7 ms·

Both are. I've done both for a long time, forcing everyone to go at 30 km/h in a 50 zone is inconsiderate. Not as inconsiderate as not being careful around cycl

by jfabre 4y ago

Both are. I've done both for a long time, forcing everyone to go at 30 km/h in a 50 zone is inconsiderate. Not as inconsiderate as not being careful around cyclists when you drive. This looks like a system design problem to me. The needs of the cyclists don't match the needs of the drivers. This is why we are fighting over this. There has to be a solution, but I know nothing about civil engineering.

avianlyric 4y ago
There is a solution! Protected cycle lanes! Keep cycles, cars and pedestrians physically separated. Inside towns and cities we should be looking to give up road space for cars, to put in dedicated cycle infrastructure. Dedicated cycle infrastructure keeps cars and cycles separate, makes cycling safer, and most importantly more accessible and friendly. Every additional cycle on the road during rush hour is one less car. If removing a car lane reduces the capacity of a road segment by 20 cars, but causes 50 additional to swap their car for a bike, then you’ve just created an 30 cars of capacity on your road. That’s just the start, a bike lane can easily carry 10 times more people than a car lane, and requires basically zero maintenance. They don’t get pot holes because cycles weigh so little their damage to the road surface is practically unmeasurable.
- Lanolderen 4y ago
  Or cyclists can be incentivised to move to small motorcycles (pedelec if they want to stay fit) and we avoid the whole issue of converting car lanes to bicycle lanes and then reverting that decision because a traffic jam occurred and residents were not impressed, wasting money in the process ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
  - avianlyric 4y ago
    What about people that can’t drive a motorcycle, like children? Or people that can’t afford a motorcycle? Or people that have nowhere to store a motorbike (I’ll like to see you hang a motorbike on a wall)? Do we just abandon them? > we avoid the whole issue of converting car lanes to bicycle lanes and then reverting that decision because a traffic jam occurred and residents were not impressed, wasting money in the process There are huge piles of empirical evidence that shows the complete opposite of this happens. Introducing bike infrastructure, at the cost of car infrastructure, almost always reduces congestion after a short adaptation period passes. Turns out if you give people cheaper easier ways of moving a round a city or town, they’ll pick them over a car.
    - Lanolderen 4y ago
      Kids are legislatively forbidden from riding motorcycles. Just let them do AM or another form of certification for small bikes that get to 50ish kmh. It's not like they can't get to 50 with a bicycle. I'd even argue it's safer since it's easier to wear protective gear when you don't have to pedal. Affording it isn't a real issue either. (i)Second hand motorcycles can be had for really cheap since they're treated as toys in the western world. I just opened up the listings for where I live (smallish town in Germany) and there are 44 ads for working bikes under 1000$ in 25km radius of me. Some are even proper 600cc+ machines. (ii)16 brand new bikes in that same area can be bought for under 2000$. (iii)Public transport. Storage: Small bikes can be manhandled into an apartment if it's about long term storage. Short term, just park it on the street like a normal person. Put a tracker on it if you're worried. I get that it improves over time but the short term effects are what determines whether whoever implements it remains in power long enough to see that. And I'd argue still that motorcycles are way faster and therefore better at decreasing congestion than bicycles. Regarding inclusivity they are also friendlier to less fit people, especially in uneven terrain since even at my ripe age in the mid twenties I can get out of breath climbing some streets on my bicycle.
      - Fnoord 4y ago
        > Kids are legislatively forbidden from riding motorcycles. Just let them do AM or another form of certification for small bikes that get to 50ish kmh. It's not like they can't get to 50 with a bicycle. Can you explain to me how my 4 year old who can barely use her bicycle can reach 50 km/hour? I can't even do it myself on our city bike or transport bike. An electric bicycle is far more expensive (you calling 1000 USD cheap), and they are legally not allowed to go quicker than 25 km/hour. An electric transport bike new goes for 4000 EUR here (NL). Its all fucking expensive. But regardless of the latter you're out of your mind if you believe young children are able to drive 50 km/hour on a bike, let alone safely. The issue I have with electric bikes is that they often cause accidents (usually elder) on specific bike lanes. I really don't want anyone to drive more quick than 25 km/hour there. Speedbikers and sports bikers are another problem, they're inconsiderate and don't give a rat about other users of the public space.
- Eigenstate 4y ago
  How do protected cycle lanes mitigate the crash types in the article? I see how they may prevent getting rear ended or doored, but all the intersection conflict points remain and in many cases are exacerbated by the "protection." I've seen lane designs that force cyclists to pass right turning cars on the right at intersections. Often the barriers reduce visibility and tell drivers they don't have to be aware of bikes, increasing the chances for conflict. While infrastructure does need to be improved, I don't think this is a complete solution.
  - avianlyric 4y ago
    Pretty simple, cycles get their own cycle on lights at crossing, and you ban right turns on red. Right turns on red are such a stupid idea, a tiny time saving for a minority of people, but a huge increase in risk for vulnerable road users. As for branch junctions along the road, priority is given to bikes going in the direction of traffic, and you build tables across the junction, reduce junction radius, both force cars to slow down when turning into junctions, and make it clear they need to look for other road users. These are all solved problems. The Netherlands publishes an extremely well respected guide on exactly how to build people-centric road infrastructure that massively reduces collisions and road incidents. There’s no need to reinvent anything, just look at countries that have road death rates at a fraction of what the US has.
    - DonHopkins 4y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Monderman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Monderman >Hans Monderman (19 November 1945 – 7 January 2008) was a Dutch road traffic engineer and innovator. He was recognised for radically challenging the criteria used to evaluate engineering solutions for street design. His work compelled transportation planners and highway engineers to look afresh at the way people and technology relate to each other. >His design approach is the concept of "shared space", an urban design approach that seeks to minimise demarcations between vehicle traffic and pedestrians, often by removing features such as kerbs, road surface markings, traffic signs, and regulations. Monderman found that the traffic efficiency and safety improved when the street and surrounding public space was redesigned to encourage each person to negotiate their movement directly with others. Hans Monderman: Rethinking the design of streets and public space. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjBGokenEhQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjBGokenEhQ Unexpected interview in Groningen (Homage to Hans Monderman https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQASVz4xun8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQASVz4xun8 HANS MONDERMAN ON THE IMPORTANCE OF HUMAN INTERACTION https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGMFNxCJyQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGMFNxCJyQ Monderman (3of10) - Drachten Roundabout Traffic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGCE6vI5j68 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGCE6vI5j68 Monderman (5of10) - Drachten Intersection https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L39gNtsaZfI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L39gNtsaZfI Road signs suck. What if we got rid of them all? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUbsFtLkGN8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUbsFtLkGN8

by jfabre 4y ago

avianlyric 4y ago

There is a solution! Protected cycle lanes! Keep cycles, cars and pedestrians physically separated. Inside towns and cities we should be looking to give up road space for cars, to put in dedicated cycle infrastructure. Dedicated cycle infrastructure keeps cars and cycles separate, makes cycling safer, and most importantly more accessible and friendly. Every additional cycle on the road during rush hour is one less car. If removing a car lane reduces the capacity of a road segment by 20 cars, but causes 50 additional to swap their car for a bike, then you’ve just created an 30 cars of capacity on your road. That’s just the start, a bike lane can easily carry 10 times more people than a car lane, and requires basically zero maintenance. They don’t get pot holes because cycles weigh so little their damage to the road surface is practically unmeasurable.

Lanolderen 4y ago
Or cyclists can be incentivised to move to small motorcycles (pedelec if they want to stay fit) and we avoid the whole issue of converting car lanes to bicycle lanes and then reverting that decision because a traffic jam occurred and residents were not impressed, wasting money in the process ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- avianlyric 4y ago
  What about people that can’t drive a motorcycle, like children? Or people that can’t afford a motorcycle? Or people that have nowhere to store a motorbike (I’ll like to see you hang a motorbike on a wall)? Do we just abandon them? > we avoid the whole issue of converting car lanes to bicycle lanes and then reverting that decision because a traffic jam occurred and residents were not impressed, wasting money in the process There are huge piles of empirical evidence that shows the complete opposite of this happens. Introducing bike infrastructure, at the cost of car infrastructure, almost always reduces congestion after a short adaptation period passes. Turns out if you give people cheaper easier ways of moving a round a city or town, they’ll pick them over a car.
  - Lanolderen 4y ago
    Kids are legislatively forbidden from riding motorcycles. Just let them do AM or another form of certification for small bikes that get to 50ish kmh. It's not like they can't get to 50 with a bicycle. I'd even argue it's safer since it's easier to wear protective gear when you don't have to pedal. Affording it isn't a real issue either. (i)Second hand motorcycles can be had for really cheap since they're treated as toys in the western world. I just opened up the listings for where I live (smallish town in Germany) and there are 44 ads for working bikes under 1000$ in 25km radius of me. Some are even proper 600cc+ machines. (ii)16 brand new bikes in that same area can be bought for under 2000$. (iii)Public transport. Storage: Small bikes can be manhandled into an apartment if it's about long term storage. Short term, just park it on the street like a normal person. Put a tracker on it if you're worried. I get that it improves over time but the short term effects are what determines whether whoever implements it remains in power long enough to see that. And I'd argue still that motorcycles are way faster and therefore better at decreasing congestion than bicycles. Regarding inclusivity they are also friendlier to less fit people, especially in uneven terrain since even at my ripe age in the mid twenties I can get out of breath climbing some streets on my bicycle.
    - Fnoord 4y ago
      > Kids are legislatively forbidden from riding motorcycles. Just let them do AM or another form of certification for small bikes that get to 50ish kmh. It's not like they can't get to 50 with a bicycle. Can you explain to me how my 4 year old who can barely use her bicycle can reach 50 km/hour? I can't even do it myself on our city bike or transport bike. An electric bicycle is far more expensive (you calling 1000 USD cheap), and they are legally not allowed to go quicker than 25 km/hour. An electric transport bike new goes for 4000 EUR here (NL). Its all fucking expensive. But regardless of the latter you're out of your mind if you believe young children are able to drive 50 km/hour on a bike, let alone safely. The issue I have with electric bikes is that they often cause accidents (usually elder) on specific bike lanes. I really don't want anyone to drive more quick than 25 km/hour there. Speedbikers and sports bikers are another problem, they're inconsiderate and don't give a rat about other users of the public space.
Eigenstate 4y ago
How do protected cycle lanes mitigate the crash types in the article? I see how they may prevent getting rear ended or doored, but all the intersection conflict points remain and in many cases are exacerbated by the "protection." I've seen lane designs that force cyclists to pass right turning cars on the right at intersections. Often the barriers reduce visibility and tell drivers they don't have to be aware of bikes, increasing the chances for conflict. While infrastructure does need to be improved, I don't think this is a complete solution.
- avianlyric 4y ago
  Pretty simple, cycles get their own cycle on lights at crossing, and you ban right turns on red. Right turns on red are such a stupid idea, a tiny time saving for a minority of people, but a huge increase in risk for vulnerable road users. As for branch junctions along the road, priority is given to bikes going in the direction of traffic, and you build tables across the junction, reduce junction radius, both force cars to slow down when turning into junctions, and make it clear they need to look for other road users. These are all solved problems. The Netherlands publishes an extremely well respected guide on exactly how to build people-centric road infrastructure that massively reduces collisions and road incidents. There’s no need to reinvent anything, just look at countries that have road death rates at a fraction of what the US has.
  - DonHopkins 4y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Monderman https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Monderman >Hans Monderman (19 November 1945 – 7 January 2008) was a Dutch road traffic engineer and innovator. He was recognised for radically challenging the criteria used to evaluate engineering solutions for street design. His work compelled transportation planners and highway engineers to look afresh at the way people and technology relate to each other. >His design approach is the concept of "shared space", an urban design approach that seeks to minimise demarcations between vehicle traffic and pedestrians, often by removing features such as kerbs, road surface markings, traffic signs, and regulations. Monderman found that the traffic efficiency and safety improved when the street and surrounding public space was redesigned to encourage each person to negotiate their movement directly with others. Hans Monderman: Rethinking the design of streets and public space. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjBGokenEhQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bjBGokenEhQ Unexpected interview in Groningen (Homage to Hans Monderman https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQASVz4xun8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQASVz4xun8 HANS MONDERMAN ON THE IMPORTANCE OF HUMAN INTERACTION https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGMFNxCJyQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqGMFNxCJyQ Monderman (3of10) - Drachten Roundabout Traffic https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGCE6vI5j68 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGCE6vI5j68 Monderman (5of10) - Drachten Intersection https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L39gNtsaZfI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L39gNtsaZfI Road signs suck. What if we got rid of them all? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUbsFtLkGN8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUbsFtLkGN8