Vehicular Cycling
I have been blogging about cycling for almost a year, and I
have been commenting on bike listservs like Mapmyride and IBikeTO for a bit
longer. During this process I have been referred to, on several occasions, as a
“vehicular cyclist”.
I’m not sure if the term is a good fit, I was reflecting on
this today.
I thought it would be simplest to consult the source, John
Forester, perhaps the best known American advocate for so-called vehicular
cycling, to sort this out. I reference his Effective
Cycling (2009) for these points.
Forester advocates for:
-
Education/training for riders
-
Riding on main arteries
-
Riding with traffic, rather than beside traffic
-
Against sidewalk and multi-use trial riding
-
For high speed riding
Does this model fit me? A brief run through of the relevant
details…
1.
I have been cycling since I was about 4.
2.
I have received no formal cycle training, in
riding or repair.
3.
I did not get my driver’s license until I was
33.
4.
I cycled for commuting and “recreationally” in
high school and university and in my current job.
5.
I commute approximately 11 miles to work, 22
miles a day, around 273 days a year (75%) on average, depending on the severity
of the winter.
6.
I don’t ride when the roads are so snowy and wet
and icy that I can’t find enough clear pavement, so dry winters = lots of
riding, wet winters = not much riding
7.
I ride on all forms of cycling infrastructure:
roads with no lanes/tracks, suburban roads, main arteries, cycle tracks,
trails, multi-use pathways, bike lanes, shared roadways, the works. My priority
list for riding is: no cars, some cars, lots of cars. The particular form of
infrastructure isn’t a big deal (for me as a rider, not for all riders, that’s
different). I think cycle tracks are the safest, bike lanes are as safe as the
wideness of the road and the density of the parking around it.
8.
I ride on sidewalks if I feel the road is not
safe, but I do not ride when there are pedestrians on the sidewalk, then I walk
my bike.
9.
I ride very slowly compared to some, averaging
around 12-14 miles an hour, 19-22 kilometers per hour.
10.
I believe that breaking the law for safety is
acceptable, but only in specific circumstances, e.g. I will ride my bike very
slowly on the sidewalk if there are no pedestrians around, but I do not ride
contraflow on one way streets, as drivers don’t expect me and often don’t look.
11.
I believe bikes have a right to be on the roads,
as long as they stay to the right when faster vehicles are behind them to allow
them to pass, my understanding is that you can ride anywhere but the
highways and designated roadways.
12.
The ambient traffic is most often faster than
me, but when traffic is light to moderate and there are at least two lanes on
the road I will ride in the middle of the right lane rather than to the right
of the lane, cars will generally pull out and pass me, for those that don’t I
pull over if they are going faster than me, or maintain the lane otherwise. It
works remarkably well, but it won’t work during the middle of rush hour.
13.
When traffic is heavy I stay to the right of the
lane and allow faster vehicles to pass.
14.
I avoid bike lanes on narrow streets, and busy
bike lanes.
15.
I use mirrors regularly.
16.
For main artery roads I prefer roads with at
least two lanes of traffic (Keele), for secondary roads I prefer roads that
have a centre turning lane (Caledonia).
17.
I use multiple transit modes in addition to
cycling, driving, transit, and walking.
18.
I cycle all year round, day or night.
19.
I like commercial feeder roads alongside major
arteries (e.g. Garyray South of Steeles
West)
20.
I think that cyclist education is a great way to reduce the number of cycling accidents.
So surprisingly enough I’m somewhere in the middle. I
suspect that many cyclists are.
It took me a while to figure out why I don’t fit the model,
and why I’m sympathetic to some claims from vehicular cyclists and I disagree
with others.
Vehicular cycling is as much a political position as a cycling
method. Forest believes that the American road
establishment actively pushed to get cyclists off roads entirely. Their
position, in some ways very similar to the position of many cycling advocates
today, was that cyclists did not belong on the road with cars, they needed
separate infrastructure. Forest railed against
this idea, and as is typical of those taking a public position against a view
they detested he went entirely in the other direction. For Forester, a cyclist
was ONLY supposed to ride on main arteries. This was the fastest way to get
around, the most direct, and it reinforced the fact that cyclists belonged on
the road.
This explains a lot about Forester’s position on cycling
safety and general cycling issues. He hates multi-use paths and sidewalks and
claims they are more dangerous than the road, he advocates for cyclists riding
as fast as possible, and he advocates for cyclists riding on main arteries with
cars.
This position puts so-called vehicular cyclists in
opposition to the primary position of many current cycling advocates: that more
cycling infrastructure is needed. What you need, the vehicular cyclist would
say, is better cyclists, not more bike lanes.
My position on these
things is not so straightforward.
I believe that cycling infrastructure is needed for newer
and less experienced cyclists, as well as cyclists who just don’t like riding
with traffic. In addition, I believe that certain forms of bike infrastructure
(e.g. cycle tracks) are safer than others. I believe that cyclists should be
encouraged to use all forms of travel infrastructure: main roads, secondary
roads, multi-use paths, cycle tracks, trails, designated roads, etc. I also
think the greatest single thing you can do to improve your safety is ride more slowly.
That is not the position of a vehicular cyclist.
However, I also believe that cyclists should and can use
main arteries if they so choose (although they should ride off to the right to
allow faster vehicles to pass when appropriate), and that certain forms of
cycling infrastructure (e.g. bike lanes) are not always a safer option as the
road conditions determine the safety of the lane, not the paint on the road.
This is a position compatible with a vehicular cyclist
(adjusted for Canadian traffic laws).
What’s the disconnect?
It took me a while to figure this out, but I think the
difference is this, I’m a cycle commuter, Forester was a cycling advocate. As a
cycle commuter, my needs and views are different.
I ride more slowly as I’m on the road more and fast riding
makes it more likely an accident will happen. I use all possible cycling
infrastructure, from unmarked roads to cycle tracks as I have to cross a fairly
decent distance, and if I relied on protected or separated infrastructure I
couldn’t get where I need to go. I need to ride on everything to make my
commute work.
This puts me in a strange place with respect to cycling
advocates and cyclists in general. I’m neither fish nor fowl. I am a proponent
of new cycling infrastructure (as I believe it is important for certain
cyclists to have access to this sort of infrastructure, and that certain forms
of infrastructure are safer than others), but I don’t need it to do my regular
commuting. I’m also just as interested in things like regular road repair
(fixing potholes and cracks) as I am in new cycling infrastructure. For
example, rather than wait months, if not years, for a new bike lane, I would
rather see existing roads repaired as this will make an immediate impact on the
safety of my ride, while at the same time advocating for more bike lanes.
Finally, being a cycle commuter gives me what I believe to
be a unique window on the future of urban transportation. Subways can be
extended, but it takes time and it is very costly. Bus routes can be added, and
new parking created for cars, but in the end there are limits to the amount of
new commuters that can be added using cars and public transit. Cycle commuting
has significant room for expansion, so it would serve cycling advocates well to
include cycle commuters in their planning, rather than dismiss them as
“vehicular cyclists” as they don’t restrict themselves to bike lanes.
