Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
This bears out what I have seen--my city has seen a cycling renaissance, and a lot of the riders I see out and about have gray hair.
Quote:
Between 1995 and 2009, the most recent year for which National Household Travel Survey data are available, the rise in biking among people ages 60-79 accounted for 37 percent of the total net nationwide increase in bike trips.
This bears out what I have seen--my city has seen a cycling renaissance, and a lot of the riders I see out and about have gray hair.
Lots of grey hairs around the neighborhood adjacent to mine.
I see them on my way to stuff. Not so many in my own neighborhood or when I go downtown. But these are busier streets that I take, and not the bike boulevards I typically see the older people on. But a lot of it could do with my own ride timing too. I usually bike to the neighborhood next door on Saturday day time, and bike downtown in the evenings or during the week.
Book regarding urban planning, copyright 2012. WALKABLE CITY How Downtown Can Save America, One Step At A Time by Jeff Speck. The author devotes a chapter to the bicycle.
Cyclists are also motorists in the sense that some obey the laws and some don't. Though I do think there should be more things that make it easier for cyclists to obey the law. Lets take an intersection that is designed for cars. If that cyclist misses the light, they might be stuck there until a car shows up to trigger the light if there isn't a pedestrian push button within reach. It would make sense to also give a light for bikes that allows them a head start to get up to speed before the light turns green for cars. Little things like that can drastically improve bike safety and make it easier for everyone to obey the laws.
Cyclists are also motorists in the sense that some obey the laws and some don't. Though I do think there should be more things that make it easier for cyclists to obey the law. Lets take an intersection that is designed for cars. If that cyclist misses the light, they might be stuck there until a car shows up to trigger the light if there isn't a pedestrian push button within reach. It would make sense to also give a light for bikes that allows them a head start to get up to speed before the light turns green for cars. Little things like that can drastically improve bike safety and make it easier for everyone to obey the laws.
Yup, or worse. One from my own experience was crossing a highway on a bridge. There were limited bridges that I could cross on and NONE had any infrastructure or space so I had to ride with traffic. On the safest bridge I could use, I could either A) stop at the light and wait for green, allowing a ton of traffic to catch-up before I could turn off that road 1/4 of a mile ahead, or B) I could run the traffic light when no one was coming and get out of the way before the onslaught of traffic caught up and tail-gated me.
Many people who don't ride don't recognize those factors (how could they?). There are too many stupid cyclists out there, but sometimes following the law isn't the best. Safety always comes first for me, even if it's "against the law". And the difference between safety and the law will continue to be stark until infrastructure and laws are adjusted for both bicyclists and automobile drivers.
Book regarding urban planning, copyright 2012. WALKABLE CITY How Downtown Can Save America, One Step At A Time by Jeff Speck. The author devotes a chapter to the bicycle.
Some motorists need to look in the mirror and take time to ask themselves:
-Did I stay below the posted speed limit at ALL times?
-Did I come to a COMPLETE stop at stop signs?
-Did I stop COMPLETELY BEHIND THE LINE before turning right on red?
-Did I signal every lane change several seconds before changing lanes?
-Did I make every left turn in to the leftmost lane and travel 100 ft before changing to the right lane?
Chances are, the answer to one or all of the above is NO. But it's quite possible you didn't endanger yourself or anyone else in the process. Chances are part of the reason is that it is impractical given the reality of traffic and visibility conditions--inadequate design and capacity for the needs of those on the road. Now imagine yourself on a bike on roads where bikes are accommodated as an afterthought--if they are accommodated at all. And sidewalks are inadequate for biking and are being used by pedestrians (imagine if I told YOU to drive on roads that are irregularly sloped and have potholes all over and have road signs in the middle of the lane). Finally, consider that most actual collisions between bikes and cars are situations when the bike was not breaking any law--and often the bike was in a marked bike lane.
Building a comprehensive network of bike lanes costs about the same as a mile of urban super highway and gets 90% of those bikes out of your way, and even gets some cars out of your way because more people feel safer biking.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
