At a recent panel session, I prefaced a question/comment by saying that about 13 years ago, my stated ambition was that my newly born granddaughter would be able to cycle to school by the time she was eight years old. I always find these panel sessions very frustrating because you ask a question, and the panel members either answer a different question or give an unsatisfactory answer, and there’s no room for discussion. On this occasion, a panel member told me that I was probably being too ambitious, and that Chris Boardman talks about “a competent 12-year-old” as the level of ambition for the usability of cycle infrastructure.
In fact, I am already well aware of the ambition set by Chris Boardman, which has found its way into every policy that relates to cycling in Greater Manchester. I disagreed with it even at the time he first said it back in 2017 as I think it is far too unambitious, and in this article I want to explain why I think that.
The source of my “8-year-old” ambition pre-dates Chris Boardman’s proposals by a very long time: it comes from a well-known Dutch adage regarding people being able to cycle “from eight to eighty”. This in fact is what they have achieved decades ago in many parts of the Netherlands, as illustrated very well by this video posted by BicycleDutch, as it happens, 13 years ago. If you can’t watch the video, at least see the screenshot I took below.
These children shown were cycling to school – they probably cycle to work by now!
That last sentence illustrates very well what my actual point is here. Going back to my granddaughter, what I also said in that panel session, which seemed to have been ignored, was that my granddaughter is now 13 (in fact going on 14) and will not even consider cycling anywhere. She is part of yet another generation that has been indoctrinated into the car-dependent society; as Kurt Vonnegut might have said: so it goes.
We know very well that the greatest hope for eliminating this absolute car-dependency we have now, is to get the next generation into the habit of cycling (as well as walking) at an early age. If they are unable to get into the habit by the time they are 12 years old, then you have lost them; it is too late!
I am sure, the “competent 12-year-old” was envisaged cycling unaccompanied, and we should expect children to be able to cycle accompanied as well as unaccompanied at a much younger age but that point also tends to be forgotten. I fact, I know I was cycling unaccompanied on the roads of Bolton at 10 years old, when there was far less motor traffic. How do I remember that fact? It was my birthday, and I got my first “proper” bicycle – a very memorable event – and “Puppet on a String” was playing on the radio, being the winning Eurovision entry that year.
It is also worth noting that many design guidance documents refer to the 8 to 80 target, including the UK Cycle Infrastructure Design Guidance (LTN1/20), which states in Summary Principle 1:
Cycle infrastructure should be accessible to everyone from 8 to 80 and beyond: it should be planned and designed for everyone. The opportunity to cycle in our towns and cities should be universal.
So, Mr panel session expert, no, I am not overly ambitious; you, and everyone who agrees with you, are being far too unambitious.
Note, there is an excellent discussion of this issue on the Wheels for Wellbeing web site.