Alright I admit this makes me 'home'sick http://www.cycling-embassy.dk/2012/05/10/cycle-concepts2012/
Imagine if just half of these concepts were adopted in SA/AUS?
Where is my magic wand?
You might like to skip straight to the PDF (16MB) download here.
But that publication is not what many cyclists in Australia want.
16 Km/hr average speed
There are regular rides in this site that suggest you should be able to average 25Km/hr just to atennd.
you need a road bike (so other people on bikes are not welcome)
The Ammy Gillet bikeway has been criticised by some because it is not sutabal for travleing at high speed (35km/hr +).
You see the Lycra clad racers using the road instead I assume that going fast and dodging cars is more enjoyable for them.
There are very few Lycra clad cyclists portaed in that publication.
They seem to be promoting cycling as an everyday activity done by everyday people that is incidental to other things.
In Australia cycling is the domain of elite sports people or elite sports people Watanabes who think that if your wheels are not worth more than the annual income of many African villages your bike is so inferior that you could never ride in in public for fear of ridicule.
If cycling is going to be done by everyday people in Australia the culture of elitism needs to disappear.
Australian sport cyclists need people like me, a utility cyclist. When more people cycle for transport, cycling becomes 'normalised'. The public then know cyclists who are relatives, neighbours, friends, work colleagues, etc. Drivers then accept cyclists on the road, stop harassing them and actually LOOK for cyclists. It would be an advantage for sports cyclists to realise this and seek better cycling facilities and conditions, which will then encourage people to cycle to reach the critical mass.
AVO, interesting link within your link.
How people will downplay the negative impact of their action. Like driver hitting cyclist or near miss?
just in case you didn't understand the post
I suppose strong legs doesn't necessarily mean strong brains.
If AC is repsenting all cyclists whre are the non road bike enjoy the ride type people?
I know Don and I share most of your observations. A real shame really
I feel quite ambivalent about the considered 'norm' for riding a bike in this country. When I occassianally drag my 20+ years road bike out of the shed I cause several raised eyebrows and questions, yet if that is the way that Australia 'are going to come around' to adopting the two wheels as a normal mode of transportation - so be it.
All I hope for is that anyone who are involved with and have the power to change the road and urban infrastructure in this country will stop argueing what is best for Australia. The answer is very well documented in the above link. As an example I personally don't think painted bike lanes are a good idea (attracts dooring, is too often an extra left turning lane for cars, creates frustration etc.), but if it over time can attract enough cyclist that we one day can reserve this space for cyclist by putting in raised segregated bike tracks - then we are winning.
There are a number of reasons why Denmark/Scandinavia/North Europe have evolved their bike culture as they have ie. urban civiliations before the dawn of cars, car/petrol taxation rules, oil crisis' in the 70'es, lack of infatuation with the US's car and urban planning principles etc., but it doesn't change the fact that Australia could learn a lot from those principles rather than (what it seems like) trying to reinvent the wheel (excuse the pun).
Having just read today's arctice (and in particular comments) in the Advertiser http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/south-australian... I can't help feeling despair. All too often ideas, working concepts, experiences etc. are turned down because it wasn't invented here ('we are different you know'). I can't help thinking that adopting the Cycle Concepts could be a massive boost for turning Adelaide into this 'vibrant city' that so many are longing for.
It should be a easy as stealing/copying your class mates notes when you went to school...
The annoying thing here is that in the past we had some examples of relatively good cycling infrastructure, such as the Port Road bike paths (plantation side of the two one-way roads that together make up Port Road), and the Anzac Hwy bike paths on the footpath sides of the kerbs. In the case of the Port Rd paths, when Give Way signs were first erected at the crossovers, they were placed to protect the bike paths. Unfortunately, these paths have been deliberately neglected and/or destroyed by local councils and the Highways Dept. (or whatever name it goes by this week).
Some of our existing facilities are a good start, but need some improvement. Someone once said to me that there is a bike path running along the old railway to Glenelg (North Terrace line). It would be nice if it did run along the line of the railway, but I have yet to meet a railway with so many twists, turns and changes of grade.
David, I think the Port Road bicycle paths are now called car parks! My recollection is that part of the median is car parking and part is grass.
The Port Rd paths were on the road reserves, "behind" the trees (from a motorist's perspective), next to the plantation reserve. Generally, the car parks, sports courts, bowling greens, war memorials, rotundas etc were on the plantation reserve. Parts of the path on the south-western side still remain. I can remember (and used) the path from the Hindmarsh roundabout (Park Tce/Adam St) to Alberton.
The first real despoliation of the bike path was at the Kilkenny Rd intersection, where the path was totally destroyed with no alternative routing whatsoever provided.