3 ms·

What's your take on urban density and neighbourhood? I can visualize a child getting around the suburbs well, but a busy city street or highway sound less pleas

What's your take on urban density and neighbourhood? I can visualize a child getting around the suburbs well, but a busy city street or highway sound less pleasant for a daily commute.

analog31 9y ago
I have a rule of thumb, to designate "busy" streets as having 2+ lanes going in each direction. That's when traffic gets faster, and more dense, so that drivers are no longer in complete control of their cars. This is just convenient in order to have a definition. I avoid those streets if possible. I also don't like fast traffic and parked cars on the side. That's just me. Safety aside, calm streets are more pleasant. In my locale, there are enough slow side streets interspersed with the higher density neighborhoods, that I can generally avoid fast streets. In some places, a bike path along an old rail line solves the problem. There's a sort of "Jane Jacobs utopia" neighborhood on the other side of town, where cars drive on one street and bikes / buses on the next street over. If it's dense enough, then people can walk. The odd thing is that the suburbs aren't necessarily great. They might not have sidewalks -- an issue for pedestrians and the smallest kids -- and everything is great until you have to get past a high speed road or intersection. Plus, due to lower density, distances are longer. I live in a moderately dense urban area. My friends who live in suburbs are the ones who drive everywhere.
- closeparen 9y ago
  Yep, it's like this in Berkeley. There are certainly streets I don't like as a cyclist, but I can go 1-2 blocks over and find one that's perfectly pleasant. Still open to cars, so local residents can go about their lives, but there aren't many around.
- II2II 9y ago
  I actually prefer busy streets for cycling. A big reason for that are the wider lanes and multiple lanes. This makes it much easier for vehicles to pass. There are also fewer intersections, a greater tendency to ensure that the lines of sight are clear of obstructions, and better lighting at night, all of which have huge benefits to safety. Quiet streets may reduce the amount of interaction with motor vehicles, yet the interaction seems to be much more risky on side streets.
awjr 9y ago
Public Highways England released IAN 195 www.standardsforhighways.co.uk/ha/standards/ians/pdfs/ian195.pdf This gives a speed profile/volume of traffic recommended infrastructure matrix from sharing (20mph < 2500 cars per day) through to hard segregation with a verge (60mph). National standards are key. The US NACTO also released a phenomenal free design guide https://globaldesigningcities.org/publication/global-street-design-guide/ https://globaldesigningcities.org/publication/global-street-...

What's your take on urban density and neighbourhood? I can visualize a child getting around the suburbs well, but a busy city street or highway sound less pleasant for a daily commute.

analog31 9y ago

I have a rule of thumb, to designate "busy" streets as having 2+ lanes going in each direction. That's when traffic gets faster, and more dense, so that drivers are no longer in complete control of their cars. This is just convenient in order to have a definition. I avoid those streets if possible. I also don't like fast traffic and parked cars on the side. That's just me. Safety aside, calm streets are more pleasant. In my locale, there are enough slow side streets interspersed with the higher density neighborhoods, that I can generally avoid fast streets. In some places, a bike path along an old rail line solves the problem. There's a sort of "Jane Jacobs utopia" neighborhood on the other side of town, where cars drive on one street and bikes / buses on the next street over. If it's dense enough, then people can walk. The odd thing is that the suburbs aren't necessarily great. They might not have sidewalks -- an issue for pedestrians and the smallest kids -- and everything is great until you have to get past a high speed road or intersection. Plus, due to lower density, distances are longer. I live in a moderately dense urban area. My friends who live in suburbs are the ones who drive everywhere.

closeparen 9y ago
Yep, it's like this in Berkeley. There are certainly streets I don't like as a cyclist, but I can go 1-2 blocks over and find one that's perfectly pleasant. Still open to cars, so local residents can go about their lives, but there aren't many around.
II2II 9y ago
I actually prefer busy streets for cycling. A big reason for that are the wider lanes and multiple lanes. This makes it much easier for vehicles to pass. There are also fewer intersections, a greater tendency to ensure that the lines of sight are clear of obstructions, and better lighting at night, all of which have huge benefits to safety. Quiet streets may reduce the amount of interaction with motor vehicles, yet the interaction seems to be much more risky on side streets.

awjr 9y ago

Public Highways England released IAN 195 www.standardsforhighways.co.uk/ha/standards/ians/pdfs/ian195.pdf This gives a speed profile/volume of traffic recommended infrastructure matrix from sharing (20mph < 2500 cars per day) through to hard segregation with a verge (60mph). National standards are key. The US NACTO also released a phenomenal free design guide https://globaldesigningcities.org/publication/global-street-design-guide/ https://globaldesigningcities.org/publication/global-street-...