Live data from Hacker News

Milan confirms new cycling network linking 80% of the city to bike paths

road.cc

161–170 of 223 posts

Re: Milan confirms new cycling network linking 80% of the city to bike paths

#161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US far more people have died of COVID-19 than we’ve ever seen of dead bike riders. The bar for the US to change policies because of a “dark moment” is going to be in the millions of deaths, which just isn’t going to happen when bike riding has such a small mode share here.

Road safety measures would benefit all road users, not just cyclists. Around 40,000 Americans are killed each year on the roads, and 1% of the population are injured seriously enough to require medical attention. Those are scary large numbers, and the fact that the country has gotten accustomed to this is really unbelievable.

Vulnerable road users have a disproportionate share of crash fatalities. And the commonly accepted safety improvements might reduce crash frequencies for drivers, but it doesn’t do it enough (and have enough impact on major injuries death) to overcome their complaints of slower traffic and less parking. If it did, America’s traffic safety numbers would look more like Western European countries.

For example pedestrian bulb outs and daylighting reducing on-street parking while making pedestrians more visible. Bike lanes remove travel lanes or parking, making traffic slower. Lower speed limits make crashes more survivable, but slow down traffic. When used for safety (and not cash) speed and red light cameras increase safety, but make driving costlier.

Re: Milan confirms new cycling network linking 80% of the city to bike paths

#162
post #157
post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should see China. Big sheds crammed with rusting bikes were a commonplace sight, though that was 10 years ago now. You could tell the Americans by their helmets and going 2X faster on fully inflated tires. Thing is, it doesn't matter. It is a bit of a rubbish problem, but there is no health hazard. If it gets people to ride bikes, that's far better than cars cramming every road everywhere.

Just curious why aren't the locals riding on fully inflated tires?

They ride pretty slow, and don't lavishly maintain their bikes in general. You see people smoking while riding a bike in the city. This applies to the typical bike on the street. I understand there is a road bike culture in China now but that's a whole other thing.

I didn't get much chance to talk to people on the street in China since I only know a few words of Mandarin. Most of the software developers I was interacting with had better means of getting around. But I did walk past some working class housing, which is where you see these really large bike sheds. I suppose it's a hassle to carry oil and a tire pump down from one's apartment and back up.

Re: Milan confirms new cycling network linking 80% of the city to bike paths

#163

Meanwhile our idiot city (Oxford, UK) is spending £1.2m on "Quickways", which are painted lines on existing roads... guaranteed to keep cyclists 0% safe. This in the face of national Government guidance in favour of physical segregation from cars. (Plans at https://letstalk.oxfordshire.gov.uk/quickway-cycle-route-oxf... : the promise of "segregation where possible" in reality means about 5% of the network.) It is rea…

Forget the paint, just remove the cars from the roads. Suddenly they become really safe, for everyone.

Re: Milan confirms new cycling network linking 80% of the city to bike paths

#164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, Weather ? Say it's raining, this makes riding a bike much more dangerous. Or even just heat, if it's over 90 F out biking is going to be rough. American cities are spread out to the point you may need to drive 5 miles to buy some oat meal. Fix that first, I'd vastly prefer smaller cities.

I read these types of arguments a lot from people who live in places where cycling is not the norm. They tend to read like strange nitpicks in light of how common it is for people of ages to cycle in different types of weather. 5 miles doesn't seem like that far to cycle. I am by no means an avid cyclist myself - for longer trips I take public transport. But I see plenty of people cycling even while I am on the train…

If every American city was dense, I'd go for metro + cycling. But as is that isn't the case.

I don't think most Americans are fit enough to cycle , that's ultimately the issue. But even if your overweight, taking a train isn't a problem.

Re: Milan confirms new cycling network linking 80% of the city to bike paths

#165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is such a weird argument. Many people can't drive (minors, elderly, handicapped, health issues, etc.), and we still shade a ton of money on car infrastructure. This is not a zero-sum game; more cyclist means fewer cars, which means better services/life for people who need to drive. And we are talking about $280 Million; that's a piss in a bucket for a city like Milan.

> Many people can't drive (minors, elderly, handicapped, health issues, etc.), and we still shade a ton of money on car infrastructure. Most of those who can't drive also couldn't get very far on a bike on their own. They can, however, ride in a car (or bus) driven by someone else, making use of that same infrastructure. Bikes are not typically designed to carry passengers.

Most people between age 7 and 16/17/18 can ride a bike, but not drive a car.

Younger children can be a passenger on a bike.

Re: Milan confirms new cycling network linking 80% of the city to bike paths

#166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You seriously think inexperienced cyclist should ride in bad weather? If you have a city of Lance Armstrongs , sure everyone could bike commute. That's not practical though. I'd argue for building more bike infrastructure just since cycling is fun. I'm planing on working remote forever anyway, so I think we'd agree on alot. But I recognize my privilege here, if you need to commute to an office biking won't work over…

Rain does not make in-city cycling significantly more dangerous, and is definitely fine for inexperienced cyclists. But if people cycle regularly, they aren't inexperienced, anyway. In areas with frequent rain, people are practiced in carrying waterproof overclothes and such. Sub-zero temperatures, snow and ice can be a much bigger problem, of course, but good maintenance resolves a lot of that, too, as it does for c…

I'm actually intrigued by this, I own a bike and whenever it rains, even a little bit I leave it at home.

I'm afraid braking won't work as well, and I'll end up hurting myself.

Re: Milan confirms new cycling network linking 80% of the city to bike paths

#167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have the opposite opinion of painted-line bike paths: I'd rather they not be there at all. If they are there I feel forced to use them by drivers punishment passing me, despite the fact that the so-called bike lanes are full of glass, potholes and cars. If they aren't there I feel like I get treated with more patience when I ride in my normal road position, about 75 cm from the kerb.

Physically separated bike lanes are even worse. You can't get out of them easily if you come across a lot of debris. And they are harder to street clean, so debris accumulates more.

As a counterpoint to the "harder to clean" argument, I can offer the following.

I've just been to Montreal, and with temperatures well below freezing and lots of recent snowfall, the segregated bike lanes were completely clear of snow. Every day. In the places I've been around town, I am not sure I've ever come across any significant debris, in any season.

This is in stark contrast with many (especially older) bike lanes in the UK, which are basically unrideable in any season as they're covered in drain covers, potholes and debris.

I think the difference here is not so much the difficultly of cleaning as the commitment to doing it.

Re: Milan confirms new cycling network linking 80% of the city to bike paths

#168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read these types of arguments a lot from people who live in places where cycling is not the norm. They tend to read like strange nitpicks in light of how common it is for people of ages to cycle in different types of weather. 5 miles doesn't seem like that far to cycle. I am by no means an avid cyclist myself - for longer trips I take public transport. But I see plenty of people cycling even while I am on the train…

If every American city was dense, I'd go for metro + cycling. But as is that isn't the case. I don't think most Americans are fit enough to cycle , that's ultimately the issue. But even if your overweight, taking a train isn't a problem.

I sympathize, but don't really feel like your comment addresses anything I said. Maybe I didn't get my message across very well in my comment, so I'll try to clarify it here:

My point is not that all Americans should suddenly start cycling everywhere at all times. That's unrealistic and undesirable. I get the impression that you're viewing this as some kind of all-or-nothing thing, where as soon as you build a bike path people will be forced to exclusively cycle and not walk, or drive, or use public transport.

My point is simply that building cycling infrastructure that would support people who'd like to cycle some or all of the time is a good thing. Me not wanting to cycle in snow doesn't mean my neighbor doesn't want to cycle in snow, and luckily he and others like him (of which there seem to be plenty) have a bike path to do so safely and easily.

I think it's relatively safe to say if people weren't worried about getting hit by a car, or falling into a pothole, or crashing into a pedestrian, or getting yelled at for being on the road, _more_ of them would choose to use a bike and experience the benefits of cycling.

As a sidenote, I'd also like to point out that you don't have to be super fit to cycle, although cycling can certainly help improve fitness over time. There are bikes built for a more relaxed ride, as well as bikes with electric assist. It is possible to pedal as fast as you want, and go for whatever distances one is comfortable with.

Re: Milan confirms new cycling network linking 80% of the city to bike paths

#169
Glad to see they're making an attempt, and I hope it works out well, but there is a big difference between talking about something that will (might, we hope) get done in the future, VS something that has already been accomplished that one can feel proud of. I look forward to seeing if this can make the transition from the former to the latter.

Also, major yellow flag: "The paths will also feature state-of-the-art infrastructure, including low-impact motion-sensor lighting, digital displays, and a network of fibre optic cables, ..." Sounds like exactly the kind of over-engineering and over-specing that plagues these kinds of projects.

Re: Milan confirms new cycling network linking 80% of the city to bike paths

#170
post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I both agree and don't agree, having recently cycled across the US and experienced areas with no cycle paths, painted cycle paths and separated cycle paths. Obviously separated paths are the safest, although unfortunately in the US they often aren't maintained as well as the road surface, so for long trips it's usually more comfortable to cycle on the road anyway. But when it comes to painted lines, the situation is…

> In areas with painted cycle lanes, the drivers understand that in this situation they are supposed to watch for cyclists, give way and then cross into the "right turn only" lane on the cyclists' right, instead of fuming and raging because a cyclist dared to follow the signage. While this works to some extent when a right turn only lane is present, this actually sets the cyclist up for a right hook when the right mo…

I think your calculation of car sizes is a bit wide. I think most cars in the US are around 6 feet wide. Even large minivans are only around 2m. Granted, the mirrors add width and some drivers add excessive dongles on the edge of that, but conscientious drivers of wide vehicles should already be accustomed to passing slow moving vehicles more carefully. In addition, in the places where there are proper dedicated cycle lanes, the lanes are painted inside a full-width shoulder, with space to spare on both the left and the right.

I found there were quite a few stretches of road in Florida, for example, where there were 3 or 4 lanes of high speed traffic going parallel to a painted cycle path in the shoulder. It wasn't the most relaxing place to ride, but it still felt safer than going down some of the highways and arterial roads in other states where there were few (if any) cycle paths, simply because the drivers had more visual aids (signage plus lines) to tell them what to do when they saw a cyclist. I felt more confident cycling even in other parts of Florida without the cycle lanes because despite the drivers being fairly inconsiderate, at least they didn't visibly panic when they saw me there.

It is important to compare like with like, though. A "cycle path" which is just a bit of different-colored paint in the gutter of an existing traffic lane is pretty much useless. But if the painted cycle path is explicitly painted in what would otherwise be a full-width shoulder, I agree with other commenters here that it allows more flexibility to the cyclist than a separated lane (e.g. in turning left without needing to do a pedestrian-style hook turn) and it has the side effect of teaching drivers how to more carefully consider other traffic.

I really think a lot comes down to driver education. For example in areas where there is frequently slow farm equipment or horse and buggies on the main road, drivers have learned how to share the road, so it feels safe to cycle when there is no cycle path or even no shoulder at all. Unfortunately my experience in a lot of the US is that most drivers don't know how to deal with cyclists, so they'll ignorantly tailgate, cut you off or abuse you just for following the road rules. I'm not sure if that results in more casualties, but it certainly makes the experience of cycling more fraught, which means less people will want to cycle, so there is a vicious circle of increasing driver ignorance. I think painted lines at least provide some antidote to that.

Post reply on HN