4 ms·
The point of the article is that bikes, by virtue of their limited speed, don't suffer the feedback loop of less density that cars do. The distance you can trav
by danhor 5y ago
The point of the article is that bikes, by virtue of their limited speed, don't suffer the feedback loop of less density that cars do. The distance you can travel by bike in half an hour is not influenced that much by infrastructure.
- newsclues 5y agoStop and go traffic is much slower than bike trails with minimal interruptions. Good bike infrastructure can make or break a commute in speed and safety
- meristohm 5y agoMy bicycle commute (and walking and running commute, depending on weather and mood) is one of the highlights of my day due in part to minimal waiting for other vehicles.
- u801e 5y agoSeparated rail or river trails are definitely a plus for bike commuting. But infrastructure parallel to roads with frequent intersections and mid-block driveways isn't really that much different than riding on the sidewalk (with all the hazards that come with it).
- _jn 5y agoThis may be true in suburban USA, but at least in European cities, sidewalks are used by pedestrians. You have to be alert riding a bike, but it’s a far cry from attempting to weave through foot traffic. The narrower roads also allow for quicker traffic light cycles, which is nicer than waiting a few minutes to cross your average suburban US arterial.
- gpm 5y agoOne summer my commute by bicycle involved a route that regularly had a certain degree of bicycle congestion, enough that at one choke point in particular we were completely saturating the road (not just the bike lane, but the car lane heading in the right direction too). In that portion my speed was probably halved, congestion definitely does have an effect at high enough volumes. If more roads in the area had bike lanes this wouldn't have happened and my commute would have been faster (and more pleasant, riding in bicycle commuter traffic is somewhat stressful since everyone wants to go at different speeds). On the other hand if the same number of people were in cars in the same amount of space traffic would definitely have been much slower.
- acomjean 5y agoI noticed on crowded bike days in the city it’s a little like being on a conveyor belt. You can try to ride a little faster but because of traffic lights and other riders there is just a speed you are going to be limited to. This is the same as driving.
- donjoe 5y agoWould you have seen congestions if infrastructure built for cars (hint: traffic lights) wouldn't have existed?
- gpm 5y agoI mean, no for two reasons. Traffic lights grouping people as you say, but also the bottle neck causing so people commuting on bikes to use this road wouldn't have existed if the other roads in the area were also designed to accommodate bikes. On the flip side, this isn't a city where a large percentage of people commuted by bike. If you turned all the people commuting by car and public transits into cyclists it wouldn't surprise me to find out there were still areas with congestion.
- u801e 5y agoInfrastructure tends to be constrained and will likely limit one's speed to the speed of the slowest cyclist ahead, since there's no room to pass. The other issue is that infrastructure doesn't take downgrades into account. So, while it can be safe to get up to speeds exceeding 20 mph (30 km/h) while in the center regular travel lane with a significant space cushion due to it's width, such speeds are hazardous with infrastructure. This means that with rolling terrain, the average speed will decrease significantly because one cannot safely travel at higher speeds on descents to make up for the time lost on ascents.