Slate Magazine on “vehicularists” vs. “facilitators”
Thanks Red Star for pointing out this article in Slate today that outlines the two camps: those of us who want more bike-only infrastructure (“facilitators”), and those of us who want bikes to be recognized as legitimate vehicles on existing roads (“vehicularists”).
I tend to be more of a “use what you got” sort of person — I’d rather not see miles and miles of new concrete and asphalt laid when we’ve got so much already. But I would like to see some dedicated inter-city bike highways (cf. my Winslow to Bisbee bike highway fantasy) and I see no reason we can’t also dedicate more of the existing pavement exclusively to bicycles (and to cafes that serve good coffee and croissants).
Cars have it so good right now.
–Erik Ryberg
October 20th, 2009 at 10:49 am
“You know who else liked bike paths? say vehicularists. Hitler.”
classic.
October 20th, 2009 at 12:34 pm
I would be happy if the motorists had some sorta incentive (danger imposed on them) which resulted in responsible drivers around me. Currently the laws think I am wrapped in 4,000 pounds of steel and glass, airbags, and seat belt. The motorists can see that I am not and act accordingly. After we resurrect the previous pre-1900 vision, we can address the two big problems cars create. Speed mismatches and space hogging.
October 25th, 2009 at 9:27 pm
I don’t know if I like either
of these two camps. At least I
don’t think it is too practical
to belong to one or the other.
In fact, demanding the existance
of these two groups stems from
car-headed reasoning. Maybe.
I think.
Bikes are always going to be a
part of traffic; being used for
the same purposes as cars on the
same roadways acting in the same
manner.
It is unfortunate that when bicycles
are being used for different purposes
than merely a transportation device,
that that usage takes place in the
space shared with cars. When we ride
for recreation, we want a different
perspective on the activity and to
get away from the usual. It’s really
why anybody recreates. We shortchange
the experience somewhat by not being
able to leave the traffic world entirely.
So bike-only facilities are warranted if
we want to have the full potential of the
bicycle. In Bogota, it seems, they didn’t
think it was enough to just create a space
for bicycles, but to eliminate cars (traffic)
in order for the full recreational experience.
Bicycles function equally well in both
the traffic and recreational worlds…
cars are stuck in just the one.
I know, I hear it..the collective,
“Aww, too bad.”
November 2nd, 2009 at 11:53 am
[...] an otherwise quite good article in today’s L.A. Times, the facilitators get short [...]