6 ms·

Hear me out: tunnels for cyclists. If tunnels are cheap, and I'm guessing small tunnels are cheaper than big tunnels, then we should have tunnels for cyclists -

Hear me out: tunnels for cyclists. If tunnels are cheap, and I'm guessing small tunnels are cheaper than big tunnels, then we should have tunnels for cyclists - maybe even right under the sidewalks.

syndicatedjelly 3y ago
This is pretty common in Denver. There are lots of pedestrian/bicycle-only tunnels under many main roads just in my area. They recently spent a few million dollars improving an intersection nearby, and in the process added another cyclist tunnel underneath. It makes me really happy to see the city prioritize cyclists.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- wolverine876 3y ago
  The tunnels are ways to cross the road - rather than a stoplight and crosswalk - or they follow the road and are essentially the bike lane?
  - drivers99 3y ago
    My guess would be underpasses like along the Cherry Creek trail, but I wouldn't call those tunnels. It's also not very usable when it floods. Skip to 8:50 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2z76dDcT8c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2z76dDcT8c
    - syndicatedjelly 3y ago
      Up in Westminster/Broomfield, there are several actual bike tunnels that go underneath a main road e.g. on Big Dry Creek bike trail underneath Wadsworth Blvd. The tunnels do get a bit wet/impassable if it has rained or snowed heavily, or if the nearby creek is running heavily (which is rare). But people dont typically bike in downpours. It doesn’t really matter, the point is that cyclists are totally separated from car traffic.
  - syndicatedjelly 3y ago
    Yep, usually underneath a freeway, railroad, or major roadway https://cloudfront.traillink.com/photos/big-dry-creek-trail-(westminster)_172121_sc.jpg https://cloudfront.traillink.com/photos/big-dry-creek-trail-... You can bike along Big Dry Creek Trail for about 10-15 miles without ever having to interact with car traffic. And it runs right across a major suburb of Denver. I actually use it almost every day to commute for errands
piva00 3y ago
Cycling in tunnels would be incredibly depressing if it's long stretches of a route.
- givemeethekeys 3y ago
  I'll bike in a tunnel all day long before risking it on public roads anywhere in America. At least for any kind of commute.
- bluGill 3y ago
  I'm on my bike to get someplace, not to enjoy the ride. I know my route to work. I know the alternates as well where they exist. There is no longer anything new to see so I'm not looking (except to watch for cars of course)
  - piva00 3y ago
    I'm also on my bike almost daily to get someplace, doesn't mean I don't enjoy the added benefit of scenery change, trees, being able to take a detour if I'm bored out of my mind of the same route, etc. Crossing the bridges in Stockholm always give me a lot of joy overlooking the water, seeing the city. Being underground for most of my commute would be utterly depressing, I enjoy biking to see the world, not to just teleport to a place.
notatoad 3y ago
why though? building good cycling infrastructure at grade just isn't that difficult, other than finding the political will to make it happen. it doesn't take up a lot of space, it's cheap, and when it's at grade it provides easy access for cyclists to stop at all the shops or other destinations along their route. the biggest impediment to cycling infrastructure is a social perception that cycling is elitist, and that spending money on it is a waste. if we can't even fund an 3m wide strip of asphalt or a couple of jersey walls to protect a bike lane, how are you going to find the money for tunnels?
- ta1243 3y ago
  At grade is awful, stopping everywhere. That includes in Amsterdam. Benefits of tunnels would be * No need to stop * Protection from elements (I for one would be far happier riding in summer if it wasn't sweltering, or in winter if it wasn't bitterly cold and rain) * Mostly flat tunnels (No hills to climb up and over) * Certainty that the route won't be removed for some reason Of course would never find the money.
  - thimkerbell 3y ago
    Eyes on the street.
- wolverine876 3y ago
  While I support the infrastructure, I don't entirely agree with the analysis: On city roads, a lane is very valuable real estate. As a simple example, taking a lane out of a busy NYC street can have a big effect on car traffic. > the biggest impediment to cycling infrastructure is a social perception that cycling is elitist, and that spending money on it is a waste. IME it is elitist, unfortunately. I see mostly delivery people and 'elites' cycling in the city, and the cycling clubs advocate for a lot of infrastructure but they don't make much effort to bring people into cycling. The infastructure is highly underutilized - it looks like those cycling clubs insisted on building that infrastructure just for their small membership. It's a real risk to the infrastructure: Eventually other people are going to notice and say, 'why are we bothering with it' and 'let's use the mostly unused space for this other project'.
bombcar 3y ago
And then we blow wind down the tunnels, one in each direction, so they get a speed boost!
- diarrhea 3y ago
  Real cyclists know if there’s any wind at all, it’s never tailwind.
  - antod 3y ago
    Yeah I felt that one. But it actually makes sense. Due to the apparent wind (adding the vectors of wind and bike velocities together), and drag being proportional to the square of velocity, you will seldom feel a tailwind and headwinds will be amplified. And this spread widens the faster you ride, even turning lighter tailwinds into a headwind.
wolverine876 3y ago
One great benefit of cycling is exercising in the fresh air, seeing the world, and connecting with the people around you.
- jacobgkau 3y ago
  > connecting with the people around you. For the 0.5 seconds you're next to them before you pass them or they pass you?
  - wolverine876 3y ago
    That is plenty of time to smile, say hello, say excuse me, have a face-to-face interaction. You wave at the child staring at you, you make appropriate warm sounds toward the dog barking with its tail wagging. You all react together to the funny sight, to the ambulance, to the sun in your eyes. You also connect by just seeing what people are doing; you are out there with them. You have time and visibility to see the whole world, 360 deg x 180 deg. Also you stop, maybe at a light, maybe to look at something, and see and talk to people there. You work out a traffic issue by talking and smiling, face to face, not by honking and banging on your dashboard. You see friends and say hello. You see somebody do something nice and say 'thank you'.
    - jacobgkau 3y ago
      You have an extremely romanticized idea of human interaction.
      - wolverine876 3y ago
        It's not romanticized, I do it every day. Not everyone responds but that's fine; it still has an effect, and many do respond. People assume it's not possible, that others are paranoid or bad-willed, and so treat others accordingly or at least don't try. Just try; it works fine. You need to read people and respect them - just basic primate social skill: obviously, some people are busy, upset, etc. and don't want to be bothered. But just trust people are good-willed and friendly, treat them accordingly, and you'll get plenty of good responses. It depends on your mood too; it comes through; if you are angry and trying to be happy, people can sense it - we all have years of experience reading others. Even crazier is that people will actually argue against it, insisting it can't be true, objecting to anyone doing it or trying it. You have to wonder what that's about; that, I think, is very revealing about our society and some of its social trends.
debacle 3y ago
I'll do you one better. You could contour the floor of the tunnel, texture the walls properly, and add some fans and create a quasi-hyperloop for cyclists.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
karaterobot 3y ago
I'm a big fan of turning some existing roads into cyclist and local access only roads, and then discouraging extended biking on other roads. Tunnels could certainly be part of that. In general, I don't think it's ever going to be safe for bikes and cars to share the same roadway any more than it would be for cars and pedestrians to travel on the same surfaces. For short distances, sure, but not on big arterial routes where everybody is at war with everyone else all the time.
cousin_it 3y ago
Hear me out: elevated, enclosed cycleways with transparent walls and ceilings. - Much cheaper to build than underground tunnels. - Cyclists get a great view of the surroundings. - Can be horizontal regardless of terrain, so that cycling is effortless. - Can be climate-controlled, so people can bike all year round in any weather. - Don't cause noise problems like trains or cars. - And of course make cyclists 100% safe from cars. I just thought of this idea and it's so amazing that I'm not sure why it's not everywhere.
- com2kid 3y ago
  > Hear me out: elevated, enclosed cycleways with transparent walls and ceilings. Costs a fortune for window washers and graffiti removal. They would also end up being used by squatters and for dumping trash. Indeed, with how bad the housing crisis is in America, plenty of cities are having problems building any sort of public structure that has a roof on it...
  - cousin_it 3y ago
    Yeah, housing is definitely a bigger problem. I was thinking about it for some time, it seems the root of the problem is that rich homeowners try to prop up the value of their homes, by lobbying to stop new housing construction nearby. Basically cities want to grow, but existing homes act as a brake. If that theory is true, maybe one possible solution is to pay rich folks to get out of the way. The city can offer to buy their land, tear down their home, build an apartment building in its place, and pay them a cut of all future rental income from that building. This way they won't feel like selling now is missing out on future increases in land value. They can use the income to live comfortably somewhere else, and the city becomes free to build up.
toast0 3y ago
The problem with segregating transportation is you then have different levels of access. If I bike on the street, I can stop at any location that addresses the street, same as any other street user. If I bike in the tunnel, there's not likely a ramp up for every business. It gets worse when you don't have a bike tunnel on every street, because then I need to go out of my way to get to destinations off the tunnel street. And all the street users will yell at me to get back in my tunnel.
- givemeethekeys 3y ago
  I don't see tunnels as a way to ban cyclists from the street. I think of it as a safer alternative for the cyclist. Dryer too and less windy. As much as I'd like for drivers to be alert, they just aren't. Yeah, I'm no city or urban planner - I can't solve every problem. It was a thought and I think there's some merit to it.

Hear me out: tunnels for cyclists. If tunnels are cheap, and I'm guessing small tunnels are cheaper than big tunnels, then we should have tunnels for cyclists - maybe even right under the sidewalks.

syndicatedjelly 3y ago

This is pretty common in Denver. There are lots of pedestrian/bicycle-only tunnels under many main roads just in my area. They recently spent a few million dollars improving an intersection nearby, and in the process added another cyclist tunnel underneath. It makes me really happy to see the city prioritize cyclists.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
wolverine876 3y ago
The tunnels are ways to cross the road - rather than a stoplight and crosswalk - or they follow the road and are essentially the bike lane?
- drivers99 3y ago
  My guess would be underpasses like along the Cherry Creek trail, but I wouldn't call those tunnels. It's also not very usable when it floods. Skip to 8:50 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2z76dDcT8c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2z76dDcT8c
  - syndicatedjelly 3y ago
    Up in Westminster/Broomfield, there are several actual bike tunnels that go underneath a main road e.g. on Big Dry Creek bike trail underneath Wadsworth Blvd. The tunnels do get a bit wet/impassable if it has rained or snowed heavily, or if the nearby creek is running heavily (which is rare). But people dont typically bike in downpours. It doesn’t really matter, the point is that cyclists are totally separated from car traffic.
- syndicatedjelly 3y ago
  Yep, usually underneath a freeway, railroad, or major roadway https://cloudfront.traillink.com/photos/big-dry-creek-trail-(westminster)_172121_sc.jpg https://cloudfront.traillink.com/photos/big-dry-creek-trail-... You can bike along Big Dry Creek Trail for about 10-15 miles without ever having to interact with car traffic. And it runs right across a major suburb of Denver. I actually use it almost every day to commute for errands

piva00 3y ago

Cycling in tunnels would be incredibly depressing if it's long stretches of a route.

givemeethekeys 3y ago
I'll bike in a tunnel all day long before risking it on public roads anywhere in America. At least for any kind of commute.
bluGill 3y ago
I'm on my bike to get someplace, not to enjoy the ride. I know my route to work. I know the alternates as well where they exist. There is no longer anything new to see so I'm not looking (except to watch for cars of course)
- piva00 3y ago
  I'm also on my bike almost daily to get someplace, doesn't mean I don't enjoy the added benefit of scenery change, trees, being able to take a detour if I'm bored out of my mind of the same route, etc. Crossing the bridges in Stockholm always give me a lot of joy overlooking the water, seeing the city. Being underground for most of my commute would be utterly depressing, I enjoy biking to see the world, not to just teleport to a place.

notatoad 3y ago

why though? building good cycling infrastructure at grade just isn't that difficult, other than finding the political will to make it happen. it doesn't take up a lot of space, it's cheap, and when it's at grade it provides easy access for cyclists to stop at all the shops or other destinations along their route. the biggest impediment to cycling infrastructure is a social perception that cycling is elitist, and that spending money on it is a waste. if we can't even fund an 3m wide strip of asphalt or a couple of jersey walls to protect a bike lane, how are you going to find the money for tunnels?

ta1243 3y ago
At grade is awful, stopping everywhere. That includes in Amsterdam. Benefits of tunnels would be * No need to stop * Protection from elements (I for one would be far happier riding in summer if it wasn't sweltering, or in winter if it wasn't bitterly cold and rain) * Mostly flat tunnels (No hills to climb up and over) * Certainty that the route won't be removed for some reason Of course would never find the money.
- thimkerbell 3y ago
  Eyes on the street.
wolverine876 3y ago
While I support the infrastructure, I don't entirely agree with the analysis: On city roads, a lane is very valuable real estate. As a simple example, taking a lane out of a busy NYC street can have a big effect on car traffic. > the biggest impediment to cycling infrastructure is a social perception that cycling is elitist, and that spending money on it is a waste. IME it is elitist, unfortunately. I see mostly delivery people and 'elites' cycling in the city, and the cycling clubs advocate for a lot of infrastructure but they don't make much effort to bring people into cycling. The infastructure is highly underutilized - it looks like those cycling clubs insisted on building that infrastructure just for their small membership. It's a real risk to the infrastructure: Eventually other people are going to notice and say, 'why are we bothering with it' and 'let's use the mostly unused space for this other project'.

bombcar 3y ago

And then we blow wind down the tunnels, one in each direction, so they get a speed boost!

diarrhea 3y ago
Real cyclists know if there’s any wind at all, it’s never tailwind.
- antod 3y ago
  Yeah I felt that one. But it actually makes sense. Due to the apparent wind (adding the vectors of wind and bike velocities together), and drag being proportional to the square of velocity, you will seldom feel a tailwind and headwinds will be amplified. And this spread widens the faster you ride, even turning lighter tailwinds into a headwind.

wolverine876 3y ago

One great benefit of cycling is exercising in the fresh air, seeing the world, and connecting with the people around you.

jacobgkau 3y ago
> connecting with the people around you. For the 0.5 seconds you're next to them before you pass them or they pass you?
- wolverine876 3y ago
  That is plenty of time to smile, say hello, say excuse me, have a face-to-face interaction. You wave at the child staring at you, you make appropriate warm sounds toward the dog barking with its tail wagging. You all react together to the funny sight, to the ambulance, to the sun in your eyes. You also connect by just seeing what people are doing; you are out there with them. You have time and visibility to see the whole world, 360 deg x 180 deg. Also you stop, maybe at a light, maybe to look at something, and see and talk to people there. You work out a traffic issue by talking and smiling, face to face, not by honking and banging on your dashboard. You see friends and say hello. You see somebody do something nice and say 'thank you'.
  - jacobgkau 3y ago
    You have an extremely romanticized idea of human interaction.
    - wolverine876 3y ago
      It's not romanticized, I do it every day. Not everyone responds but that's fine; it still has an effect, and many do respond. People assume it's not possible, that others are paranoid or bad-willed, and so treat others accordingly or at least don't try. Just try; it works fine. You need to read people and respect them - just basic primate social skill: obviously, some people are busy, upset, etc. and don't want to be bothered. But just trust people are good-willed and friendly, treat them accordingly, and you'll get plenty of good responses. It depends on your mood too; it comes through; if you are angry and trying to be happy, people can sense it - we all have years of experience reading others. Even crazier is that people will actually argue against it, insisting it can't be true, objecting to anyone doing it or trying it. You have to wonder what that's about; that, I think, is very revealing about our society and some of its social trends.

debacle 3y ago

I'll do you one better. You could contour the floor of the tunnel, texture the walls properly, and add some fans and create a quasi-hyperloop for cyclists.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

karaterobot 3y ago

I'm a big fan of turning some existing roads into cyclist and local access only roads, and then discouraging extended biking on other roads. Tunnels could certainly be part of that. In general, I don't think it's ever going to be safe for bikes and cars to share the same roadway any more than it would be for cars and pedestrians to travel on the same surfaces. For short distances, sure, but not on big arterial routes where everybody is at war with everyone else all the time.

cousin_it 3y ago

Hear me out: elevated, enclosed cycleways with transparent walls and ceilings. - Much cheaper to build than underground tunnels. - Cyclists get a great view of the surroundings. - Can be horizontal regardless of terrain, so that cycling is effortless. - Can be climate-controlled, so people can bike all year round in any weather. - Don't cause noise problems like trains or cars. - And of course make cyclists 100% safe from cars. I just thought of this idea and it's so amazing that I'm not sure why it's not everywhere.

com2kid 3y ago
> Hear me out: elevated, enclosed cycleways with transparent walls and ceilings. Costs a fortune for window washers and graffiti removal. They would also end up being used by squatters and for dumping trash. Indeed, with how bad the housing crisis is in America, plenty of cities are having problems building any sort of public structure that has a roof on it...
- cousin_it 3y ago
  Yeah, housing is definitely a bigger problem. I was thinking about it for some time, it seems the root of the problem is that rich homeowners try to prop up the value of their homes, by lobbying to stop new housing construction nearby. Basically cities want to grow, but existing homes act as a brake. If that theory is true, maybe one possible solution is to pay rich folks to get out of the way. The city can offer to buy their land, tear down their home, build an apartment building in its place, and pay them a cut of all future rental income from that building. This way they won't feel like selling now is missing out on future increases in land value. They can use the income to live comfortably somewhere else, and the city becomes free to build up.

toast0 3y ago

The problem with segregating transportation is you then have different levels of access. If I bike on the street, I can stop at any location that addresses the street, same as any other street user. If I bike in the tunnel, there's not likely a ramp up for every business. It gets worse when you don't have a bike tunnel on every street, because then I need to go out of my way to get to destinations off the tunnel street. And all the street users will yell at me to get back in my tunnel.

givemeethekeys 3y ago
I don't see tunnels as a way to ban cyclists from the street. I think of it as a safer alternative for the cyclist. Dryer too and less windy. As much as I'd like for drivers to be alert, they just aren't. Yeah, I'm no city or urban planner - I can't solve every problem. It was a thought and I think there's some merit to it.