Copenhagen has had bicycle highways for a while now.<p><a href="http://www.copenhagenize.com/2012/04/launching-copenhagens-bicycle.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.copenhagenize.com/2012/04/launching-copenhagens-b...</a><p>The elevated highway that mjn mentioned is only a few hundred metres long while the new highways have 300Km planned.
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.
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: <a href="http://politiken.dk/ibyen/nyheder/gadeplan/ECE1594066/koebenhavn-faar-235-meter-lang-cykelsti-i-foerstesals-hoejde/" rel="nofollow">http://politiken.dk/ibyen/nyheder/gadeplan/ECE1594066/koeben...</a><p>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.
True story: I moved from southern California to Holland in no small part because of how amenable the country is to cycling.<p>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 (<a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuBdf9jYj7o" rel="nofollow">https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuBdf9jYj7o</a>). 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! (<a href="http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2010/05/487-million-euros-for-cycling.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.aviewfromthecyclepath.com/2010/05/487-million-eur...</a>)<p>Yet I see very little chance of this happening in California, not because cyclists lack a voice, but because we need to create more <i>dis</i>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:<p>- damage to the environment<p>- subsidy to cheap gas prices by the DoD budget (and body count) for controlling the world's oil flow<p>- casualties from motor vehicle accidents<p>- health problems resulting from sedentary lifestyles<p>- zoning rules that require abundant free parking to be available in communities.<p>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.)<p>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.<p>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 ;)
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.
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.
I enjoyed the article, but I'm very hesitant to believe any news sponsored by or affiliated with Vice.<p>On top of questionable reporting practices, companies can pay to influence the content of articles and the type of coverage.<p>Examples: <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2013/04/08/130408fa_fact_widdicombe" rel="nofollow">http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2013/04/08/130408fa_fact_...</a>
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...
* 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.<p>* Some related thoughts:<p>___ 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.<p>____ 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.<p>____ 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.<p>____ 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).<p>____ 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.<p>-------<p>[1] <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folding_bicycle" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Folding_bicycle</a><p>[2] <a href="http://www.metro.net/bikes/bikes-metro/" rel="nofollow">http://www.metro.net/bikes/bikes-metro/</a><p>[3] <a href="http://la.streetsblog.org/category/issues/bike-sharing/" rel="nofollow">http://la.streetsblog.org/category/issues/bike-sharing/</a><p>[4] <a href="http://www.xtracycle.com/" rel="nofollow">http://www.xtracycle.com/</a>
<i>“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.”</i><p>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.
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.<p>The app is just giving me timeouts now though, and I've never seen mention of an old light rail system elsewhere.
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.
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.<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cedar_Lake_Trail" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cedar_Lake_Trail</a>
This sounds like a vintage version of Elon Musk's Hyperloop <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperloop" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperloop</a>