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

211–220 of 223 posts

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

#211

Post by laputan_machine »

the_biot wrote: post #205
laputan_machine wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I've classified you as someone who doesn't cycle because of how you wrote your initial comment, 'i.e. rabid anti-car cyclists'. This language is the same language people who hold prejudiced views on cycling use. I don't think these people are 'evil', you are making wild assumptions.

My reply told you that I own cars, I enjoy driving, I enjoy working on them. I find mechanics interesting, cars and bicycles both. I tried to explain that I do not sit in the 'us-vs-them' camp, I pay VED, yet I cycle a lot too. I think I can see both sides of the issue.

I think my response was even-tempered.

You complain about things being 'us-vs-them', yet you think adding cycling lanes is 'anti-car pro-bicyle'. I think you should look at whether or not you sit in a certain camp, to me, the language you use is telling.

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

#212

Post by agos »

peoplefromibiza wrote: post #117

TBF the new biking lane in Viale Monza sucks big time. Also: you can make how many bike lanes you want, they will never make biking in the cold comfortable, especially for people that are not used to it. A lot of people living in Milan come from warmer weathers. So the main users of bike paths are riders delivering food with their e-bikes and/or tier scooters. EDIT: I've been living in Milan for 8 years, i live where…

the new biking lane in Viale Monza is the greatest thing to happen to Viale Monza since the metro.

with "warmer weathers" are you referring to southern Italy? because the same riders you said are using the bike lanes are coming from actually warmer weathers (like western Africa) and if they manage to bike around all evening in January maybe a person from Puglia can commute without big issues.

and the main safety issue with that bike lane (or any other bike lane in this city) is people who treat it as a parking spot or a car lane, not the occasional bus

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

#213

Post by agos »

kawsper wrote: post #58
qwerty456127 wrote: post #31

BTW the next problem we have to solve after bike paths lacking in a city are showers lacking in office buildings.

I bike to work in -2 to ~30 degrees celcius, as long as you don't go really fast you don't really sweat that much in the climate of Denmark, it's mostly about pacing and not wearing too many layers. I leave the fastpaced action for the trip home, just bring spare clothes in case of rain :-)

with the weather in Milan, from late June to early September even one layer is too much

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

#214

Post by tohmeiphun »

jimmytidey wrote: post #200
tohmeiphun wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I live in Boston, in the 90's it was way easier to have a car. The bike lanes have cut our two lane main roads down to one which has created a lot of traffic, a lot more than in the past. And there's much less parking due to the bikes, but also the new developments. The Mayor of Boston in the 90's wouldn't let anyone build housing unless they provided a parking space for every bedroom. The new mayor just green lit a…

Thanks for your reply. Ultimately it just depends on your vision of what you'd like your city to be like. I would like everyone to have the option of cycling or walking around their city without fear of death or hospitalisation. It doesn't seem like an extremist position - the roads are for everyone, there is no intrinsic reason to prioritise cars. It's so frustrating that it becomes part of some car vs bike culture…

I would also like the option of using whatever transportation you like to get around. But my observation has been that the roads are unfortunately not for all in Boston and we need to make a choice. Boston is a great pedestrian city, so I would focus on public transit and prioritize cars over bicycles, it worked better that way in the recent past.

The public transit buses have been highly impacted by the bike lanes. By reducing the main roads to one lane because of the bike lanes has created more traffic so it's harder for the busses. The solution to that was to create lanes that only busses can travel, in certain parts of the road, which in turn has created even more traffic and not really improved things. I applaud them for trying, but it really doesn't look like it working from a quality of life stand point.

I think your right how it's become a part of the culture war.

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

#215

Post by milkytron »

dfxm12 wrote: post #186
multiplegeorges wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It was a battle won by blood. This is the current battle in Toronto, Canada. Last year, there were more people killed by cars than gun violence, but you wouldn't know it by the media coverage. The city, largely due to strong local advocacy, has started to respond with physically separated lanes, but we're talking double digit KM/year, if we're lucky, when we need 100s of KM to link the city together like this Milan…

but you wouldn't know it by the media coverage. Yeah, it doesn't help that the media used to almost exclusively refers to car crashes as "accidents", falsely implying there was nothing that could have been done to avoid the situation, putting zero fault on any drivers involved. At least nowadays you see headlines about "car crashes", although you'll still find ledes like "person struck by dies of complications". No n…

A driver should certainly be at fault, but also how much blame should be put on the engineers designing our roadways? They have built an environment that is hostile to anyway not in a car. I get that they have "standards" that have to be followed, but when you're implementing a bad design that likely will result in any number of deaths greater than 0, shouldn't those design standards be questioned?

DOTs around the US measure vehicle traffic regularly, but very few measure any kind of other traffic, so they don't even know how many travelers are on roads that are not in a car.

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

#216

Post by jimmytidey »

tohmeiphun wrote: post #214
jimmytidey wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks for your reply. Ultimately it just depends on your vision of what you'd like your city to be like. I would like everyone to have the option of cycling or walking around their city without fear of death or hospitalisation. It doesn't seem like an extremist position - the roads are for everyone, there is no intrinsic reason to prioritise cars. It's so frustrating that it becomes part of some car vs bike culture…

I would also like the option of using whatever transportation you like to get around. But my observation has been that the roads are unfortunately not for all in Boston and we need to make a choice. Boston is a great pedestrian city, so I would focus on public transit and prioritize cars over bicycles, it worked better that way in the recent past. The public transit buses have been highly impacted by the bike lanes.…

Just to put some perspective on this, I looked up Boston's bike lanes. There are 8 miles of separated bike lanes in Boston, out of 800 miles of down town roads.

Drivers in Boston are being asked to _share_ 1% of the road infrastructure with bikes.

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

#217

Post by Grustaf »

zip1234 wrote: post #73
Grustaf wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of bike paths here in Copenhagen are simply painted and it works fine, even for small kids.

Is there actual enforcement of people stopping their car or parking in those lanes? Doesn't happen for the most part in the US.

You’re definitely not allowed to drive or park in a bike lane, nobody would do that.

On some on way side streets they have this weird system where the bike lane and takes up half the road and shares it with parked cars

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

#218

Post by Grustaf »

Symbiote wrote: post #106
Grustaf wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of bike paths here in Copenhagen are simply painted and it works fine, even for small kids.

A painted bike line in Copenhagen is huge compared to the lanes they paint in Britain. The British version is about half as wide, and often allows parking for large parts of the day (i.e. is only a lane for a couple of hours). I've never been to Oxford, but someone mentioned Abingdon Road [1]. Just some bike symbols painted on the road. Or a little further up [2] -- that thing on the left is a British cycle lane. If…

I haven't done a statistical analysis, but looking at my way to work now it's more than half of it that's painted bike lanes. That from Østerport to the Parliament, meaning the outskirts of the center to downtown.

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

#219

Post by nybble41 »

dragonwriter wrote: post #202
nybble41 wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

Okay, perhaps "full driver's license" was excessively optimistic. I was able to obtain my full license well before 17; I hadn't realized we'd regressed quite so far.

Still, the provisional or restricted license you can get before 17 in 49 states (or at 17 in New Jersey) is enough to drive yourself around without a chaperone, even if it falls short of the freedom of a full license. Depending on the state you may or may not be able to carry multiple passengers or drive at night. And a large majority of states (34 vs. 15—with no data on Vermont) do still allow full licenses at 17 or earlier, with the remainder making you wait until 17½ or 18.

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

#220

Post by nybble41 »

Symbiote wrote: post #209
nybble41 wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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,…

A cheap used car isn't necessarily a huge expense (they start around $3-4k in my area, despite the current shortages), and you don't necessarily need an individual policy or even your own car if you can borrow a family vehicle. It isn't free but many in this age range would have a summer job which could easily cover the expense.

When I was in high school some decades ago the upperclassman were allowed to drive themselves, and many did. I was not one of them, being rather young for my grade, but I can easily understand the appeal of a 16-minute car trip (never mind the prestige among your classmates) vs. the 45+ minutes I spent on the bus each way.

E-bikes are a nice middle ground but many have warnings discouraging their use by minors (sometimes backed by local rules—eight states limit unsupervised use of e-bikes to those 14 and older) and the decent ones (new) can cost almost as much as a used car.

Post reply on HN