
In 1897, a Bicycle Superhighway Was the Future of California Transit - weston
http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/in-1897-a-bicycle-superhighway-was-the-future-of-california-transit
======
tnuc
Copenhagen has had bicycle highways for a while now.

[http://www.copenhagenize.com/2012/04/launching-
copenhagens-b...](http://www.copenhagenize.com/2012/04/launching-copenhagens-
bicycle.html)

The elevated highway that mjn mentioned is only a few hundred metres long
while the new highways have 300Km planned.

~~~
larsberg
The pictures in that article don't really give a sense for how bicycle-
friendly that city is. I went there for a conference last September, and the
fact that there were bikes and bike lanes _everywhere_ as well as more bike
parking at every train station than you can imagine really stuck with me.

That and the lack of worry about theft. At a coffee shop and going to the
bathroom? Just leave your laptop, wallet, and cell phone on the table. I
couldn't physically do that if I tried, after growing up in Chicago.

~~~
toomuchtodo
Fellow Chicagoan. Could not imagine doing that. Happy to know there are still
places like that in the world though.

------
josephjrobison
I think this is still an excellent idea for a lot of areas, especially Los
Angeles where the traffic is horrendous all the time. It wouldn't take much to
build this alongside major freeways so that you won't have to claim eminent
domain and go through private properties. This would take up a max of an extra
10-15 feet on the side of freeways. Now, in LA a lot of freeways are built out
so much that there's not even 10-15 ft without hitting a building or house,
but there are a lot of areas this could work. Sometimes it takes 3 hours to go
10 miles in LA during rush hour, and this could make everything better.

~~~
zevyoura
As an LA motorcyclist, I can tell you that almost no one would want to bike
10-15 ft. from the edge of the freeway. It's extremely loud and unpleasant,
and there's a significant amount of debris that would need frequent removal.

~~~
rdouble
Such a bike lane would be loud and unpleasant, but if separated from the road
it would be similar in loudness and unpleasantness to the Williamsburg,
Queensboro and Manhattan bridge bike lanes, which are widely used.

That said, it would likely not work because the distances are much further in
LA, and following the path of the freeway is not going to be the most direct
route on a bicycle.

~~~
mturmon
No. The cars and semis will be going 55-70 mph, typically 5 lanes each way. It
is incredibly loud. The bridges you mention don't have traffic like this.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
Why not just build a wall as a sound barrier to push the noise upward and over
the bike lane?

~~~
mturmon
Listing all the problems with any idea of a bike lane along a freeway will
tire me out (starting with: there's no space, high barriers are regarded as
ugly, there's no way to make the interchanges work, the freeway under road
overpasses will permit larger road widths only with enormous expense, we can't
even build carpool lanes and light rail, people won't stand for the
construction delays). Let's not do this.

~~~
EEGuy
Agreed mturmon; an open-air LA-freeway-adjacent bike path poses many
technical, aesthetic, scale-of-access, cost and possible health issues.

I do not think a freeway-adjacent bikeway would be popular with cyclists if
open-air. LA has a freeway-adjacent bus rapid transit line (the "Sliver Line")
which isn't very popular at 12K avg boardings in March 2013, compared to the
far more successful rail-route-replacing "Orange Line" at 30K+ avg weekday
boardings for the same month.

The Orange Line has a parallel bike lane which is popular with cyclists and
pedestrians, even into the evening as it's well-lit and well-landscaped.

Edit: Reference for LA Metro system boardings:
<http://www.metro.net/news/ridership-statistics/>

------
mjn
On a much smaller scale, Copenhagen is reviving the idea of a grade-separated
bike "highway" in at least one place. A major bicycle commuting route
currently goes through a complex congested area (with a bunch of 90-degree
turns, pedestrian cross traffic, canals, and even a staircase at one point),
but will from next year bypass it on a 1/4-km overpass:
[http://politiken.dk/ibyen/nyheder/gadeplan/ECE1594066/koeben...](http://politiken.dk/ibyen/nyheder/gadeplan/ECE1594066/koebenhavn-
faar-235-meter-lang-cykelsti-i-foerstesals-hoejde/)

In the rest of the city the goal is to string together something more like
arterial bicycle roads, though, rather than fully grade-separated highways.

------
CoreDumpling
True story: I moved from southern California to Holland in no small part
because of how amenable the country is to cycling.

People like to think that cycling is popular here naturally because the
country is flat and densely populated. However, it's easy to forget that
during the postwar boom years, a major shift toward cars happened and it took
a concerted effort of willful resistance and politically non-expedient
measures to bring back the bike paths
(<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuBdf9jYj7o>). Clearly, 1897 was not the
last chance the Dutch had to fix their transit system, and with the groundwork
they've laid over the years, it now costs only €30 per person in funding
annually! ([http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2010/05/487-million-
eur...](http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2010/05/487-million-euros-for-
cycling.html))

Yet I see very little chance of this happening in California, not because
cyclists lack a voice, but because we need to create more _dis_ incentives to
driving. This obviously is a political no-go considering that motorists are by
far the majority demographic. It's saddening, though, that there is so much
willful ignorance (or apathy) with regard to how we've externalized the true
cost of driving, whether it's in the form of:

\- damage to the environment

\- subsidy to cheap gas prices by the DoD budget (and body count) for
controlling the world's oil flow

\- casualties from motor vehicle accidents

\- health problems resulting from sedentary lifestyles

\- zoning rules that require abundant free parking to be available in
communities.

We'd probably have to see gas hit $10/gallon and parking lots charge $50/day
before Americans start to reconsider. (These prices are actually quite typical
in European cities.)

Oddly enough, I think it's good that the Great Recession has caused a lot of
Americans to reconsider their car expenses and choose to scale back their
lifestyles in ways that are more healthy, safe, and environmentally friendly.
I hope this trend (not the recession, of course) continues and if America can
set an example of moving away from a car culture, it will do far more good
around the world to discourage the growing middle class in China, India, and
other developing countries from adopting the same wasteful practices.

In the meantime, though, I'll piggyback on the 40-year head start on bicycle
infrastructure in the Netherlands. If I sound bitter, it's my sore legs from
yesterday's 70km ride talking ;)

~~~
burntsushi
Respectfully, I think your analysis is overly simplistic. You ignored the
elephant in the room: the geography of the US.

Cycling makes a _ton_ of sense if you live in and around an urban area---
particularly when most of your interactions with other people are in that same
small area. Despite my love for driving, if I fit that mold, I'd happily adopt
cycling as my main mode of transportation. But there are a couple of very
common scenarios in the US that maybe aren't so common in other countries:

* Living in a suburb/rural area that is more than a half-hour drive from your place of work (in no traffic). There's a high price to pay in terms of _time_ that cycling would entail.

* Traveling throughout the US. And I don't just mean across the country where trains or buses are appropriate---I mean visiting your friend several towns over. For instance, my friend that I frequently visit is about 30 minutes away by car but is about 100 minutes away by bicycle (back-roads, no traffic, data from Google Maps). Similarly for my parents.

I think both of these scenarios strongly militate toward owning a car in favor
of a bicycle. I also think tons of people in the US fit this mold---certainly
more so than smaller countries with a much denser overall population. Most of
the people in the US live in cities--- _but_ the overall population density of
the US is much lower than most other countries, which suggests that even if
you live in or around a city, you have a much higher chance of having
connections with people who live in more suburban or rural areas (than similar
folks in denser countries). When that happens, a car is typically the most
sensible form of transportation.

Of course, it's certainly plausible that we could own cars that we rarely use
but cycle to work every day, for example. But I think that's a more complex
dynamic and I don't think I have the tools to properly analyze it.

I also find your enthusiasm for passing laws to legislate your cost/benefit
analysis on everyone else to be deeply disturbing, but I'll leave that one be.

~~~
swift
> Living in a suburb/rural area that is more than a half-hour drive from your
> place of work (in no traffic).

That this situation is so common is a symptom of the fact that our cities and
towns have been designed around driving. The geography of the US is a
comparatively small factor, since (as you mention) most people here live in
cities or suburbs.

> When that happens, a car is typically the most sensible form of
> transportation.

For these sorts of occasional needs, car sharing services work well.

> I also find your enthusiasm for passing laws to legislate your cost/benefit
> analysis on everyone else to be deeply disturbing, but I'll leave that one
> be.

This assumes that the status quo doesn't already constitute legislating one
group's cost/benefit analysis on everyone else.

~~~
burntsushi
> That this situation is so common is a symptom of the fact that our cities
> and towns have been designed around driving.

I live outside Boston. Which was most certainly not designed for driving. And
yet, my analysis holds there too.

> The geography of the US is a comparatively small factor, since (as you
> mention) most people here live in cities or suburbs.

I think you've taken what I said out of context. I went on to qualify that by
saying those people, due to the lower overall population density, have a
decent chance of knowing people in suburbs/rural areas that they visit.

> For these sorts of occasional needs, car sharing services work well.

In urban areas, yes. In suburb/rural areas, no. My friend had a similar
dilemma, and her solution was to rent a car. Plausible, but is of varying pain
depending upon use cases. Her use case was "I need a car infrequently but for
long stretches of time."

> This assumes that the status quo doesn't already constitute legislating one
> group's cost/benefit analysis on everyone else.

No it doesn't. I said nothing about the status quo. I didn't even argue in
_favor_ of the status quo.

Do you acknowledge that geography plays a big role in the viability of cycling
as a primary mode of transportation? From your response, I can only assume
that you don't. If my assumption is right, then I suggest we focus the
conversation on that.

~~~
Retric
Your also assuming an ether or situation if you drive less having a cheaper
car seems more reasonable. I bought a 30k car back when I spent 2 hours a day
in it, now that I drive ~2 hours a week and kind of wish I had bought a Honda
civic instead.

~~~
burntsushi
> Your also assuming an ether or situation if you drive less having a cheaper
> car seems more reasonable.

Where did I assume that? This isn't about whether you have a $30K car or a
Civic, just that you _have_ a car...

------
nbloom
Yes, so in 1897 we missed an opportunity. Have we completely missed the boat
to bring bicycling back as a mainstream form of local travel, like they do is
so many European cities? Maybe the biggest challenge is: people need to stop
thinking about cycling only as exercise.

------
brokentone
The biggest problem with bicycle transport isn't how to get from A-B but what
to do with your bike once you arrive. In NYC there are decent bike lanes
around (although the tourists stepping out into them make them difficult in
certain areas). Do I lock my bike to a pole and hope it doesn't get stolen? Do
I use a bike share system (starting roll out now), and walk way out of my way
at the start and destination of my journey to find the nearest one? Maybe I
get one of those fancy fold up ones and hope my building lets me take it
inside.

~~~
pmahoney
I've been lucky to work in areas where theft isn't a huge issue. My biggest
problem is the weather.

In the hot, humid summers, I wish my building had a shower, or at least some
area to change clothes larger and less smelly than a bathroom stall. When it
rains, there isn't always an appropriate place to hang dripping, often muddy
clothes (and I hope they dry off before the ride home). I'm also lucky to not
need to wear a suit, but I don't envy those whose responsibilities include
being more presentable.

If the roads aren't covered with snow and ice, the worst part about winter is
the darkness, but that isn't something an office building can solve.

~~~
tirant
If you are commuting, you don't need to cycle as hard as if you were
training/racing. Just use a regular pace, like when you walk in the street
instead of running. The same energy you use when walking normally will
translate to long distances in a bike, because of the energy-efficiency of
biking.

~~~
pmahoney
That's a good point. I'm young(ish) and tend to race my past self (while
following traffic laws). On one hand, what's the point of biking if I can't
get to work faster than by bus? But on the other, a more leisurely pace would
surely leave me less sweaty while still providing some exercise benefit.

------
baddox
> The notion that anyone could profit off of such a venture—a bicycle toll
> road—seems insane now.

I completely disagree.

~~~
prawn
Same. Monthly and annual membership or donations, or sponsorship options, etc.

------
hawkharris
I enjoyed the article, but I'm very hesitant to believe any news sponsored by
or affiliated with Vice.

On top of questionable reporting practices, companies can pay to influence the
content of articles and the type of coverage.

Examples:
[http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2013/04/08/130408fa_fact_...](http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2013/04/08/130408fa_fact_widdicombe)

~~~
rickdale
Careful here. I recommend you watch an episode of Vice on HBO. I had my doubts
as well, but the reporting on that show is great and my only criticism is that
its too short. The article you posted is just an opinion of that person and
she doesn't provide specific examples or lay it out objectively. I just
recommend checking it out and then judge it for yourself.

------
ry0ohki
If I told you there was a new form of transport that would allow travel over
great distances without having to maintain a horse or use gas, it would be
revolutionary right? I can't help but wish the bicycle had a longer time
period between when the safety bike and automobile were invented...

~~~
dredmorbius
Even in countries where it was widely adopted (look at China), the car has a
tremendous appeal.

There are parts of Europe where war and high gas prices didn't drive bicycle
use completely underground (despite fairly inclement weather), but it's a
tough sell.

More's the pity though, I agree.

~~~
seanmcdirmid
Back in 1999 on my first visit to Beijing this was true: there were lanes
dedicated to the sea of bicycles that was used for commutes. This sea has
mostly disappeared, and many of the bicycle lanes used exclusively for bikes
before have turned into a mess of parking and extra car lanes.

Using these lanes today for non-electric biking is very frustrating.

------
EEGuy
* The 1897 Pasadena-to-LA Cycleway looks appealing to this native Angelino [perhaps in part because it's empty in all the photos?], but had it been completed and survived, I would it to be heavily subcribed now.

* Some related thoughts:

___ o My favorite LA commute replaced a 80-minute auto commute with a
90-minute total { auto + Metrolink commuter rail + bike locker + 1.6 mile bike
ride } commute. By driving to the "home end" and renting a bike locker (where
I kept a bike in storage overnight) at the "work end" of the commute, I solved
the "last mile problem". And I got 20 minutes of reading time each way on
commuter rail.

____ o Folding bikes [1] solve the "last mile" problem given that (within
certain restrictions) they can be taken on-board folded on LA busses [2].
Having put over 8,000 miles on three different folding bikes, I have found
them to be practical but at-times finicky.

____ o LA is getting a bike share program under beta rollout in "LA-
adjacent"-Anaheim [3]. These bikes use driveshafts (instead of chains) for
cleanliness.

____ o Adapting a mountain bike or hybrid bike using an "Xtracycle" attachment
[4] creates a long wheelbase cargo bike cable of carrying a week's groceries
for a family of four. I have over 2500 miles on one of these. It won't go on
public transportation nor on the bike rack of a car, but it can carry up to
300 pounds (if the hills aren't too steep and the load is well-distributed).

____ o My present LA commute is 5 miles, suburban all the way, and takes 30 to
35 min by bike, independent of auto traffic. Taking my auto instead saves 10
to 15 minutes, depending on traffic.

\-------

[1] <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folding_bicycle>

[2] <http://www.metro.net/bikes/bikes-metro/>

[3] <http://la.streetsblog.org/category/issues/bike-sharing/>

[4] <http://www.xtracycle.com/>

------
Samuel_Michon
_“The plan was to charge bicyclists 10¢ a pop for hopping on the bike-only
highway one way, or 15¢ round trip. That's a savings of 50% if you make a day
of it, folks.”_

Is it just me, or is that math off? The round trip is 50% more expensive than
the one way ticket. The round trip costs 75% of what 2 one way tickets would
cost, it’s a 25% discount. “If you make a day of it”, savings of 50% would
mean a round way ticket costs the same as a one way ticket.

------
svachalek
This reminds me of something that came up in Google's Field Trip app one day.
It said that there used to be light rail running through Cupertino about 100
years ago (down Steven's Creek IIRC) and it got torn down to make room for the
age of the automobile.

The app is just giving me timeouts now though, and I've never seen mention of
an old light rail system elsewhere.

------
JoeKM
As an avid cyclist in California, I sometimes daydream about having the entire
101 and I-5 free of cars, and what a blast it would be to tour with a host of
friends. Well, at least until my daydream reminds me that there isn't much
scenic pleasure on those highways, and I'd probably get bored 30 miles in.

------
dominic_cocch
Minneapolis actually has a bike highway, though it's public and free. I'm not
entirely sure why the article calls the idea crazy so many times.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cedar_Lake_Trail>

------
lsanza
This sounds like a vintage version of Elon Musk's Hyperloop
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperloop>

~~~
backprojection
But Musk hasn't really released any real details about it. How can you
comparte this to something you don't know anything about? Or has he released
more details?

