Comment by doug_durham

Comment by doug_durham 20 hours ago

As a cycling commuter I'm happy with margin. Give me roads and bike lanes that are wide enough to allow me to navigate with margin of safety. The problem with separate bike tracks is that they are rarely built because of the cost and politics involved. Bike trails are a nightmare because inevitably you need to share them with pedestrians. We just need spaces where cars and bikes can coexist. I think that cities in the Bay Area do a good job with this. Turning a 4 lane road into a two lane road with bike lanes, or eliminating parking on the side of the road are much easier to do, and very effective. Don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good enough.

cinntaile 19 hours ago

> The problem with separate bike tracks is that they are rarely built because of the cost and politics involved.

The cost of bike lanes isn't too bad. Unlike a car road it doesn't require a lot of maintenance.

> Bike trails are a nightmare because inevitably you need to share them with pedestrians.

This is a political issue, here you have plenty of bike trails just for bikes.

Reply View 4 replies

usrusr 18 hours ago

> The cost of bike lanes isn't too bad. Unlike a car road it doesn't require a lot of maintenance.
Tell that to cyclists used to navigating mandatory bike infrastructure full of terribly broken up surface. If car lanes were that quality, people would put the authorities under permanent siege with torches and pitchforks, for refusing to maintain roads.
"Oh, but that road is fine, few spots where you have to step out of the car to push it". For some reason, people responsible for bike infrastructure (outside .nl or Copenhagen) tend to think that it's ok to slow down to walking speed or dismount, on main routes. Imagine similar things required from drivers.

Reply View | 3 replies
- Lio 17 hours ago
  
  > Tell that to cyclists used to navigating mandatory bike infrastructure full of terribly broken up surface.
  We’ve had paved, off-road bike lanes where I live since the 80s.
  They’re not mandatory but they are highly used and to my knowledge have required almost no maintenance in all that time.
  There’s no scaring or resurfacing visible.
  The wear and tear on tarmac is directly related to the weight of the vehicles that use it.
  The benefits of bike lanes are massive compared to the cost.
  
  Reply View | 1 reply
  
  MereInterest 15 hours ago
  
  > The wear and tear on tarmac is directly related to the weight of the vehicles that use it.
  From empirical studies, damage to the road is proportional to the fourth power of axle weight. A bike with rider may weigh 200 pounds, where a passenger car weighs around 4000 pounds. That 20x difference in weight results in a 80,000x difference in damage to the road.
  (That’s not even getting into semi trucks, which are around 40 tons fully loaded. Split along 5 axles rather than 2, that’s 9x the axle load of a passenger car, leading to 6,500x the damage to the road relative to a passenger car, or 520 million times that of a bike.)
  [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_power_law
  
  Reply View | 0 replies
- cinntaile 13 hours ago
  
  I did say it was low maintenance, not that it was maintenance free.
  
  Reply View | 0 replies