Exactly. So an average of 800.000 people can benefit in Amsterdam of this budget, but only 750 car owners can benefit from two to three parking garages.
@@tubetuur not even that because parking garages are rarely filled. so lets say 200 the only garages that are filled, are tiny ones under housing complexes. because... you know... they're used?? but car infrastructure is expensive. roads cost an average of 3 million per mile add the cost of parking with it gas enviormental costs, and all you can get is that it is unpayable.
@@awesomeatronik no? they are build by the government, then "oh no.. we promised free cheap parking but the cost are too much" and then they sell it for a fraction of the cost to a company who then increases the cost of parking there amsterdam has done this sooo many times and yet still build garages as if it wont happen AGAIN.
Testing has shown time and time again that road wear increases exponentially, not proportionally, with weight, bike infrastructure should theoretically last significantly longer than the roads cars and more importantly heavy trucks drive on.
You’re right, but you also have to keep in mind all the cables, tubes and utilities underneath the roads that do need to be replaced or maintained. For those, 30 years is a long time.
Minor point of pedantry, but wear is proportional to weight to the fourth power. It's still polynomial growth, but yes, wear is not directly proportional to weight.
Most cities half ass it and put bike lanes on roads that go 45mph or as much as 55mph. Most care are going 5-10 over the speed limit which makes it extremely dangerous for bikes. They absolutely need their separate roads
So important to remember that our cities are not permanent and they are always being constantly renovated and updated. Which is why it’s important that we never stop fighting for the future we want
@@Bioniking Do people forget that cars haven't always existed, and that putting that infrastructure in place for them was also a major change at one point?
This is EXACTLY how we got our excellent infrastructure. We don't rip out what is new, we replace things in a regular maintenance schedule according to well-thought out standards. But from what I gather, it would be revolutionary for US cities to have maintenance schedules (including financing)...
Not only is the initial cost cheaper, bycicle infrastructure requires much less maintance. The reason our roads break down is because cars are extremely heavy. Roads for bikes, mopeds, pedestrians can last indefinitely
In San Antonio, TX, the city bought land to create a paved Greenway Trail system. There are over 100 miles of connected trails, across the city that enable cyclists to be on safe trails versus dangerous roadways. Although, I would prefer more common, shared infra that accommodates a combination of autos, bikes, and pedestrians; this local Greenway has also enabled a safe cycling and commuting option for San Antonio.
@cbailey2376 About 35 years ago, I lived and cycled in Dallas. At the time, White Rock Lake was being extended to North Dallas, but even then it was overrun with riders. We are very fortunate with the path San Antonio has taken under a vision of former Mayor Phil Harberger. Part of the expansion and maintenance is funded with .25% local sales tax. Visitors come from Austin to assess the development. Hope Dallas will consider an extended Greenway option. Safe cycling!
That's a lot better than just sticking them right next to car roadways if you ask me. Just like drivers, cyclists can be absolute idiots and sometimes straight-up dangerous assholes. Giving a separate but still usable thoroughfare is the ideal solution, IMO.
The govts don't want this because they don't make money. By promoting EVs instead of low emission vehicles like motorcycles and bicycles, they can invest in the companies which they are pushing policies on. Follow the $.
its the most expensive because it's the lowest capacity and it generates no income, unlike roads/cars where you pay taxes on plates, gas/electricity and a license. So until you have to pay yearly taxes on a bike, register it with the state and have a license for it, then bike lanes will be the single most expensive piece of infrastructure per monetary value for a city.
@@TiberiusCowgillbike infrastructure is significantly higher capacity than car infrastructure, like over 10x lol…also car infrastructure is insanely expensive because it needs an insane amount of land, massive flyovers and turn circles, constant road maintenance, systems to help investigate crashes etc, free parking. Taxes and license plate registrations literally makes such a tiny minuscule portion of the cost of car infrastructure that it’s literally negligible lol
The main problem in most of North America is they have to start at absolute zero: Many stroads don't even have a sidewalk to start with and even their residential streets are often to dangerous to bike on due to wide lanes and high speeds. So just waiting 25 years until the road is "due" (and usually much much longer for residential) might work here in Northern Germany, where when they really forgot a bike lane some 50 years ago you still can use a sidewalk or take another route.
Part of that is a matter of scale the us is massive as are its major cities (by area), and th other is that in the 60's and 50's cars were set as the preferred mode of transportation so all cities after thst point were designed that way.
@@John-Wolfe Hamburg was a wasteland after the war and everybody saw the car as the most important thing of the future. So in the 50s they build a main arterial: Three lanes per direction. But also with bike lanes on both sides that still meet current design standards - not as a "safe alternative", but to keep the slow bicycles of the road.
@@John-Wolfe American cities are bigger and less dense, but not so big that building bike infrastructure is useless or impossible, especially since we have relatively dense downtowns still. Besides, all it takes is a few relatively simple changes to zoning to make our cities better, allowing them to grow in smarter ways
In the UK the quality of the cycle lanes is shocking. The new ones near me is horrible to cycle on. really rough ride, and it's better to cycle on road or footpath.
It's not just cities we need to rethink. We also need to rethink suburbs. This might be more productive than rethinking cities, because as designed suburbs are economic losses and totally dependent on cars for transportation.
@@Dangernoodlle you can live in a small town or on the outskirts of it. we just need to stop romanticizing suburban life because it's literally not convenient. one of the saddest things is that kids grow up doing nothing and unable to gain any independence because they can't go anywhere without their parents driving them
Im not a cyclist.... but I agree that cyclists need their own lane and everything, so they can be safe and drivers dont have to have a mini heart attack w/e they see a bike on the roar which is the only spot they can be in, in the US, atm
@@patrickponce483890% not a cyclist? Where did you get that statistic? 64% of the Dutch population uses the bike daily or multiple times a week. 26% never uses a bike.
You don't even have to wait for the road to need maintenance to implement bike infrastructure. It's cheap and easy to just throw down some portable concrete curbs to define protected bike lanes and reduce car lanes. You get more bike infrastructure without rebuilding the entire street, you don't have to wait, and it will be more appealing to the public if people don't have to be afraid of getting hit by a car or "doored" by a parked car.
Absolutely not, reducing car lanes to make room for slow ass inefficient bikes is utter idiocy. Negatively effecting hundreds or thousands, to begin a dozen people. Y’all are so entitled it’s unbelievable.
Cost is recouped with the value of everything gained thru it ...but then the city and govt institutions have to recognize that healthy living and neighborhood design is important. That's where we fail.
@@RisingFlag100But the reason people are unwilling to use them is because the infrastructure is bad, not the other way around. Also, everyone advocating for bikes accepts that cars are still a necessity for long journeys
@@RisingFlag100 that's the lamest excuse for inefficient land use. Just because you have lots of land doesn't mean you should use it inefficiently. Classic sunk cost fallacy
@@RisingFlag100 and maybe the reason more casual cyclists don't use the bike lanes here in the states is because they are poorly designed and are usually unseparated from fastmoving traffic
@@RisingFlag100 our cities were not built for cars, they were bulldozed for cars in the 60s and 70s. Auto industry lobbying killed off street car systems that even small towns had in abundance in the 1920s and 1930s. You don't have to build infrastructure specifically for bikes in order to make an area cycle-able, you just have to not exclusively make it for cars. and the climate is a weak excuse for car-dependent development, there are plenty examples around the globe of cities in hot and cold climates with excellent public transit and ability to walk/bike...
Cycle infrastructure saves money overall long term because of th3 reduction in hazardous air and noise pollution and increase in exercise resulting in a healthier population. Plus cyclists are more likely to stop at small shops on the way home and boost local economies
Plus just the costs of the actual materials used. There's a reason Roman roads lasted so long, they didn't have 2 ton monstrosities crushing them. It's crazy, in every statistic or metric I come across public transportation is just the better solution.
And those who are living on and around these infrastructure changes. Its GOOD to incorporate society into this thinking to encourage acceptance of these societal lifestyle changes.
Bruh my city ain’t fixing a street until there are more craters per square feet than the moon and even then they’ll wait for a couple cars to breakdown to start doing their job.
@@williewonka6694it's estimated that 800k people use the cycle lanes in Amsterdam alone so that disproves that good cycle infrastructure doesn't get used
@@williewonka6694go to copenhagen or amsterdam please. Come visit and see what happens when you build bike infrastructure. If you make it well then people will use it
The problem, at least here in the UK, is that urban streets are rarely wide enough to accommodate the sort of segregated cycle infrastructure seen in the video. To fit in cycle lanes often means reducing pedestrian footpaths (or having 'shared use' pedestrian/cyclist paths) or reducing the carriageway to a single lane and introducing a one-way system. Add in that most urban areas also rely on on-street parking for both residents and visitors and the difficulties mount.
america is a little different though for our problems, the shops majority of those closed down over 30 years. Competition for stores is great till everyone goes to cheaper store which then closes the small stores. also when companies can just pick up and move doesn't help either. Larger stores needed more room like walmart, so to fit compacity, they built a larger walmart outside of town and then closed and sold the old walmart that was in town
Those problems are made by the car and not solved by it. Not everyone in the UK can have a car, otherwise it just wouldn't work in dense city centers. If everyone owns a car it's not gonna work at all. On the other hand, if you have fewer cars then there is space where they used to park.
Well, the best practice is to covert those urban streets into bicycle streets, where cyclist have priority and cars are considered as guests, as per Dutch standard.
@@miles5600 Well aware, LOL. Ohio has the highest mileage of bike trails in America. Largest matrix of bike trails in America is ALSO where I live in SW Ohio. Witnessed them doing so, "As we speak," for well over 30 years.
@@garyseckel295 maybe... But no Ohio cities is among top 50 us cities for biking . Columbus has no rail commute service and Cleveland and Cincinatyi are botyom half of 50 cities on bicycle use modes .. Recreational bike trailsare something completely different than a bike path network for daily commute and transport ... My estimate is that the state is very car dependent !
I wish they would do something positive like this where I live. Norwich UK is the least cycle-friendly city I have ever had the misfortune to ride in. Here they still think that painting a picture of a bicycle on an existing footpath somehow makes it a bike-lane - except it doesn't!
You have to live in a bike city like Amsterdam to really appreciate what the change brings. 20min ride to wherever you are going. Bike and pedestrian become king. Heightened level of awareness. Improved physical wellbeing. Improve air 'taste'. Your body becomes your gasoline. Appreciation of environment I.e outdoor spaces. Improved human interaction. *Endless benefits*
never really understood why other countrys never had a really good bycycle infastructure, here in the Netherlands every village has it edit: thanks for the information about the bycycle infractructure in other countrys.
you won the war on cars from our perspective. North America is still losing as of right now. Electric cargo e-bike uses a small fraction of what a Tesla would need battery wise, but you see Teslas everywhere.
@@WasephWastarthe Netherlands shows you’re wrong. They built a car centric infrastructure and found out it would not work and then started to change the future plans. There is a reason why people in the USA are less healthy, less happy, more angry, more afraid, more stressed, and so on. Everyone is stuck in traffic and requires to use a car for even the smallest jobs.
“Roads are paid for by drivers.” There are studies that have proven that drivers don’t pay anywhere near the cost of the infrastructure they use. pirg.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Who-Pays-for-Roads-vUS_1.pdf usa.streetsblog.org/2013/01/23/drivers-cover-just-51-percent-of-u-s-road-spending#
@@hostilepancakesdoesn’t mean that bikes shouldn’t pay their fair share. Or, yknow, they could be considerate and ride on paths/sidewalks (GUESS WHAT???? THEY PARALLEL THE ROAD AND YOU DONT INCONVENIENCE ANYONE)
Most city officials don't even care about what makes sense in the moment, never mind the future. Zoning is the best example of this. New builds? "My contributing constituents take priority."
Forbid large cars in NY-city, slow down the speed and only alow smaller electric vehicles on the surface roads. The lower speed and smaller cars makes the need for safety go down, which means cheaper cars. The smaller cars means more cars can fit on the roads so now we can make lanes and parking narrower which means we can reclaim more road for bikes and pedestrians.
We need better public transport and walkable cities in america, the excuse that america is too big is a shitty excuse when railroads built this country and car companies bought out trams and railroads to make more room for cars, you can't go anywhere in america without a car, it's dangerous to walk and bike often times there aren't any sidewalks or bikelanes. Car companies put a chokehold on our country and are squeezing the money and life from us.
Bicycle lanes and painting on the ground only stays for about 6-8 months here in Québec. They have the worst contractors in the country. Roads have to be redone every 3 years or so.
@@thatoneguy611he is not a designer my guy, you can't just remove and rebuild a town right away and would require permission from the city and funds. You seriously gotta be unemployed to do this and use your time and effort
The problem is that cities try to modify the existing infrastructure without making allowance for lost parking for local businesses. Or for the reduced number of traffic lanes causing extra congestion in traffic. Nor do they put in any enforcement for the cyclists who ride like idiots. I ride a bike to and from work. I drive truck for work. Cities need to find solutions that work for both motorists and cyclists. The problem is that they do not get advice from experts thst understand all sides to the issues.
i walk at work, sadly my drive is teh only time i sit down besides my 30min lunch break and (2) 10 min breaks, i roughly walk 10 -12 miles a day. i'm rural but i do have to drive to town
Each additional car added to the road has an exponential impact on commute time. The solution to making roads better for motorists is finding a way to get as many cars off the road as possible via mass transit, safe bicycling, and walkable cities.
Cycling and proper infrastructure creates healthier communities and reduces traffic congestion. It also helps with less of an impact on the environment. Wins all the way around.
I hate knowing that all the construction projects in my city are going to be finished looking exactly the same as they did before they ripped it up. I don't expect them to rip everything out at once, but building it right the second time should be priority.
The majority of the time, it's not their fault, it's the city's fault for making it both a bike lane and parking at the same time, rather than have bike lanes separated from the road entirely
Whatever it takes to keep cars and bikes out if the same lane. If jaywalking is illegal I don't see why we keep putting bicyclists together with cars. It's like putting a guppy in with sharks.
In prior decades I would agree. But the climate is breaking down super fast and we just don’t have time now. We have to just get rid of private cars in urban areas as soon as possible. That’s how we’re going to make the change in the fastest possible time.
We can't just get rid of cars. Cars are not the issue. Car centric design is the issue. By giving people access to things like bike lanes and sustainable public tranpsport, we decrease the need for cars.
@@gorganfredman5363 And understood that those traveling in a heavier vehicle always must be ready to stop for lighter ones and pedestrians/cyclists....
Oh no who will think of the person driving the lifted ford f-250 with a steel frame and aluminum body and hundreds of safety features and it's lifted off the road 5 feet. They inconvenienced slightly by the menace of bad bikers!
@@GlorpLorp??? Car infrastructure is the least efficient (read: most expensive) infrastructure you can build. Reducing traffic by building more efficient alternatives (google induced demand it ain't that complicated) saves cities in the long (and relatively short) run. Investing in quality infrastructure makes cities money - it contributes to some 30% of Amsterdam's GDP *growth* per year. A huge portion of a population will utilize quality infrastructure if it exists (go look at any quality city in Europe or Asia). Amsterdam scales better than LA, just fucking scale it. It's not that complicated.
@@callmeconvay7977 Amsterdam is TINY. Read it again. TINY. You are demanding that we fill the ENTIRE United States of America with useless bike infrastructure. You know why it's useless? Because we are MASSIVE. The average American drives 10 to 20 miles to work daily. You expect them to bike 10 miles? 20? Europeans will always struggle with the fact that their countries are geographically tiny.
Planning is very important. Our city has some designated two-way bike lanes, but they were not well planned. They are only on some areas and a lot of them end up obstructed by parked cars. Crossing streets is also very difficult, many cars are not used to the two way system and accidents are common. I would like to bike, but it is too dangerous for me right now.
Wait until you learn how often cars drive park and swerve into unprotected bike lanes. Over 1000 die a year,over 130,000 are injured. How many drivers are injured by bicyclists hitting their car? 0
Bicycle paths last much longer because the load they carry is much much lower than a regular road. A bicycle with a regular rider would weigh less than 100 kgs and thats nothing when compared to a 1.5 tonne SUV or a even heavier truck.
That's funny, because in urban areas if you go that fast you'll get a nice little fine, in most places in urban areas speed limit is 50 km/h (31 mph) and 30km/h (19 mph)
1) Most roads in cities are not 40 mph 2) roads used to be for pedestrians until car corporations tricked everyone into believe they were for cars and needed to be subsidized by the government 3) our entire world is being consumed by car infrastructure making it impossible to move anywhere without cars. We don't need speed minimums for bikers, we need speed maximums for drivers.
@@efinveecaught7281 1. you don't know how to read. 2. The world is fine, how else would we get farm foods into super markets, getting rid of big road ways is about as logical as getting rid of electricity for the average person. 3. having a bike that *can* go 40 mph is different than saying every bike *has to always* go 40 mph (see point 1)
Of course it's cheap. Close a lane, eliminate parking from one side of a street, and put up jersey barriers to protect the two way bike land. Jersey barriers mean that car clowns damage their own vehicles if they invade bike space, yet can be pushed to the side during winter for snow clearance.
I will perpetually be irate that there isn't a safe way for me to rollerblade 15 minutes down the road to the grocery store. We've sucked the fun right out of being adults.
The car culture is so deeply ingrained people act like the car is an extension of them, they can’t imagine life without it so they’re resistant to change. Not to mention cars can be classist and people like to flex their cars
I am so glad I live in Amsterdam. But I do think that the bicycle infrastructure should be re-designed. also things like the single zone-ing zone-ing etc ..
In Paris, it's a bit of a nightmare. Nothing seems coherent, car lanes and parking spots and sidewalks are being taken over by bike lanes, but cyclists dont use the bike lanes because they can't stand slower cyclists and so cut out on the street to overtake.plus they dont stop at red lights, and some even ignore pedestrians crossing - including harassing and yelling abuse at old people, kids and people with strollers to cross faster or get out of their way. And yes, a couple of times, ive seen them slam on the brakes and yell abuse at pregnant women who were crossing on a pedestrian green light. Infrastructure may be cheap, but good bike etiquette is cheaper.
For me, as a wheelchair user, I would rather the cities spend money makeing paths better for all, making the gutters easier for wheelcairs to cross My town just spent millions on a bike path that I have only seen one person use. meanwhile the paths around the hospital are cracked and broken
I had a back and fourth a while back with someone about this. They couldn’t comprehend the fact that a two way bicycle lane which is by itself thinner than a regular US Highway lane and doesn’t have to accommodate anywhere as much weight rolling over it would be cheaper than car infrastructure
Have you ever seen the average driving skill of motorists? I guarantee you've also screamed until you're red in the face about other drivers, but somehow only bikers come to mind when you think of people who make the road worse. Between 60 lb bike, versus the 6,000 lb F-250. Which is making the road more dangerous and difficult to traverse? In the end, why do you care so much about a random biker? if you are on a bike and get hit you die, if you hit a biker in a car you get a slight bump.
You really should brush up on your driving handbook. If you did, you might learn that in some states cyclists can treat stop signs like yield signs, but you probably won’t and will continue to drive through red lights, not use your turn signals, drive distracted, etc.
The best way is to calculate the cost savings and foot traffic in shops that these changes will undoubtably bring. Cargo bikes should also be considered as low impact ways to help restock shops. Lorries can park out of town, and cargo bikes can deliver the rest
That is awesome. Life expectancy 25 to 30 years for a street. Here in the Chicago area, they seem to have to resurface the same roads every damn year 😂
Theirs a major road in my city that was supposed to be widened in my first year of middle school , I’m about to start college in a week and the damn thing is only half way done. So it’s taken them 7 years to pave half of a 1/2 mile section of asphalt. The reason I say this is to show, that in some places even with legal provisions, it still likely won’t get done
I do my best to stay away from cities. I grew up in a small town in America. Growing up, if you wanted to get somewhere on a bike, you made a trail threw the woods to avoid vehicles on the roads! No cost to anyone, but yourself, personal hours, & labor! No other person had to pay for ANYTHING! BS taxes from corrupt politicians to waste other people's money on worthless projects is pathetic! Just as well as the people that push for this waste of money, & resources!
If you're mad about bike lanes costing us "BS taxes" and this "Waste of money and resources" wait until you hear about the billions of dollars the US government and private businesses are forced to spend on roads for cars to drive on. You do realize its all subsidized by your taxes right? Big car corporations don't pay for it, but your taxes go to making gigantic fields for cars to be stored in, for roads for them to drive on, and those roads keep getting bigger and wider and need more repairs. I think your anger is misdirected. The bike lanes cost us like 1/1000th what the roads do. And it doesn't need to be this way.
The entire bike infrastructure budget for amsterdam is about 60m per year… or you can get two to three parking garages.
Exactly. So an average of 800.000 people can benefit in Amsterdam of this budget, but only 750 car owners can benefit from two to three parking garages.
@@tubetuur not even that because parking garages are rarely filled. so lets say 200
the only garages that are filled, are tiny ones under housing complexes. because... you know... they're used??
but car infrastructure is expensive.
roads cost an average of 3 million per mile
add the cost of parking with it
gas enviormental costs, and all you can get is that it is unpayable.
keep that bullshit in europe...
Parking garages are private though.
@@awesomeatronik no? they are build by the government, then "oh no.. we promised free cheap parking but the cost are too much" and then they sell it for a fraction of the cost to a company who then increases the cost of parking there
amsterdam has done this sooo many times and yet still build garages as if it wont happen AGAIN.
Testing has shown time and time again that road wear increases exponentially, not proportionally, with weight, bike infrastructure should theoretically last significantly longer than the roads cars and more importantly heavy trucks drive on.
You’re right, but you also have to keep in mind all the cables, tubes and utilities underneath the roads that do need to be replaced or maintained. For those, 30 years is a long time.
@@denaamisdaanAnd don't forget that UV light contributes to aging of concrete.
You're right the cars and heavy trucks are far more important. Bicycles are for recreational purposes
Minor point of pedantry, but wear is proportional to weight to the fourth power. It's still polynomial growth, but yes, wear is not directly proportional to weight.
Heavy trucks will not reduce, just increase with population demand
Most cities half ass it and put bike lanes on roads that go 45mph or as much as 55mph. Most care are going 5-10 over the speed limit which makes it extremely dangerous for bikes. They absolutely need their separate roads
Those stupid paint ain't enough
Especially when many bikers neglect to use said bike lanes, instead riding in travel lanes and causing problems for everyone else.
These are all over in LA. Painted lanes that place a cyclist between parked cars and vehicles moving well above the speed limit. Total shite!
So important to remember that our cities are not permanent and they are always being constantly renovated and updated. Which is why it’s important that we never stop fighting for the future we want
Reading that actually made me feel inspired haha
Tell that to the people who want to "preserve the character of our neighborhood." Such an insufferable mentality
@@Bioniking Do people forget that cars haven't always existed, and that putting that infrastructure in place for them was also a major change at one point?
@@raerohan4241Horse drawn carts existed before cars and the space they took up was just as large if not more so.
'Us Drivers' bro you don't speak for anyone but yourself@@user-mj5vx8xj8t
This is EXACTLY how we got our excellent infrastructure. We don't rip out what is new, we replace things in a regular maintenance schedule according to well-thought out standards.
But from what I gather, it would be revolutionary for US cities to have maintenance schedules (including financing)...
Not only is the initial cost cheaper, bycicle infrastructure requires much less maintance. The reason our roads break down is because cars are extremely heavy. Roads for bikes, mopeds, pedestrians can last indefinitely
In San Antonio, TX, the city bought land to create a paved Greenway Trail system. There are over 100 miles of connected trails, across the city that enable cyclists to be on safe trails versus dangerous roadways. Although, I would prefer more common, shared infra that accommodates a combination of autos, bikes, and pedestrians; this local Greenway has also enabled a safe cycling and commuting option for San Antonio.
Hello, Dallas, take a memo.
Kudos, San Antonio. 👏 ❤😀
@cbailey2376 About 35 years ago, I lived and cycled in Dallas. At the time, White Rock Lake was being extended to North Dallas, but even then it was overrun with riders. We are very fortunate with the path San Antonio has taken under a vision of former Mayor Phil Harberger. Part of the expansion and maintenance is funded with .25% local sales tax. Visitors come from Austin to assess the development. Hope Dallas will consider an extended Greenway option. Safe cycling!
is there a website that I can see this greenway system on?
That's a lot better than just sticking them right next to car roadways if you ask me.
Just like drivers, cyclists can be absolute idiots and sometimes straight-up dangerous assholes. Giving a separate but still usable thoroughfare is the ideal solution, IMO.
@@crossup13 For sure. The stupid "bike lanes" on roads with zero separation from cars are unpleasant and downright dangerous.
The govts don't want this because they don't make money. By promoting EVs instead of low emission vehicles like motorcycles and bicycles, they can invest in the companies which they are pushing policies on. Follow the $.
no more car dependent infrastructure!
"Bike infrastructure too expensive"
"It's the cheapest to build..."
"Oh, well, you're right but I wasn't going to do it anyways."
its the most expensive because it's the lowest capacity and it generates no income, unlike roads/cars where you pay taxes on plates, gas/electricity and a license. So until you have to pay yearly taxes on a bike, register it with the state and have a license for it, then bike lanes will be the single most expensive piece of infrastructure per monetary value for a city.
@@TiberiusCowgill Actually, you are wrong and need to update your simplified view of economics.
@@TiberiusCowgillbike infrastructure is significantly higher capacity than car infrastructure, like over 10x lol…also car infrastructure is insanely expensive because it needs an insane amount of land, massive flyovers and turn circles, constant road maintenance, systems to help investigate crashes etc, free parking. Taxes and license plate registrations literally makes such a tiny minuscule portion of the cost of car infrastructure that it’s literally negligible lol
@@TiberiusCowgill If you look [at] corridor capacity charts you will find that a cycle track can replace a 6 lane freeway for passenger capacity.
@jakub.kubicek except you're wrong.....
The main problem in most of North America is they have to start at absolute zero: Many stroads don't even have a sidewalk to start with and even their residential streets are often to dangerous to bike on due to wide lanes and high speeds.
So just waiting 25 years until the road is "due" (and usually much much longer for residential) might work here in Northern Germany, where when they really forgot a bike lane some 50 years ago you still can use a sidewalk or take another route.
Part of that is a matter of scale the us is massive as are its major cities (by area), and th other is that in the 60's and 50's cars were set as the preferred mode of transportation so all cities after thst point were designed that way.
@@John-Wolfe Hamburg was a wasteland after the war and everybody saw the car as the most important thing of the future. So in the 50s they build a main arterial: Three lanes per direction. But also with bike lanes on both sides that still meet current design standards - not as a "safe alternative", but to keep the slow bicycles of the road.
@@John-Wolfecities don’t have to be big
@@John-Wolfe American cities are bigger and less dense, but not so big that building bike infrastructure is useless or impossible, especially since we have relatively dense downtowns still. Besides, all it takes is a few relatively simple changes to zoning to make our cities better, allowing them to grow in smarter ways
@@John-Wolfe yeah well that is another problem that US won't adress. Building endless suburbahn hell.
In the UK the quality of the cycle lanes is shocking. The new ones near me is horrible to cycle on. really rough ride, and it's better to cycle on road or footpath.
never happy
Also the street renewal period in the UK is closer to 70 years, not 30.
I saw they kind of snake back and forth, can you imagine if roads were like that? The problem is they're brute forcing it.
@@Shiggiesmalls02Why would anyone be happy with bad infrastructure?
never used by cyclists
Bike lanes are always empty
It's not just cities we need to rethink. We also need to rethink suburbs. This might be more productive than rethinking cities, because as designed suburbs are economic losses and totally dependent on cars for transportation.
Good luck imposing your radical agenda without the use of government tyranny.
@Sirisaac Newton the government made it so we cant build anything in many in suburb locations, thats more tyrannical then just removing the law
Ya and also a much better place to live cities are terrible
@@Dangernoodllesmall brain suburbanite detected
@@Dangernoodlle you can live in a small town or on the outskirts of it. we just need to stop romanticizing suburban life because it's literally not convenient. one of the saddest things is that kids grow up doing nothing and unable to gain any independence because they can't go anywhere without their parents driving them
Im not a cyclist.... but I agree that cyclists need their own lane and everything, so they can be safe and drivers dont have to have a mini heart attack w/e they see a bike on the roar which is the only spot they can be in, in the US, atm
90% of Dutch people also aren’t cyclists
@@patrickponce483890% not a cyclist? Where did you get that statistic? 64% of the Dutch population uses the bike daily or multiple times a week. 26% never uses a bike.
You don't even have to wait for the road to need maintenance to implement bike infrastructure. It's cheap and easy to just throw down some portable concrete curbs to define protected bike lanes and reduce car lanes. You get more bike infrastructure without rebuilding the entire street, you don't have to wait, and it will be more appealing to the public if people don't have to be afraid of getting hit by a car or "doored" by a parked car.
Absolutely not, reducing car lanes to make room for slow ass inefficient bikes is utter idiocy. Negatively effecting hundreds or thousands, to begin a dozen people. Y’all are so entitled it’s unbelievable.
How's a bicycle inefficient?
Cost is recouped with the value of everything gained thru it ...but then the city and govt institutions have to recognize that healthy living and neighborhood design is important. That's where we fail.
This is needed around the world 👏👏👏
@@RisingFlag100But the reason people are unwilling to use them is because the infrastructure is bad, not the other way around. Also, everyone advocating for bikes accepts that cars are still a necessity for long journeys
No it’s not.
@@RisingFlag100 that's the lamest excuse for inefficient land use. Just because you have lots of land doesn't mean you should use it inefficiently. Classic sunk cost fallacy
@@RisingFlag100 and maybe the reason more casual cyclists don't use the bike lanes here in the states is because they are poorly designed and are usually unseparated from fastmoving traffic
@@RisingFlag100 our cities were not built for cars, they were bulldozed for cars in the 60s and 70s. Auto industry lobbying killed off street car systems that even small towns had in abundance in the 1920s and 1930s. You don't have to build infrastructure specifically for bikes in order to make an area cycle-able, you just have to not exclusively make it for cars. and the climate is a weak excuse for car-dependent development, there are plenty examples around the globe of cities in hot and cold climates with excellent public transit and ability to walk/bike...
Narrator sounds like my boss and I thought I was at work for a sec
Cycle infrastructure saves money overall long term because of th3 reduction in hazardous air and noise pollution and increase in exercise resulting in a healthier population.
Plus cyclists are more likely to stop at small shops on the way home and boost local economies
Plus just the costs of the actual materials used. There's a reason Roman roads lasted so long, they didn't have 2 ton monstrosities crushing them. It's crazy, in every statistic or metric I come across public transportation is just the better solution.
It's also just cheaper to build to begin with. But yes, the gap widens even more over time
We can't afford NOT to do it now.
Irrational statement.
@@howtubeableirrational statement
@@howtubeableyou sure you read that right?
commenting for the algorithm. more people need to see this, especially legislatiors
And those who are living on and around these infrastructure changes. Its GOOD to incorporate society into this thinking to encourage acceptance of these societal lifestyle changes.
The City of Vancouver recently spent $1.3 million to create a bike lane that was 0.8 miles long.
Sometimes bike lanes are expensive.
Sounds like they needed to waste (steal) the cash
Yes in Canada different policies then in the Netherlands or anywhere else
Bruh my city ain’t fixing a street until there are more craters per square feet than the moon and even then they’ll wait for a couple cars to breakdown to start doing their job.
Cycle infrastructure is only needed cos drivers and cyclists won't be careful and considerate...
Building bike infrastructure may have a large upfront cost but it is FAR cheaper in maintenance.
That makes sense, almost no one is using them. Build them, and no one will come.
@@williewonka6694it's estimated that 800k people use the cycle lanes in Amsterdam alone so that disproves that good cycle infrastructure doesn't get used
@@williewonka6694go to copenhagen or amsterdam please. Come visit and see what happens when you build bike infrastructure. If you make it well then people will use it
@@sventinus america is not amsterdam
@@willblack8575 it could be
I am so glad you put this in a little snippet because this quote right here just sums up the importance of design and progress over time so well.
Walkabe cities are so much better than car dependant ones
The problem, at least here in the UK, is that urban streets are rarely wide enough to accommodate the sort of segregated cycle infrastructure seen in the video. To fit in cycle lanes often means reducing pedestrian footpaths (or having 'shared use' pedestrian/cyclist paths) or reducing the carriageway to a single lane and introducing a one-way system. Add in that most urban areas also rely on on-street parking for both residents and visitors and the difficulties mount.
america is a little different though for our problems, the shops majority of those closed down over 30 years.
Competition for stores is great till everyone goes to cheaper store which then closes the small stores. also when companies can just pick up and move doesn't help either.
Larger stores needed more room like walmart, so to fit compacity, they built a larger walmart outside of town and then closed and sold the old walmart that was in town
Those problems are made by the car and not solved by it. Not everyone in the UK can have a car, otherwise it just wouldn't work in dense city centers. If everyone owns a car it's not gonna work at all. On the other hand, if you have fewer cars then there is space where they used to park.
Well, the best practice is to covert those urban streets into bicycle streets, where cyclist have priority and cars are considered as guests, as per Dutch standard.
Bro, footpaths are the BEST thing for biking.
Hurry up and encourage cycling, America!
They’re doing it as we speak.
@@miles5600 Well aware, LOL. Ohio has the highest mileage of bike trails in America. Largest matrix of bike trails in America is ALSO where I live in SW Ohio. Witnessed them doing so, "As we speak," for well over 30 years.
@@garyseckel295 Nice, Ohio is doing a way better job than most of the country
@@garyseckel295 maybe... But no Ohio cities is among top 50 us cities for biking . Columbus has no rail commute service and Cleveland and Cincinatyi are botyom half of 50 cities on bicycle use modes ..
Recreational bike trailsare something completely different than a bike path network for daily commute and transport ...
My estimate is that the state is very car dependent !
@@lws7394 Simply passing on Published Information. Yes, I was addressing "Recreational bike trails."
I wish they would do something positive like this where I live. Norwich UK is the least cycle-friendly city I have ever had the misfortune to ride in.
Here they still think that painting a picture of a bicycle on an existing footpath somehow makes it a bike-lane - except it doesn't!
You have to live in a bike city like Amsterdam to really appreciate what the change brings.
20min ride to wherever you are going.
Bike and pedestrian become king.
Heightened level of awareness.
Improved physical wellbeing.
Improve air 'taste'.
Your body becomes your gasoline.
Appreciation of environment I.e outdoor spaces.
Improved human interaction.
*Endless benefits*
never really understood why other countrys never had a really good bycycle infastructure, here in the Netherlands every village has it
edit: thanks for the information about the bycycle infractructure in other countrys.
Too expensive lol /s
@@tobiasstewart5632 it is litterally one of the cheapest infrastructures
you won the war on cars from our perspective.
North America is still losing as of right now. Electric cargo e-bike uses a small fraction of what a Tesla would need battery wise, but you see Teslas everywhere.
@@kleintje3080 it's too difficult to do and noone ever uses them anyway /s
@@WasephWastarthe Netherlands shows you’re wrong. They built a car centric infrastructure and found out it would not work and then started to change the future plans.
There is a reason why people in the USA are less healthy, less happy, more angry, more afraid, more stressed, and so on. Everyone is stuck in traffic and requires to use a car for even the smallest jobs.
"Bike infrastructure is too expensive", it is a fraction of the size of regular roads and rarely needs maintenance because bikes aren't 1-2 tonnes.
In the US, the best places for bicycles have SO MUCH THEFT, it is almost crazy to own a bike OR car.
Just like Paris
We dont need separated recreational paths for bikes, we need separated lanes on the roads we already have
So make bicyclists bay fees and tolls. Just like cars do. Roads are paid for by drivers
“Roads are paid for by drivers.”
There are studies that have proven that drivers don’t pay anywhere near the cost of the infrastructure they use.
pirg.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Who-Pays-for-Roads-vUS_1.pdf
usa.streetsblog.org/2013/01/23/drivers-cover-just-51-percent-of-u-s-road-spending#
@@hostilepancakesdoesn’t mean that bikes shouldn’t pay their fair share. Or, yknow, they could be considerate and ride on paths/sidewalks (GUESS WHAT???? THEY PARALLEL THE ROAD AND YOU DONT INCONVENIENCE ANYONE)
"Everything they're building now is going to be around for 30 years.."
Looks at painted bike gutter...
in NYC they occasionally stop road constructions every 25-30 years
In my city they keep redoing intersections with no regard for bike planning.
Most city officials don't even care about what makes sense in the moment, never mind the future. Zoning is the best example of this. New builds? "My contributing constituents take priority."
NYC thinks that paint is bike infrastructure
Forbid large cars in NY-city, slow down the speed and only alow smaller electric vehicles on the surface roads. The lower speed and smaller cars makes the need for safety go down, which means cheaper cars. The smaller cars means more cars can fit on the roads so now we can make lanes and parking narrower which means we can reclaim more road for bikes and pedestrians.
Great! A bike commute to work would only extend it by 2 hours! How fun! Spending 8 hours working and 5 hours biking.
We need better public transport and walkable cities in america, the excuse that america is too big is a shitty excuse when railroads built this country and car companies bought out trams and railroads to make more room for cars, you can't go anywhere in america without a car, it's dangerous to walk and bike often times there aren't any sidewalks or bikelanes. Car companies put a chokehold on our country and are squeezing the money and life from us.
I live in USA. We are slowly understanding this. Wish it was faster.
Bicycle lanes and painting on the ground only stays for about 6-8 months here in Québec. They have the worst contractors in the country. Roads have to be redone every 3 years or so.
"every 25-30 years" 😂 est bonne
Resurfacing a road takes weeks, resurfacing a bike path, literally takes a night.
Tell that to the street outside my work building that's been closed for 3 months!
I've never had bicycle infrastructure yet somehow my bicycle makes it everywhere I need to go.😊
Do your ride on the roads?
@@tangomango2353I do
The most surprising thing is hearing roads need to be resrufaced every 25-30 years. The streets here are torn up every few years for who knows what.
Sadly in Arizona riding a bike for the most part is hard to do because everything is so far from each other having bike lanes wouldn't help
Everything is so far because car infrastructure needs way too much space
So design your cities to be more traversable by bike.
@@thatoneguy611he is not a designer my guy, you can't just remove and rebuild a town right away and would require permission from the city and funds.
You seriously gotta be unemployed to do this and use your time and effort
@@lilacghoste8366 well no shit. I didn’t say it would be an immediate change at the hands of one UA-cam commenter.
@@thatoneguy611 we aren't talking about cities. You Europeans just can't understand that we live in a bigger country then you.
The problem is that cities try to modify the existing infrastructure without making allowance for lost parking for local businesses. Or for the reduced number of traffic lanes causing extra congestion in traffic. Nor do they put in any enforcement for the cyclists who ride like idiots.
I ride a bike to and from work. I drive truck for work. Cities need to find solutions that work for both motorists and cyclists. The problem is that they do not get advice from experts thst understand all sides to the issues.
i walk at work, sadly my drive is teh only time i sit down besides my 30min lunch break and (2) 10 min breaks, i roughly walk 10 -12 miles a day.
i'm rural but i do have to drive to town
Each additional car added to the road has an exponential impact on commute time. The solution to making roads better for motorists is finding a way to get as many cars off the road as possible via mass transit, safe bicycling, and walkable cities.
Cycling and proper infrastructure creates healthier communities and reduces traffic congestion. It also helps with less of an impact on the environment. Wins all the way around.
I hate knowing that all the construction projects in my city are going to be finished looking exactly the same as they did before they ripped it up. I don't expect them to rip everything out at once, but building it right the second time should be priority.
I was just in the Netherlands and was blown away by the bike paths everywhere.
the thing is some people park on the bicycle lane sometimes I just want to break their windshield
Yeah bike lanes need to be built properly to work
Or the mirrors. 😈🤨
The majority of the time, it's not their fault, it's the city's fault for making it both a bike lane and parking at the same time, rather than have bike lanes separated from the road entirely
That's where police need to do their job and give hefty fines
Get a cargo bike and 4 garage jacks.
Jack up the car and roll it into the car lane. After all, it's their lane.
I'm so happy I recognized that voice
This is the best way to put it when it comes to about any political issue/ decision that is made. Not just bicycles.
Whatever it takes to keep cars and bikes out if the same lane. If jaywalking is illegal I don't see why we keep putting bicyclists together with cars. It's like putting a guppy in with sharks.
In prior decades I would agree. But the climate is breaking down super fast and we just don’t have time now. We have to just get rid of private cars in urban areas as soon as possible. That’s how we’re going to make the change in the fastest possible time.
It isn't going to happen.
You could ban all cars and it wouldn't solve climate change. It's really just a drop in the bucket when most of the pollution is done by corporations
We can't just get rid of cars. Cars are not the issue. Car centric design is the issue. By giving people access to things like bike lanes and sustainable public tranpsport, we decrease the need for cars.
try & come take my car from me mf see what happens
@@-SidneyPrescott Thanks for showing me that Britain isn’t as insane as America quite yet 🤣
now if only cyclists would obey traffic signals
If there where safe intersections for bikers.
Now if only drivers wouldn't try to kill cyclists...
@@gorganfredman5363 And understood that those traveling in a heavier vehicle always must be ready to stop for lighter ones and pedestrians/cyclists....
@@TheEsseboycyclists are scum that want all the privileges of motor vehicles and pedestrians at the same time
Oh no who will think of the person driving the lifted ford f-250 with a steel frame and aluminum body and hundreds of safety features and it's lifted off the road 5 feet. They inconvenienced slightly by the menace of bad bikers!
"we need to build roads instead of bike infrastructure. You know,,, to save money"
“Everything we build now is going to be around for 30 years”
Philippine roads getting demolished several times in just 5 years:
💀
Amsterdam has 800k residents - Los Angeles county has 10 million people, plus at least 2-3 million illegals.
okay? it also has more space, and obviously more need for public transportation. you literally just need to scale up Amsterdam, bud.
@@callmeconvay7977 more space means more time.
@@callmeconvay7977 so spend trillions of dollars on an infrastructure a small portion of America would use? Amsterdam is tiny.
@@GlorpLorp??? Car infrastructure is the least efficient (read: most expensive) infrastructure you can build. Reducing traffic by building more efficient alternatives (google induced demand it ain't that complicated) saves cities in the long (and relatively short) run.
Investing in quality infrastructure makes cities money - it contributes to some 30% of Amsterdam's GDP *growth* per year. A huge portion of a population will utilize quality infrastructure if it exists (go look at any quality city in Europe or Asia). Amsterdam scales better than LA, just fucking scale it. It's not that complicated.
@@callmeconvay7977 Amsterdam is TINY. Read it again. TINY. You are demanding that we fill the ENTIRE United States of America with useless bike infrastructure. You know why it's useless? Because we are MASSIVE. The average American drives 10 to 20 miles to work daily. You expect them to bike 10 miles? 20? Europeans will always struggle with the fact that their countries are geographically tiny.
The people that fetishize bikes are just as wrong as the people that love cars. The best future for urban life is trains
Not with my taxes.
Trains cant take people to work tho and people dont have respectful hygiene
No, it' all about options. Trains are fine, but they don't take kids to school or me to the bakery a couple of streets away.
Went to berlin and amsterdam this summer. Damn was public transport good in berlin. And the bike lanes in amsterdam 😩😩
Planning is very important. Our city has some designated two-way bike lanes, but they were not well planned. They are only on some areas and a lot of them end up obstructed by parked cars. Crossing streets is also very difficult, many cars are not used to the two way system and accidents are common. I would like to bike, but it is too dangerous for me right now.
You can build all the bicycle infrastructure all you want
Bicyclists are going to be on the wrong lane anyway 😂
Wait until you learn how often cars drive park and swerve into unprotected bike lanes. Over 1000 die a year,over 130,000 are injured.
How many drivers are injured by bicyclists hitting their car? 0
Yeah because if you remove the cars and ride a bicycle, you don’t need lanes.
Bicycle paths last much longer because the load they carry is much much lower than a regular road. A bicycle with a regular rider would weigh less than 100 kgs and thats nothing when compared to a 1.5 tonne SUV or a even heavier truck.
They fot it right in Boulder, CO too. Bikes ride with motor vehicles with very few incidents and have been for decades.
Cycling infrastructure also lasts like oh idk 10x longer than any road used by cars.
Never seen a Businessman or woman,or a Tradesman cycling, especally in the rain, high winds, and snow!!!!!
How would you know what they are they have raincoat on and bike PPE?
Hope you enjoy riding your bike in -20 Celsius weather in Canada.
People do.
Just ask Canadian cyclists, or Fins, or Danes, or swedes, or Norwegians.
Hell I'll bet even the Russians use their bikes during the winter.
Hope you enjoy riding your bike in 98 degrees F and 100% humidity. Enjoy your heart attack.
So there’s this crazy invention called the jacket…
@@thatoneguy611 at -20 you are a joke
It's really quite refreshing 😜
If your bike cant go 40 mph then it doesnt deserve to be on the road.
And it shouldn’t have to
That's funny, because in urban areas if you go that fast you'll get a nice little fine, in most places in urban areas speed limit is 50 km/h (31 mph) and 30km/h (19 mph)
@@therealpeter2267 Why can people on youtube not fucking read? I said *cant go* not *has to go 40 mph all the time no matter the laws*.
1) Most roads in cities are not 40 mph 2) roads used to be for pedestrians until car corporations tricked everyone into believe they were for cars and needed to be subsidized by the government 3) our entire world is being consumed by car infrastructure making it impossible to move anywhere without cars. We don't need speed minimums for bikers, we need speed maximums for drivers.
@@efinveecaught7281 1. you don't know how to read.
2. The world is fine, how else would we get farm foods into super markets, getting rid of big road ways is about as logical as getting rid of electricity for the average person.
3. having a bike that *can* go 40 mph is different than saying every bike *has to always* go 40 mph (see point 1)
Of course it's cheap. Close a lane, eliminate parking from one side of a street, and put up jersey barriers to protect the two way bike land. Jersey barriers mean that car clowns damage their own vehicles if they invade bike space, yet can be pushed to the side during winter for snow clearance.
I will perpetually be irate that there isn't a safe way for me to rollerblade 15 minutes down the road to the grocery store. We've sucked the fun right out of being adults.
The car culture is so deeply ingrained people act like the car is an extension of them, they can’t imagine life without it so they’re resistant to change. Not to mention cars can be classist and people like to flex their cars
I am so glad I live in Amsterdam. But I do think that the bicycle infrastructure should be re-designed. also things like the single zone-ing zone-ing etc ..
Good thing you're not working for the municipality then.
Pedestrian safety guidelines need to be considered by bicilcle advocates
The goal should be to separate bikes and automobiles, not integrate them. Integrate bikes and pedestrians
In Paris, it's a bit of a nightmare. Nothing seems coherent, car lanes and parking spots and sidewalks are being taken over by bike lanes, but cyclists dont use the bike lanes because they can't stand slower cyclists and so cut out on the street to overtake.plus they dont stop at red lights, and some even ignore pedestrians crossing - including harassing and yelling abuse at old people, kids and people with strollers to cross faster or get out of their way.
And yes, a couple of times, ive seen them slam on the brakes and yell abuse at pregnant women who were crossing on a pedestrian green light.
Infrastructure may be cheap, but good bike etiquette is cheaper.
For me, as a wheelchair user, I would rather the cities spend money makeing paths better for all, making the gutters easier for wheelcairs to cross
My town just spent millions on a bike path that I have only seen one person use. meanwhile the paths around the hospital are cracked and broken
Sorry my guy but USA don't care about disabled and mentally ill people and poor people ( because they can't drive, )
I had a back and fourth a while back with someone about this. They couldn’t comprehend the fact that a two way bicycle lane which is by itself thinner than a regular US Highway lane and doesn’t have to accommodate anywhere as much weight rolling over it would be cheaper than car infrastructure
In my city here in new zealand government paid $110m for 110km or cycle way 😂😂😂😅
Imagine if car infrastructure was that cheap😂
When bikers start stopping at stop signs I’ll start respecting them
The one traveling in the heavier vehicle have to respect the smaller ones...that is the law of the land...
Have you ever seen the average driving skill of motorists? I guarantee you've also screamed until you're red in the face about other drivers, but somehow only bikers come to mind when you think of people who make the road worse.
Between 60 lb bike, versus the 6,000 lb F-250. Which is making the road more dangerous and difficult to traverse?
In the end, why do you care so much about a random biker? if you are on a bike and get hit you die, if you hit a biker in a car you get a slight bump.
@@efinveecaught7281 keep whining soy boy
You really should brush up on your driving handbook. If you did, you might learn that in some states cyclists can treat stop signs like yield signs, but you probably won’t and will continue to drive through red lights, not use your turn signals, drive distracted, etc.
They need to build more Bicycle 🚲 Infastructure in my city and surrounding cities!
Even if you do it the “right” way, it’s still going to be expensive in America due to corruption and incompetence. Nobody wants to address that.
Note the lack of curbs in the Netherlands. The curbs we're building in North America are the wrong approach.
in the uk, the last I heard from the government, they are prioritising cycle lanes over any other transport 👍
The best way is to calculate the cost savings and foot traffic in shops that these changes will undoubtably bring.
Cargo bikes should also be considered as low impact ways to help restock shops.
Lorries can park out of town, and cargo bikes can deliver the rest
It's more of a skill issue in America than of funding. They just can't with bikes.
no they just don't have time
@@knightwolf3511meanwhile asians and Europeans..
@@lilacghoste8366 buddy. How long do you think it takes to go from the east coast to the west coast while biking. Don't search it up.
That is awesome. Life expectancy 25 to 30 years for a street. Here in the Chicago area, they seem to have to resurface the same roads every damn year 😂
North America: no one wants to ride bikes unless you’re seen as Lance Armstrong while riding.
Yes, it’s super cheap to paint lines on a road that say, “This is for bikes now.” I don’t think price is the reason people object.
Theirs a major road in my city that was supposed to be widened in my first year of middle school , I’m about to start college in a week and the damn thing is only half way done. So it’s taken them 7 years to pave half of a 1/2 mile section of asphalt.
The reason I say this is to show, that in some places even with legal provisions, it still likely won’t get done
I know the voice of Mr. NJB when i hear it
The way they did it in my area was to take the right lane and now traffic is a nightmare. But the 3 bikers who use it daily love it.
Those people sitting in traffic sound like they're making a dumb decision and should consider biking.
Just one more lane and traffic will go away 🛣️
My roads don’t even have good car infrastructure
The bike lanes in Amsterdam make it scary for pedestrians
Perhaps pedestrian should stay on the pavement instead of walking on bikelanes...?
I do my best to stay away from cities. I grew up in a small town in America. Growing up, if you wanted to get somewhere on a bike, you made a trail threw the woods to avoid vehicles on the roads! No cost to anyone, but yourself, personal hours, & labor! No other person had to pay for ANYTHING! BS taxes from corrupt politicians to waste other people's money on worthless projects is pathetic! Just as well as the people that push for this waste of money, & resources!
If you're mad about bike lanes costing us "BS taxes" and this "Waste of money and resources" wait until you hear about the billions of dollars the US government and private businesses are forced to spend on roads for cars to drive on.
You do realize its all subsidized by your taxes right? Big car corporations don't pay for it, but your taxes go to making gigantic fields for cars to be stored in, for roads for them to drive on, and those roads keep getting bigger and wider and need more repairs.
I think your anger is misdirected. The bike lanes cost us like 1/1000th what the roads do. And it doesn't need to be this way.