And how much of that 2% is actually separated bike lane? Paint is not infrastructure
A white line with a bike symbol painted on the road doesnt protect anyone
Only 2% of public roads! That’s way less than I would have guessed, but I guess it makes sense. I wonder how much is car exclusive. Of the car roads, many are technically shared.
Cette proportion grimpe à 73,8% pour la circulation automobile.
Yeah, but most of those roads allow bikes too.
Montreal is zoned 45% for single family homes. Still high, but at least they’ve made an attempt at nicer cities compared to the rest of the provinces.
I’m curious: what counts as a road with a bike lane? Does that statistic mean that of all the toad surface, 2% has a bike lane beside or on it, or does that mean for every named road, 2% of them have a section that has a bike lane on it?
Because in my city, road improvements are paid for by property development. As a result, we have roads that have “bike lanes to nowhere” where you’ve got a separated bike lane for 2 blocks, that abruptly vanishes at both ends, sometimes into a shoulderless stretch of one or two lane roadway shared by everyone.
If that 2% is actually properly designed bike artery that’s fed by low density shared roadways, that’s actually pretty good. If it’s just randomly scattered throughout the city, it might be more dangerous than having no bike lanes at all.
Montreal’s bike lanes generally connect somewhere within its own borough. We do have some oddities where one borough ends and the next one decides to not implement bike lanes, so the lane abruptly ends, but they are pretty rare.
Most bike lanes I’ve seen are long bike lanes that cross multiple boroughs and go through population centres, such as downtown.
They’re selfish pricks who think only they should catered to.
Ride a bike, it’s free - no taxes (fuel). Or drive a car and pay for the road the cyclists need. It’s quite simple. Take automobiles OUT of the equation and watch municipal. provincial and federal taxes sky-rocket. Livable cities? SURE!! They’ll cost you, though, so don’t be like every other NIMBY-cyclist and thing it’ll be some kind of free utopia.
Montreal’s roads are mostly paid for by property taxes, sales tax and business taxes. Cars are actually a burden and the city would do better and could drastically reduce spending on road maintenance if it increased transit and bike infrastructure. It’d also help with congestion.
There’s very few people who want cars totally out of the equation. I live in one of the most bike friendly parts of North America (Plateau in Montreal) and there’s still plenty of car traffic. There are arterial roads where cycling is discouraged, and many local roads without bike lanes but designated one way to discourage through traffic.
Even here, people need deliveries, they need to leave the neighborhood. The issue is the car being the default option, not that it’s an option at all.
This is so dumb. Here in the States gas taxes don’t even come close to funding roads. That comes out of a general fund. And without the massive amount of wear and tear of more autos the roads would last longer before needing maintenance.
And like said- no one here really argues no cars. Just space for people to use other methods.
That’s the States. That has nothing to do with sane fuel tax policy in the rest of the world.
I’m not entirely sure what your comment is arguing for.
