On 28 Apr 2010, at 13:56, Keith Barry wrote:
Thanks Nick --Not long my background is as and Engineer and an Academic.
I just have a few questions about the concept:
-- How long did it take you to develop it?
-- Where did you get the idea for a bicycle skyway?
Aa friend took me to a rails-to-trails track outside Atlanta. After a while of having an incredibly pleasant ride I looked down and thought wow I've travelled 20 miles in practically no time and hardly noticed I was doing it. I tried cycling in Atlanta and realised that places I thought where a huge distance away where quite close on a bike. I think cars have change our perception of time and space, we think the city is much bigger than it actually is. Perhaps its not cars but congestion that has done this.
I was working for the Georgia Regional Transport Authority in Atlanta/Georgia working on Atlanta's congestion problem where I became aware of new kind of public transit system called Personal Rapid Transit. The mathematics of PRT fascinated me, here was something that could finally compete with a car in terms to door to door transit times and yet was much cheaper than introducing a bus service and produced less CO2 than anything. I wondered if I could do better. Most PRT operates like a micro-monorail so it can retro-fit into the city( the city was considering building a monorail at the time)
The key to cost was the weight of the vehicle. The heavier the vehicle/pod the stronger the beam/track and the closer together you have to build the legs. So I experimented with the lightest possible vehicle you could build - a bike. I liked the mathematics, in theory this would reduce the cost and the technical risk significantly.
I also liked what it told me about how we think about cycling and our attitudes to it.
For example if you talk about a covered way you find people (even other cyclists) feel cyclists deserve to suffer outside in the heat,rain and snow. I don't know anyone who would work out a gym in the rain.
It seems strange so why do we suddenly feel surprised when people for some strange reason people don't like cycling.
By doing this I began to have a new perspective on how we support cycling.
-- How would bikes be able to pass each other? Would there be potential injuries from doing a header and falling off the skyway?
Cyclists would pass each other the same way drivers do on freeways - on separate freeways. Most PRT systems have separate up/down loops on near by streets. Most cyclists like car drivers don't mind the extra distance one way systems provided they don't have to put to much effort into it.
The injuries from falling off a skyway would be about the same as driving your car off an elevated/raise freeway (fatal) and about as likely (never). If your genuinely worried about potential injuries what about the numbers who would gain in life expectancy by getting mild regular exercise and those saved by avoiding collisions with cars?
The system would be enclosed ( roof to stop rain and protect from sun ) some designs other people have done have air conditioning, I think you could do it with natural ventilation. Many elevated cycle lane systems have fans driving air down the tube creating a wind to your back so you need to be enclosed. I think most building regulations would stop you building something you could climb out of.
What about riders who are afraid of heights?
For riders who are afraid of heights would be in the same can as drivers who are afraid hights when they are driving on raised freeway sections or pedestrians are afraid of walking on those covered raised walkways you get in Minneapolis and down town Atlanta, they would have to ride on the ground.
-- How would the design affect streetscapes?
Down town As little as possible. The Chicago loop fills the street where as skyways would be 8 to 10 time narrower. The supports would be like slightly fat street lighting and at the same interval. The glass of the cycle way would be frosted if the cycle way was too close to the second or third story building view. Like down town Minneapolis you might see shops, malls, offices and hotels developing special third story entrances from the upper level system.
Most importantly we are dealing with bikes so while you might have something carrying the same capacity of people as an 8 lane highway above you I don't think you would notice the sound. If you don't believe the 8 lane claim then check out http://www.jpods.com/HomeCongestion.html - its a good visual example of how low density automotive traffic is.
Generally you would see more bikes running on the street as people move from stations to there places of work. I think the biggest thing you would notice would be fewer cars sitting in traffic less and you might notice fewer very fat people.
-- Would it be built on existing rights of way?
Most PRT systems mix above freeway, with above highway use to maximise rights of way this would be no different. By being so light weight and modular an elevated cycle system could be fairly flexible, temporally crossing a disused space or car lot. One big advantage over monorails is an elevated cycle lane can turn quite sharp corner which sound minor until you realise that most monorail and light rail systems don't have the kinds of turning circles you find in built up urban areas.
-- Is there any popular support for building such a network of elevated trails?
Well I don't think there was popular support for the Internet before people saw it but does give the lovely image of people marching around Lincion Laboratory at MIT in the 50's with placards shouting "what do we want?" "some form of electronic digital communication' 'when do we want it?" "'by the late 1980s". People don't support technologies they haven't heard of and I wouldn't expect them to.
Alternatively if you ask people "would you like a form of transport which can be 50 times cheaper per mile than building a transit system and 2 to 10 times cheaper than a new bus service, it would do a fantastic job on your carbon foot print, it would soak up congestion like a wet sponge and could well do your BMI index a lot of good" I think many people would say "its worth giving
the idea a chance"
Popular support, if you check my blog you can see I'm not the first or last one to come up with the idea. Shweeb do a nice variant on the theme. Many households have bikes so you have to ask your self what is stopping people getting on them? I think what something like elevated cycle lanes do is ask what happens if you treat cycling as a form of transport rather than a leisure activity?
No comments:
Post a Comment