Hacker News Reader

Comment by anonymou2 | Hacker News Reader

That's just insane, building two sets of parallel road systems, it's probably the most inefficient engineering ever, are you also going to build a new set when a new type of vehicle comes along? what about a scooter only road? And all of this because of the irrational believe that cyclists are inferior and can not share the road with motorists. I am so glad I don't live in Denmark.

View on HN

What makes cars deserve a big piece of asphalt but cyclers not? We have a lot of cyclers in the Netherlands and they deserve the safety and convenience of separate roads, away from multi-ton vehicles.

Also, bike roads are not as overly constructed like car roads (maybe just 1 or 2 layers of asphalt instead of more)

The problem segregating bicycles is that that automatically means that they are excluded from the best infrastructure which are the regular roads, which by the way do not belong to cars. I suffer that discrimination everyday when I ride my bike and there is a bike path adjacent to the road in places where I had no problem before, and that's after many years of riding so I can tell you that it is completely safe to share the road. Bike paths are built to kick us out of the roads it is pretty obvious to me now.

Unless you ban cars completely from streets, no matter how good the asphalt is I would not want to be around cars. I actively avoid cars if I have an option to go longer path, but with less car nearby me. I have no driving license, but I'm sure that as a car driver I would also prefer to see cyclists away from me.

I don't see how someone would want to go on main street if you have an option to drive on a separate road.

Whenever I wanted to go to a place by bike I used to go into google maps then clicked on the "avoid freeways" option and I would take that route. Nowadays where I live I have to not only avoid freeways but streets or roads with bike paths, it is really awful. I've been riding my bike to work every day for the last 13 years and I realize that If I want to keep using the road safely and correctly I am going to have to buy a car or a motorcycle.

> The problem segregating bicycles is that that automatically means that they are excluded from the best infrastructure which are the regular roads

The above is purely a public policy decision. We (as in we the people) can decide to change this.

Of course the example here might not be so bad because it is so far away from the road that motorists may not know it is there. The moment they know and they see you on the regular road then they yell at you harass you.

You realize that the Netherlands is famous for being probably the most bike-friendly country in the world? Everybody cycles, and cyclists are definitely not seen as inferior to vehicle traffic.

There were bicycles in the Netherlands before they were segregated, a lot of them. Then they were kicked off the roads to let "progress" (i.e. the car) go unimpeded. Now yeah, they sell that as bike-friendly, so sad.

You're clearly not up to date with the situation on the ground here. We're upgrading our cycle infrastructure and removing cars from city centres at the same time. Where there's no space for segregated infrastructure or in rural areas where it would not be economical, speed reductions are generally applied: 30 km/h in built-up areas, 60 km/h outside.

As for the why: car and bicycle speeds are just too different. Segregation improves life for both, and especially safety for cyclists, who will always be at a physical disadvantage in an accident.

There is one basic rule of traffic engineering: first come first served. It allows for vehicles of different speeds to share the road. Your responsibility as a driver of a vehicle is to not drive so fast that you can not possibly stop within your field of view (you are not driving a train), that is enough to share the road with bicycles, tractors, horses or whatever. Of course drivers of cars do not want to be bothered with that an want the road all for themselves, that's why you still insist in getting cyclists off the roads, at least where there is enough space to do so. The fear of cars is very convenient for this purpose.

You are stating the obvious, then drawing a conclusion that is the opposite of the logical one. I can only conclude that you are trolling.

As a cyclist who have taken the effort to ride correctly not only I have to put up with motorists who think that the road belongs to them, also with bicycle activists who think it is best for me to ride as If I were a pedestrian on wheels and that of course the road also belongs to motorists. Now I also have to put up with people on the internet who say that I am a troll because I try to explain as best as I can how me and fellow cyclists are being mistreated by almost everyone.

I am a daily fervent cyclist, but from what I'm reading I don't think I am a fellow cyclist of you.

You are probably a pedestrian on wheels then

That's far from how I would describe myself, but go ahead, thoughts are free.

Also the speed is not so different. The speed difference is even greater between bicycles and pedestrians yet you see places where they mix them. As a pedestrian I have been passed by cyclists which disappear much faster than a car when a car passes me as a cyclist.

But that's in the Netherlands.

You are right, highways really were a mistake. Who builds roads that can't even be used by cyclists, or wait, you probably mean roads right, I mean who wastes asphalt for surfaces that can't even be used by pedestrians?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com