spare_wheel

There was definitely "parsing" of injury accidents in that defensive response. The ADFC used data that counted hospitalization, not just injuries.

https://www.adfc-nrw.de/kreisverbaend...-radwegen.html

The Dutch Fietsberaad had recently notified the Ministry of Transport, that in 2006 40% of hospital accident victims were cyclists.

I admire Hembrow's blog but Holland is a unique nation when it comes to cycling. Cycling has been an intrinsic part of their national identify for much of their modern history. I look to Germany for inspiration because they have managed to break the 20% mode share barrier in Munich using infrastructure that is feasible in North America.

hagen2456

You really, REALLY need to start reading things a little more thoroughly.

Bekologist

I think what's quite interesting are Jan's latest backtracking and waffling on separated facilities - at todays blog post Jan is calling for complete traffic separation starting at 30mph.

apparently, Jan would like to significantly expand portland and seattles' cycle track network!!!!

he'll get out of that wet paper bag someday.

Bekologist

Funnier still - out of the first six streets in Munich's bicycle network in the marienplatz i looked up on street view-

all were cycletracks.

Hilarious.

spare_wheel

Direct quotes:


https://janheine.wordpress.com/2013/0...rlds-together/

spare_wheel

Heine in response to Bekologist:

Could not have said it better, myself. Bike boulevards only work if you eliminate cut through traffic.

UberGeek

Hell, all this back and forth going on...

All I want is either a door-free bike lane, and traffic calming measures The cycle tracks are nice to have for the ride home though, and weekend rides

spare_wheel

https://goo.gl/maps/9chgT

https://goo.gl/maps/GO0uz

Bekologist

The vigor at which you want to deny Jan's furtive endorsement of expanding cycle track networks is unparalleled.

Bekologist

yes, if you compare the official Munich bike map with the facilities in place on the ground via street view, all of the main cycling routes in and out of the marianplatz are all separated cycletracks amidst a busy urban core.

the marianplatz itself is more old european city square, unfortunately burdened with car traffic. but all the streets leading TO the marianplatz appear to have separated cycle tracks. the main roads, anyway.

A similar approach merited in cities across north america- a small set of core, off road cycle tracks or paths serving as the backbone of a varied, context sensitive bikeway network.

and an approach Jan Heine endorses, in his own inchoate manner.

Bekologist

that cross posting could prove perilous to an inebriates sobriety. Quite the Vim and Vigor!

spare_wheel

Heine:

Bekologist

wierd, because - despite Jan's skewed, inaccurate depiction of cycling in Munich - the main, designated cycle routes in Munich are cycle tracks.

and jans speed metrics for traffic separation remarkably mirrors Seattles new bike master plan.

Yeah, you think?

sudo bike

I know, right? The most bizarre contradictions pop up when you totally misrepresent someone's argument...

Bekologist

Jan Heine- duplicitously framing bike safety with propaganda, presenting half baked design standards, and haplessly aiming to repress cycling participation, all rolled up into one.

Jan's foray into 'advocacy' to repress separated bike lane miles in Seattle is reminiscent of when vehicular cyclists lose their training wheels and discover gosh darn it, they can ride in 30mph traffic at which point they're writing articles calling for complete traffic separation starting at 30mph.

perplexed. inchoate. contradictory. These form the basis of Jan's position on cycle tracks and traffic separation.

hagen2456

I think there are a couple of misunderstandings on the side of the VC crowd. First there's the matter of the danger associated with separated bike paths. Yes, there are potential dangers, but they are, in general, smaller than the dangers of riding in heavy traffic. No matter how you twist and turn the numbers, that's the facts of the matter, and those dangers can be reduced to a minimum where they're barely existant. Some have pointed to the large number of bike accidents in Holland, but without noticing that the great majority of these do not involve other cyclists or cars. It's simply people who, due to inattentiveness (or, in the case of small children and elderly, clumsiness) crash on their own.

Now, the other great problem VC'ers see in separated bike paths is speed. They want to be able to commute fast and far. What they don't get is that on most Dutch or Danish bike paths, that's no problem outside the city cores (I've elsewhere pointed to lots of exampes from the Copenhagen suburban arteries). As for the city cores, that's where car traffic is generally heaviest and most packed, and often moves slowly. That's also where you actually move faster on the separated paths than you would in slow, packed car traffic. So really, where's the problem? Intersections? Yes, but it can be solved, and you will still move faster than rush hour car traffic.

This is not to say that one should have bike paths, separated or not, everywhere. Of course not. It all depends on the volume and speed of traffic, and the character of the road/street. But would I let my 12 and 14 year olds ride on their own, two miles to school through the rush hour traffic of inner Copenhagen, without separated bike paths? No way. And not even outside rush hours, to visit friends etc. I remember what it was like in my early youth before the net of bike paths was established. I hated biking in the city back then. Not because I was incompetent or whatever VC'ers may call it, but because I knew it was bloody dangerous.


Edit: It's no coincidence that the few remaining "black spots" in Copenhagen are streets with heavy traffic but without bike paths. There are a few, and without exception, they have the largest number of accidents and fatalities.

spare_wheel

*looks around for a VCer on this thread*

CPH has tons of in road bike lanes and many of its so-called cycle tracks are really just door zone free bike lanes with a wee curb or ramp.

https://goo.gl/maps/lSlpB

https://goo.gl/maps/0A2LM

This facility is approved by spare_wheel.

The problem is not so much CPH but moronic infrastructure built in its name in north america.

John Forester

Hagen is quite happy with his view of traffic in Copenhagen. However, he offers no evidence that cycling in traffic is very dangerous. All he offers is his feeling, dating back to his early years, that it is. He also is happy that near the urban center, the cycle tracks provide faster traveling than do the adjacent streets. All that's fine, but it does not apply to the USA. We know the types and causes of car-bike collisions on American streets, so that we can separate the types aided and the types prevented by cycle tracks. That information allows us to predict the dangers of cycle tracks as compared to normal streets, or to streets with bike lanes. Furthermore, there are very few places in the USA where cycling is faster than motoring. So, whatever Hagen believes about cycling in his home town is just not applicable to cycling in most cities in the USA.

hagen2456

No "tons of in road bike lanes". Mostly, it's either bike path or nothing. The ones you show are from the experimental stage of partly closing down that street to car traffic and widening the bike paths. They are now finished, with nice curbs and everything. And there's no parking along it. There is along many other bike paths, though. That's one of the points where the Dutch do a better job than the Danes.

hagen2456

You're wrong, and if you had been awake to read through this and the many other threads I've participated in, you'd full well know it.

Now back to bed, mr. Forester!

Commodus

um. no offense, but I think most people can read Jan's blog and understand it. You... seem to be having trouble. These problems you have are almost entirely of your own invention. Your posts remind me of a politician's attack ad, "SEE!!! SEE!!! HE ADMITS IT! HE HATES/LOVES FREEDOM/TERRORISTS/etc."

Just as a hint, if you're incapable of producing a coherent argument using clear language - as your groan-inducing comments on his blog indicate - your position may have problems.

I-Like-To-Bike

See impressions of Copenhagen from a different Portlander and lots of Copenhagen cycling photos at:
https://bikeportland.org/2013/05/28/p...penhagen-87422
and
https://bikeportland.org/2013/05/28/a...-streets-87367

spare_wheel

Haaah! Aaaaahaaa! It IS an anti bike lane conspiracy! I knew it!

I road "cycletracks" in CPH where repeated paving had caused the curb to almost disappear. But anyways, when people in the USA build cycle tracks they do not build these types of facilities. These "cycle tracks" are in road facilities with a small curb that do not have the kind of intersection problems that Heine was criticizing. I can't think of a single example of this kind of facility in the USA.

buzzman

Really?

Well, it's a gorgeous day and I'm off to meet my friend downtown. Guess I'll ride on that separated bike path with numerous intersections, which will take me far less time than if I were to drive. And be far less expensive, since where would I park that car anyway once I got to my destination? Probably several blocks away and then I would have to walk there.

But oh yes, you're right. It's always much more convenient and faster to drive in any American city.

Bekologist

That's rich. Jan's own words have him suggesting total traffic separation starting at 30mph in his latest blog post.

It's not a smack down, it's a hamfisted surrender of the confounded who never had a tenable position to begin with. Full traffic separation is Jan's 'first choice always' if implemented well, dontchyaknow?

lots of roads over 30mph in america!