9 ms·
I quickly read through this. Context: I'm Dutch and live in Utrecht, The Netherlands. This booklet has one massive flaw: it is constructed using American best-
by crote 8y ago
I quickly read through this. Context: I'm Dutch and live in Utrecht, The Netherlands.
This booklet has one massive flaw: it is constructed using American best-practices. At best, a couple of examples could be considered almost acceptable. Most of them were woefully inadequate and consist of little more than a blob of quickly-fading green paint in ill-considered positions. Worst of all, several examples are clearly flawed, and to me seem even more dangerous than not having any infrastructure at all.
If the goal is to show to unimaginative people that it is indeed physically possible to create something resembling bike infrastructure, then it will do fine. But if you're trying to actually create a good, safe, well-used cycling network, then this is not the way to do it.
If you want good examples, go visit something like https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/ https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/ . This booklet almost reads as if it was written by someone who has only heard about cycling infrastructure, but never actually lived in a city which has it. The intention is there, but there's an even longer way to go.
Some trivial stuff to change:
- Add green dye to the asphalt instead of adding a layer of green paint. This means that it will not fade.
- Color the whole cycle path, not just a few small parts of it. You're trying to create a continuous network, remember?
- Don't use a zebra-crossing style striping at crossings. A continuous green bar would be way easier to see and interpret as something to stop for.
- Don't create turn boxes. They are always in dangerous positions and there are better alternatives.
But most important of all: don't just add cycle paths to your main car roads. You wouldn't add a sidewalk and crosswalk to an interstate, would you? Create the main cycle routes on secondary streets, and make them unattractive for cars.
- skookumchuck 8y agoAround here they create X crossings, where the bike lane and the right hand car lane cross each other in an X. This is sheer madness.
- jessaustin 8y agoHow would you handle locations where cars are turning right and cyclists are riding straight?
- crote 8y agoNote: right turn on red is illegal in all examples. Like this: https://goo.gl/maps/HJnyxbs1hnJ2 https://goo.gl/maps/HJnyxbs1hnJ2 https://goo.gl/maps/VatZztEiXTJ2 https://goo.gl/maps/VatZztEiXTJ2 https://goo.gl/maps/PpSaGeChwS12 https://goo.gl/maps/PpSaGeChwS12 Note the advanced bike stop line. https://goo.gl/maps/zJZNRTYQ5ZL2 https://goo.gl/maps/zJZNRTYQ5ZL2 Note the bike-only tunnel. https://goo.gl/maps/CWLmL1DTsBs https://goo.gl/maps/CWLmL1DTsBs https://goo.gl/maps/dGJSZnQVfw82 https://goo.gl/maps/dGJSZnQVfw82 https://goo.gl/maps/rvf9hP3DvV62 https://goo.gl/maps/rvf9hP3DvV62 https://goo.gl/maps/sYNKHgEBsZk https://goo.gl/maps/sYNKHgEBsZk Note the two-way left turn for cyclists. https://goo.gl/maps/63YCi5hzz6M2 https://goo.gl/maps/63YCi5hzz6M2 There is a X-crossing right of this, but cyclists vastly outnumber cars here, and it's being removed. In virtually all examples it is physically impossible for right-turning cars and cyclists to conflict, unless the driver is grossly negligent. There is no conflict due to phasing: one phase for straight-through cars and cyclists, one for right-turning traffic.
- jessaustin 8y agoAll of those intersections look great. Treating bicycles and cars as totally different streams of traffic certainly works in those locations. It would be a major change in other locations in other nations. If "not grossly negligent" is the standard to which we're holding drivers, I don't really see the problem with the "X-crossing" displayed in skookumchuck's sibling comment. It's very clear that right-turning cars have to cross the bike lane to get to the turn lane, and any bicycles in the bike lane would be quite evident. Realistically, we can expect some automobile operators to do the wrong thing at that intersection, but that would be negligence.
- Doxin 8y agoThe problem with an X-crossing like that is the angle at which the crossing happens. A driver needs to look all the way over his shoulder to see a cyclist he's about to hit. For the improved crossings you see in e.g. the netherlands the cars and cyclists cross at a 90 degree angle, meaning the driver has a much easier time spotting cyclists.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- v_dev 8y agoAgreed, there's no need to re-invent the wheel. Just do what the Dutch did: they have the best cycling infrastructure in the world and they have lots of experience.
- ken 8y ago> Add green dye to the asphalt instead of adding a layer of green paint. We've had green bike lanes here for many years. I've never noticed any of them fade. We're supposed to lay new streets for one lane, for a problem which hasn't happened yet?
- SECProto 8y ago>We've had green bike lanes here for many years. I've never noticed any of them fade The key word in your post is "here". These things vary by location - for example, anywhere that uses snowplows, a superficial treatment (paint, even thermoplastic) will wear away in a very short period of time. Centrelines here are repainted every year or two (or ten, on roads that aren't considered very important).
- gotocake 8y agoOf course places such as the Northeast (USA) are also the worst candidates for the SF dream of bike dominance. Where I’m from (Colorado) the idea of bike-first is something we roll our eyes at, and generally rightly assume that the loudest advocates live somewhere else, don’t have families, and only go back and forth to work. That’s really not the whole country, no matter how much a minority of SV’ers want it to be. Parts of the country are really spread out, parts are brutally cold, windy, and rainy, and yes some parts are lovely and sunny and packed to the gills. The problem is that evangelists for Bike Jesus never seem to accept that, and there’s always one or two who claim to live in Antarctica with a family of 6, and all while only riding a bike.
- amalcon 8y agoI've always thought cities with a snowy season would be great candidates for bike lanes. Bicycling drops dramatically in the winter, so the bike lanes sit mostly unused. This makes them a good place to deposit excess snow.
- selectodude 8y agoThat’s essentially how it works in Chicago.
- lifeisstillgood 8y agoAgreed - details matter a lot. For example many years ago, Camden in London put in green asphalt cycle paths - one was dangerously hilarious - you ran parallel to the main road, on a painted strip, on the side of a one way street - going against the traffic. However the new cycle "superhighways" in London are a big improvement but oddly now I find the biggest challenge is to change the attitude of the cyclists - we have effectively been given roads - and so now need to obey the laws of the road - it's a toss up if every cyclist will stop at the traffic lights for these superhighways - frustrating if you are a fellow cyclist and dangerous if you are crossing At some point however we are going to face the fact that roads are a cheap form of transport because they are shared and so are dangerous - the UK has 4500 deaths a year - and when we look at segregating cycle traffic to make it safer we realise it is effectively asking to build a railway- and we shall face the same as self driving vehicles get close to good enough but plateau out - and I bet the business case for self driving cars rarely has ever been coated with "we build segregated roads everywhere with huge fences to keep out pedestrians and other hard to avoid objects."
- gotocake 8y agoAt some point however we are going to face the fact that roads are a cheap form of transport because they are shared and so are dangerous - the UK has 4500 deaths a year Well that’s untrue. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reported_Road_Casualties_Great_Britain https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reported_Road_Casualties_Gre... As you can see road casualties have been dropping for quite a while, and for the last 5+ years the rate is around 1,700. Deaths per year haven’t been near 4500 since the 90’s. This also reflects another reality you ignore, which is that road fatalities are not evenly distributed. Being drunk, driving tired, owning an unsafe or poorly maintained car, driving too fast, all contribute to risk, and all are avoidable. You also picked the UK, which has an extensive rail system.
- bosie 8y agoNot trying to argue the 4500 death as that seems wrong according to your link. however, i never understood the focus on "killed" as that seems to be a combination of things, i.e. EMT, medical services, car safety for example. Why not measure the accident by impact (that would keep it consistent over time). Also, what happened in 2010?
- i_am_proteus 8y agoOne more: if you run a cycle lane along a road for automobiles, run it above the main road's grade, if feasible.
- jimmux 8y agoEvery incident I've had on a bike would have been prevented if this was the case for bike lanes in my city. Just two days ago I had to slap a vehicle to let him know I was about to be crushed between him and parked cars, because he casually drove into the bike lane I was occupying without looking or indicating. This would also encourage safer riding by cyclists. Last year ago I had a serious crash because of another rider cutting across lanes of traffic to get ahead of me. Riders being forced to enter the bike lane at the intersection makes them more predictable.
- elbows 8y agoThis works great until it snows. Then the above-grade bike lane is generally not adequately cleared, and cyclists are forced back onto the street, which is now narrower by the width of the bike lane.
- Tomte 8y agoBut below the sidewalk!
- burlesona 8y agoI completely agree. There was an article here on HN about American infrastructure problems which described the “uncuriosity” of the US and Canada when it comes to infrastructure projects - apparently studies like this looking only at North American examples are the rule, not the exception. As an American I find that disappointing and concerning. Thanks for the links to the Dutch cycling site, that’s really cool!
- screye 8y agoFrom what has been told to me by my fellow architecture / urban design studying friends, American urban design is not looked upon very favorably around the world.
- syndacks 8y agoI recently visited Amsterdam and was blown away by the cycling infrastructure there (I live in NYC and cycle daily). I realized, though, that unlike many American cities, Amsterdam came of age way before the automobile. The US has a fetish with cars. Therefore, it's impossible to compare the two countries' cycling infrastructures. The link you shared is so far beyond anything we have in the US; you can't simply say "this is how it should be done". Instead, we have to start somewhere small and make incremental changes until a tipping point ocurrs. Add more bike lanes, introduce bike share programs, etc. Since I've lived in NYC the amount of cyclists has increased steadily. I'm hopeful this trend will occur as programs like OP are continually introduced. Overall I agree with you, I just think the historical contexts are fundamentally different. American cities will approach Amsterdam...in a few hundred years :)
- pmontra 8y agoAmsterdam has a different layout than most US cities but it became a car city much like everywhere else. They fought to change. This is what the Dutchs did https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/may/05/amsterdam-bicycle-capital-world-transport-cycling-kindermoord#img-1 https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/may/05/amsterdam-bic...
- bdamm 8y agoLet's not ignore the fact that Amsterdam is almost completely flat.
- fowkswe 8y agoSo is New York City
- mrob 8y agoAmsterdam also has high average wind speed. Headwinds can slow you down just as much as hills, and crosswinds make it harder to control the bike. Most energy spent while cycling goes to overcoming wind resistance, and it's easy to underestimate how important it is if you don't cycle regularly.
- kartickv 8y agoHere are my thoughts on redesigning roads for pedestrians and cyclists: https://medium.com/@karti/redesigning-roads-for-people-e8d744f68b92 https://medium.com/@karti/redesigning-roads-for-people-e8d74...
- tinyhouse 8y ago> "But most important of all: don't just add cycle paths to your main car roads. You wouldn't add a sidewalk and crosswalk to an interstate, would you? Create the main cycle routes on secondary streets, and make them unattractive for cars." I was actually thinking about this recently. Where I bike in the Boston area many of the bike lanes are on the busiest roads where buses and trucks drive on too. I often take side streets that don't have bike lanes but fell safer. However, I don't think it's that easy to use mainly side streets, it really depends on the city street design.
- ndnxhs 8y agoThere is one terrible issue I encounter almost every time I ride to work. In the mornings the traffic is stopped all the way to work. The stopped cars leave gaps next to the side roads so cars coning from the other direction can turn across to reach them. Because there is a wall of cars in between the bike lane and the other side of the road, neither the turning car or I can each each other so the car blindly turns across the road assuming no bikes are coming.
- theclaw 8y agoSeems a reasonable assumption to me. If someone is waiting to let someone else pull into a sideroad shouldn’t you wait as well? It’s dangerous to overtake on the passenger side regardless of what vehicle you’re using. You should overtake on the driver’s side so people can see you easily.
- ndnxhs 8y agoI can't see if anyone is turning because cars leave a gap when no one is turning so if someone does show up they are able to turn. Also I don't think overtaking on the drivers side is allowed on a bike.