(08-18-2020, 10:55 AM)jamincan Wrote: I definitely have a concern that ineffective spending on bike infrastructure could backfire. Until there is a feasible network, uptake will be limited, which could be seen as an indictment on cycling as transportation rather than a reflection of the inadequacy of the system.
I think that we're all alluding to the fact that there has to be a network, not just isolated infrastructure. CycleWR has said this as well.
So here's separated bike infrastructure in NZ which perhaps wasn't the best because it is not connected to anything. It's a long piece and the discussion of connectivity is at the end. (edit: spot the Rob Ford reference)
https://www.noted.co.nz/life/life-urbani...-community
I've walked along there twice during the lockdown but have never taken my bike there (it is relatively far from where I'm staying). Also, detailed design is important and yet somehow never put out for input. Always the same story.
Victoria-IHT is hard.
As for dtkmelissa's point about car sewers: Yeah, I wonder about nodes and corridors. I wouldn't actually want to live on Weber, Erb, or Bridgeport. Too many cars. Better to live a bit farther back from there.