Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

road.cc

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 223 posts

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

#201

Post by nybble41 »

Symbiote wrote: post #165
nybble41 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

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

In most of the US 16-year-olds can get a full driver's license and drive a car on their own, assuming they have access to one. Most parents these days wouldn't let a 7-year-old travel far without a chaperone by any mode of transportation even if they are physically capable. (Lack of "safe" biking infrastructure is far from the only risk factor.) But yes, in the very short window in the early teens between not being trusted to be out on your own safely and acquiring a driver's license and car a bike can be more accessible when traveling solo or with others of similar age and maturity.

> Younger children can be a passenger on a bike.

One younger child can be a passenger on a bike, at the expense of extra effort on the part of the rider providing the propulsion. Perhaps two if they are both small. (Don't forget that you'll need to bring extra cargo as well—especially if the passenger(s) are very young.) Beyond that you're going to want a larger vehicle with its own power supply, unless your goal has more to do with riding bikes than getting to your destination.

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

#202

Post by dragonwriter »

nybble41 wrote: post #201
Symbiote wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Most people between age 7 and 16/17/18 can ride a bike, but not drive a car. In most of the US 16-year-olds can get a full driver's license and drive a car on their own, assuming they have access to one. Most parents these days wouldn't let a 7-year-old travel far without a chaperone by any mode of transportation even if they are physically capable. (Lack of "safe" biking infrastructure is far from the only risk fa…

> In most of the US 16-year-olds can get a full driver's license and drive a car on their own, assuming they have access to one.

No, in 4 states that's true (and while some states have 16½ or 16¾ requirements, it's still less than half where it is true at some point before 17.) A few decades ago before provisional driver’s license rules for younger drivers became common this was true, but full licenses have moved up in age a bit.

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

#203

Post by estebank »

frosted-flakes wrote: post #181
estebank wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

30km/h is not an uncommon speed in European urban areas. For example, in France within towns 50km/h is the default speed limit for main arteries, but it is 30km/h for areas where pedestrians are expected. Most of Paris has made the switch, so has Brussels. I would go as far as saying they are a majority of streets , while yes, roads are always faster, but that would be playing semantic games.

All streets are roads, no? While not all roads are streets.

I'm going off of Strong Town's differentiation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OZ1HhLq-Huo, also tackled by Not Just Bikes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ORzNZUeUHAM.

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

#204

Post by chaircher »

eatonphil wrote: post #45
Schroedingers2c wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah, the ol' Oxford cycle "lanes". Where (if they exist) the paths themselves are bumpier than the Netherlands, and every few dozen meters you are greeted by a water drain or a manhole. In addition you have quite busy rush hours in the mornings and evenings. I moved from Oxford to the Netherlands a couple years ago and let me tell you: cycling here is a bliss.

Is "a bliss" a typo or is that a (UK) English way of speech? I'm American and I've never seen someone say something is a bliss just that something is bliss (no indefinite article).

may be regional dialect

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

#205

Post by the_biot »

laputan_machine wrote: post #24
the_biot wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's equally frustrating how a certain class of people, i.e. rabid anti-car cyclists, only read publications within their bubble that are equally anti-car, while constantly throwing shade at any country that is not the paradise Netherlands. I encourage you to take that next step: only commenting on these type of stories within your bubble.

When I commuted to work I cycled 16+ miles a day rain, snow or shine. I also own 2 cars, I love working on them. I've built a few bicycles and regularly maintain them for my friends and family. I think I have a pretty decent perspective on both sides. Cycling in the UK is 1% of road traffic, and are drowned out of the conversation on how roads are built up until very recently. They are the most vulnerable things on w…

It's NOT about car drivers vs. cyclists. You've immediately classified me into somebody who couldn't possibly cycle, as clearly I am evil. I disagreed with an anti-car pro-bicycle article after all!

This is why I think this sort of rabid us-vs-them crap should be kept to its own bubble: it has no place in a civilized discussion among even-tempered people.

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

#206

Post by ryan_lane »

mdavis6890 wrote: post #183
Eric_WVGG wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> cycling is not practical transportation for most people. It targets a certain demographic, people who have the physical ability to actually cycle. That's… most people. Like I get it, we have an obesity epidemic, but fat people can ride bicycles. It's not unusual. And a lot of them start shedding pounds fast once you get them out of the automated wheeled easy-chairs we call "cars."

It's not necessarily about physical disabilities. Think about 1 parent with 2 young children and 3 bags of groceries. And that roughly fits a LOT of folks. Maybe if both your house and the grocery store (or other destination) are within 1-2km of a mass-transit stop you can use that - otherwise it's pretty much personal car/bus. And if that's the case for one particular trip, you still need to have this option for the…

It's a norm to see mothers riding two children on a bike here in Tokyo. Grocery stores are typically in walking distance, so no need for the bike ride for that.

Note that reliance on cars leads to grocery stores not being within walking/biking distance, and less cars (and denser cities) leads to more livable cities.

The goal is to make it possible to bike places safely, which makes it easier to transition from reliance on cars to better forms of transportation. No one is suggesting that we switch everything over to bikes right now.

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

#207

Post by orthoxerox »

usrusr wrote: post #146
mpol wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Car drivers get trained when doing driving lessons. There are so many roundabouts that you have to cooperate as a car driver. Also, it is well-known that when an accident happens, the car driver gets the financial damage, and yes, the insurance will pay, but he/she will lose a big percentage of the no-claim decrease in insurance fee. Recently, local governments are moving away from the real small roundabouts like thi…

I simply don't understand why roundabouts aren't just shared. Do separation as much as you like 10m away from them, but in the roundabout, there's exactly zero excuse for a speed difference between motor vehicles and bikes. When drivers are expected to let segregated cyclists pass on leaving the roundabout, they actually have to go slower than they would merged behind even the laziest cyclist. I really don't get it.…

Blind spots. The driver turning right doesn't see the cyclist planning to take the next exit if the bike lane is right next to the car lane.

With a segregated bike lane the driver turbing right has the bike lane in front of them.

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

#208

Post by maxwell86 »

trgn wrote: post #142
maxwell86 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It is really frustrating how highway engineers, as a profession, are unwilling to consistently learn lessons from the Netherlands in designing cycle infrastructure. These decisions aren't made by highway engineers, they are made by politicians. The highway engineer puts a proper bikelane, makes the highway wider, and tells the politician that its going to cost 100 million dollars to do a couple of kms. The politici…

> The highway engineer puts a proper bikelane, makes the highway wider, and tells the politician that its going to cost 100 million dollars to do a couple of kms. Yikes! That's criminal. You can get an excellent bikelane with a few bollards and a paint can. I would say that's a failure of the engineering profession.

If the road is designed for 2 car lanes, without much tolerance, something has to give. Either you make it wider, or you change it to one car lane, or you remove parking spaces, etc.

If you leave the 2 car lanes, and make them smaller to fit to one bike lane per car lane, such that cars barely fit, and such that cars can't leave a proper distance when overtaking bikes, you end up with the crappy unsafe solution that the OP is complaining about.

You annoy car drivers, and you give bike riders the impression that cycling is unsafe, so this is actually counter productive.

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

#209

Post by Symbiote »

nybble41 wrote: post #201
Symbiote wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> Most people between age 7 and 16/17/18 can ride a bike, but not drive a car. In most of the US 16-year-olds can get a full driver's license and drive a car on their own, assuming they have access to one. Most parents these days wouldn't let a 7-year-old travel far without a chaperone by any mode of transportation even if they are physically capable. (Lack of "safe" biking infrastructure is far from the only risk fa…

How many American 16/17 year olds can afford a car? Perhaps more than I realized.

In Britain the insurance cost is so high it's prohibitive for many teenagers. Although based on a quick search, it's significantly less than the average American teenagers pay. Perhaps that shows the lack of alternatives Americans have -- "Teenagers pay an average of $371 a month for an individual car insurance policy" yet "Nationwide, 76.3% of high school students aged ≥16 years reported having driven during the 30 days before the survey".

In the UK, "people in the 17-to-19 age group ... pay ... an average cost of £752 a year" ($1000/year, $85/month), yet only ~20% of licensed school/university students use a car to get to education. (I can't find statistics just for 17-18 year olds. Driving to "high school" would be extremely rare, maybe 1% -- it's not even mentioned in the surveys.)

Nowadays, many people in Denmark using bicycles to carry a child have upgraded to e-bikes. Larger bikes (e.g. "Christiania cycle") to carry multiple children have been electric a while longer, although these are expensive.

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

#210

Post by ghusbands »

999900000999 wrote: post #166
ghusbands wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

When you get a bad feeling about something, it's often an indication of implicit knowledge that you might not be consciously aware of. In this case, I'd suggest your brakes might need maintenance/replacement. As the sibling post here notes, you shouldn't be working near the limit of your brakes in normal use, anyway, and so a small reduction in their ability in rain shouldn't be a problem.
Post reply on HN