3 ms·

> Usually they get put there because of it; a quiet residential street doesn't need nearly as much intervention to be good for cycling, so they don't really bot

by bkor 7y ago

> Usually they get put there because of it; a quiet residential street doesn't need nearly as much intervention to be good for cycling, so they don't really bother with it. In my view (I'm Dutch), every road and intersection needs to be built with pedestrians and cyclists in mind. You might even consider another mode, as electric bikes and similar can be quite a bit quicker than bikes, but slower than cars. Alternatively, let's say everything is built for pedestrians and cyclists. Then cars just have to "make do" and only in busy roads you make it safe for everyone. That's considered crazy but exactly the case in many countries for both pedestrians and cyclists. Easy example: try walking a few blocks in various cities. How long do you have to wait for traffic lights? Now try the same in The Netherlands. The wait in other countries is often insane (1-2 minutes).

maxerickson 7y ago
The Netherlands has done a great job investing in infrastructure, but it's not really a typical place. Even when you include all the land set aside for farming and nature, the population density is very high. The region here is about the same physical size and has ~300,000 people. Dedicated infrastructure is often helpful, but there's not the resources or justification to build it everywhere.
- mumblemumble 7y ago
  As density goes up, the need for specific infrastructure goes up, but you don't have to get as intense about it as the Netherlands does to create an environment that's safe and pleasant for cyclists and pedestrians. Montréal, for example, is about as dense as any other large North American city (which is to say, not very), but still does a great job without, from what I can tell, any serious expenditure of resources on physical infrastructure. There are a few physically separated bike lanes, but mostly the city just focuses on calming down the traffic: More one-way streets, left turns permitted at fewer intersections, and a ban on turning right at a red light go a long way toward making the city's streets more pleasant for everyone. I even find it's more pleasant to drive there than it is in my city.

by bkor 7y ago

maxerickson 7y ago

The Netherlands has done a great job investing in infrastructure, but it's not really a typical place. Even when you include all the land set aside for farming and nature, the population density is very high. The region here is about the same physical size and has ~300,000 people. Dedicated infrastructure is often helpful, but there's not the resources or justification to build it everywhere.

mumblemumble 7y ago
As density goes up, the need for specific infrastructure goes up, but you don't have to get as intense about it as the Netherlands does to create an environment that's safe and pleasant for cyclists and pedestrians. Montréal, for example, is about as dense as any other large North American city (which is to say, not very), but still does a great job without, from what I can tell, any serious expenditure of resources on physical infrastructure. There are a few physically separated bike lanes, but mostly the city just focuses on calming down the traffic: More one-way streets, left turns permitted at fewer intersections, and a ban on turning right at a red light go a long way toward making the city's streets more pleasant for everyone. I even find it's more pleasant to drive there than it is in my city.