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

Investigating the effects of bike lanes in Minneapolis

oa.mg

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 258 posts

Re: Investigating the effects of bike lanes in Minneapolis

#171

Post by nabilhat »

SeanLuke wrote: post #60

This was a case study with no control group. Case studies are, IMHO, close to useless. Having read the study, I'm not impressed. No attempt was made to compare Minneapolis with peer cities as controls, that is, ones which did not increase bike infrastructure. A limited model was attempted regarding climate impacts, but beyond this little was done to control for external factors. Thus we have no idea if the change in…

It's quite generalized. If you're looking for more focused data and conclusions, public projects like these infrastructure improvements that are to some degree novel or pioneering (for the USA at least) are subject to a high level of attention and data collection over time. The city's website presents a lot of those results:

https://www2.minneapolismn.gov/government/departments/public...

Minneapolis in particular has been remarkable in the USA bikey world for their investment in multimodal infrastructure over the last 15 years. In this regard they've long been widely regarded as a success and discussed in detail in blogs, magazines, etc.

Re: Investigating the effects of bike lanes in Minneapolis

#172

Post by s0rce »

bliteben wrote: post #170
s0rce wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm tired of subsidizing rural people, the communities are unsutainable, particularly in the west where they have extreme fire risk.

Where did you get this insane idea that subsidizing actual farming and agriculture is a bad idea? Do you not like eating or being alive? I agree the subsidies are probably not 100% efficient but the intent is to keep you alive in times of famine or worldwide catastrophe. We don't live in a planned society and many many people have made mistakes about where to farm / raise livestock in the US. The good news is they us…

I guess that was overly broad. Many rural residents (most?) are not farmers...

Re: Investigating the effects of bike lanes in Minneapolis

#173

Post by john61 »

aBioGuy wrote: post #6

If you make it pleasant to ride a bike - people will do it. Where I live, there is an off-street bike path that was completed about 10 years ago. Since then many new businesses have opened along the path. The economic impact of pulling people OUT OF A CAR and INTO THEIR environment is perhaps under-appreciated.

It is also much more intersiting for the biker. On many occasions I met people or interesting art / shops etc. while biking, I would have missing those travling by car or bus. You are much more connected to your environment. You do not need an artificial entertainment system, the world itself is your entertainment, as it should be.

Re: Investigating the effects of bike lanes in Minneapolis

#174

Post by bombcar »

AlecSchueler wrote: post #116
ericmay wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> which is that you don’t like the life choices most other Americans are making I think this is the fundamental problem. I don't have a bone to pick with oil and gas companies. It's a resource, we need to address climate change, w/e, but fossil fuels are useful and should be used within reason. But I do have a bone to pick with this idea that Americans are making a choice because I think they're not making a choice w…

And why would their choices be so different to their counterparts in Europe? Especially Denmark, Netherlands, Germany, France, UK etc? Their counterparts in China? If the infrastructure is built for a certain vehicle then it's not really a choice is it?

Europe has much older cities than the US, and larger amounts of land were already taken up, which has limited the amount of "freeway"-style development.

Arguably if it had NOT been for the interstate highway push in the US we'd have an America that would look more European.

Re: Investigating the effects of bike lanes in Minneapolis

#175

Post by bombcar »

rayiner wrote: post #164
ir123 wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How come europe is not that car dependent?

Europe has lots of car companies and oil companies too, so that framing would seem to support the idea that they’re not the cause. What’s different about Europe is virtually everything else. See my sibling post on this issue. In a nutshell, an immigrant nation with a long tradition of migration for opportunity and to get away from others places a higher value on unrestricted mobility. Culture is extremely sticky. Add…

Also, America has other, darker, undercurrents that occurred around the same time - the racial aspect of car culture can't be entirely dismissed (even if race is/was a proxy for "poor") - Europe seems much more comfortable with poor and rich living near each other (where rich is some variation of "middle to upper-middle class +").

Re: Investigating the effects of bike lanes in Minneapolis

#176

Post by bombcar »

sokoloff wrote: post #149
mdasen wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Toyota didn’t hold a gun to my head to get me to buy an SUV No, but lots of things push people to buy those vehicles. As others buy giant vehicles, you might want to buy a giant vehicle so that you feel safer on the road. If everyone is riding around in a 4,000 pound (1,800 kg) SUV whose bumper is very tall, you don't want to be riding around in a 3,000 pound (1,350 kg) car whose bumper is low. As we mandate parkin…

> The US allows you to deduct parking costs from your taxes. Parking costs in furtherance of a business, yes. Same as the US allowing me to deduct the cost of taking the subway to a business meeting or the utility bills required to air condition my office building.

The "oh it's deductible" is way WAY overplayed and I suspect people use it as a fig-leaf for otherwise dubious purchases.

Meanwhile, things like making the electric car tax rebate an actual refundable credit can't be done because that might actually help poorer people!

Re: Investigating the effects of bike lanes in Minneapolis

#177

Post by willio58 »

diordiderot wrote: post #155
Paianni wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

According to Figure 6 from the study linked below, the trend in cycling levels in the Netherlands was essentially flat from the mid-80s to the mid-2000s. I recall (but cannot find) a source with statistics that suggest a minor increase since then, but much of the current infrastructure was in place 15 years ago. http://web.archive.org/web/20150211090849/http://www.policy....

They built their cycle infrastructure through the 60s and 70s tho so that would make sense

Yep, they started doing the same dumb car-centric infrastructure as the US around the 50s but unlike us they stopped when they saw how it was negatively affecting life for their people.

Re: Investigating the effects of bike lanes in Minneapolis

#178

Post by bombcar »

Bukhmanizer wrote: post #148
jader201 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's fucking crazy that we do this. I don't know how much more emphasis I can put on it. I usually jump on a soapbox whenever I see so much support for getting rid of cars on HN, so here goes: Not everyone lives in a city. I’m 100% in agreement for all of these arguments, with the precondition that you live in the city . But many prefer and enjoy distance from neighbors, commerce/industry, and enjoy being surrounde…

I think most people, including the person you replied to would agree with this. The key is that people shouldn’t be required to have a car to go everywhere. By increasing density in some places, we would decrease density in other places, allowing people to have a choice in how they want to live. But in huge swaths of America, there is basically no diversity in density. You literally can’t live somewhere that’s walkab…

I really wonder what people mean by "rural" but I suspect what most people are saying is "suburbs are where I want to live, but I want everything as close as it is in the city.

Because in my "town" which is something like 10k, we're 30 miles from the nearest "bigger town" and 45 from the nearest international airport, but I can walk to Walmart in 30m or walk to Ace Hardware in about the same (though in a different direction).

So they do exist, they just don't exist where people want them to.

To me "rural" is mile long dirt driveway at the end of a gravel road that is ten miles from the nearest paved road, let alone the nearest services.

Re: Investigating the effects of bike lanes in Minneapolis

#179

Post by bombcar »

bjustin wrote: post #153
jader201 wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's fucking crazy that we do this. I don't know how much more emphasis I can put on it. I usually jump on a soapbox whenever I see so much support for getting rid of cars on HN, so here goes: Not everyone lives in a city. I’m 100% in agreement for all of these arguments, with the precondition that you live in the city . But many prefer and enjoy distance from neighbors, commerce/industry, and enjoy being surrounde…

Large networks of large roads are not financially sustainable [1]. I can only assume this is more the case the more rural you get. Asking for more of the current American style of car infrastructure may not even work, depending on the specifics. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7IsMeKl-Sv0

Rural areas are actually cheaper because they do NOT have paved roads every 500 feet or so. The local county pays for all of the rural roads (maintenance, plowing, etc) and the little town pays for the roads in town; federal funds are only used for the interstate and some connecting ramps, etc.

What may not be sustainable is city-like road patterns with suburban densities.

Re: Investigating the effects of bike lanes in Minneapolis

#180

Post by donatj »

nightski wrote: post #50
donatj wrote: post #32

Minneapolis resident here. Unlike the other Minneapolis resident here, I feel like I see most of the bike lanes entirely disused. A project in my neighborhood turned a major thoroughfare into a one way with a separated bike lane, and I've seen maybe 40 people use it since it's completion a few years ago. I'm curious what a 69% increase looks like in real numbers - a 20% increase on next to nothing is still next to no…

It's been shown that temperature doesn't necessarily have a correlation with biking activity. It has a lot more to do with infrastructure [1]. I know I live in the tri-state area (MN,ND,SD) and bike year round. [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uhx-26GfCBU

I mean I can say without a doubt that I'm not personally going to cycle when it's above 85 or below 40. It's not a pleasant experience.
Post reply on HN