[k99x55]

Cycle infrastructure needs to be continuous, feel safe to ride, and exist where people actually go to, not near the riverside.

Build them and they will come.

Cycle infra is not only cycle lanes. Cycle lanes are needed only where cars move fast (>30kmh). What is even more important is traffic calming in residential streets. LTNs, modal filters etc. Build for people, not cars.

[zolbrek]

>Build for people, not cars.

Do you mean build for pedestrians and cyclists, not motorists?

[david-gpu]

They mean building infrastructure that is able to sustain more trips per hour while also reducing the risk of deadly collisions, noise and air pollution.

By providing convenient and safe infrastructure for people who walk, take transit and bike around we gain safer more pleasant neighborhoods that also allow more people to get around in their neighborhood.

[zolbrek]

The risk of deadly collisions, particularly when most people are going 30-50 km/h in the city and driving modern cars, is already low.

Modern cars are also quiet with emissions nothing like the cars of our grandparents.

Can you elaborate on what you mean by trips per hour and how one is supposed to conveniently commute outside of one's neighborhood, particularly with small children and shopping?

[david-gpu]

> The risk of deadly collisions, particularly when most people are going 30-50 km/h in the city and driving modern cars, is already low.

The probability of a pedestrian being killed when a motorist strikes them with their vehicle depends very strongly on the speed of the vehicle. At 30kph the risk is less nearly 0%, but it rises rapidly to 50% when the impact happens at 50kph[0]. Would you take those odds? I wouldn't. Especially given that motorists tend to interpret speed limits as minimums rather than maximums.

> Modern cars are also quiet with emissions nothing like the cars of our grandparents.

I live next to seven lanes of traffic. Modern cars are not remotely quiet. Their emissions are not limited to what comes out of their tailpipe, either. You must include the microparticles that are emitted from the tires, the asphalt and the brake pads [1].

> Can you elaborate on what you mean by trips per hour and how one is supposed to conveniently commute outside of one's neighborhood, particularly with small children and shopping?

Public transit. Bicycles. Living in a neighborhood with mixed use buildings. I have never had a driving license and my family with two small kids has somehow figured it out with a combination of the above. Many others do the same. It is not rocket science. The first step is ditching the car.

[0] https://nacto.org/docs/usdg/relationship_between_speed_risk_...

[1] https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4315878/

[zolbrek]

How often do collisions with pedestrians occur at 50 km/h? If the pedestrian doesn't literally jump in front of the car from an somewhere he's visually obscured, there's usually time to stomp on the brakes. I've done it multiple times with cyclists riding in the wrong direction on the bicycle lane, over crosswalks where they should be dismounting, or just plain "jaycycling".

We clearly have different views on what's quiet and what's not. If I'm on my terrace I can hear cars when they drive past, but not inside my home and it being a 30 zone it doesn't bother me. Were you forced to live next to seven lanes of traffic, where I assume the limit is much higher than 30-50 km/h?

I don't have much to say about tire particles and whatnot. Are you just as much against microplastics in food and cosmetics?

If you've never gotten a license, it surprises me you're so against something you've never tried. I tried cycling for about a year and a half. I learned I don't like sweating profusely in summer, getting rained on in spring or fall, or riding on snow in winter. I can drive to work and drop my child off at kindergarten in 15 minutes, with a bicycle and a trailer it would take me more than 45 if the weather is good. I don't need to hurry home after grocery shopping and I only need to shop once every week or two, as opposed to two to three times a week if I'm limited to what I can fit into a backpack, and I don't need to drink tap water since I can fit a few crates of mineral water in my trunk. The risk of getting my car stolen is lower than my bicycle getting stolen, which has happened in the past. You're absolutely right, it's not rocket science. Foe me the choice is clear.

I still don't know what you mean by trips per hour.

[david-gpu]

> How often do collisions with pedestrians occur at 50 km/h?"

Enough to kill several dozen people every year in my city and severely injure over a hundred, according to official statistics.

> it surprises me you're so against something you've never tried

I have plenty of experience with what it is like to walk and cycle in busy streets, and I do not wish to force that upon my neighbors. Whether or not driving would be convenient for me is not the issue -- the issue is how it makes our neighborhoods dangerous, noisy and dirty. I don't want to be responsible for that.

Other people only care about what is convenient for themselves. I get that. I see it every day.

Trips per hour means exactly what it says. Single occupancy four-wheeled vehicles are the least efficient mode of transportation in terms of throughput (people moved per hour). [0]

> Are you just as much against microplastics in food and cosmetics?

Textbook whataboutism. Do you believe that I need to be some sort of monk-like hippy vegan to be opposed to traffic in my neighborhood? Or is it okay for some regular person to care about something that you don't care about?

[0] https://transformative-mobility.org/multimedia/passenger-cap...