4 ms·

Counterpoint: The picture you linked doesn't look at all like a 'reasonable balance' to me, but more like they just slapped some paint on the crossing and calle

Counterpoint: The picture you linked doesn't look at all like a 'reasonable balance' to me, but more like they just slapped some paint on the crossing and called it a day. In the Netherlands, there would in general be physical separation between cycling and car infrastructure. Examples: https://publicaties.rekenkamer.amsterdam.nl/fietsvriendelijke-kruispuntenbestuurlijk-rapport/image.jpg https://publicaties.rekenkamer.amsterdam.nl/fietsvriendelijk... https://jorrevannieuwenhuyze.files.wordpress.com/2018/11/screenshot-from-2018-11-04-23-33-34.png https://jorrevannieuwenhuyze.files.wordpress.com/2018/11/scr... https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5717/23592200220_ae52835ed4_o.jpg https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5717/23592200220_ae52835ed4_o... Even in cases without physical separation, there would still be separate cycling lanes, so that cyclists do not have to share a lane with much faster and larger motor vehicles. Examples: https://gratistheorie.nl/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/fietsstrook-1.jpg https://gratistheorie.nl/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/fietsstr... https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/eb/Fietsstrook_Herenweg_Oudorp.jpg/800px-Fietsstrook_Herenweg_Oudorp.jpg https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/eb/Fi... Are there roads with no separate cycling infrastructure? Certainly, but the urban landscape tends to be designed such that motor traffic is discouraged from using such roads. In contrast, the picture you linked looks frankly horrid for cyclists, by Dutch standards. The road looks to be busy with both cars and buses, but there doesn't appear to be any substantial cycling infrastructure present, except for a singular buffer. In general, many Dutch people (including myself) would be terrified of cycling on London's roads.

throwaway22032 5y ago
> In contrast, the picture you linked looks frankly horrid for cyclists, by Dutch standards. Yes, I did in fact explicitly called the Netherlands out as an extreme example. Cycling in London is more catered for than in the US and harder than in the Netherlands.
- Tijdreiziger 5y ago
  Sure, but I would argue that if the goal is to reduce car dependence (not just for some cycling enthusiasts, but among the general population), separate cycle lanes are a must. After all, to lure drivers out of their cars, cycling must not only be minimally feasible, but actually attractive (i.e. safe and convenient). Consider also the fact that Dutch cycling infrastructure hasn't always existed: it's a result of decades of focused policy. For example, consider this road (in front of busy Den Haag HS railway station) in the '80s vs. now: https://www.denhaagfietst.nl/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/header-image-stationsplein-1440x450.jpg https://www.denhaagfietst.nl/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/head... On the other hand, London compensates for its lack of cycling infrastructure with its excellent transit, which is commendable.
  - throwaway22032 5y ago
    I think this is probably a better top line comment on this thread. I don't think that London is car dependent. Most of the US is, large parts of the UK are including many of our cities. My argument is that London is a happy middle ground where you can cycle, or get the tube, or ride the bus, or use a car, and all of those work and that's fine. If anything the car is probably quite a bit less convenient than the others, mainly due to the geometry issues outlined in the article, and you have to really want to drive for the sake of it. Though it's probably a good way to frame it. Car dependence is bad, having cars is not. My street is full of them yet I also live ten minutes away from a few different tube lines. Best of both worlds and this means I use my car maybe 50-100 times a year instead of 500+. I have another friend. From my house at this time, I can cycle there in ~20 mins, drive in ~25-30, get the bus in ~55, the train in ~45mins or walk in ~1h20min. Most of the time I cycle. So am I cycling dependent then? No, I'm just choosing the best option! It'd be annoying if it was gotten rid of out of some quest just to remove cycling because someone didn't like cycling or whatever.

throwaway22032 5y ago

> In contrast, the picture you linked looks frankly horrid for cyclists, by Dutch standards. Yes, I did in fact explicitly called the Netherlands out as an extreme example. Cycling in London is more catered for than in the US and harder than in the Netherlands.

Tijdreiziger 5y ago
Sure, but I would argue that if the goal is to reduce car dependence (not just for some cycling enthusiasts, but among the general population), separate cycle lanes are a must. After all, to lure drivers out of their cars, cycling must not only be minimally feasible, but actually attractive (i.e. safe and convenient). Consider also the fact that Dutch cycling infrastructure hasn't always existed: it's a result of decades of focused policy. For example, consider this road (in front of busy Den Haag HS railway station) in the '80s vs. now: https://www.denhaagfietst.nl/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/header-image-stationsplein-1440x450.jpg https://www.denhaagfietst.nl/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/head... On the other hand, London compensates for its lack of cycling infrastructure with its excellent transit, which is commendable.
- throwaway22032 5y ago
  I think this is probably a better top line comment on this thread. I don't think that London is car dependent. Most of the US is, large parts of the UK are including many of our cities. My argument is that London is a happy middle ground where you can cycle, or get the tube, or ride the bus, or use a car, and all of those work and that's fine. If anything the car is probably quite a bit less convenient than the others, mainly due to the geometry issues outlined in the article, and you have to really want to drive for the sake of it. Though it's probably a good way to frame it. Car dependence is bad, having cars is not. My street is full of them yet I also live ten minutes away from a few different tube lines. Best of both worlds and this means I use my car maybe 50-100 times a year instead of 500+. I have another friend. From my house at this time, I can cycle there in ~20 mins, drive in ~25-30, get the bus in ~55, the train in ~45mins or walk in ~1h20min. Most of the time I cycle. So am I cycling dependent then? No, I'm just choosing the best option! It'd be annoying if it was gotten rid of out of some quest just to remove cycling because someone didn't like cycling or whatever.