4 ms·
That's true in Seattle right now too. The city has been building bicycle lanes all around the city -- and yet cycling is down as a percent of commuters for the
by nostromo 9y ago
That's true in Seattle right now too.
The city has been building bicycle lanes all around the city -- and yet cycling is down as a percent of commuters for the fifth straight year in a row.
We could have dedicated that space to larger sidewalks and greener boulevards, instead of sparsely populated bicycle lanes. (Like London, we don't have great weather -- and we also have lots of steep hills. But city planners keep looking to cycling as our transportation panacea.)
- buswell 9y agoSeattle has the insanity of having obligatory bicycle helmet laws. No city has ever had a successful bike-sharing scheme with laws saying you need to wear a helmet. No city with that law has ever had any amount of cycling either. Medellin has plenty of hills and cycling, London has plenty of rain and cycling. Rain and hills won't kill you, unlike the pollution from cars
- Xylakant 9y agoWeather seems to be a lesser concern to cycling as both all of the Netherlands and Copenhagen demonstrate. Hills are more of an issue, but given how electric cycles improve, that should be taken care of. All in all, cycling is a replacement for car traffic more than for walking and thus the space allocation for cycle path should be taken from roads rather than pedestrian areas.
- tantivy 9y agoCycling dropping as a share of commuters doesn't tell you that fewer people are cycling. There are also more commuters. Seattle has been rapidly growing, and I'd guess that most new arrivals won't immediately take up cycling in a city that's unfamiliar to them. Building bicycle infrastructure makes cycling more inviting and less stressful for inexperienced riders, which helps shift the balance over time, especially as the network itself strengthens and coverage improves.