News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law. Parent comment

Re:Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law by mjevans on Thursday April 11, 2019 @01:53PM (#19637278)
How about elevating those public spaces up two floors and leaving all of the level beneath to motorized transport (preferably electric only)?

The safest engineering solution is to separate heavy motorized vehicles from human scale things.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law by novok on Thursday April 11, 2019 @02:28PM (#19637648)
Cars crashing into supporting pillars might create a disaster for the people above. And it's also a lot more expensive.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law by mjevans on Thursday April 11, 2019 @05:14PM (#19639286)
Crashes in to and over 'barriers' can already happen. If you want to provide safety against that you really should have pedestrian only paths.

The way to get THAT inside of major cities involves lots of adapter IO at the edge of the city, and a much more (Azimov's) Cave of Steel like transit infrastructure inside.

[ Parent | on HN ]