Bike lanes are not good enough
video description
Date: 2019-09-12
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 10
S Tho
Different modes of transit work in mixture when all modes can do their own thing, thus move logically, without drastically imposing their own quirkyness onto the other mode. If a bike (like a pedestrian) can move to a destination without doing something weird unanticipated, then a driver or pedestrian can cope. If a driver has to do something weird like drive in a single lane two way, then problems and anger results. Motorbikes coexist with cars as they can move in the same pattern and their 10% don't require a significant burden on 90% of the traffic. Jackass motorbikers that ride much higher speeds, pass on the right, zip in and out of lanes in expectantly cause the problem and many accidents and death. A bike coexisting with cars should have enough room on a street for three feet for them, three feet clearance, 9 feet x 2 for two way cars and then the additional six feet for the other bikes. If the two way road (no parking) is not 40 feet wide, this can't happen. Compromises then must occur. 1) Switch the street to one way affecting both cars and bikes (only 15 feet needed which may leave some for parking on the non bike side of the roadway. 2) leave it two way with two car lanes but one way bike lane. Next street over has the other bike lane. 3) barely room for two cars already (90% of the use) then move biking to an adjacent street that gets there. Fines for biking on a NO BIKES street. 4) repurpose unused walking paths for bikes. If pedestrians are not using public ROW, then bikes may make it work. In the US and UK bikes have been a PIA for decades. Pedestrians don't want them on the sidewalks, dog walkers don't want them in the park, cars don't want them on the street. The matter came from them originally being seen as frat boy shenanigans. This is continued by the elaborate tour de france costumes to ride a bike 1/2 mile in traffic. The Netherlanders just wear clothes. I don't care what study proved what. All official studies are funded by someone and run by someone enthusiastic about the subject. Confirmation bias and conclusion spin is extremely common in social science studies. There really is no such thing as pure objective science in social science. If there was, there would be no debate after two centuries of it. Smith, Marx or the Fascists would have won by now and we'd have one social format.
reply
Different modes of transit work in mixture when all modes can do their own thing, thus move logically, without drastically imposing their own quirkyness onto the other mode. If a bike (like a pedestrian) can move to a destination without doing something weird unanticipated, then a driver or pedestrian can cope. If a driver has to do something weird like drive in a single lane two way, then problems and anger results. Motorbikes coexist with cars as they can move in the same pattern and their 10% don't require a significant burden on 90% of the traffic. Jackass motorbikers that ride much higher speeds, pass on the right, zip in and out of lanes in expectantly cause the problem and many accidents and death. A bike coexisting with cars should have enough room on a street for three feet for them, three feet clearance, 9 feet x 2 for two way cars and then the additional six feet for the other bikes. If the two way road (no parking) is not 40 feet wide, this can't happen. Compromises then must occur. 1) Switch the street to one way affecting both cars and bikes (only 15 feet needed which may leave some for parking on the non bike side of the roadway. 2) leave it two way with two car lanes but one way bike lane. Next street over has the other bike lane. 3) barely room for two cars already (90% of the use) then move biking to an adjacent street that gets there. Fines for biking on a NO BIKES street. 4) repurpose unused walking paths for bikes. If pedestrians are not using public ROW, then bikes may make it work. In the US and UK bikes have been a PIA for decades. Pedestrians don't want them on the sidewalks, dog walkers don't want them in the park, cars don't want them on the street. The matter came from them originally being seen as frat boy shenanigans. This is continued by the elaborate tour de france costumes to ride a bike 1/2 mile in traffic. The Netherlanders just wear clothes. I don't care what study proved what. All official studies are funded by someone and run by someone enthusiastic about the subject. Confirmation bias and conclusion spin is extremely common in social science studies. There really is no such thing as pure objective science in social science. If there was, there would be no debate after two centuries of it. Smith, Marx or the Fascists would have won by now and we'd have one social format.
reply
Loon Atic
Advisory bike lanes (ABL? In Belgium the term for those advisory bike lanes Moordstrookje has been voted word of the year 2018. A literal translation is murder strip. In Germany we have tons of those. An official name for them is Schutzstreifen (literal: protection strip) but cycling activists call them Schmutzstreifen (dirt strip) or Scherzstreifen (joke strip. What is wrong about them is that they indicate this is where bikes should be and the rest is car space. Two things happen as a consequence: Firstly, whenever someone rides outside of this ABL, motorists view them even more as obstacles because they assume that the cyclists belong in their strip. So if you want to turn left or overtake another cyclist and move out the ABL for that you are honked at, cut off, yelled at, and endagered even more by motorists than on regular streets without ABL. Secondly, motorists assume that so long as they drive outside the ABL they can overtake cyclists that are in the ABL. Since there is no buffer zone between ABL and car space, this leads to dangerous close passes at high speeds. ABLs only are safe in a world where streets without any biking infrastructure are safe too: A world where drivers accept cyclists as viable part of traffic and as human beings that must not be endangered. In the world we have though none of that is the case and therefore ABLs are what Belgians call them: murder strips. ABLs are what lazy traffic planners do, when there is not abundant space and they are too big of a coward to take some space from cars or they want to brag about how many km or miles of cycling infrastructure they have created but at the same time are not given any money by politicians. Paint is cheaper than actual traffic construction. But PAINT IS NOT INFRASTRUCTURE. So please stop telling people that advisory bike lanes are good. They are simply dangerous, lazy pieces of pseudo-infrastructure.
reply
Advisory bike lanes (ABL? In Belgium the term for those advisory bike lanes Moordstrookje has been voted word of the year 2018. A literal translation is murder strip. In Germany we have tons of those. An official name for them is Schutzstreifen (literal: protection strip) but cycling activists call them Schmutzstreifen (dirt strip) or Scherzstreifen (joke strip. What is wrong about them is that they indicate this is where bikes should be and the rest is car space. Two things happen as a consequence: Firstly, whenever someone rides outside of this ABL, motorists view them even more as obstacles because they assume that the cyclists belong in their strip. So if you want to turn left or overtake another cyclist and move out the ABL for that you are honked at, cut off, yelled at, and endagered even more by motorists than on regular streets without ABL. Secondly, motorists assume that so long as they drive outside the ABL they can overtake cyclists that are in the ABL. Since there is no buffer zone between ABL and car space, this leads to dangerous close passes at high speeds. ABLs only are safe in a world where streets without any biking infrastructure are safe too: A world where drivers accept cyclists as viable part of traffic and as human beings that must not be endangered. In the world we have though none of that is the case and therefore ABLs are what Belgians call them: murder strips. ABLs are what lazy traffic planners do, when there is not abundant space and they are too big of a coward to take some space from cars or they want to brag about how many km or miles of cycling infrastructure they have created but at the same time are not given any money by politicians. Paint is cheaper than actual traffic construction. But PAINT IS NOT INFRASTRUCTURE. So please stop telling people that advisory bike lanes are good. They are simply dangerous, lazy pieces of pseudo-infrastructure.
reply
NatureShy
I'll be honest, I will never give up the car because I am an avid hiker and I travel a lot. Getting to remote or far away trailheads will always require a car, and traveling via bike for hundreds of miles of highway while getting to said trailhead, wouldn't be possible, either. And when you do this dozens of times a year, and need to carry gear with you (backpacks, tent, etc, a bike isn't gonna be an option. The second reason is that it is just too hot in summer, and too rainy in winter here in Portland, Oregon. And then there are the hills. My place is 700 feet higher than the surrounding valley. I cannot stand being without A/C when it is hot. I can't even stand cars without A/C. And another advantage is all the extra space in a car, for carrying stuff, not to mention a comfortable seatbike seats are not that comfortable, by comparison. There's a third reason, too. I prefer a quiet suburb, not a dense, noisy, light polluted, crowded downtown or high density area. I prefer having space for gardens (native plant habitat space, too, away from the center/closer to the countryside, and a large house vs. an apartment. Biking for miles to go anywhere, would be more inconvenient. But since I don't enjoy biking, it doesn't count as a con for me. That said, I do support more bike infrastructure and public transport options. I would also be in favor of high speed rail, connecting Eugene, Salem, Portland, Seattle, and Vancouver (the maple syrup and moose one. I love it, in concept, but not something I would likely be interested in, anyway, unless biking for leisure only (and I don't even enjoy biking all that much anymore, anyway. So a car it is for me; but cyclists, you have my support
reply
I'll be honest, I will never give up the car because I am an avid hiker and I travel a lot. Getting to remote or far away trailheads will always require a car, and traveling via bike for hundreds of miles of highway while getting to said trailhead, wouldn't be possible, either. And when you do this dozens of times a year, and need to carry gear with you (backpacks, tent, etc, a bike isn't gonna be an option. The second reason is that it is just too hot in summer, and too rainy in winter here in Portland, Oregon. And then there are the hills. My place is 700 feet higher than the surrounding valley. I cannot stand being without A/C when it is hot. I can't even stand cars without A/C. And another advantage is all the extra space in a car, for carrying stuff, not to mention a comfortable seatbike seats are not that comfortable, by comparison. There's a third reason, too. I prefer a quiet suburb, not a dense, noisy, light polluted, crowded downtown or high density area. I prefer having space for gardens (native plant habitat space, too, away from the center/closer to the countryside, and a large house vs. an apartment. Biking for miles to go anywhere, would be more inconvenient. But since I don't enjoy biking, it doesn't count as a con for me. That said, I do support more bike infrastructure and public transport options. I would also be in favor of high speed rail, connecting Eugene, Salem, Portland, Seattle, and Vancouver (the maple syrup and moose one. I love it, in concept, but not something I would likely be interested in, anyway, unless biking for leisure only (and I don't even enjoy biking all that much anymore, anyway. So a car it is for me; but cyclists, you have my support
reply
mike4ty4
Yet another example of how Europe does things way better than the USA. I really, really don't get all the hangups so many Americans have when it is being _PROVEN_ with empirical evidence that the European methods _work_ - by the very fact of them _being_ there and people being satisfied with them - and moreover, many of the things Americans _claim_ will go wrong either not doing so or doing so at a rate low enough that on the overall, people still think it way better. Sorry, but I go with solid empirical evidence. The USA needs to be more like Europe, and those who don't agree with that, sorry, but I'll lump you in with germ theory deniers, global heating deniers, and others. And then I see all the complaints about bikers riding on the sidewalks. Problem is, the reason they do that is to me totally understandable - _they don't feel safe_ And who can blame them when your tiny 85 kg of meat has to joust with 1000 kg+ metallic death machines? As they say in sociology, a systematic trend likely means a systematic factor is to blame and this is it: bad infrastructure. This is why I call the USA a joke country, because it is so rich, yet it is worse in some respects than nations twice as poor. Moreover, in other aspects I get this strange sense of coldness, roboticism and distance that I've not seen looking at anywhere else.
reply
Yet another example of how Europe does things way better than the USA. I really, really don't get all the hangups so many Americans have when it is being _PROVEN_ with empirical evidence that the European methods _work_ - by the very fact of them _being_ there and people being satisfied with them - and moreover, many of the things Americans _claim_ will go wrong either not doing so or doing so at a rate low enough that on the overall, people still think it way better. Sorry, but I go with solid empirical evidence. The USA needs to be more like Europe, and those who don't agree with that, sorry, but I'll lump you in with germ theory deniers, global heating deniers, and others. And then I see all the complaints about bikers riding on the sidewalks. Problem is, the reason they do that is to me totally understandable - _they don't feel safe_ And who can blame them when your tiny 85 kg of meat has to joust with 1000 kg+ metallic death machines? As they say in sociology, a systematic trend likely means a systematic factor is to blame and this is it: bad infrastructure. This is why I call the USA a joke country, because it is so rich, yet it is worse in some respects than nations twice as poor. Moreover, in other aspects I get this strange sense of coldness, roboticism and distance that I've not seen looking at anywhere else.
reply
TransitBiker
I actually prefer to ride on the roads in the lane. Here in pennsylvania, there is a law that requires motorists give cyclists 4 feet of space when passing. There is also another law that allows any vehicle be it a motor vehicle or a bicycle to treat traffic lights stuck on red as a stop sign. These two laws alone have made a HUGE difference in not only over-all traffic smoothness, but has been a boon for cyclists Cannot tell you how many times i've stopped for a red and it just did not change Bike lanes? I ride around 25 mph, so those ones on the sidewalk or between sidewalk and parked cars would mean i on my bike would have to slow down, making a 20 minute trip for example into a hour long trip. Then there are the bumps/barriers that confine cyclists to the bike lane. I find these very dangerous and a crash hazard. Building all this crazy bike-only stuff is not the best idea right now anyways, because building segregated bike infrastructure is a very easy way for car lobby to push cyclists off streets by law, which would basically kill the bicycle industry overnight. That, and the rail to trail trend is actually destroying options for transit expansion. I have a lot more to say, but i don't want to clog the comments section. Love your videos by the way
reply
I actually prefer to ride on the roads in the lane. Here in pennsylvania, there is a law that requires motorists give cyclists 4 feet of space when passing. There is also another law that allows any vehicle be it a motor vehicle or a bicycle to treat traffic lights stuck on red as a stop sign. These two laws alone have made a HUGE difference in not only over-all traffic smoothness, but has been a boon for cyclists Cannot tell you how many times i've stopped for a red and it just did not change Bike lanes? I ride around 25 mph, so those ones on the sidewalk or between sidewalk and parked cars would mean i on my bike would have to slow down, making a 20 minute trip for example into a hour long trip. Then there are the bumps/barriers that confine cyclists to the bike lane. I find these very dangerous and a crash hazard. Building all this crazy bike-only stuff is not the best idea right now anyways, because building segregated bike infrastructure is a very easy way for car lobby to push cyclists off streets by law, which would basically kill the bicycle industry overnight. That, and the rail to trail trend is actually destroying options for transit expansion. I have a lot more to say, but i don't want to clog the comments section. Love your videos by the way
reply
deniska0
My friend was very irritated by unexpected bike ring bells coming from cyclists in every direction, in pretty much walking city, on our recent trip to Amsterdam. For which I asked him to imagine as if all those cycling lanes that we were passing, while browsing the city, would be replaced with proper car roads instead, adding traffic lights, pedestrian crossing, restricting and reducing the role of pedestrians in public realm, adding a risk of fatalities of car crashes etc. He wasnt complaining after that. You have to get used new way of negotiating between cyclists and pedestrians, but It wont take too long. Pedestrians are in the win, saving time, walking everywhere they want to walk with occasional look out, reducing their chances been killed in car crash or die of problems related to air pollution, or obesities for car drivers. Cities should be build of an appropriate density that would allow its citizens travel around by foot or cycling. Saves so much time, money, keeping us healthy. Oil companies are the only ones who lose.
reply
My friend was very irritated by unexpected bike ring bells coming from cyclists in every direction, in pretty much walking city, on our recent trip to Amsterdam. For which I asked him to imagine as if all those cycling lanes that we were passing, while browsing the city, would be replaced with proper car roads instead, adding traffic lights, pedestrian crossing, restricting and reducing the role of pedestrians in public realm, adding a risk of fatalities of car crashes etc. He wasnt complaining after that. You have to get used new way of negotiating between cyclists and pedestrians, but It wont take too long. Pedestrians are in the win, saving time, walking everywhere they want to walk with occasional look out, reducing their chances been killed in car crash or die of problems related to air pollution, or obesities for car drivers. Cities should be build of an appropriate density that would allow its citizens travel around by foot or cycling. Saves so much time, money, keeping us healthy. Oil companies are the only ones who lose.
reply
Adam Freeman
NYC has a pretty decent system of bike lanes, most avenues having a bike lane separated by parking and crosstown streets with bike lanes every few blocks. Not perfect but you can always go where you need to go, and there's always a fair amount of people using it. The issue is just bike parking. There's not enough sidewalk space to lock your bike, and even if you do you need to lock both wheels because people will take your rear wheel if it's not secured. Even though the transit itself is perfectly fine the city doesn't care about where to put the bikes. There are many times more 'citi bike' spots around, but those things aren't an efficient use of space - a regular bike corral can fit four times as many bikes, but there's no real push to create regular bike corrals since the city doesn't get any of that advertising money. It's a shame because those rental bikes aren't very efficient and you can't ride properly on them.
reply
NYC has a pretty decent system of bike lanes, most avenues having a bike lane separated by parking and crosstown streets with bike lanes every few blocks. Not perfect but you can always go where you need to go, and there's always a fair amount of people using it. The issue is just bike parking. There's not enough sidewalk space to lock your bike, and even if you do you need to lock both wheels because people will take your rear wheel if it's not secured. Even though the transit itself is perfectly fine the city doesn't care about where to put the bikes. There are many times more 'citi bike' spots around, but those things aren't an efficient use of space - a regular bike corral can fit four times as many bikes, but there's no real push to create regular bike corrals since the city doesn't get any of that advertising money. It's a shame because those rental bikes aren't very efficient and you can't ride properly on them.
reply
Brutus Tan
Sorry but bikes are toys for children, leisure and adventure off on the trails etc. There for people who havent earned a real paycheque, too young for a license and too poor to afford own domain that is the car, and or lost their virginities or cant get girls. There is no place for sissy bikes. European beta Culture is the WRONG way to go (Im not a driver btw Im a public transit commuter. I mean you come in wrinkled sweaty smelly and tired and work next to me downtown for 8 hours. NO ONE should be biking and they always attract the worst enviro douches and or morons who can use their brains and by their deluded sense of self righteousness think they own the road by virtue of those in cars being the ones with deadly weapons kowtowing to them. NO THANK YOU. Especially using MY taxpayer dollars for more smug environmental douches. Bring on the weak ass counter arguments.
reply
Sorry but bikes are toys for children, leisure and adventure off on the trails etc. There for people who havent earned a real paycheque, too young for a license and too poor to afford own domain that is the car, and or lost their virginities or cant get girls. There is no place for sissy bikes. European beta Culture is the WRONG way to go (Im not a driver btw Im a public transit commuter. I mean you come in wrinkled sweaty smelly and tired and work next to me downtown for 8 hours. NO ONE should be biking and they always attract the worst enviro douches and or morons who can use their brains and by their deluded sense of self righteousness think they own the road by virtue of those in cars being the ones with deadly weapons kowtowing to them. NO THANK YOU. Especially using MY taxpayer dollars for more smug environmental douches. Bring on the weak ass counter arguments.
reply
Dan Scannell
HOW DID YOU NOT TALK ABOUT DAVIS? I like Linden Rd as much as anyone, but. DAVIS? Bike capital of the country? ;)Anyway, I agree with everything you're saying, but. I'm noticing that most of your outside-USA comparisons and asides focus on Europe. It'd probably make a lot of sense to broaden your horizons, and those of your viewers, by looking at the rest of the world, particularly Asia. Maybe you haven't been because you focus on nations with similar cultures and systems of government, or maybe it's because you haven't thought of it or don't know much about other places. But I'm just letting you know, you run the risk of appearing limited in view and scope if you leave out most of the world. It's especially noticeable after popping over from, say, a Wendover video. Just wanting to give some friendly advice, hope you don't take this the wrong way.
reply
HOW DID YOU NOT TALK ABOUT DAVIS? I like Linden Rd as much as anyone, but. DAVIS? Bike capital of the country? ;)Anyway, I agree with everything you're saying, but. I'm noticing that most of your outside-USA comparisons and asides focus on Europe. It'd probably make a lot of sense to broaden your horizons, and those of your viewers, by looking at the rest of the world, particularly Asia. Maybe you haven't been because you focus on nations with similar cultures and systems of government, or maybe it's because you haven't thought of it or don't know much about other places. But I'm just letting you know, you run the risk of appearing limited in view and scope if you leave out most of the world. It's especially noticeable after popping over from, say, a Wendover video. Just wanting to give some friendly advice, hope you don't take this the wrong way.
reply
sdracklryeg
I think people downplay the weather and geography as a contributor to biking. In summer the netherlands barely breaks 20C and there is not much snow during winter, additionally the Netherlands is notoriously flat. In other words you can ride a bike very easily 12 months of the year without breaking a sweat. Where I live It's 30C+ for about 5-6 months of the year and at its coldest we still get to 20C during the day, also the terrain around me is quite hilly. I'd happily bike in the cold months but there is no way I will be riding a bike to and from work when I would be absolutely covered in sweat after being outside for 5 minutes. I guess in very continental climates like those in the United States where people get several feet of snow during Winter, the inverse is also true. I doubt you will ever see Minnesotans biking to work in Winter.
reply
I think people downplay the weather and geography as a contributor to biking. In summer the netherlands barely breaks 20C and there is not much snow during winter, additionally the Netherlands is notoriously flat. In other words you can ride a bike very easily 12 months of the year without breaking a sweat. Where I live It's 30C+ for about 5-6 months of the year and at its coldest we still get to 20C during the day, also the terrain around me is quite hilly. I'd happily bike in the cold months but there is no way I will be riding a bike to and from work when I would be absolutely covered in sweat after being outside for 5 minutes. I guess in very continental climates like those in the United States where people get several feet of snow during Winter, the inverse is also true. I doubt you will ever see Minnesotans biking to work in Winter.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
