4 ms·
Do bike lanes cause more traffic congestion? What the research says
- aspenmayer 2y agoTitle edited for length: Do bike lanes really cause more traffic congestion? Here's what the research says https://archive.is/OIX0u https://archive.is/OIX0u
- Scoundreller 2y agoCBC doesn’t paywall
- aspenmayer 2y agoGood to know! I add archive links to my submissions and others that I come across on HN that I think could benefit from an archive, as a courtesy and to keep the thread clear of low-hanging fruit drive-by complaints about interstitials, pop-ups, and other distractions or annoyances that archive links sometimes avoid, so that discussion and efforts can flow more freely, sooner. It's easier sometimes just to archive everything, just for uniformity and posterity.
- Out_of_Characte 2y agoClicking links on HN can cause websites to go down so having an archive is really appreciated.
- aspenmayer 2y agoThis is a good point! By the time you need an archive, it may already be too late to make one. Don't delay; archive today.
- cratermoon 2y agoBetteridge's Law applies.
- slau 2y agoThe only case where bike paths do generate congestion is when you add them to roundabouts. This is done atrociously in Denmark, effectively negating all benefits of roundabouts—-most likely the reason there are barely any roundabouts in agglomerations. There is one example in particular (the one between Ørestads Boulevard and Grønjordsvej for any locals reading this). Cycles have right of way, which prevents cars from exiting the roundabout smoothly. At rush hour, this very quickly generates massive queues (in comparison with the amount of traffic), and can sometimes get completely gridlocked.
- DemocracyFTW2 2y agoGranting anyone—busses, streetcars, pedestrians, bicycles—priority over CARS is verboten right, because that 'blocks traffic'.
- DiggyJohnson 2y agoYou are being snarky. GPs point is literally that the main benefits of a traffic circle - safety and uninterrupted flow - are negatives by how the roundabout is shared with bikes… thus it could have been a different style of intersection if the plan was to share with bikes.
- DemocracyFTW2 2y agoI'm being snarky because I believe that giving traffic other than cars priority at crossings and in roundabouts is the way to go. I live on a busy city street; traffic has become worse and worse and it has become ever more difficult to cross the street. This has in recent years been alleviated by two means: some unmarked crossings with a traffic island between the lanes, meaning now you have a relatively safe spot that allows you to cross while paying attention to one direction at a time. The other is a zebra crossing where cars have to stop for crossing pedestrians. The latter works very well and I much prefer it to the traffic islands and to the traffic lights that are further down the street. And yes the cars (and cyclists) have to stop for pedestrians, but that is intentional: yield to the weaker one. Besides traffic has become so congested overall that it's not like there's any measurable time lost for the car driver, and who ever accounted for the endless waiting times that pedestrians have to endure at traffic light crossings when walking the city? In any event the daily traffic jam is definitely not caused by bicycles or pedestrians, with or without priority given to them—it is 100% caused by cars.
- atoav 2y agoLiving in a city it doesn't surprise me at all that traffic is better if there are more options to get where you want. Where I live the bicycle is the fastest way to get anywhere within a 10 km radius and especially during rush hour. But it is not enough to count the meters of bicycle infrastructure — it is also important to know how far you can go on it without being faced with situations where you have to ride on the street. What also matgers is the quality of the infrastracture, with lanes with a paint seperation and bicycle paths on walkways being the worst and separate infrastructure with hard barriers being the best. I wish anybody would know the joy of cycling in the Netherlands or in Kopenhagen, it is truly a good form of transportation that just requires the infrastructure to be good.
- withinboredom 2y agoSame. Since moving to the Netherlands, I have yet to find a reason to purchase a car. For some things, I will rent a car for a day or two, but mostly, there is no reason to own one here.
- k99x55 2y agoCycle infrastructure needs to be continuous, feel safe to ride, and exist where people actually go to, not near the riverside. Build them and they will come. Cycle infra is not only cycle lanes. Cycle lanes are needed only where cars move fast (>30kmh). What is even more important is traffic calming in residential streets. LTNs, modal filters etc. Build for people, not cars.
- zolbrek 2y ago>Build for people, not cars. Do you mean build for pedestrians and cyclists, not motorists?
- david-gpu 2y agoThey mean building infrastructure that is able to sustain more trips per hour while also reducing the risk of deadly collisions, noise and air pollution. By providing convenient and safe infrastructure for people who walk, take transit and bike around we gain safer more pleasant neighborhoods that also allow more people to get around in their neighborhood.
- globular-toast 2y agoCongestion is caused by cars, not the roads. Carbrain is a real thing.
- hulitu 2y ago> Congestion is caused by cars, not the roads. Carbrain is a real thing. Always "the other" are to blame. And talking about "Carbrain": people are "thought" in school to not be interested about how things work. And this is the result.
- DemocracyFTW2 2y agoThere being too many cars is a fact, there being too much money being spent to built infrastructure for cars only to the detriment of alternatives—rail, busses, bikes—is also a fact. Blaming cars is not blaming the 'other', it is pointing at the culprit.
- Shaanie 2y agoI believe you may be conflating opinion with fact, unless you add some qualifier like "based on potential throughput" or some such.
- DemocracyFTW2 2y agoHow many more decades of forced-to-own-a-car policy do you need? How many more suburban and rural areas in Europe and the US that had at some point decent public transport that they don't have now do you need? How many more kilometers of noisy highways cutting through the landscape and the urban space do you need? How many price hikes in public transport paired with impoverished services do you need? How many tens of thousands more miles of disused railroad tracks do you need before opinion becomes fact?
- globular-toast 2y agoIt's not "the other". I own a car and drive it regularly. My WV Golf (which is basically a "small car" nowadays) is huge and unwieldy. It uses up more space than my office, it doesn't respond to "excuse me" and it can't even move sideways. When I place it on a road it blocks that road. People don't block roads.
- david-gpu 2y agoEven if they did, since they allow more people to move around town, wouldn't that be a net win? Every person on a bike is one fewer car on the road; less danger to others, less noise, less air pollution. By disincentivicing car use, fewer people will choose to drive, which is a win for everybody outside the vehicle.
- jamil7 2y agoResearch really doesn't matter if policies are increasingly determined by culture wars. While major capitals are catching up to Denmark and the Netherlands, Kai Wegner in Berlin is busy cancelling bike and pedestrian infrastructure plans while drummning up antagonism between drivers and cyclists.
- zolbrek 2y agoOn the other hand, in Berlin you also get entire blocks threatened with being forced to move out because the "temporary" covid-era bike path which never went away causes problems for the fire department in case of an emergency evacuation. https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/news/streit-um-radwege-in-der-kantstrasse-muessen-die-bewohner-ausziehen-li.2264960 https://www.berliner-zeitung.de/news/streit-um-radwege-in-de... (Article in German)
- okr 2y agoYeah, current cities are not built to maintain all possible modes of transportation. And so you had a short interruption of a city favouring bikes and causing all kind of chaos, while everyone else had to suck it up. And so the pendulum swings, and someone else is trying to work out the city transportation problem. Personally, i wanted a privileged skateboard lane, but no lobby for that.
- jamil7 2y agoKantstraße is a bit of an extreme case because there was previously no bike lane at all and it’s an especially dangerous area for cyclists. I’m fairly certain the solution is not to reverse all investment in bike infrastructure, it’s just a knee jerk reaction to win the vote of a certain demographic.
- nubinetwork 2y agoThe article mentions the law being proposed in Ontario requiring approval for putting in more bike lanes... but what about the strong mayor laws? If the city can just veto whatever comes from the province, does it matter?