←back to thread

437 points Vinnl | 3 comments | | HN request time: 2.028s | source
Show context
choeger ◴[] No.43992350[source]
I wonder if this will eventually lead to increased density and if that then leads to congested bike lanes. Will the cities of tomorrow regulate traffic between individual buildings?

Make no mistake, bikes are much, much, better for urban centers than cars. But the overall problem isn't cars, it's individual traffic in densely populated areas.

Certain policy here in Europe simply assumes that people stay in their surroundings ("15 minute city") and rarely, if ever, visit parts that are farther away individually.

Public transportation, however, is naturally biased. It can be much quicker to get 10km north-south than 5km east-west, or the other way around, depending on the city. And, of course, public transportation is often lacking quality compared to individual traffic. (Taking a bike across a bicycle road vs. getting into a crammed subway train in July, for instance.)

replies(13): >>43992403 #>>43992506 #>>43992515 #>>43992640 #>>43992684 #>>43992779 #>>43993186 #>>43993255 #>>43993455 #>>43993817 #>>43995605 #>>43996326 #>>44010287 #
1. egypturnash ◴[] No.43992403[source]
Less cars + overflowing bike lanes = hey what if we mark more of the street as being for bikes. (Possibly with an interim step of "the cyclists have already claimed pretty much the entire street for bikes".)
replies(1): >>43995788 #
2. returningfory2 ◴[] No.43995788[source]
They've already started doing this in NYC - the new 10th ave bike lane is double the width of normal bike lanes.
replies(1): >>43997511 #
3. egypturnash ◴[] No.43997511[source]
Oh FUCK YEAH! I am envious. Not enough to leave New Orleans for NYC but still envious.