Today’s Headlines

7 thoughts on Today’s Headlines

  1. It’s great to expand these city/country tours to places like the Netherlands–there’s nothing like actually experiencing pervasively good bike infrastructure to be able to envision how we could really transform and retrofit cities in the US.

    A lot of the theoretical objections to separated bike infrastructure are addressed by actually seeing it work smoothly in person.

    As David Hembrow points out, though, it’s important to keep in mind that just because a certain solution exists in, say, The Netherlands, this doesn’t mean it should be unquestioningly copied. The NL has been doing trial-and-error with infra for decades and steadily replaces treatments proven over time to be subpar. This can mean, however, that certain older exemplars still exist and shouldn’t be copied just because they exist in the Netherlands.

    For example, while in the Netherlands the general trend is towards replacing what they call “Suggestion Lanes” (Advisory Lanes) with physically separated infrastructure, we just saw this last week:

    The grain-of-salt thing is all the more important when examining Danish infrastructure, which is not as comprehensive as that in the NL and has more dangerous arterial intersections (which are not protected physically like Dutch ones typically are). Unsurprisingly, even bike modeshare in Copenhagen comes nowhere near that seen on average in the Netherlands.

    How to tell the difference between best-practice and subpar infra? Every delegate should be given a copy of CROW!

  2. Upgrading a highway to an interstate between two large cities is not a boondoggle. Not all freeways are bad.

  3. Water is a red herring … though to be sure, a lack of water has yet to prove a deterrent to Arizona development. Yes, a drop of only five more feet in Lake Mead will trigger an 11% reduction in Colorado River water deliveries to Arizona, something almost sure to happen within the next year. But Arizona developers are very skillful at ignoring just that sort of thing. And that’s irrelevant to this issue, anyway.

    The real issue with this project is that it’s an unnecessary waste of money. Density along the route is nonexistent and always will be, in large part because of the water issues you cite. The only real population served is at either end, with 300 empty miles in between. The route sees very little traffic now. Most of route is already a deserted four-lane divided highway. Any further upgrade will benefit a very small number of people. There’s no reason to do it. It’s just a lot of money so Arizona can have another blue line through empty land on an interstate map.

  4. What is bike mode share outside of Copenhagen? Denmark is wealthier per capita than the Netherlands and much less dense.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *