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

251–260 of 274 posts

Re: Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

#251

Post by zo7 »

santaclaus wrote: post #49
zo7 wrote: post #3

I don't think non-cyclists realize how much risk you take on when you ride in the city. In my town we really only have bike lanes on the two main roads that go up and down the bulk of the city, and they ride dangerously close to lines of parked cars. I was riding downhill once when someone opened their door in front of me without looking -- luckily I managed to get past, but had they opened it a few moments earlier I…

> I managed to confront the driver at the next intersection, "Hey were you trying to kill me?" "Yeah, I was" (he had two kids in the car too) Even in the fairly bike friendly city of Portland, OR I've had drivers harass me. I had a dude nearly clip me, pull a u-turn at the next intersection, come back around, turn around again , and tailgate me while blaring his horn. He rolls down his window, yells at me for riding…

Damn... I can't imagine the mindset people need to get that angry at people passively going their own way.

Re: Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

#252

Post by zo7 »

bigiain wrote: post #144
prawn wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't antagonise someone who'd just tried to kill me. Not sure of phrasing that would get the guy to change his attitude, but I don't think involving his kids would get the best response.

When he's a big brave "motorists activist" while wrapped in and (barely) in control of a ton of metal cage doing 30mph, sure. But when he's stopped at a light and you're beside him in a position his weapon cannot be easily aimed? They're _mostly_ pretty soft and pathetic and mouthy. I often quite enjoy antagonising them into a frothing rage. (Note: this is a point of view from a country where they're spectacularly un…

Yeah, after that I told him (as calmly as I could coming off the adrenaline from almost getting hit) something to the effect of "You have your kids with you, I'm just trying to get home like you and I'm required to ride on the road". He actually shut up and apologized pretty quickly.

Re: Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

#253

Post by usrusr »

pif wrote: post #208
PeterSmit wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 The more I think about it, the more I think this is a myth. Everybody say they are the most efficient, but with regards to which metric? The only important metric is door-to-door time. If I can walk a short distance to the bus stop, have a ride and then walk another short distance to my workplace, then I'm lu…

“The suburbs“ is not "inside the city". That was his whole point: cars from outside should behave like guests, not like they own the place.

Re: Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

#254

Post by throwaway6734 »

throwanem wrote: post #228
throwaway6734 wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fellow Baltimorean here! My main mode of transportation is cycling. I try my best to use bike lanes and stay in the street and off the side-walk. That being said, sometimes it's scary/unsafe to ride in the street due to having a combination of high-speeds/single lanes/parked cars. Even streets with bicycle lanes (St. Paul St. is a good example) can be uncomfortable due to the above problems. I'm excited for the cycle…

Pleased to meet you! I've spent a lot of time on a bicycle here, especially last year when I was having trouble finding work and needed something to do other than sit home and go crazy. I never found it necessary to ride on the sidewalk, by and large because I was quite willing to avoid busy thoroughfares and use alleys or less heavily traveled parallel streets instead. Going a couple blocks out of my way seemed very…

Excellent post!

How would you handle the following? -> On the last stretch of a trip, your destination is in the middle of the block. Do you ride to the corner and then walk your bike to the destination or reduce speed and ride on the sidewalk?

Re: Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

#255

Post by diogenescynic »

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/…

>I reckon damaging the bodywork of your ambulance or fire appliance to move another vehicle out of the way is not standard operating procedure.

I think you misread the comment. He's saying the opposite, ambulances and firetrucks could damage a citizen's car if it's blocking the emergency vehicle--not the other way around.

Re: Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

#256

Post by throwanem »

throwaway6734 wrote: post #254
throwanem wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pleased to meet you! I've spent a lot of time on a bicycle here, especially last year when I was having trouble finding work and needed something to do other than sit home and go crazy. I never found it necessary to ride on the sidewalk, by and large because I was quite willing to avoid busy thoroughfares and use alleys or less heavily traveled parallel streets instead. Going a couple blocks out of my way seemed very…

Excellent post! How would you handle the following? -> On the last stretch of a trip, your destination is in the middle of the block. Do you ride to the corner and then walk your bike to the destination or reduce speed and ride on the sidewalk?

Thanks!

To your question: the former, not least because it gives me a chance to catch my breath and let my heart rate drop a bit for a gentler transition from riding to not riding. But that's a personal preference and a side note to the main point, which is that if I'm on the sidewalk, I'm walking, not riding. Perhaps you prefer otherwise, but at the very least I'd ask that you slow to roughly walking pace and, if you must overtake a pedestrian, use a bell or your voice to announce your approach. It's not that I am unwilling to share a sidewalk with a cyclist, though I prefer you not make it necessary; it's that I'd much prefer you don't scare the hell out of me in so doing.

Re: Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

#257

Post by throwaway6734 »

throwanem wrote: post #256
throwaway6734 wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Excellent post! How would you handle the following? -> On the last stretch of a trip, your destination is in the middle of the block. Do you ride to the corner and then walk your bike to the destination or reduce speed and ride on the sidewalk?

Thanks! To your question: the former, not least because it gives me a chance to catch my breath and let my heart rate drop a bit for a gentler transition from riding to not riding. But that's a personal preference and a side note to the main point, which is that if I'm on the sidewalk, I'm walking, not riding. Perhaps you prefer otherwise, but at the very least I'd ask that you slow to roughly walking pace and, if yo…

Thank you for taking the time to write such a well-reasoned response. Enjoy the wonderful weather today!

Re: Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

#258

Post by throwanem »

throwaway6734 wrote: post #257
throwanem wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks! To your question: the former, not least because it gives me a chance to catch my breath and let my heart rate drop a bit for a gentler transition from riding to not riding. But that's a personal preference and a side note to the main point, which is that if I'm on the sidewalk, I'm walking, not riding. Perhaps you prefer otherwise, but at the very least I'd ask that you slow to roughly walking pace and, if yo…

Thank you for taking the time to write such a well-reasoned response. Enjoy the wonderful weather today!

Thanks for humoring me. You have a good one too!

Re: Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

#259

Post by ptaipale »

bigiain wrote: post #142
ptaipale wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A bicycle helmet changes the probabilities significantly towards survival, in all crash types. In majority of bicycle deaths, the most serious injuries are to the head, and the "dinky" helmet is what makes a difference. A large majority of bicycle deaths are low speed accidents. (Over here (Finland) a majority of them actually does not even involve a motor vehicle; here we have a pretty good segregated bike/pedestria…

"Significantly" "in all crash types"? That's not what the evidence I've seen suggests. Nor does it align with my personal anec-data. In all the crashes I can remember having in the last decade on a bicycle (nearly all failing to unclip when stopping or failing to negotiate an obstacle at low speed) I've never even touched my bicycle helmet (or head, if nt wearing one) to the ground. There's quite a few studies recent…

For a typical non-heavily-trafficed-commute or a weekend ride-in-the-park - there's very few accidents.

When there's an accident, the helmet makes a difference.

"It seems intuitive that bicycle helmets would be an effective means of reducing head injury, and indeed helmet manufacturers and standards associations worldwide conduct rigorous tests to determine the impact absorption and other qualities of helmets. It is however, important to go beyond laboratory tests and understand whether helmets reduce injuries in the event of a crash in real‐life; hence the review by Thompson et al.1 This review included five well conducted case‐control studies and found that helmets provide a 63–88% reduction in the risk of head, brain and severe brain injury for all ages of bicyclists. Helmets were found to provide equal levels of protection for crashes involving motor vehicles (69%) and crashes from all other causes (68%). Furthermore, injuries to the upper and mid facial areas were found to be reduced by 65%, although helmets did not prevent lower facial injuries. The review authors concluded that bicycle helmets are an effective means of preventing head injury."

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2598379/

And then my personal anecdata: 25 years ago I went over the bar as I hit the brakes to stop before a child that ran to the cycle path from a bush. I broke my radix but not my head - I did not have a helmet. I realized how lucky I had been. I started to wear the helmet.

Last winter I fell when I didn't notice ice on my home road. Before I could unclip, I was falling sideways. I bruised my ribs and hit my head on the ground, but avoided cracking my skull because I did have on my helmet that I've been wearing the 25 years since the previous bone breaking fall.

Don't be stupid. Wear helmet when riding bike.

Re: Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco

#260

Post by usrusr »

pif wrote: post #233
collyw wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is evidence to suggest that running red lights is safer for cyclists. I certainly feel safer when I get a head start and get ahead of the traffic in town. http://www.rudi.net/node/16395

I'm sincerely sorry for the people who died in those accidents, but the only evidence I found in the article is that queuing behind a lorry would have prevented all of them.

Would you also suggest queuing behind a lorry while on a bike lane? That's where "our" (where I live) numerous turning-lorry victims get killed. Nearly without exception slow, defensive cyclists (as far for from the lycra crowd as possible, you can get a pretty good idea what type of cyclist they were from pictures of the maimed remains of the bike) who would not have enough velocity to serve laterally faster than the truck. More aggressive cyclists survive by carefully modulating speed so that they never next to a potentially turning vehicle at the critical point. (Which btw means that they will go through the same "dark amber" lights as the car next to them, because that is where all attention goes in the final approach).

The main problem with trucks are not their huge blind spots, but that the rules of physics require them to start their turn very late in the intersection. If you ignore the turn signal (or the driver did not set it) they will look like going straight for a very long time. It's just a very, very good trap (except when the driver yields, as law would require).

This trap is also a good illustration of the general "attractivity" of red lights for cyclists: crossing traffic (that would kill you if ignored) is a lot more predictable than turning traffic (that can kill you without warning). Personally, I tend to consider red lights a welcome opportunity to catch my breath while noone is trying to kill me. If on pole position in the bike lane, I will prepare to sprint ahead of turners (cars are whales, as correctly observed somewhere else I'm this discussion), or stare at the bumper ahead of me just like everybody else (I could look farther ahead, but the latency between "starting soon" and "starting now" would drive me mad)

Post reply on HN