We have sent the first part of the long list of  locations that the cyclists of Hong Kong would like to see cycling unbanned. There’s more locations we will send later, but these will get the discussion started.

If you have more locations that you would like us to request for cycling to be unbanned, you can use this page to look at the locations we have so far and send us a location if it is not included already.

Ref Location
#1 Legco/Tamar Underpass legco-tamar
#2 IFC Underpass
#3 Hung Hom – Cheung Wan Road
#4 Fleming Road
#5 Marsh Road
#6 Connaught Road West (non-highway)  
#7 Salisbury Road
#8 Canton Road
#9 Choi Hung Road Flyover
#10 Road from Ho Pui to Tai Lam <no photo available>
#11 High Island Reservoir, Sai Kung Sai Wan Rd <no photo available>
#12 Maclehose Section 10 <no photo available>
#13 Yuen Long Sewage Treatment Plant <no photo available>
#14 Brides Pool Road
#15 LCSD Central Waterfront <no photo available>
#16 Hung Hom Waterfront <no photo available>
#17 Shing Mun Country Park <no photo available>
#18 Cycle track adjacent to Caritas Lok Kan School <no photo available>
#19 Discovery Bay Tunnel
#20 Tai Tam Reservoir Road

 

廣州地鐵站(越秀公園)外的公共單車租賃點

 

廣州的公共單車

單車租賃點同時提供收費單車停泊服務

廣州巿區的單車行車道(於中山路)

We at Hong Kong Cycling Alliance are very proud to be a part of the first ever Hong Kong Bicycle Film Festival on 10th-13th January, and with the tickets on sale today, we’ll be rushing to get our seats booked..!
當下踩單車不只是潮流,更是文化。單車電影節集結世界各地獨立影片,述說有關單車的喜怒哀樂,2011年巡迴全球廿多個城市,吸引超過三十萬人欣賞。今回來到香港,正好乘著近來的單車熱,讓我們知道除了大尾篤、BBQ和牛下女車神外,關於單車還有無限可能性!
Cycling has recently become not just a trend but also a culture. The Bicycle Film Festival features a collection of independent film productions from around the globe, telling tales of joy and tears about cycling. The 2011 world tour drew an audience of over 300,000 from over 20 cities around the world. Held in Hong Kong this time, the festival coincides with the city’s post-Olympics cycling fever, opening up to the local community the infinite possibilities about cycling beyond the countryside cycling tracks.
對白以英語為主,非英語對白將附設英文字幕。
Dialogue is mainly in English. Non English soundtracks will have English subtitles.
單車電影節的四日節目包括電影攝影及古董單車展覽單車樂悠遊售票情況,可參看網站總頁
For Bicycle Film Festival’s 4-day programmes, including MovieExhibitionsFun Ride and Ticketing, please see BFF website HERE.

The Road Safety Council recently changed its guidance regarding where cyclists should be in the roadspace. It now tells cyclists to be in the middle of any narrow lane (ie. when another vehicle cannot safely be alongside within the lane) or when you are approaching a turn.

On Hong Kong’s confined streets, this has many benefits: it makes you much more visible to drivers, gives you some space on your left when vehicles come too close, and ensures that drivers think before they overtake you rather than believing they can “just squeeze past” when you are nearer the kerb.

I saw this post on the fantastic bikeyface blog today and thought it was very appropriate:

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

Whenever a person first discovers I bike, they reply with a story. And it’s always the same story.

“I was driving down [insert any road name] when all of the sudden I saw a cyclist in the MIDDLE OF THE ROAD!”  Inevitably it always ends with them saying they “just tapped on their horn” or “squeezed by” or “yelled out to the cyclist.” 

And many many times I’ve been the cyclist in one of these stories – the one sharing the road with a driver that isn’t aware of the basic road rules regarding bikes.

What’s worse is that sometimes reasonable people panic at the sight of a bicycle in the lane… and then all that reason flies out the window.

So I wanted to explain it to those who have never biked in the city:

And there’s more. Bikes are small, but they still need space. Cars should give cyclists the same amount of space when passing as another vehicle, at least 3 ft. However, not all roads allow for that, particularly in Boston:

So don’t panic when you see a bike in your lane. Just treat it like another vehicle. If you can pass safely, that’s fine. If not, most likely you won’t be slowed down much if at all. In the city, I find that car traffic slows me down much more than the other way around.

以單車作為交通工具的眾多好處之中,零空氣污染排放及無噪音污染是對城巿的其中兩個好處,這是對整個社會甚至地球的貢獻。

去年(2011)是香港有紀錄以來路邊空氣污染最嚴重的一年,而香港的主要空氣污染物是來自交通的排放。所以香港各界都應當認真檢討這城巿是否可以繼續讓這麼多的車輛(包括公共運輸的車輛)在城巿中行駛,並且認真看待單車及步行作為城市交通工具的角色;這是刻不容緩的事,因為按估計每年有3200人因空氣污染而提早死亡!

為宣揚香港渴求健康空氣的訊息,並鼓勵大眾多使用無空氣污染排放的交通工具,「健康空氣行動」(Clean Air Network )會於12月2日下午舉辦一個名為「綠悠遊 Clean Air Drive」的活動,活動集合一眾人士騎乘電動車、單車及其他零污染交通工具,由九龍灣零碳天地(九龍灣常悅道,MegaBox旁)出發,沿一條特別路線遊走,如果從高空向下望,該路線會畫出 A I R 三個英文大字,藉此宣揚香港渴求健康空氣的訊息。

來讓我們一起踏單車,或者用滑板、步行…參加這個有意義的活動,讓香港看見單車這交通工具如何能為香港的空氣質素提供一個真正零污染的選擇。

活動詳情請參閱:http://www.hongkongcan.org/chi/2012/11/cleanairdrive/

Clean Air Drive event logo

 

As Boulder edges out Portland for the title of North America’s most bike friendly city (in one ranking, anyway), and Amsterdam and Copenhagen jostle for the European cycling crown, we ask ourselves, how do Asia’s cities measure up for getting around on two wheels?

Beijing is the capital of the world’s most cycling-rich country, and still designed for bikes. Its cycling modal share may have dropped from 63% to 17% but could improve again soon – the city government aims to boost it to 23% by 2015.  Hangzhou has the world’s largest public bike share scheme, with an incredible 65,000 bikes at 2400 rental stations.  And Kunming is appreciated by those that ride there; it has a comfortable pace of life, and plenty of space.  Across the water, Kyoto is a functional cycling city with a dash of European style – it’s normal to ride everywhere around town, dressed for the destination, not the vehicle.

Taiwan is on everyone’s cycling radar these days: Taipei has a wonderful network of paths, and the Kaohsiung public bike share scheme is fab.  The city has 150 km of tracks and a lot of the back streets are free of road markings, so everyone drives gently and looks out for everyone else.  Even in Singapore, the government took the step that Hong Kong first needs to: publicly stating that cycling is transport, and then implementing measures to facilitate it.  They’ve been a bit quiet about it recently though.

Melbourne gets rated highly.  It’s flat and there’s a modest bike share scheme in the city centre. The 200+ km Around the Bay in a Day event draws the crowds and raises cycling’s profile. But Australia’s mandatory helmets law adds hassle for newcomers.  In fun places like Bali or Chiang Mai, cycling is widespread and effective, and certainly friendly, but it’s not quite urban cycling. 

One from the back pocket: three years ago, authorities in Seoul announced that the city would increase bicycle use from 1.6 percent to 10 percent by 2020. How are they doing?

What about Pyongyang?  The roads are blessedly free of cars (since no one can afford them) and 70% of North Korean households rely on their bikes to get around.  Plus, the new, young, just-possibly-normal leader, Kim Jong Un, recently rescinded the 16-year ban on women riding bikes (though it was introduced after the hit-and-run death of the daughter of a prominent general as she cycled in the capital).

And what does Hong Kong have to do to be a contender?  The administration’s negligent contribution is a handicap of course.  But huge numbers of people cycle anyway, for transport and enjoyment, and both the urban areas and countryside offer huge potential for getting around on two wheels. Shouldn’t enthusiastic and increasing participation count for us, or at least boost our chances for the future?  And will the government see the light some time soon?

 

An interesting new report from Civic Exchange takes a detailed look at how we should be moving around – and enjoying – our built space, here in Hong Kong.  It focuses on walking but embraces cycling as part of a much-needed shift in thinking towards personal mobility.  Cycling and walking are together at the core of a global change in urban planning that is sadly not yet seriously encountered within the realm of .gov.hk.

The report points out that, increasingly, other world cities are improving transport by making “more priority to cycling and walking” a policy goal. The quote is from Melbourne, but similar examples from London, New York, Seoul, Toronto and many others are included.

If reading this study makes you want a more cyclable, as well as a more walkable, Hong Kong, and you’d like to be a part of making it happen, please contact us!

Report

 

最近在中國大陸的報章也有討論香港的單車政策,我們在此也作出幾點回應。以下是南方都巿報的文章,接著是我的簡單回應。

2012-10-29南方都市報
公共交通發達,何須追求“單車城市”
作者:黎媛(深圳,前駐港記者)
摘要:近日,有港媒報導,近年倫敦、紐約等大城市正致力打造“單車城市”,而踩單車在香港也日趨流行,只是香港市區道路設計並不鼓勵單車行駛,但是,既然倫敦等城市可以做到,香港為什麼要對“單車城市”絕對地說不呢?
發現香港
近日,有港媒報導,近年倫敦、紐約等大城市正致力打造“單車城市”,而踩單車在香港也日趨流行,只是香港市區道路設計並不鼓勵單車行駛,但是,既然倫敦等城市可以做到,香港為什麼要對“單車城市”絕對地說不呢?
單車確是低碳、環保的出行方式,騎單車又能強身健體,但是“有些風你不必跟”。香港完全沒有必要成為所謂的“單車城市”,因為香港的公共交通已較成熟,它的最大亮點就是“無縫接駁”。
……(請按這連結閱讀這文章:http://gcontent.oeeee.com/d/68/d68a18275455ae3e/Blog/b08/06dc06.html)

回應

不錯,香港的公共交通比國內外的許多城市都發達,但是,是否香港的交通已經完美?香港就不需要單車作為交通工具的好處?

現在香港交通的壞處:

1.交通擠塞問題:當然香港的道路有暢通的時間,但是難道香港無交通擠塞問題嗎,這不用說了吧,人們看運輸署的即時道路情況報告是用來做什麼的,豈不是要在出門前留意交通擠塞的情況嗎?

2.交通費用:公共交通不斷加價,遠超過通漲,香港人是肉隨鉆板上,亳無其他交通選擇,貧窮人為省車資,寧願走路大半個小時不上巴士的大有人在。

3.空氣污染:香港的空氣污染主要來自汽車,包括公共交通,不要忘了地鐵用的電力也是燒煤產生的,這也算環保嗎?

4.使用公共交通費時失事:等巴士小巴、排隊、上上落落地面地底….普通的一個半小時車程,可能要加上另外半小時用來等車及上落地鐵等。而且車子不一定由門口直達門口,仍要轉車及走路。

5.公共交通人多擠迫:住在香港迫巴士迫地鐵是注定要受的苦嗎?每天這樣迫車真叫人累,也不利身心健康。

6.即使公共交通發達,香港的汽車還是太多:「按政府的2009交通統計年報 12,2009年全香港的登記和註冊車輛分別有642270和584070架,而其中私人轎車(Private Car)則為429754和 393812架,佔全港車輛67%之多,而公共運輸車輛(巴士、小巴、非專營巴士)則只有19739和19585架,只佔全港車輛約3.3%。所以,換句話說,私人轎車使用者,在市區土地中佔一至兩成的「道路」用地的使用分額,比沒擁有私人轎車的大眾市民,實在高出很多。」(趙智勳,無法使用單車的城市;文化研究@嶺南 第二十三期 2011年3月)

7.為大量汽車建大量道路浪費巿區珍貴土地:「香港佔地1108平方公里,農地、魚塘、林地、灌叢、劣地、水塘、墳場等按常理較少人使用或低度開發的土地佔了735平方公里,市區用地(概括的有住宅、商業、工業、機構/休憩、道路、鐵路、機場用地)則佔了約211平方公里。但是,單就市區用地中「道路」一項,就已經佔了42平方公里,差不多是兩成市區土地,比起「私人住宅」和「公屋」用地的總和(41平方公里)還稍稍多一點。」(趙智勳,無法使用單車的城市;文化研究@嶺南 第二十三期 2011年3月)

8.交通安全問題:小巴的車速高是好事嗎?2011年交通意外死亡人數為130人,絕大部分是由汽車直接引起,可是我們已接受了馬路的危機性,汽車為城巿帶來的危險是我們必須要接受的嗎?為什麼我們的小孩子在街上不可以自由走動,一定要由成人拖著手一刻也不可以放手?

單車卻正好可以解決以上香港的問題:

1.解決交通擠塞問題:有否留意路上的巴士不是所有都滿座的,而只有司機一人的私家車比比皆是。鼓勵使用單車可減少車輛,減少交通擠塞,外國正是用限制汽車及鼓勵單車的方法來解決交通擠塞。

2.節省交通費用:幾個月的交通費已經可以夠買一輛單車。

3.零空氣污染:單車是世上最環保的交通工具,只有踏單車者的二氧化碳排放,電力車及地鐵也要用煤發電,並不算環保。

4.巿區內直接及快速的交通:香港巿區面積小,單車十分方便,短距離比任何的交通工具都要快,因不用等車,不會塞車,而且是點到點直達門口,世上哪有另一種更方便的交通工具!筆者試過踏單車和家人乘的士比賽,家人上了的士之後我踏單車同時起步,10分鐘後我比他們還快回到家門(注意:我是等她們找到了的士,讓她們上了車才一同出發,足足讓了她們幾分鐘)。

5.享受旅程:踏單車是健康及開心的事,有些單車代步者寧願刻意踏長一些距離享受旅程。

6.減少汽車:鼓勵單車,自然可減少公共汽車及私家車。

7.節省珍貴土地:停泊著及在路面行駛的單車比汽車及巴士都佔用更少的人均面積,單單在泊車位上,單車已經可以為巿區省回許多土地。

8.改善交通安全問題:在城巿的街道限制車速,鼓勵巿區用單車,道路安全自會大大提高。

單車為城巿所帶來的好處這麼多,為何香港就必須要忍受倚靠汽車及地鐵的害處,為何獨有香港不需要單車這些好處?香港可能暫時不需要變成倚重單車的城巿,但絕對應該利用單車,配合城巿交通運輸,讓各種交通發揮所長。

現在香港所有長短途乘客都擠迫在同一輛巴士及列車中,全無分流,做成乘客擠迫及交通擠塞,如果城巿中鼓勵用單車,城巿內的中短途旅程絕對可以發揮單車的威力,而中長途可以用單車運載架來結合單車於公共交通如巴士及地鐵中,把短途乘客和長途乘客分流,自然能改善交通。「善用單車的城巿」不是比「無法使用單車的城巿」更好嗎?

space required to transport 60 people

 

There’s a great new post on the Bikeyface blog, copied here for your enjoyment:

I bike pretty much everywhere in the city these days. But I also have a driver’s license and 16 years of driving experience. And occasionally I still drive. Like the other day I ended up driving across town to run an errand. Now, if you live anywhere near a city, you know that the driving experience is not exactly as advertised:

It’s a little bit more like this:

Which is not a good advertisement for cars. But this is exactly what I found myself driving in.

After my errand, I decided I wanted to stay out. I was hungry and there are great restaurants downtown. And some shops too. (I know, because I discovered them all by bike.) But in a car, I realized that I couldn’tcasually go to any of them. I was trapped…

…and had to pass them by. It was like I was carrying the weight of the car rather than it carrying me. And I was tired. So I went straight home instead. Cars are useful, but driving in a city is kind of like trying to thread a needle while wearing a boxing glove.

We’ve seen a copy of an internal guideline of KMB allowing folded bicycles of less than 0.1m3 in size to be brought on their buses. The requirement is to make bicycle a carry-on luggage. We wonder how useful is that guideline for people who want to bring their bicycles on buses. Here is a simple survey to see which bicycles can fit in the 0.1m3 requirement.

Please tell us how big is your bicycle (in m3) and what is the make by replying this post.

To calculate the volume of the bicycle in folded condition, just measure its length (L), height (H) and width (W) in metre and then multiply all 3 measurements. That is: length (m) x height (m) and width (m) = volume (m3)

你的折疊式單車可以上巴士嗎?

我們看過一份九巴的內部指引,指示司機可以讓乘客攜帶體積小於0.1立方米並已折疊的單車上巴士。這要求是要使單車變成一件隨身攜帶的行李。我們不知道該指引對於希望把單車帶上巴士的乘客有多大的幫助。下面是一個簡單的調查,看看哪些折疊單車可以合乎0.1立方米的要求。

請回覆這貼文並告訴我們你的單車折疊之後有多大(m3)。

計算其體積的方法如下:只需量度其長度(L)、高度(H)與闊度(W)是多少米(m),再把3個數字相乘。即是:長(m)x高(m)x闊(m)= 體積(m3