Comments by "Holger P." (@holger_p) on "Not Just Bikes" channel.

@dandiehm8414 No, that's too expensive. To Support wheelchairs you have to have elevators and soon you are at $1million per crossing. We are lucky if this is done for railroad crossings.
30
This is exact the situation, this video is protesting against. The cyclist was not "killed because there were no separated bike lanes", but because a car driver or whatever made a mistake !!! There is no excuse for accidents like "the geometry of the interesection was inappropriate".Banning cyclists to a "save space" sounds like putting the first nations into a reservate. No ! Traffic is a together. Separation might help sometimes, but it must function without any prerequisites also.
12
Now how about learning and changing mind ? Isn't behaving differently from parents considered cool also ? Most often it needs just a generation change. And some positive experience may be.
12
Correct, we have an increasing number of single-households, who don't want a yard or a home, just an appartment.
4
Speed is set by safety rules for the "other" people in traffic, like pedestrians or bicycles. If a place experiences many accidents, it's lowered. It's as simple. I'm German and the idea of "everybody should go the same speed" simply does not exist. You had to ban slow vehicles to achieve this, and this is not done. Passing is mainly impossible inside cities, no matter if you have a speed limit or not, there is no space to pass. There are so many intersections and you have to watch out for so many things ..there are so many more rules to obey than just speed.
3
@dojadog4223 But there are completly standalone cities with 100.000 or less people having streetcar networks. Yes, the kind of housing, 5 story high apartment buildings vs. single family homes may make the difference.
3
It's all a matter of density. A vehicle for 180 people is not superiour to a vehicle for 40 people, if you have to collect only 20 people per ride. At the place with highest density (Manhattan) you can invest most money easily. But you get the payoff.
1
So how do you pay for the garbage, is it all tax-financed ?
1
OK, but this is no reason to tear down buildings to create flat parking lots, or to have no sidewalks along the street.
1
It's not muscles memory, to not obey the signs. It's your brain and only on roads you are familiar with, at least I hope so.
1
@keithvincenttucker9923 Right. Correcting knowledge is harder than aquiring knowledge. That's why older people always don't like innovations. But there is no way around it. It's a problem, but if you disobey new rules, you are a criminal. No excuses are valid ;-)
1
To achieve this pulse timetable, they had to really put effort in having city-to-city connections of around 55 Minutes, so to reduce travel time from 70 to 55, buy building a tunnel or using faster trains was essential. And this is what makes it hard to reproduce for other countries. Either distances are longer, or you have huge cities every 20minutes. The city to city distance is nowhere as evenly distributed as in Switzerland.
1
The problem is you read to much. People with fear to flight get a therapy. Did you read about someone stroke by lightning ? So better you stay home and never leave your house ever again. Life is risky in general.
1
This is only a way to enforce a speed limit, rather than putting a sign only.
1
So, you make philosophy about the wording ? So cyclist is no term for a bike-rider for you. It's hard to reproduce for an international audience, since you first teach the situation in USA, although you are not in USA. European listeners will grasp what's going on in USA, US listeners will learn what cycling does not mean. I'm not sure who you are adressing with this channel.
1
You even see this in this video, this method is slowing down traffic, cause it's perceived by the driver as "this is not made for me".
1
Parking does not take place in "public transit plans". They should pick you up at your front door. Maybe in very low densitiy countryside they offer a "park&ride" place, where you change from car to the transit network. That's most often in the suburb and for free. People are penalized for using their cars, and that's completly correct. They shall not come by car to the station. There is no reason why your tram ride should be "short", no it should be the longest possible, in optimum to the house you are living in.
1
@TgWags69 How real is this "crime" topic ? Maybe it's just a bad image ? If there are 10 people together, how should one dear to get criminal ? Public is a protection, same as in a restaurant. You just need more riders and suddenly you will be safe. what you observe is a self fullfilling prophecy. You don't use it, that's why there is possibility for crime. I see you are missing the experience how much mobility you gain, to not loose time with parking, to get into pedestrian zones of downtowns, simply to go faster, if the public transport has dedicated tracks. If gas and parking is expensive enough, you even save money.
1
@TgWags69 You obviously don't seem to realize I'm not American. I don't know rural USA. I keep forgetting it's an highly unsafe country with a high criminality rate. I'm european and never heard of anybody breaking into a car, in the last 30 years. It stopped when radios where made unexchangable and keys got electronic. If you are afraid somebody steels your tires it sounds like you live in a slum in Costa Rica. My grandma lived in a small village, never owned a car, just took the bus to the train station. For shopping she walked, to visit friends in the next village, she took the bicycle until she was 80. As less you own, as less to you have to worry for your belongings ;-)
1
@TgWags69 This is how you learn something, you talk with other people. How can I get to know your situation, without you describing it to me ? Why should you talk with people having the same experience as you ? You cannot learn anything, the other cannot learn anything, it's completly useless. Must be quiet early morning in USA. And it's common habit for anxious people, to exaggerate when it comes to criminality. Maybe you learned, you emphasized the perception of USA as an unsafe country. Most often it's just related to gun laws, but you underline, even without guns, it's unsafe.
1
The words may differ, but the idea in minds, you are either a cyclist or a car driver, exist in many cultures. It's always assumed that are different people not understanding each other. Not the very same person.
1
In Europe companies especially build their offices or facilities around stations, to support their workers without cars, or to attract workers to work at their place. So for a station to become a busy place, you need companies who are in extension. Another pressure is the high rental market. If it's too expensive to live downtown , people move towards the suburbs, especially around train stations. America just seems to have too much space.
1
To some extent yes, but it doesn't increase with multiple lanes. And besides with with, it's the number of intersections, the possibility of pedestrians etc.
1
@bosstowndynamics5488 no, this is your Evaluation, to consider public transport is for people who cannot afford cars. I recently heared a quote: "a developed society you do not recognize in poor people havin cars, but in rich people using public transport ". Sample would be switzerland. Having a coffee and reading the newspaper is much more pleasant than driving.
1
@bosstowndynamics5488 So who should break this cycle ? Who should "want" public transport. In a democracy, if >50% want it, they should get it. Public transport is in no way inferior, some people might just miss the experience of the quality. Every improvement starts with the idea "after we have done it, it will be better". Your "reinforcing cycle" is a cycle of missing experience , imagination or just education. The problem is, you cannot make money with this. Same as with the police, or streets, or other public services. But it improves the overall quality of living.
1
@bosstowndynamics5488 Well, you said public transport is inferior to other modes of transport. That's the opposite of "I don't need to convince you". I understood later on, you talk about present existing transport, not best imaginable transport. But OK, i got your intention better now. There is nothing like "car dependent countries". It's a free decision to make a country car dependent, you talk about it, like it would be naturally given. For less educated people, experience is the best way to learn. So maybe they have to do more trips to DC and NYC, where transport is working better, and to experience, how hindering a car can be. And it's important to say, nobody wants people to get rid of cars. This would cause resistance; from people and from car industry. You gain an option for people underage or high age to stay mobile without driving and for the adult people to have another option, maybe to not need a second car per houshold. Finally to save money without loosing comfort. It's the voters who do this decision and need to encourage politics to improve on public transport.
1