61–70 of 145 posts
I doubt the US or local states/cities will properly implement bicycle infrastructure anytime soon. Imaginative or not there’s just too much money to be made by having everyone purchase cars.
Designing to accommodate bikes is the right direction but I wonder if a city could be designed to have a actual physical separation between large vehicles and small ones. Just because of the physics people on bikes are likely to be injured or killed by much larger cars in the event of a collision.
The places where people ride bikes en masse, like Amsterdam, have physical separation. Very few people want to have cars whizzing by a few feet from their elbows. If you want people to seriously consider cycling as anything other than a hobby you need physical separation of bicycles from cars. Unfortunately cycling advocacy organizations in the United States tend to be opposed to physical separation.
Even very serious and activist cyclists around here are still most likely seasonal/recreational riders, and still want to use their cars, at least in the winter. (See “share the road” bumper stickers). They are not necessarily wild about reducing vehicle access.
I quickly read through this. Context: I'm Dutch and live in Utrecht, The Netherlands. This booklet has one massive flaw: it is constructed using American best-practices. At best, a couple of examples could be considered almost acceptable. Most of them were woefully inadequate and consist of little more than a blob of quickly-fading green paint in ill-considered positions. Worst of all, several examples are clearly fl…
I recently visited Amsterdam and was blown away by the cycling infrastructure there (I live in NYC and cycle daily). I realized, though, that unlike many American cities, Amsterdam came of age way before the automobile. The US has a fetish with cars. Therefore, it's impossible to compare the two countries' cycling infrastructures. The link you shared is so far beyond anything we have in the US; you can't simply say "…
The only cities "designed for cars" are probably Phoenix, Tucson, and greater LA, every other American city saw its establishment and principal growth when walking, cycling, and horse riding was the norm.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course places such as the Northeast (USA) are also the worst candidates for the SF dream of bike dominance. Where I’m from (Colorado) the idea of bike-first is something we roll our eyes at, and generally rightly assume that the loudest advocates live somewhere else, don’t have families, and only go back and forth to work. That’s really not the whole country, no matter how much a minority of SV’ers want it to be.…
> Of course places such as the Northeast (USA) are also the worst candidates for the SF dream of bike dominance I would say the opposite. Apart from the weather (which is a big part, but still), they are perfectly poised for biking. North eastern cities dense, relatively flat and have no way of building more roads or accommodating new cars / parking spaces. Cycles also work very well in tandem with public transport (…
Beyond the weather, Caltrain is unusually bike-friendly rail, with ~100 bike racks per train (on multiple special bike cars per train). Palo Alto boasts an 87 'bike score' (higher than Minneapolis or Portland) and a network of bike boulevards that discourage through car traffic. San Francisco is investing heavily in rearranging streets for protected bike lanes, and there are plenty of SF city dwellers without cars.
I quickly read through this. Context: I'm Dutch and live in Utrecht, The Netherlands. This booklet has one massive flaw: it is constructed using American best-practices. At best, a couple of examples could be considered almost acceptable. Most of them were woefully inadequate and consist of little more than a blob of quickly-fading green paint in ill-considered positions. Worst of all, several examples are clearly fl…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Amsterdam has a different layout than most US cities but it became a car city much like everywhere else. They fought to change. This is what the Dutchs did https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/may/05/amsterdam-bic...
Let's not ignore the fact that Amsterdam is almost completely flat.
Designing to accommodate bikes is the right direction but I wonder if a city could be designed to have a actual physical separation between large vehicles and small ones. Just because of the physics people on bikes are likely to be injured or killed by much larger cars in the event of a collision.
The places where people ride bikes en masse, like Amsterdam, have physical separation. Very few people want to have cars whizzing by a few feet from their elbows. If you want people to seriously consider cycling as anything other than a hobby you need physical separation of bicycles from cars. Unfortunately cycling advocacy organizations in the United States tend to be opposed to physical separation.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is that? I've seen that: dedicated, separated bike paths are unused, and cyclists continue to ride in the street with the cars.
Cycle lanes tend to be designed for speeds below that which a cyclist of even average ability is capable (otherwise, they would tend to more closely resemble roads). Sheltered from motorised traffic, they cater to a wider age, experience and ability range, and the fact that they are typically narrower than roads exacerbates problems that arise from mixed-ability/experience users sharing same facility. Features of cyc…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>We've had green bike lanes here for many years. I've never noticed any of them fade The key word in your post is "here". These things vary by location - for example, anywhere that uses snowplows, a superficial treatment (paint, even thermoplastic) will wear away in a very short period of time. Centrelines here are repainted every year or two (or ten, on roads that aren't considered very important).
Of course places such as the Northeast (USA) are also the worst candidates for the SF dream of bike dominance. Where I’m from (Colorado) the idea of bike-first is something we roll our eyes at, and generally rightly assume that the loudest advocates live somewhere else, don’t have families, and only go back and forth to work. That’s really not the whole country, no matter how much a minority of SV’ers want it to be.…
Finland is sparsely populated and almost entirely subarctic. Malta and Cyprus are tiny islands with year-round sunshine.
You might think that bad weather and low population density are insurmountable obstacles to the widespread adoption of cycling, but you'd be objectively wrong. The key factor isn't climate or density or hills or infrastructure, it's culture.
https://www.cyclinguk.org/article/campaigns-guide/cycling-le...
I quickly read through this. Context: I'm Dutch and live in Utrecht, The Netherlands. This booklet has one massive flaw: it is constructed using American best-practices. At best, a couple of examples could be considered almost acceptable. Most of them were woefully inadequate and consist of little more than a blob of quickly-fading green paint in ill-considered positions. Worst of all, several examples are clearly fl…
I recently visited Amsterdam and was blown away by the cycling infrastructure there (I live in NYC and cycle daily). I realized, though, that unlike many American cities, Amsterdam came of age way before the automobile. The US has a fetish with cars. Therefore, it's impossible to compare the two countries' cycling infrastructures. The link you shared is so far beyond anything we have in the US; you can't simply say "…