I don’t think we will get leading edge change from Depts. of Transportation, who tend to think linearly and are rightfully conservative. We are likely to get disjointed change from landscape architects and bicycling facility designers, who are motivated by the politics of change as much as by sound if avante garde engineering. We probably have more to gain from Joe Sixpack and his friends, who will be taking abrupt energy cost changes in the pocketbook and have to deal with it ASAP, on the infrastructure that exists.

Cyclists, pedestrians, transit users, NEV drivers and others could band together to change the beliefs again, in the interest of health, environment and economics.

This is not to say we don’t need to change the Form; we certainly do. We need both strategies.

Going beyond the logic and data-driven discussions about bicycle driving and using inspirational, creative framing inspires a much broader audience. It also breaks through some of the emotional blockades which are impervious to logical arguments.

We have, as Mighk recounts, built a paradigm upon cheap gasoline, low density, big backyards with dogs and swing sets, and decentralization. Furthermore, during the sixties, anyone who could flee the city and its racial strife and burning communities did so. Including my parents. I grew up in a slowly growing little town about twenty miles from Buffalo, N.Y., safe from the riots. Sadly, Buffalo has fallen apart. Metaphorically, its now the hole in the donut.

This migration, supported by a remarkably thriving and in some ways monopolistic U.S. economy built on abundant resources and our Arsenal of Democracy capability (i.e., we could sustain our rapid growth as long as the rest of the world was still recovering from having been bombed flat in WW II), drove a transportation system enabling us to move large distances quickly and painlessly. Hence the car. Hence our highway system. Dispense with conspiracy theories about the demise of rail and all that crap. This was a natural evolution.People wanted to be free.

Back to bicycling. As far as mismatched speeds? Traffic engineers generally get heartburn when different vehicles are travelling at significantly different speeds on the same roadway because the number of interactions is higher (i.e., as Keri showed in her bike cop video, a cyclist is constantly being passed rather than swimming in place with the other fish. So many of the PEs would prefer engineered separation on higher speed roads, even the appearance of separation. Motorists don’t want to be inconvenienced, so they would prefer separation. Non-cyclists who want to take up cycling want separation because they are afraid of traffic.

We vehicular cyclists want integration because we want to be able to use the roads we have rather than be forced onto substandard and at times nonexistent facilities. Its simply unfair. Furthermore, we are not afraid to integrate into traffic, having built up our skills to do so. Its really not that hard, but there are certainly hazards to mitigate and sometimes they do bite you in the ass in spite of your own preventive measures. Hence the headlines.

I would start small, using Mighk’s analogy to Luke Skywalker. One has to bite one piece of the elephant at a time. Opportunistically re-structure communities so local transportation is humanized and re-structure people’s thinking to accommodate the idea that speed is but one means to an end of quality of life–and not necessarily the best one. Balance a facilities approach with an approach stressing education, reform of our traffic habits, and slowly expect a contraction of humans back to centralized areas since we will probably not be able to afford to drive till we drop any more.

It will take decades to reform our world, assuming we can do so, and it will be driven by necessity, i.e., post peak oil and international competition for resources, not by idealism. Necessity will drive a redevelopment of communities to energy efficiency; low speed electric vehicles, bicycles, and shoe leather will have advantages. This will make transportation social again. But in a democracy, that will require that we convince people to change. I am afraid I think change will be a trailing indicator of crisis rather than the other way around.

Losing train of thought, so will shut up now.