettoizing" cyclists in cycling biking. A problem is now bringing the bike lanes on major roads and avenues, what are means that cyclists with higher speed traffic and higher volumes of traffic mix. A solution is to make bikes on most of the streets of the city, including those without bike lanes are suitable.
Felix Salmon appeals for patience, recognise that the New York for this characteristic are not known:
These people really think that New York Copenhagen would become overnight? The fact is that changing the fast-paced culture of New York is going to take time. As more and more people begin to slow that cycling is become to secure using cycle which is average speed of cyclists and drivers and pedestrians cyclists want to be aware that share increasingly valuable macadam.
Robert Sullivan lets loose the cyclists sarcasm (delicious, I must say):
The idea that bikers are mad out, everyone to destroy: we need these idiots from the bikes and put back into cars where you belong.
Bike networks are concentrated, subsidized benefits for a small portion of commuting public.
Regular bike commuters are a hardy bunch and the dedicated few often have already overcome, psychological and practical barriers that are necessary to integrate your preferred mode of transport in their lifestyle.
Before it was built, it was usual for New Yorkers to be careful of the Brooklyn Bridge. Chronicled the press of each growing pain in design and construction - and every skeptic has been proven repeatedly wrong. Cycling is in New York's next iconic markers are set. Let's take a deep breath and see where the streets to take.
So this is how it looks when cycling advocates their arguments to the general public. Some rage some bile, but mostly I think civil,. Will it take?