Liste des Groupes | Revenir à rb tech |
Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:This is not some visual deception. A couple years ago my wife and I did a multi-day vacation in a large Ohio city, visiting museums, shopping centers, bike shops, etc. We saw miles and miles of bike lanes, but almost zero bikes using them. Near the very center of the downtown we saw some electric scooters in bike lanes, but no bikes.On 6/25/2024 4:48 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:That is one of the reasons london and other places have automatic countersFrank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:>>Again national mode share particularly the US with a significant rural
I'm sure Youngstown's bike mode share is minuscule, just like almost all
U.S. cities. Remember, the national average is far below one percent.
And despite all the "innovative" segregated infrastructure, it's falling.
>
population is not a useful metric.
>
Cities are where it’s at, and probably 5 mile or less journeys.
That may be true. But data for U.S. cities is not much better. I
frequent four or five medium to large U.S. cities. Only one has a
noticeable amount of bike use, and the great bulk of that is connected
with several inner-city colleges. Two others have extensive bike lanes
that are always empty of bikes.
>
as they knew darn well that taxi etc would say “I never see a bike!” This
said clearly london is doing rather better and more than US cities let
alone number of European cities.
Essentially bikes don’t clump up in the same way as cars etc do.
"Innovative" doesn't impress me. Quite the opposite, in fact. It's the "innovative" stuff that includes collision hazards or wheel deflection hazards for the cyclists. It's the "innovative" stuff that sends cyclists wrong-way into intersections.Car size absolutely has its issues mainly width, and blocking views.>Why is it falling? I suspect one factor is the constant propaganda>
claiming everyone NEEDS a barrier-segregated facility to be safe on a
bike. That tells almost everybody "You can't ride a bike until that
stuff gets built." IOW, never.
>
That’s clutching at straws really is! don’t think the massive increase in
car sizes/volumes car centric infrastructure? To name but a few over the
last 70 so years?
You can't deny that there have also been massive increases in
"innovative" bike facilities! And car size is largely irrelevant.
Most of the cycle lanes have been some bike symbols or painted lanes or
possibly some disjointed shared paths. Only segregated stuff seems to have
been alongside major roads which only exist as they need to keep access see
my old 1959 cycleway as example.
And very little if anything innovative, more box ticking.
It really isn’t because someone said it’s dangerous to ride a bike or theySo you say. But people regularly report that they think bicycling is too dangerous. And they are frequently told that without special facilities, bicycling is too dangerous. I'm surprised you don't admit the possibility of a causative link.
should wear a helmet.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.