4 ms·
69% doesn’t seem like the kinds of gains you’d hope for. If you’re going from unsafe infrastructure to protected bike paths I’d want to see a tripling of riders
by TimPC 4y ago
69% doesn’t seem like the kinds of gains you’d hope for. If you’re going from unsafe infrastructure to protected bike paths I’d want to see a tripling of ridership.
- zeroonetwothree 4y agoExactly. Before it must have been close to zero so we would expect a huge increase. Seems underwhelming
- anamexis 4y agoIt was not close to zero before 2007. For quite a long time, Minneapolis has a solid set of bike paths and a good bicycle culture to accompany it - all along the Mississippi river, around the numerous lakes in the city, and also the Midtown Greenway, an off-grade rail trail that runs all the way from the river to the lakes, which opened in 2000. In addition to several other bicycle commuter paths that predate this change. These new bike lanes were the city doubling down on being a bicycle-friendly city.
- alistairSH 4y agoI didn't see any mention of starting numbers, at least not in the summary/abstract. I believe Minneapolis has been bike-friendly for quite some time, so the starting point was probably not zero.
- rocketbop 4y agoWithout knowing the initial number of regular users and the initial number of potential users the percentage doesn't tell you much, not sure what is special about a 200% increase in isolation.