Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

fastcoexist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 274 posts

Re: Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

#241

Post by sonthonax »

pyb wrote: post #190
MagnumOpus wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cycle couriers/deliveroos are the cycle equivalent of the white van man and the black cabbie - they drive for a living and time is money, so they try to kill you if you so much stand in their way. Luckily even if they crash into you, they are as likely to kill themselves a you - something that cannot be said of white van men...

Ok, but it's really lycra clad commuters I've had bad experiences with... some of them are just oblivious I don't find black cabs threatening. It's the Ubers who are usually really dangerous. Not sure if it's because they're new to their jobs (a high turnover occupation?), or half asleep.

> lycra clad commuters I've had bad experiences with... some of them are just oblivious

Or perhaps it's because they're often faster than you, come out of nowhere with no audible warning, cut you off based on their expectation of your predictability, and then shake their asses at you.

Re: Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

#242

Post by mdrzn »

philbarr wrote: post #139
jrockway wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing we need in the United States are traffic tickets. A lot of people get tickets on freeways (where there is a dedicated highway patrol that exists only to write speeding tickets), but nobody gets ticketed on surface streets, no matter how badly they drive. I see garbage trucks barrelling through red lights at 45mph. I see taxis driving the wrong way down one-way streets. I see black cars driving 60mph down na…

If you're blocking an emergency vehicle in the UK by bad parking they have the right to smash your vehicle to get past - and it's your fault.

Wow! Got any backup info on that? News that you've read or a recent law?

Re: Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

#243

Post by mikestew »

jrockway wrote: post #126
dasil003 wrote: post #84

I've spent most of my life with cycling as my primary mode of transportation, living in Minneapolis, Santa Fe, London and SF/Oakland. I ride fast and generally try to go with the flow to avoid inconveniencing drivers while also being considerate to pedestrians. I think this traffic cone thing is pretty cool, but I have a larger observation to make: Here's the thing about SF: everyone is way too fucking agro. Drivers…

The thing we need in the United States are traffic tickets. A lot of people get tickets on freeways (where there is a dedicated highway patrol that exists only to write speeding tickets), but nobody gets ticketed on surface streets, no matter how badly they drive. I see garbage trucks barrelling through red lights at 45mph. I see taxis driving the wrong way down one-way streets. I see black cars driving 60mph down na…

There was an interesting pilot program to give $50 tickets to people exceeding the speed limit by 30mph in school zones.

I think you mean to say opposition to the proposed speed cameras. Doing 30 over even in Bumphuck, Nevada puts you at risk of not only paying a fine much larger than $50, but going to jail for reckless driving. (Well, the fine isn't so much of a risk, as you're almost guaranteed to pay much more than $50). I seriously doubt more than a few nut jobs are going to be in support of people doing 50 mph in a school zone.

OTOH, there are legitimate reasons to oppose speed cameras.

Re: Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

#244

Post by mikestew »

PeterSmit wrote: post #164
Symbiote wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> to avoid inconveniencing drivers I used to cycle like that, in London. I moved to Copenhagen, and quickly had to change my behaviour. Drivers are firmly at the bottom of the heap here, and everyone knows it. It's inefficient and confusing to others to disrupt this.

And that is how it should be. Cars are great to go between cities fast, but inside cities they should behave like guests. Ironically, most drivers are guests to a city as well, coming from the suburbs. Pedestrians, cyclists and public transportation are the most efficient mode of transportation inside a city, and should be honored as such. In most medium to big Dutch cities this is the case, although there is always…

Pedestrians, cyclists and public transportation are the most efficient mode of transportation inside a city, and should be honored as such.

You're thinking of motorcycle/scooter. All the speed and independence of a car, while taking up only a fraction of road and parking space. And I can still haul lumber and groceries on my motorcycle.

Re: Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

#245

Post by makecheck »

Cyclists need to follow the rules in order to command respect, frankly.

I wish this wasn’t true but I see dozens of cyclists every week (no exaggeration at all) doing things that are blatantly illegal and definitely dangerous. FLYING through stop signs. Deciding to just “go” at a red light when there seems to be no traffic. Turning wherever they want without signaling. Assuming they have the right of way in pretty much any situation. Multiple riders in parallel formations that make them move into the road anyway. The list goes on, and on, and on. I am not kidding.

And that kind of behavior just makes me not want to help. I’m sorry, you have to make sure you are at least doing everything possible to help yourself before you expect drivers to make any more concessions.

Re: Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

#246

Post by kazinator »

ubernostrum wrote: post #156
Thlom wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm a pretty relaxed cyclist. I ride more or less upright, but the forward momentum is precious. It's no problem to stop while walking, it takes no more energy to start walking than to continue walking. Same goes for driving a car. On a bike on the other hand, starting to cycle requires much more energy than keeping momentum. That said, some "avid cyclists" are total jerks.

On a bike on the other hand, starting to cycle requires much more energy than keeping momentum. To which I have to say: that's on you. The only way to have multiple modes of transportation -- motorized, pedal, and foot -- coexist is for everybody to give a little. Which means there are times when you will have to stop and yield and wait for someone else, even if it costs you "momentum". (and this is the polite versio…

I never had a problem with a manual transmission in heavy traffic. If you look some five to ten cars ahead to anticipate what is going on and leave a bit of space, you don't have to come to a full stop. You can use first gear to creep very slowly, if necessary. Also, as long as you have some forward momentum, the clutch picks up very easily in second. I handled most congested situations in second gear with just clutch work every now and then.

Also, if I had to come to a full stop, I wouldn't start again if it was obvious that the car ahead of me would be only able to move three feet before coming to a full stop again. Automatic transmission drivers tend to stare at the bumper of the car ahead of them and track every minute movement.

Re: Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

#247

Post by mrgoldenbrown »

igf wrote: post #125
ubernostrum wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Want some fun? Try being someone who commutes in the Bay area via a combination of walking and public transit. Cars give me very little trouble. Bicycles, though.. at least a couple times a week I nearly get killed by one. At crosswalks, typically I'm in a crowd of people and drivers know better than to try to make a turn through the crowd. Cyclists, though, will blow through, even just flat running a red light, and…

Bicycles are a tool for turning ordinary people into selfish jerks, jealously guarding their precious forward momentum. A pedestrian doesn't mind if they have to stop for a moment, it's no big deal. A driver doesn't mind stopping for a moment either, it's easy to get back up to speed again. But for a cyclist, having to stop is a minor disaster requiring a massive effort to get back up to speed, so they start behaving…

>A driver doesn't mind stopping for a moment either,

This has to be a joke right? Drivers roll through stop signs all the time. Sometimes they don't even stop. And don't get me started on the "Red light means only 2 more cars can go through" attitude. Anytime I cringe at having gone through a yellow-turning-red, I am always surprised/relieved/disappointed to see several cars follow me through.

Re: Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

#248

Post by dasil003 »

pjc50 wrote: post #171
dasil003 wrote: post #84

I've spent most of my life with cycling as my primary mode of transportation, living in Minneapolis, Santa Fe, London and SF/Oakland. I ride fast and generally try to go with the flow to avoid inconveniencing drivers while also being considerate to pedestrians. I think this traffic cone thing is pretty cool, but I have a larger observation to make: Here's the thing about SF: everyone is way too fucking agro. Drivers…

It's kind of strange to see the intensity of London driving described as "chill". I wonder if the huge difference in availability of public transport has something to do with it; most Londoners and many of the commuters into London simply don't drive on a daily basis and probably won't even own a car (where would you keep it?) So the traffic is much more likely to be commercial. The medieval street layout also makes…

To be clear, I never said London was chill, that's what I thought the west coast was supposed to be. London I would describe as just-get-on-with-it-then for the most part, which as I said is not perfect, and sure there is still a fair amount of road rage, but on balance it's more crowded, works better, and a couple notches less shrill by everyone involved.

Re: Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

#249

Post by et-al »

dzhiurgis wrote: post #219

Why not put parking spots (where possible) outside the bike lane, so the cars protect cycle path. Its done in some places in Denmark.

It's a good idea in theory, but having ridden this setup in Golden Gate Park[0], I'm constantly worried about getting doored and ride as far away from the cars as possible. I'd argue one's chances of getting doored are higher than an auto rear-ending a biker, so it would take up a lot more space to implement correctly.

Also, for passenger in a car, can you imagine (carefully) opening a door, hoping not to door a biker, only to try to cross a stream of bikes to reach the sidewalk? It's a bad scenario for all parties.

[0] https://www.google.com/search?q=golden+gate+park+bike+lane&b...

Re: Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

#250

Post by Symbiote »

teh_klev wrote: post #237
philbarr wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're blocking an emergency vehicle in the UK by bad parking they have the right to smash your vehicle to get past - and it's your fault.

I'd like a citation for that, I don't think that's true. I imagine they can legally tow your vehicle away, but I reckon damaging the bodywork of your ambulance or fire appliance to move another vehicle out of the way is not standard operating procedure. There is however an act called the The Emergency Workers (Obstruction) Act 2006 [0] which makes it an offence to obstruct emergency vehicles. [0]: https://www.gov.uk/…

Fire And Rescue Services Act 2004 says they can "move or break into a vehicle without the consent of its owner". I don't know if that's sufficient.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/21/section/44

Post reply on HN