6 ms·

> There should just be separate lanes/carve out for bikes. This is highly controversial, and at best, overly simplistic. See for instance https://www.enotrans

> There should just be separate lanes/carve out for bikes. This is highly controversial, and at best, overly simplistic. See for instance https://www.enotrans.org/article/cycling-philosophies-collide-furth-versus-forrester/ https://www.enotrans.org/article/cycling-philosophies-collid... "the vehicular cycling principle" – "Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles" -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Forester_(cyclist) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Forester_(cyclist)

Symbiote 5y ago
Forrester's "share the road" vehicular cycling view from the 1960s clearly fails in every wealthy country in which it remains the default option.
- hirundo 5y ago
  Here's a good HN debate on that topic, with several current commuter cyclists participating. The result is a lot more nuanced than "clearly fails". https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19634987&p=2 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19634987&p=2 E.g. ahoy: I don't know a single cyclist who agrees with that (Forrester) statement. btrettel: I've been a transportation cyclist for roughly a decade and I agree with everything he said. Many cyclists do, particularly more experienced ones. Bike lanes can be helpful, but they are not the panacea many people make them out to be. I think the main benefit bike lanes have is increasing the number of cyclists which leads to the "safety in numbers" effect. I think far too many bike lanes are made poorly, however, and these ones seem to be less safe than if there was no bike lane.
wffurr 5y ago
I'm not sure what your link is supposed to show, but it seems to be pretty clearly in favor of separated bicycle infrastructure: "When accounting for sidewalk riding, normalized risk along road segments and intersections, and riding in the opposite direction of traffic, the results of studies arguing for shared vehicle and bicycle infrastructure suggest that dedicating right-of-way to bicycles may, in fact, improve roadway safety. There are additional, more recent studies designed to assess safety differences between mixed traffic, bike lanes, buffered bike lanes, and separated paths that show safety in separation."

Symbiote 5y ago

Forrester's "share the road" vehicular cycling view from the 1960s clearly fails in every wealthy country in which it remains the default option.

hirundo 5y ago
Here's a good HN debate on that topic, with several current commuter cyclists participating. The result is a lot more nuanced than "clearly fails". https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19634987&p=2 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19634987&p=2 E.g. ahoy: I don't know a single cyclist who agrees with that (Forrester) statement. btrettel: I've been a transportation cyclist for roughly a decade and I agree with everything he said. Many cyclists do, particularly more experienced ones. Bike lanes can be helpful, but they are not the panacea many people make them out to be. I think the main benefit bike lanes have is increasing the number of cyclists which leads to the "safety in numbers" effect. I think far too many bike lanes are made poorly, however, and these ones seem to be less safe than if there was no bike lane.

wffurr 5y ago

I'm not sure what your link is supposed to show, but it seems to be pretty clearly in favor of separated bicycle infrastructure: "When accounting for sidewalk riding, normalized risk along road segments and intersections, and riding in the opposite direction of traffic, the results of studies arguing for shared vehicle and bicycle infrastructure suggest that dedicating right-of-way to bicycles may, in fact, improve roadway safety. There are additional, more recent studies designed to assess safety differences between mixed traffic, bike lanes, buffered bike lanes, and separated paths that show safety in separation."