Beyond the Autobahn: Germany's New Bike Highways

On 26/02/16 23:18, Duane wrote:
On 26/02/2016 2:33 AM, James wrote:
On 26/02/16 15:04, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/25/2016 9:59 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
With the recent opening of a "bike highway," Germany is taking the
lead in Europe by starting to build a network of wide, dedicated
bicycle thoroughfares designed to lure increasing numbers of commuters
out of their cars and onto two wheels.

Cycling highways are fundamentally different from usual cycling lanes.
Highways are around 4 to 5 meters wide -- twice the width of many bike
paths -- so faster cyclists can overtake slower ones in both
directions. High-quality asphalt is often used to enable bicyclists to
travel faster. These highways are designed with few or no
intersections with major roads, and as few traffic lights as possible
-- all intended to enable cyclists to travel effortlessly within or
among cities and suburbs. Like autobahns, the biking highways are
designed to allow travelers to cover large distances without leaving
the network.

http://www.resilience.org/stories/20...bike-highways#




I've read about this before, but I've not seen any details on how they
will arrange for "few or no intersections with major roads" while still
being useful for transportation. It seems there would be relatively few
locations that could be practically served while meeting that criterion.


Grade separation.


In the picture it looks like there's an overpass with some sort of exit
to the sides. This is similar to a plan here in Montreal where they are
rebuilding an area called the Turcot Interchange.

Precisely. That is an example of grade separation.

--
JS

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oH6mw2Rc3DQ

yeah 500 pounds ya need zero gravity..


when it falls you incinerate in a flash of white light welding your ashes to the tarmac......ROAD WARRIOR !

On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 12:12:12 PM UTC-8, AMuzi wrote:
On 2/26/2016 1:15 PM, jbeattie wrote:
On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 7:56:33 AM UTC-8, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/26/2016 2:33 AM, James wrote:
On 26/02/16 15:04, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/25/2016 9:59 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
With the recent opening of a "bike highway," Germany is taking the
lead in Europe by starting to build a network of wide, dedicated
bicycle thoroughfares designed to lure increasing numbers of commuters
out of their cars and onto two wheels.

Cycling highways are fundamentally different from usual cycling lanes.
Highways are around 4 to 5 meters wide -- twice the width of many bike
paths -- so faster cyclists can overtake slower ones in both
directions. High-quality asphalt is often used to enable bicyclists to
travel faster. These highways are designed with few or no
intersections with major roads, and as few traffic lights as possible
-- all intended to enable cyclists to travel effortlessly within or
among cities and suburbs. Like autobahns, the biking highways are
designed to allow travelers to cover large distances without leaving
the network.

http://www.resilience.org/stories/20...bike-highways#



I've read about this before, but I've not seen any details on how they
will arrange for "few or no intersections with major roads" while still
being useful for transportation. It seems there would be relatively few
locations that could be practically served while meeting that criterion.


Grade separation.

That would be their plan, I'm sure, but it's hugely expensive. I've
been over four (IIRC) modern bike path bridges within 60 miles of my
home. (One was since removed, BTW.) They're showpieces, but one can't
afford showpieces very often. And if the project can't afford them very
often, it seems the routes must avoid most busy roads. That makes the
routes sound less useful.

Even for those willing to spend huge sums of public money, it seems each
bridge or underpass would divert money that could be used instead to
build an additional ten to fifteen miles of perhaps lateral paths.

BTW, Stevenage in Britain has grade separations for its extensive
bikeway system. But that system has been a failure. See
http://evworld.com/urban.cfm?newsid=17

One of the problems, supposedly, is that people feel insecure going
through the underpasses, especially at night.

But a bigger problem is that Stevenage did nothing to actively
discourage car use. By contrast, Dutch cities tend to make car parking
rare and super-expensive, and they close direct routes to cars so car
trips take longer than bike trips, etc. etc.

It seems that as long as it's easier to get into a car and turn the key,
almost everyone will prefer to drive.

I think it will become parallel infrastructure for eBikes. Except for the devoted recreational cyclist or racer, most people don't want to ride that far to get to work, but you can game the system with an eBike. I was thinking about that -- in Vancouver, Washington, housing is cheaper, and there is no state income tax (meaningful later when I retire). The bridges and traffic into Portland are miserable, but I could beat the traffic and deal with the extra 10 mile distance by riding an eBike. I'd get something fast.. Clear the way!

-- Jay Beattie.


friendly, hip, eco-sensitive
Oh, and 200HP, 218mph:

http://www.engadget.com/2014/05/20/l...bike-revealed/

Your firm has an employee electric vehicle subsidy right?

Maybe something less obvious -- like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0-5kerYz6B0 Spin my legs around now and then to make it look plausible.

-- Jay Beattie.

THE BIKE ROUTEN NEEDS PARTOLING, CLEANiNG, MAINTENANCE, REPAVING GRASS CUTTING LIGHTS ELECTRICITY....

are we Americans in tough with German weltanschauung ?

Maybe in Portland

lower income groups here can't hack it. All cooks n cleaners are on the bus or pooling. Local help with cars that die quit for unemployment, welfare, ect

bike use is waaaay down post Lance. During Zika ....

ride all year save for the future ? GNAW buy a Honda n lower it Dude go street racin'

Beattie, yawl own your house ? eeieieyyayayy buy 2 ebikes and a cape !

On Friday, February 26, 2016 at 6:41:14 PM UTC-5, wrote:
Beattie, yawl own your house ? eeieieyyayayy buy 2 ebikes and a cape !

yeah like me , move offshore !

James wrote:
On 26/02/16 23:18, Duane wrote:
On 26/02/2016 2:33 AM, James wrote:
On 26/02/16 15:04, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 2/25/2016 9:59 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
With the recent opening of a "bike highway," Germany is taking the
lead in Europe by starting to build a network of wide, dedicated
bicycle thoroughfares designed to lure increasing numbers of commuters
out of their cars and onto two wheels.

Cycling highways are fundamentally different from usual cycling lanes.
Highways are around 4 to 5 meters wide -- twice the width of many bike
paths -- so faster cyclists can overtake slower ones in both
directions. High-quality asphalt is often used to enable bicyclists to
travel faster. These highways are designed with few or no
intersections with major roads, and as few traffic lights as possible
-- all intended to enable cyclists to travel effortlessly within or
among cities and suburbs. Like autobahns, the biking highways are
designed to allow travelers to cover large distances without leaving
the network.

http://www.resilience.org/stories/20...bike-highways#




I've read about this before, but I've not seen any details on how they
will arrange for "few or no intersections with major roads" while still
being useful for transportation. It seems there would be relatively few
locations that could be practically served while meeting that criterion.


Grade separation.


In the picture it looks like there's an overpass with some sort of exit
to the sides. This is similar to a plan here in Montreal where they are
rebuilding an area called the Turcot Interchange.

Precisely. That is an example of grade separation.


I expect the one here to get a lot of usage. It is in an area that is
particularly unpleasant to ride or drive.
I expect the one pictured to be the same as long as it's functional.

--
duane

On 2/26/2016 8:01 PM, Duane wrote:

I expect the one here to get a lot of usage. It is in an area that is
particularly unpleasant to ride or drive.

In my area, the powers that be have been pretty good at building new
infrastructure to get around "particularly unpleasant" areas to ride.
This has led to that "second tier" of riders, riders who found the
unpleasant areas reason enough not to ride in the past. The first tier
went from "g-d I hate that freeway interchange" to "wow, this is nice."
Next month, the spousal unit's company is moving to the industrial park
where I used to work. She would never have considered cycling there
prior to the completion of the San Tomas Aquino Creek Trail, the freeway
intersection involved cutting across high speed on and off ramps three
times in each direction. I used to do that and it was not pleasant.

If you look at the cities throughout the world with high cycling levels,
they also tend to have high levels of infrastructure. For those people
that adhere blindly to the tenets of "vehicular cycling," the
infrastructure is not only unnecessary, it discredits the whole theory
of vehicular cycling. We don't want cyclists afraid to ride on regular
roads, sharing them with vehicles, but by the same token when separate
infrastructure eliminates those "particularly unpleasant" places most
cyclists would think that it's a good thing.

http://urbantexture.com/urbantexture...6-_DSC9975.jpg


http://i.istockimg.com/file_thumbvie...-road-sign.jpg