http://amsterdamize.com/2009/12/13/kid-stuff/

http://hembrow.blogspot.com/2009/11/what-segregation-really-means.html

“I can teach a 10-year-old the rules of the road and the skills needed to bike safely in traffic (though judgment is another matter).”

Kevin’s comment:
I agree. I am comfortable taking the lane on roads with dense car and truck traffic, but I will not allow my 11-year-old son to do the same. It is just too dangerous and unpleasant.

Here is a video of Assen, NL, where almost all the children arrive at school by bicycle. Note the infrastructure that enables a safe and pleasant ride. One that parents obviously have no issues sending their children out on. See:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2n_znwWroGM&feature=player_embedded

How can one possibly be improving safety if you’re increasing conflicts?

I can teach a 10-year-old the rules of the road and the skills needed to bike safely in traffic (though judgment is another matter), so why should an adult without a license be unable to understand the rules of traffic? Indeed, I knew the rules of traffic well before I took driver’s ed in high school because I spent countless hours on the roads on my bike.

Too many American bikeways are predicated on incompetence, ignorance and fear. (And the European-style designs many of my colleagues are promoting are even worse.)

I challenge anyone to provide an example of a successful safety system predicated on incompetence, ignorance and fear.

The common planning opinion, from what I have seen, is that the vehicular cyclists (they call them “A” cyclists, for Advanced) can already hold their own on existing infrastructure and seldom ask for asking for anything special, so little or no thought need be given to them. The fact that most cyclists fall into one of their other two categories (“B” for Basic and “C” for children) is considered all the more reason to focus planning efforts on these groups, with bike lanes and other bicycle-specific infrastructure.

I was in a meeting a few months ago with some engineers from a local transportation engineering consulting company, and they commented that their design audience for bicyclists includes not only those who know and follow the rules of the road, but those who may not posses a driver’s license and therefore may not even KNOW the rules of the road! That took me aback quite a bit, and I’m still sorting out how I feel about it. I guess it’s a logical conclusion that since bicyclists are not forced to be licensed the way motorists are, planners have to assume the presence of SOME bicyclists lacking even basic driver training, but geez, I can see the difficulty in trying to accommodate them with engineering only. (Although I would still think that the vast majority of adult bicyclists DO know how to drive a car, they just don’t ride like it. But I don’t have numbers, and I’m sure it varies by neighborhood.)

http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2009/12/21/21climatewire-a-pro-bicycle-city-faces-trouble-promoting-el-2513.html

AMSTERDAM — Cars in the pinched, medieval streets at the center of this city can quickly clog traffic. The policy has been to find myriad ways to discourage them, clearing the way for more and more bicyclists.

The Dutch have tried stiff fees, a maze of prohibited lanes and other ways of outright discrimination to limit the number of cars in this antique city of arched bridges and canals. It was originally built to cater to boats.

The city’s charm campaign was then shifted to bicyclists, but now officials are trying to switch gears and mount an aggressive effort to encourage people to buy new electric cars. That jibes with this country’s fight against global warming, but it is also warming the tempers among cyclists. They worry that their traditional right-of-way over cars will be sideswiped by more cars and more parking ramps.

“Also, the general public has no idea how much their car and the use of said vehicle is subsidized.”

Technology exists to charge motorists directly for their impacts. GPS. A GPS unit connected through a third-party company that keeps the personal data out of the government’s hands could act as an intermediary. It could also be an intermediary with private parking lots. You’d pay for every mile you drove; every place you parked. You could be charged more for peak-hour usage. More for exceeding the posted speed. More in areas with poor air quality. It facilitates per mile insurance payment, too. The unit could tell you exactly what you’re paying and why.

The technology exists; it’s a political problem.

Kevin’s comment:

The City of Toronto has zoning requirements for bicycle parking. These requirements include short-term (visitor) parking and long-term (employee and resident) parking. For a quick summary of requirements, please see the chart at the top of page 36 at:

http://www.toronto.ca/planning/pdf/bicycle_parking_guidelines_final_may08.pdf

Although these are officially draft guidelines, City staff are not approving designs that fail to conform to the guidelines.

Except for medical offices, commercial buildings are required to have at least six short-term parking spots. The total number of short-term bicycle parking spots is the greater of six or 0.2 spots per 100 sq M of office space. In addition to this, there is also a requirement for long-term parking of 0.2 spots per 100 sq M of office space.

These parking spaces have to conform to specific standards as set out in the link.