I was eager to try this for myself. Although it was my first visit to the city, I found it easy to follow traffic and quickly learned the method for left turns (waiting on the far corner for the light to change). The relatively small number of traffic lights prevented frequent delays, and I did not observe a single vehicle opening a door into or blocking a path (it helps that there is a low curb between the traffic lane and the cycle lane). At intersections, the cycle path was almost always painted bright blue, reminding motorists to yield (which they did). To my surprise, I never felt unsafe!Not every street had a separate cycle path. Some were simply blocked off with bollards at selected intersections, preventing motor vehicles from using them as through routes but allowing pedestrians and cyclists to do so.
Another thing that made cycling incredibly convenient was not needing to physically chain down one's bicycle at each destination. Most bikes have a lock that immobilizes the rear wheel, which takes only a few seconds to engage and release. This prevents someone from riding off with your bike but is not especially secure. (Very high bicycle ownership contributes to an extremely low rate of bike theft.)
I think that New York can learn a great deal from Copenhagen. Both cities became less pedestrian- and cyclist-friendly when they attempted to maximize motor traffic throughput on city streets. Copenhagen improved its cycling infrastructure in response to activists petitioning reluctant politicians to address traffic fatalities. The city has a 36% bicycle mode share yet is aiming for an ambitious 50%. New York (which recently hit 1%) is in its infancy by that measure, but is undergoing a similar process in response to public pressure. In a decade or so, we will look back and wonder how we ever tolerated unsafe streets.
No comments:
Post a Comment