WI: Bicycle lifts appeared during the first bicycle

[Myrtonos]

Apparently they feared that if there were proper cycle paths cyclists would be forced onto them and banned from using any normal road even if there was no cycle path alternative. To be fair there are plenty of drivers who want bikes banned from the roads and are also bitterly opposed to any cycle paths being built anywhere.

I've never heard of pedal-powered vehicles being banned from roads anywhere in the world, including in countries that do have a lot of bike paths but excluding controlled-access roads where speed limits* are in excess of what utility cyclists (in everyday clothes on road-going bikes) can achieve.

You can't really take many bikes on a crowded commuter train during rush hour.

But bicycle storage on trains does exist, and this depends on the trains. If you make the trains larger, then at least upright bikes can be carried, often stored vertically, possibly even at busier times.

*This sometimes applies even to minimum speed limits.

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

I've never heard of pedal-powered vehicles being banned from roads anywhere in the world, including in countries that do have a lot of bike paths but excluding controlled-access roads where speed limits* are in excess of what utility cyclists (in everyday clothes on road-going bikes) can achieve.

It's not what would have happened, but it's what the cycling organisations were afraid of. Also I don't think the cycling organisations were all that bothered about utility cyclists getting to work, school or doing the shopping, just the racing and touring clubs riding for sport.

It really drives me mad that they acted so stupidly. Even in the 30's it was clear the numbers of cars on the roads was just going to keep climbing and that cars and bikes don't mix well. The government actually had a plan that would have been good for both cyclists and motorists but they chose to dig their heals in and oppose it.

During the post war period it would have made sense to restart the bike path program as part of the reconstruction as well. Cars use oil, oil costs dollars and Britain was so short of dollars we had to ration bread for the first time because we couldn't afford to import all the Wheat we needed. Also cars sold on the domestic market could have been exported.

 

[Myrtonos]

It's not what would have happened, but it's what the cycling organisations were afraid of. Also I don't think the cycling organisations were all that bothered about utility cyclists getting to work, school or doing the shopping, just the racing and touring clubs riding for sport.

Maybe a petition signed by utility cyclists would have changed the minds of these organisations and protected bikes lanes actually go against banning pedal power vehicles from roads.

It really drives me mad that they acted so stupidly. Even in the 30's it was clear the numbers of cars on the roads was just going to keep climbing and that cars and bikes don't mix well. The government actually had a plan that would have been good for both cyclists and motorists but they chose to dig their heals in and oppose it.

What was that plan? Was it clear that cars were going to be more common than horse-drawn carriages ever were?

During the post war period it would have made sense to restart the bike path program as part of the reconstruction as well. Cars use oil, oil costs dollars and Britain was so short of dollars we had to ration bread for the first time because we couldn't afford to import all the Wheat we needed. Also cars sold on the domestic market could have been exported.

So the question is why import oil rather than more wheat? The U.K was short of pounds.

 

[oberdada]

Cycling on the road is actually saver than on bike path in most cases, because most of them are terrible, especially the older ones on boardwalks.
There are bike lanes on the road that are really great.
Everyone sees you and there is enough space to surpass slower riders. The worst accidents between cars and bikes happen because the driver did not see the bike.
So I'd rather be seen than hidden.
although it sometimes feels like it, it's not cyclers hunting season, ever.
The lift looks like a nice gadget, but I probably wouldn't use it more than, especially if it costs money every time

 

[Myrtonos]

Could the leisure market be the market, or maybe one of them, that saved velocipedes such as bicycles from obsolescence?

 

[Myrtonos]

Apparently there isn't a fee to use the Trondheim lift.

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

One thing I think should have happened is that during the post war council housing boom the government should have compelled councils to include safe cycle routes in the new road networks of the new estates. Routes that led to the schools, shopping districts and industrial areas would have been a real benefit in the years when it was still unusual for the average working family to own a car, let alone two as is not uncommon now. The practice would probably have been followed in the new private estates as well, but the government wasn't funding them so had less pull.

 

[AJE]

And better at this

Bicycles are much better at that from personal experience. They have less ground pressure so they won't sink in that much in the first place, and more importantly, they can go into other areas. In that particular photo I would have (and have done this before) walked my bike up the mound on the side of the road, and cycled on top of it by those trees where the car can't go. In general the ability of a bike to be walked/lifted up short paths too steep for a car, and to ride through paths too narrow for a car, makes them far superior at getting through that sort of terrain.

 

[Insane Ranter]

Another thing to consider is where people live. If the majority of the population lives out in the country and not the city then having to bike everywhere is pointless and the car still takes over. If you are like Europe where most people live in the city then bikes make sense.

I know here in Atlanta people commute 50 miles a day to get to work and then 50 miles to get home. They are not going to use a bike for work. But then they are to spread out where they live still to use a bike to go shopping.

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

I know here in Atlanta people commute 50 miles a day to get to work and then 50 miles to get home. They are not going to use a bike for work. But then they are to spread out where they live still to use a bike to go shopping.

Sure using a bike isn't always practical, but if you can ride your bike 3 miles to the railway station, take the train 45 miles into town and then rent a bike (perhaps included in the ticket price for the train) and ride the last two miles into work in less time than driving to work and spending god knows how long stuck in jams it makes a lot more sense.

If you actually live in a big densely populated city with adequate public transport is it really practical to spend thousands on a car, plus insurance, plus fuel plus parking fees, when you mostly travel less than 5 miles on any one journey and traffic speed is an average of 10mph or so? (Based on London)

 

[marathag]

If you actually live in a big densely populated city with adequate public transport is it really practical to spend thousands on a car, plus insurance, plus fuel plus parking fees, when you mostly travel less than 5 miles on any one journey and traffic speed is an average of 10mph or so? (Based on London)

Duluth is not densely populated, but between hills and weather, Biking is a rough way to commute

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

Duluth is not densely populated, but between hills and weather, Biking is a rough way to commute

That's what busses, trams and subways are for. No single form of transport can be the answer to every journey needed. The problem is that for generations city planners, politicians and big business have sold us the myth that the car is the answer to every journey needed, and it's killing us by the tens of thousands every year, either directly in accidents or via pollution. We need a more balanced approach.

 

[marathag]

That's what busses, trams and subways are for. No single form of transport can be the answer to every journey needed. The problem is that for generations city planners, politicians and big business have sold us the myth that the car is the answer to every journey needed, and it's killing us by the tens of thousands every year, either directly in accidents or via pollution. We need a more balanced approach.

Twin Cities has decent bus and light rail service.
Duluth has1/6th the population density of that..
So there's no way around that.

 

[Insane Ranter]

That's what busses, trams and subways are for. No single form of transport can be the answer to every journey needed. The problem is that for generations city planners, politicians and big business have sold us the myth that the car is the answer to every journey needed, and it's killing us by the tens of thousands every year, either directly in accidents or via pollution. We need a more balanced approach.

I agree with you and if I can I will try to walk or bike to work. Just not that practical or at least in the minds of some not practical. Getting the public to build the rail is really hard. The county I live in outside of Atlanta has traditionally voted NO on light rail due to the myth that it would increase crime. But we need rail badly.

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

I agree with you and if I can I will try to walk or bike to work. Just not that practical or at least in the minds of some not practical. Getting the public to build the rail is really hard. The county I live in outside of Atlanta has traditionally voted NO on light rail due to the myth that it would increase crime.

How the heck does having another way to get to work increase crime? It's poverty that increases crime and light rail provides more jobs.

 

[marathag]

How the heck does having another way to get to work increase crime? It's poverty that increases crime and light rail provides more jobs.

https://sfist.com/2019/11/18/lengthy-expose-shows-how-crime-on-bart-has-gone-off-the-rails/

Rates are low, but the few acts get magnified: that won't happen to you if you drive, people think.

They may not know who Sartre was, but probably believe that Hell is other people

 

[Insane Ranter]

How the heck does having another way to get to work increase crime? It's poverty that increases crime and light rail provides more jobs.

I really wish I knew the answer other than it does not. Trust me its past time for light rail!

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

I really wish I knew the answer other than it does not. Trust me its past time for light rail!

Does the council only object to light rail or just any transport other than the private car? If it's the later then you have a real problem. It still amazes me when I see pictures of streets in American towns that don't even have footpaths. How are you supposed to get anywhere if your car breaks down?

 

[marathag]

Does the council only object to light rail or just any transport other than the private car? If it's the later then you have a real problem. It still amazes me when I see pictures of streets in American towns that don't even have footpaths. How are you supposed to get anywhere if your car breaks down?

Uber, if you don't have a buddy to give you a lift. Unless you have crap insurance, your tow is covered and that gets you a ride back to the garage.

You couldn't pay me to walk on I-35 or I-*94 around the Twin Cities

Most like it in the suburbs that you don't have a sidewalk, as it's the Homeowners responsibility to keep it clear of snow