No ridiculous car trips

   
No ridiculous car trips is an informational film about a campaign bearing the same name. This campaign, now in its fourth year, aims at convincing more people too choose cycling over driving in Malmö City in Sweden.


No ridiculous car trips from Martin Lang on Vimeo.

The idea of ridiculous car trips is spot on. I still remember getting appalled with one of my then colleagues who shamelessly told me how she would drive down her driveway to pick up the mail... Ok, that one is pathological.
Yet, too many trips are made that could easily be done on a bicycle. Malmö's campaign was successful and brought them some international recognition.

Traffic calming tools

  
I cannot remember in which post I mention these. Bornes escamotables in French.

Random picture from the Internet

 They are awesome traffic calming devices. In parts of Europe, neighbourhoods will put these all around their entry points. Only area residents would be equipped with special cards/laser devices that are scanned directly on the thing. They then disappear into the ground to allow those residents to proceeds.

Marché Jean-Talon

Others walk or bike.
How come they are not more widespread? A perfect area to implement them is the Old Montréal with its narrow Nouvelle France streets.

A closer look. These ones do not look magnetic. Still...

Keeps off unwanted traffic, and especially, prevents any rat running in residential streets!
These are a cyclist's best friends, even more than cycle lanes. This is how Bordeaux became a cycle friendly place (from the mess it used to be), along with other adjustments, of course.

If we have them in Jean Talon, we can perfectly have them all around Montréal!

Undress Peter to dress Paul - part 2

  
Additional local examples.

This  portion of the Berri Street is wide enough to welcome a cycle path: it is three lane wide each side for a portion of road in which traffic is not that intense and should not anyways.

Yet, nobody was brave enough to carve out a cycle path in this giant six lane portion of road located smack downtown. So they took off the sidewalk.

To the point that this stupidly created pedestrians/cyclists conflict caused the death of one cyclist a few years ago.

I hope it is clear to all that pedestrians don't have much choice but walk on the cycle path, which is dangerous as, right before this section, cyclists come down quite a steep slope.

Undress Peter to dress Paul

 
Actually, I found out pretty late in my life that the proper expression in English is "Robbing Peter to pay Paul". In French you say déshabiller Pierre pour habiller Paul which I transglibberished into English for this post's title.
Just like a lot of Montrealers I find Franglish a lot more fun than plain English or plain French. Go figure!

Yet the very issue underlined by these sayings cannot be better illustrated than by this little video. It was posted on Copenhaganize.com and was sent from a Romanian cyclist, illustrating the recently "completed" Bucharest cycle tracks.

This, below, is what happen when dumb-asses are in control:



They meet up and sit around wondering how they can deliver the freaking cycle tracks folks are asking, without affecting the current status quo. Do not affect motor traffic. Do not touch the automobile circulation.
In order to achieve said cycle network, they simply take the space away from pedestrians, who are supposed to just shut up and somehow accept this nonsense.

Bullshit like that only achieves one thing: pitching pedestrians against cyclists and vice versa.

We have our very own gems, among which, the infamous Place des Arts oh-so-smart stupid design

As well as several other for which I unfortunately do not have any picture.
We must stop compromising on such half-assed infrastructures and start demanding respect for both cyclists and pedestrians.
Urban planners around the world: please grow the balls to face motorists and take away from them what has been confiscated from all of us, i.e. the public space.

Overcrowded bike paths

 

How many cities can pretend to have this kind of problem hum?

Well, believe it or not, our bike paths are overcrowded, or so it seems. Now, I have made that comment a million times, yet some people seem to remain quite skeptical about this. I totally understand as most North American cities are nowhere close to experiencing this so it is hard to imagine for those who have not been in Montreal recently.

However, it is becoming a problem, not just for cyclists anymore but for pedestrians and municipalities as well. Westmount is one of the many municipalities making up "Montreal".

Here is an article from the Montreal Gazette. Integral and original version can be found here. I did not write it. I have inserted my comment in colour.

*****************

Overcrowded Westmount bike path has become safety hazard: group

Residents propose new routes for cycling trail

By RENÉ BRUEMMER, The Gazette September 28, 2011
 

"The two-way de Maisonneuve bike path that traverses Westmount should be changed to a one-way bike lane running westward, with eastbound cyclists diverted onto Ste. Catherine St. W., says a citizens advocacy group.
Westmount Citizens for Safe Cycling is also recommending cyclists be routed around Westmount Park, that bike lanes running in each direction be added to Ste. Catherine St., and other east-west thoroughfares in the municipality, [...]"

I have no idea who these folks are, so I cannot determine whether friends or foes. 
Yet they are totally right in what they are saying here. What they are recommending corresponds to the newer generation of bike paths: one way only, going in the same direction as the street they are on, allowing for more space each way, i.e. instead of sharing the space for a come lane and a go lane, the entire width is dedicated to a single direction.
De Maisonneuve and Ste Catherine are two parallel streets that go in opposite direction and cross downtown entirely.

"[...] and enforcement be stepped up because the de Maisonneuve path is becoming a dangerously overcrowded commuter throughway.
"Fundamentally it's a safety issue, because cycling certainly has outgrown what that path was intended for when it was opened," said Don Taddeo of the 25-member WCSC, who lives on de Maisonneuve Blvd. [...]"

For the record, that path was opened in 2008 and, as it crosses the entire downtown area, it was always meant to be a commuting throughway.

"[...]As an infrastructure it's inadequate - and given the volume of traffic it accommodates, it's unsafe" for cyclists, motorists (?)  and pedestrians.
The group presented an 18-page brief in early September to Westmount's master traffic-planning committee, formed to find solutions to the municipality's burgeoning congestion.
The number of cyclists using the de Maisonneuve path that connects Notre Dame de Grâce (i.e. NDG)  to downtown has jumped to as many as 500 an hour during peak hours, studies have shown.[...]"

That's actually not that much. There are sections of the cycling network that see a lot more cyclists than this. But I agree that, as they are, the infrastructures are totally insufficient. 

"[...] Of that group, 88.5 per cent ignored traffic signals, a WCSC survey found. [...]"

Totally irrelevant to the discussion and weakens their argumentation. If they are trying to help solve the problem, they should NOT single out, wag fingers at or antagonise cyclists. Everybody knows nobody respects any of the traffic rules in this city and pedestrians are just as bad as cyclists.

"[...] The width of the bike lanes are narrower at several points than the minimum proscribed by Vélo Québec and the provincial transport department, sightlines for cars and cyclists at intersections are restricted, and the path is intersected by numerous streets, lanes and driveways. [...]"

All of this is the result of sucky municipal/administrative planning. In particular, the lack of sightline at intersections is worsened by the fact the the Code rule saying that cars should never park within 5m of any intersection is never enforced by the Police. Everyone complains there is no money in the coffers of the City: this is easy money, how come they are not grabbing it?

Well, you cannot encourage something, all be it passively, and then bitch-and-complain about it.

"[...] The brief notes car traffic along de Maisonneuve Blvd. used to intersect Westmount Park via Western Ave., but in 1976 the city closed the avenue to bridge the northern and southern portions of the park. Now, cyclists on the bike path have replaced the cars, Taddeo said, posing a hazard to pedestrians. [...]"

That's entirely the authorities' fault, who failed to see that cycling is no longer only a recreational activity but has become full fledged transportation again. This was already a visible trend in 2008. 
Bike paths used for transport should never go through parks, sidewalks or other pedestrian turf.

"[...] The WCSC suggests the two-way bike path be phased out over two years.
In its place, a one-way bike lane running westward delineated with painted lines would go from Wood Ave., to Claremount Ave., with a detour around Westmount Park via Ste. Catherine St.
Eastbound cyclists would be routed onto Ste. Catherine St., at Claremount Ave., and transferred back to de Maisonneuve at Wood, one block west of Atwater Ave.
The move may placate residents, but would likely frustrate cyclists forced out of their way on a route that includes a steep downhill pitch with a traffic light at the bottom, followed by an uphill slog.
The WCSCWestmount Ave., and Côte St. Antoine Rd. [...]"

This is all freaking bullshit. 

Again, I don't know who these folks are but this part of their plan is totally lame.

First of all, for some reason, in Montreal, it simply cannot take less than ten years for an idea to go from concept to administrative reality, et encore. Go figure.

Then, they want to remove from cyclists a straight-line throughout path and swap it for a tortuous "turn here, then left, then right" type of detour shit-path. 

And such shit-path will no longer be a protected path anymore (with a border or within a park) but will only be bullshit paint on the road.  Right now most of it is a bollard delineated path.

And not happy with imposing a detour to cyclists, then we'll have to go down a slope, climb back up, bear tons of lights and negotiate even more intersections.

So, we get short-changed.

Now, I am all for sparing and protecting parks but they need to propose something where everyone gets something, win-win style. 

And anyways, cyclists will not respect this. I know I won't. I will continue cycling through the damn park just as I never dismounted during the summer festivals and cycled through the crowds on the Maisonneuve path to no end.

Note to the authorities:

I don't take crap like this anymore and I am not the only one. Show us respect and we will respect you. Do not build a deficient facility and then bitch-and-complain that people are using it too much. Do not have a path running through a park or festival area and then complain when cyclists use it to get around the very way it was intended. Grow balls, use your $@!?&@# brains to plan properly and everyone will be happy.

Build decent facilities and we will use it. Give us crap and we'll shit on it. As simple as that.

"[...] The master traffic planning committee was to present its findings to Westmount's city council Tuesday night.
"When I opened the bicycle lane (in 1992, i.e. the section that runs through the park), it was intended for recreational use and it's really transmogrified into a means of transport, which is good," Westmount Mayor Peter Trent said Tuesday afternoon. "But the problem is we do get a tremendous number of complaints from people on the street. [...]"

All your fault. Should not have waited until the situation got to this point. 

For the record though: 

Westmount is an extremely high income area, a very bourgeois neighbourhood, golden ghetto-style, that has a particularly high proportion of elderly people who get scared pour un oui ou pour un non. They can get heart attacks at the very sight of their own shadows. So they are scared of bicycles, which is understandable. We all know cyclists are reckless delinquants who snatch old ladies handbags and cycle away with an evil laugh.
Yet, they are not scared of driving those Mercedes down three blocks to go get a loaf of bread, which is somehow a lot less understandable. 

Oh, and while we are on the subject of big fancy cars, wished those elderly eyesights got checked a bit more seriously, you know, could spare the city quite a few deaths every year, particularly among pedestrians. Ahem.

"[...] The municipality is open to converting the path to a oneway lane, Trent said, "but where do you put bicycles going the other way? Our eastwest arteries are completed blocked. [...]"

No they're not. Somebody simply does not have the courage to put their foot down on that nonsense.
Take a full lane from both Ste Catherine and de Maisonneuve, build decent PROTECTED bike paths and that's it. There is NO reason to be driving in that area, there are more metros stations and bus lines than needed in the sector. If needed, increase their frequency. People drive down there because it's feasible. Prevent it and the mess stops.

"[...] I do know one thing - we have a real conundrum. We can't handle the cars, we can't handle the bikes and sometimes we can't handle the pedestrians. [...]"

Then somebody is lazy. Or incompetent. Or both.

"[...] It's really a problem. [...]"

No it's not. 

You're the problem. Grow @#%@?& balls, that's all that is needed.

Hint: a colleague of yours grew quite a nice pair over there in the Plateau area and it is working.

The problem will only get worse once work begins on the Turcot Interchange, Trent noted.

Hell yes! This is gonna be an absolute mess but one that they'll have to suck up on their own. The Turcot interchange is one of the dumbest projects this city has ever gotten into.

rbruemmer@ montrealgazette.com

© Copyright (c) The Montreal Gazette

Nice videos: the Dutch Cycling Embassy

 

And it's a go!
The Dutch Cycling Embassy kicks off nicely, launching with with this very inspirational video, included here for your enjoyment.


Cycling For Everyone from Dutch Cycling Embassy on Vimeo.

I wish them all the best of lucks. All help is needed in the promotion of cycling as a valid transportation alternative.


 .

At the market

The other day, on the last stretch of my run, I got to Jean Talon market and noticed this sign:

This is what the sign is referring to: bike parking.

Of course, this parking has been there for a good while now. But it is always nice to see it officialised and institutionalised.

And then surprise! What do I see:

Geez... change is creeping on me!
Are the days of the rattling clunkers counted? NOT!

Along the Claire Morissette

 

Back to Montreal and its cycle paths.
On my way to Canadian Tire, I took those pictures: random day, at random hour, for a random errand.
The easiest route is through de Maisonneuve bike path a.k.a the Claire Morissette bike path.

So, we start on the René-Lévesque path all the way from under Jacques Cartier bridge to Berri St. corner.

Up Berri St.

Turned left onto de Maisonneuve St
Corner of Sanguinet St. (I think). Anyways, always blasting that red!

Nearing St Laurent St. a.k.a. The Main, red light District...

On Place des Arts,

Where stupid design,

Encourages pedestrians to walk on the path.

This must be Bleury St.

Hum, University St.?

So, I am pretty sure this is McGill College

 Peel St.

Drummond St.

Crescent St.

Bishop St. or Mackay St.?

Nearing Concordia University bike parking,

 In front of the John Molson School of Business, girl with set of tires. Ah! Memories... Of both carrying similar load in similar fashion AND attending said school... Oh well, time flies.

Somewhere before Atwater,

There we are.

 
Terminus, tout le monde descend!

Ganging up: TRANSIT

Serendipity, once again!

It must have been already up in the air for me to connect to it so accurately, akashic style.
Barely a month ago, I wrote a post, part bitchy rant, part serious analysis, at the end of which I recommended that cyclists should not to entrust their hopes and advocacy efforts to other "cyclists" but to any grouping of the following:

- Pedestrian associations 

- Health associations of all kinds promoting sound lifestyle policies and comprehensive disease prevention

- Child obesity concern groups 

- Child safety groups

- Lots of school administrations would love to see car traffic decrease in their areas

- Folks against sound pollution and urban noise (they exist)

- Elder leisure groups who like to walk and visit their towns

- Architectural heritage folks who like to preserve cachet and correct the mistakes from the 60s and 70s (like the movement for the removal of urban highways)

- Better living, livable environment folks

- Voluntary simplicity folks

- Those in the degrowth movement (stronger in Europe)

- Peak oil activists (those ones really rock the cashbah)

- Those for the empowerment of minorities, of people living in poorer neighbourhoods and for the integration of immigrants

- Student associations

- Political parties who are very clear on cycling infrastructure issues

- And of course urban planners of the new school type

 And I concluded:

"That's a lot of folks. Properly ganged up, there is no reason for the situation not to change fast."

You can read the whole post here.

Little did I know that merely a month later, such a gang would really get created for the specific purpose of lobbying for better transportation alternatives!

This group calls itself TRANSIT, "Alliance pour le financement des transports collectifs au Québec", i.e. alliance for the (proper) financing of collective transportation in Quebec.

It is composed of the following organisations:

• Accès transports viables, a group concentrating on viable transportation alternatives in the Quebec City region;

• Association des usagers du transport adapté de Longueuil, an association of disabled users of Longueuil's public transit service;

• Association québécoise de lutte contre la pollution atmosphérique, a provincial association against air pollution;

• Centre d’écologie urbaine de Montréal/Montreal urban ecology centre, focuses on sustainable urban development and the management of urban affairs. They are the current organising host of Ecocity 2011, a conference that ended this past week;

• Coalition québécoise sur la problématique du poids, a group focusing on weight issues, i.e. obesity, particularly with regards to children;

• Communauto, of course, our famous, successful and much appreciated car-share program had to be part of the gang;

• Conseil central du Montréal métropolitain – CSN, a labour union. Not sure what their contribution is but hey, the more, the merrier!

• Conseil québécois sur le poids et la santé, another group dealing with weight issues and their prevention through social, environmental and behavioural changes;

• Conseil régional de l’environnement Capitale nationale, a group defending the environment and promoting sustainable development in the Quebec City area;

• Conseil régional de l’environnement de Laval, same as above for the Laval area;

• Conseil régional de l’environnement de Montréal, same a above for the Montreal area;

• Conseil régional de l’environnement et du développement durable de l’Outaouais, same as above, for the Ottawa area;

• Convercité, an agency promoting the optimisation of the urban space and environment;

• ENvironnement JEUnesse, an organisation focusing on sensitizing and educating youth about various environmental issues, including active transportation;

• Équiterre, a well-known NGO active in organic farming, alternative transportation, fair trade and local consumption, climate change, green advocacy in general;

• Faculté d’aménagement de l’Université de Montréal, University of Montreal school of urbanism, architecture and design;

• Fondation David Suzuki, a well-known environmental advocacy NGO that became pretty vocal recently on cycling issues;

• Forum URBA 2015, a group ralated to the University of Quebec in Montreal, dealing and organising conferences on urbanism and tourism;

• Greenpeace, well of course, everybody knows this one;

• Mobiligo, a consulting company specialising in commuting and mobility management;

• Mobili.T, a centre for mobility management and the promotion of alternative transportation in the Quebec City area;

• Regroupement national des conseils régionaux de l’environnement du Québec, yet another group pushing for sustainable development. It is a federation of all the "Conseils régionaux" above;

• Table de concertation des aînés de l’île de Montréal, an organisation focusing on the 55 plus group, on issues of well-being well-aging, agism and autonomy. This is very important to me, as I think the seniors will become a very powerful force in imposing the concept of livable, walkable and quiet cities in the future. Aging in the suburbs is simply bullshit. One cannot be reliant on a car past a certain age;

• Vélo Québec, of course;

• Vivre en Ville, an organisation supporting livable communities, alternative transportation, green urbanism etc.;

• Voyagez Futé, a centre for mobility management and the promotion of alternative transportation in the Montreal area;

Some of them I already knew, others I discovered today.
These folks, whether individually or collectively have done and are still doing far more for urban cycling than any cyclist could ever dream of.
Cycling organisations overall have been complete failures at obtaining significant improvements in cycling conditions for their members. Political activism, better urban planning, green advocacy and image makeover (Cycle chic and others) have done far more in far less time.

I am still in shock due to the timing of all of this!
I wish this coalition all the best, and I hope we all reap the fruits of all these advocacy efforts.

Saga Cité

Came across this cute little video. It is all in French of course, but one can easily figure out what this cartoon-like livable city advocacy video is trying to convey.
This is the type of initiative cyclists should associate with if they hope to obtain anything in terms of better infrastructure planning.

Basically, the vid tells the story of Colvert, a typical North American drowning in environmental, social, urban, traffic and health problems. It goes over how the city got there, through suburban sprawl, car dependency, etc. Then it relates how its population and mayoress solved the problems with courageous decisions, architectural overhaul, urban planning makeover, emphasis on public and active transportation etc.

Enjoy!



You can learn more about the Saga Cité project here (in French).

Not a joke

From the Montreal Gazette:

Actually, this past Thursday, coming down the Boyer bike path, I see the girl in front of me slowly steering out of the path and smashing into one of the parked cars lining the path. She landed on the hood. I was taken aback as nothing had happened: there seemed to be no reason, there was no pothole and no collision occurred. I then thought that maybe she fainted or had some sort of attack. I pull up to her and ask "Are you ok?".
The, girl, still half on her bike, half on the car's hood, was still holding her phone and finishing her texto. Obviously she was unharmed. She barely turned her head toward me and answered, "OH yeah, I'm fine, don't worry about me!" all the while texting away!!

Well, I guess we can say, thank God for bike paths where you can do shit like this with little consequences... Or, better, thank God for all of us (cyclists, pedestrians AND motorists) that such folks are choosing to ride bicycles  rather than driving cars...

Gangs of cyclism

As in any activity developed or mature enough to have a substantial base and a critical mass, the bigger community will further divide itself into sub-groups, tribes or factions. This is absolutely normal. Normal and healthy. Confrontation between (even the bickering among) these groups eventually generates progress, new ideas, so long as the general interest is kept in mind by all. Any social movement pushing a specific agenda experiences this phenomenon. Most manage to keep some sort of balance between these tribes and keep those tensions in check, the goal being to avoid jeopardizing the movement. The key idea here is to avoid jeopardizing the movement.

Well, that's not the case with cyclism.
 Anyone who thinks (or pretends) that cyclists are one big united community, "We are family!" type of cotton candy picture is living in a severe bubble-gum cyclotopia.

There are several nomenclatures for the different cycling tribes. This one is mine:

- Commuters

- Urban cyclists

- Sports

- Recreational / week-end / occasional / fair-weather / fitness

- Vehicular

Some of these groups overlap: vehicular cyclists tend to be commuters but are also present among sports cyclists. Most urban cyclists commute. Yet these distinctions make sense to me as they separate different mindsets and realities.
Particularly, people often wonder about the difference I make between commuters and urban cyclists. This differentiation is really mine, I have not seen too many people emphasize it so much.

Basically, urban cyclists are those for whom a bike is the only transportation vehicle, along with maybe public transport in the winter and some occasional car-sharing (i.e. Communauto). They do everything with their bikes. Commuters on the other hand seem to overly focus on their commute. Going to work and back, that's about it. For other activities, a significant proportion of them seem to revert back to their cars, which they usually still own as opposed to urban cyclists who do not own cars. Urban cyclists will live in town or very close. Commuters will live slightly outside of the city core, but in an environment that is still considered "urban". They'll bike to work, but if they have to visit friends or family or get groceries, all the sudden, there are all kinds of good reasons why it is not feasible yet for them.
I actually have lots of respect for this; I see it as an intermediary step toward full urban autonomy. Usually after a few years, they sell their cars and move into full urban mode.
The progression usually follows this pattern:

Casual-leisure-part-time cyclist => Commuter => urban cyclist

Now, back to the greater picture. Among cyclism's sub-groups, some do not and have not always behaved with cycling's best interests in mind. Cycling has got two main internal enemies:

- Those who do not care at all because cycling is only and exclusively a sport to them:

They cycle like others go to the gym or play hockey. They will load their bikes on their SUVs and drive up to their recreational centers, sometimes honking at and endangering some of their fellow cyclists along the way. Traffic, commuting, transportation mean only one thing to them: cars.

These really are motorists and nothing else. They are like foxes in a hen house. If allowed to much say in cycling organisations they will block any progress towards better cycling infrastructure and will oppose traffic calming measures as if their lives depended on it.

- Those who are very comfortable with the way things are: 

Crazy traffic, psychopath maneuvering, criminal speeding, bring it on! They love it, gives them such hard-ons... Just merge in with the freaking traffic and "drive" your bike like a car... three, four, five lanes... gotta love them! Just make sure you signal all right, so the dude coming at 70 km/h behind you will give you all due respect for that oh-so-visible fluorescent jacket. And as you switch from lane to lane to make that left turn, make sure you are pedaling at traffic speed with 2 years old junior in the back seat, pooky the chiwawa bobbing his head in the front basket and one week worth of groceries hanging and clanking in the side panniers.

(Meet Pooky!! Yeah, I know, that's not a chiwawa... Just for the sake of argumentation, let's pretend it is)

These folks are called vehicular cyclists. 

For them, if more people do not cycle, it's because they're too chicken. They're whinnies and pussies who need to be shaken up. So they'll offer cycling classes. Organise all sorts of campaigns. They'll push gear like it's cocaine. Then they'll shove you into traffic. Manage!

Mind you, they'll never encourage their own children, wives (yeah, most are men, surprised?) or grannies to attempt any of this. But YOU yes.

These folks are absolute enemies of cycling. They are a selfish little clique of elite cyclists who only care about themselves. They are not interested in see cyclism grow or in making it easy for beginners. On the contrary, they want to keep it a chasse-gardée for their own little elitist and egocentric enjoyment.
They are the worst type as they can go largely unnoticed until it is too late. By the time people realise what is happening, it is usually too late: they've taken over most prominent cycling organisations and started advocating against infrastructure improvements, claiming bike lanes and bike paths are dangerous.

They've controlled most western cycling organisations from the seventies up to very recently. They've preached their nonsense for all these years. Results: none! Cycling rates never passed 2% in any of the countries in which they have wrecked their havoc.

They've got to be squashed to silence and verbally beaten down to a pulp as they have been harming the cycling community for too long.

Now, I am NOT saying that all sports cyclists are so careless, nor that all vehicular cyclists are that thick. Lots of them are perfectly fine people. However, in general, urban/commuting cyclists will usually not receive much help from these people.

Strategically speaking, it would much better to forge alliances with:

- Pedestrian associations 

- Health associations of all kinds promoting sound lifestyle policies and comprehensive disease prevention

- Child obesity concern groups 

- Child safety groups

- Lots of school administrations would love to see car traffic decrease in their areas

- Folks against sound pollution and urban noise (they exist)

- Elder leisure groups who like to walk and visit their towns

- Architectural heritage folks who like to preserve cachet and correct the mistakes from the 60s and 70s (like the movement for the removal of urban highways)

- Better living, liveable environment folks

- Voluntary simplicity folks

- Those in the degrowth movement (stronger in Europe)

- Peak oil activists (those ones really rock the cashbah)

- Those for the empowerment of minorities, of people living in poorer neighbourhoods and for the integration of immigrants

- Student associations

- Political parties who are very clear on cycling infrastructure issues

- And of course urban planners of the new school type

That's a lot of folks. Properly ganged up, there is no reason for the situation not to change fast.

(EDITED for pictures and links)

Follow-up post:" Ganging up: TRANSIT"