Making Cycling Irresistible - Can it happen here?

I recently read a fascinating article about cycling and transportation policy in northern Europe, entitled "Making Cycling Irresistible: Lessons from the Netherlands, Denmark and Germany." The authors are John Pucher and Ralph Buehler, and the full text of the article is available here.


Here is the abstract, to whet your appetite:

"This paper shows how the Netherlands, Denmark, and Germany have made bicycling a safe, convenient, and practical way to get around their cities. The analysis relies on national aggregate data as well as case studies of large and small cities in each country. The key to achieving high levels of cycling appears to be the provision of separate cycling facilities along heavily traveled roads and at intersections, combined with traffic calming of most residential neighborhoods. Extensive cycling rights of way in the Netherlands, Denmark, and Germany are complemented by ample bike parking, full integration with public transport, comprehensive traffic education and training of both cyclists and motorists, and a wide range of promotional events intended to generate enthusiasm and wide public support for cycling. In addition to their many pro-bike policies and programs, the Netherlands, Denmark, and Germany make driving expensive as well as inconvenient in central cities through a host of taxes and restrictions on car ownership, use, and parking. Moreover, strict land use policies foster compact, mixed-use developments that generate shorter and thus more bikeable trips. It is the coordinated implementation of this multi-
faceted, mutually reinforcing set of policies that best explains the success of these three countries in promoting cycling. For comparison, the paper portrays the marginal status of cycling in the UK and USA, where only about one percent of trips are by bike."

The main object of the article is to understand how Germany, Denmark, and the Netherlands have managed to make bicycling such an integral part of local and even intercity transportation. Cycling levels in those countries are reportedly ten times greater than they are in the US and UK (the low UK figures surprised me). There are many interesting details, but the one that really jumped out at me came from the section on traffic calming, beginning on page 20, where it was noted that residential street speed limits are set to 19 mph (30 kph). Some streets have even been designated "home zones" where "Pedestrians, cyclists, and playing children have as much right to use such residential streets as motor vehicles; indeed, motor vehicles are required to yield to non-motorized users." The larger point here is that while dedicated bike lanes on (or even separate bike paths alongside) major roads between towns/cities make good sense, serious and comprehensive traffic calming in towns allows bikes to coexist easily and safely with automobiles. Not least, this allows for narrower streets in general, and more pleasant neighborhoods.

The person who alerted me (and the other members of Middletown's transportation alternatives group) to the article also provided a score card for Middletown. He observed that "Traffic calming has been implemented on High Street and Westfield Street to significant controversy. Traffic calming in Europe is implemented in a macro sense, instead of the micro experimental sense that Middletown currently implemented. The result is [in Middletown] an incoherent policy as seen by the driving public."

I agree with this assessment, though I would note parenthetically that every complaint about the redesign of High Street could be interpreted positively as a driver who doesn't like having had to slow down and pay attention to what s/he is doing. I've heard it said that many of our elected representatives in city hall are now dead set against any more traffic calming in Middletown after the struggle over High Street. Nevertheless I am convinced that the Traffic Calming Ordinance (conceived of and passed by the Common Council about nine years ago) was one of the best things that happened to Middletown in recent memory, and that the entire city needs more and more comprehensively implemented traffic calming. (Incidentally, I've never liked the term "traffic calming" -- any suggestions for a better term?) Excellent candidates for immediate attention are South Main, East Main, Newfield, and Pine Streets. And wouldn't it be wonderful if we could get lower speed limits along all Middletown streets currently set at 25 mph? As Robert Orr's recent presentation to the Planning and Zoning Commission reminded us, serious injuries involving automobiles and pedestrians/cyclists tend to result if the vehicle is traveling faster than 25 mph. Since a 25 mph speed limit means, in effect, automotive speeds that approach 30-35 mph, lowering the speed limit would have an enormous injury reduction payoff -- and would further serve to make the streets more inviting for bicyclists and pedestrians.

A final note, apropos of safe driving: I routinely walk down High Street, and cross at the intersection with Church Street. While waiting for the cross walk light, I sometimes do some counting -- the number of SUVs, or vehicles with only one occupant, or number of cars that run the red light. But my favorite is the number of drivers chatting away on their cell phones. It will surprise no one that the cell phone law has gone the way of the speed limit, a rule to be "more honour'd in the breach."

(Posted by Vijay Pinch, a Middletown resident)