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

Pop-up bike lanes show that demand exists

bicycletimesmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 146 posts

Re: Pop-up bike lanes show that demand exists

#71

Post by Tommyixi »

coldpie wrote: post #66
sidlls wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd have more sympathy for your position if auto drivers didn't seem to think they owned the road, margins, turn lanes and basically anything else that isn't a building. Shared space doesn't mean "shared with other auto drivers only."

Okay, so why doesn't it work? You can complain about drivers all you like, but fundamentally car traffic and bike traffic are incompatible. You can't expect a driver traveling at 30 MPH on a 30 MPH road to suddenly and calmly accept that they are now traveling 10 MPH because of the guy in front of them. Swap the biker for a driver going 20 MPH under the speed limit and you're looking at a road rage situation. Sharing…

You're insinuating that since the road cannot be shared then bikes should not be allowed on them. It does work when people are respectful of others and aren't always in such a rush all the time.

Re: Pop-up bike lanes show that demand exists

#72

Post by pc86 »

throwaway2016a wrote: post #57

Ironically (perhaps?) I think in the US the cities are often doing a good job but suburbs are awful. At least where I live, I can bike in my own neighborhood but to get from my neighborhood to the commercial districts where the actual jobs are I need to essentially go on a highway and share the road with 40 MPH cars. When neighborhoods are spread out it makes biking hard. Where I am at least, neighborhoods tend to be…

In my state it is illegal for anything but a motorized vehicle to be on the highway (and rightfully so as most traffic is 70 mph+ outside of rush hour). With rare exception I've seen cyclists on most of the busy multi-lane surface streets where it is 45+ and traffic is going 10-15 faster than that.

What metro area are you in? It seems odd that there are no surface streets at all between two points just a few miles away.

Re: Pop-up bike lanes show that demand exists

#73

Post by Freak_NL »

bryanlarsen wrote: post #69
flippyhead wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> anyone can do the same, anywhere. I love Holland and I love biking but you guys have it easy compared to, say, Seattle where I live part-time. The hills make it a very different problem. I bike a lot but will still drive/uber when I can't deal with being crazy sweaty for a meeting or something. I was very disappointed when they decided NOT to install electric bikes in the bike share system here. Electric bikes are…

AFAICT Seattle has fewer hills than Aarhus, Denmark. 47% of commutes in Aarhus are done by bicycle.

It also does not appear to rain more in Seattle than in, say, Amsterdam:

https://weather-and-climate.com/average-monthly-Rainfall-Tem... https://weather-and-climate.com/average-monthly-Rainfall-Tem...

This is a cultural and legacy infrastructure problem mostly.

Re: Pop-up bike lanes show that demand exists

#74

Post by nkrisc »

coldpie wrote: post #54
Tommyixi wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean, if we're talking about Boston then the roads weren't originally designed for cars either: they were created for horse drawn carriages. http://www.mass.gov/eea/docs/dcr/pe/historic-parkways/4d72bd... They have been engineered to accommodate cars, so now they're undergoing a renovation for bikes.

> so now they're undergoing a renovation for bikes. Good! Renovate them to accommodate bikes. That's great, do more of that. But "sharing the road" is a terrible solution, which leads to the honks and dangerous situations the OP described. Neither the biker nor the drivers in the OP's post are in the wrong. It's just a really terrible situation that really should not happen.

Sharing the road is dangerous with dangerous, aggressive drivers. Tailgating and bumping bikers is the fault of the driver, not an unavoidable consequence of sharing the road.

Re: Pop-up bike lanes show that demand exists

#75

Post by belorn »

coldpie wrote: post #66
sidlls wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd have more sympathy for your position if auto drivers didn't seem to think they owned the road, margins, turn lanes and basically anything else that isn't a building. Shared space doesn't mean "shared with other auto drivers only."

Okay, so why doesn't it work? You can complain about drivers all you like, but fundamentally car traffic and bike traffic are incompatible. You can't expect a driver traveling at 30 MPH on a 30 MPH road to suddenly and calmly accept that they are now traveling 10 MPH because of the guy in front of them. Swap the biker for a driver going 20 MPH under the speed limit and you're looking at a road rage situation. Sharing…

If we view them as incompatible then the solution is rather obvious but to the disadvantage of the car traffic. The current cooperation between bike traffic and car traffic is to allow bike traffic without disrupting existing car traffic.

For roads where there is street parking you simply dedicate that for bike lanes and force car owners to use the more expensive parking houses. This influence the commercial flow a bit unless the space between parking houses is minimal in commercial districts.

In proportion to bike ownership you also need to remake roads which are too narrow and make them dedicated bike lanes. The proportionality clause here is really important to balance the interest of both groups if we want to view roads as incompatible to be used by both.

Re: Pop-up bike lanes show that demand exists

#76

Post by awjr »

usrusr wrote: post #23
awjr wrote: post #7

The arguments for segregated cycle tracks (physical barriers) rather than cycle lanes (paint) can be answered by one question: "Would you let your child cycle here?" https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/jun/15/urban-planner... However the argument against cycle tracks focuses on resident car parking and becomes extremely political. So a key part of developing a good end to end cycle network, given that a network i…

Please don't design cycle infrastructure for children. Bikes can be toys, but they can also be so much more. Designing for children locks bikes into the toy-role. Do I have to arm myself with a car to be treated like an adult?

This gets into the vehicular cycling argument. If you want an inclusive cycle network that works for all the population, not just the physically fit and brave, design for those that want to cycle but feel they can't as it is too dangerous.

That does not mean design a two tier infrastructure, that is kids using shared pavements and real men riding with HGVs. Take a universal approach that enables all ages and all abilities to cycle safely.

Re: Pop-up bike lanes show that demand exists

#77

Post by Kluny »

coldpie wrote: post #61
Jacqued wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wait, you mean drivers deliberately hitting a biker with their car are not in the wrong?

Heheh, I feel like I'm making my point poorly :) The driver is in a 3000 pound vehicle capable of accelerating from 5 MPH to 60 MPH in a couple of seconds. The biker is an unprotected human capable of traveling 10, maybe 20 MPH as an absolute maximum. My point is that these two objects cannot share traffic on a US street that is designed for cars traveling 30 MPH for more than a brief period of time. If they do share…

Better to leave the car out of it then. After all, Boston's narrow winding streets aren't designed to accomodate them.

Re: Pop-up bike lanes show that demand exists

#78

Post by coldpie »

Tommyixi wrote: post #71
coldpie wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Okay, so why doesn't it work? You can complain about drivers all you like, but fundamentally car traffic and bike traffic are incompatible. You can't expect a driver traveling at 30 MPH on a 30 MPH road to suddenly and calmly accept that they are now traveling 10 MPH because of the guy in front of them. Swap the biker for a driver going 20 MPH under the speed limit and you're looking at a road rage situation. Sharing…

You're insinuating that since the road cannot be shared then bikes should not be allowed on them. It does work when people are respectful of others and aren't always in such a rush all the time.

Yes, that is the unfortunate truth. Humans are stupid, rushed, and fallible. Expecting them to override 50+ years of cars owning the roads because you put up a street sign is misguided. If it cannot be done safely, it should not be done. If we want more biking, we need to make it safe. "Sharing the road" is stupid and unsafe, like the OP says. We need a different solution.

Re: Pop-up bike lanes show that demand exists

#79

Post by nkrisc »

coldpie wrote: post #66
sidlls wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd have more sympathy for your position if auto drivers didn't seem to think they owned the road, margins, turn lanes and basically anything else that isn't a building. Shared space doesn't mean "shared with other auto drivers only."

Okay, so why doesn't it work? You can complain about drivers all you like, but fundamentally car traffic and bike traffic are incompatible. You can't expect a driver traveling at 30 MPH on a 30 MPH road to suddenly and calmly accept that they are now traveling 10 MPH because of the guy in front of them. Swap the biker for a driver going 20 MPH under the speed limit and you're looking at a road rage situation. Sharing…

I most certainly can expect that of them. Driving is a privilege, not a right. If they can't follow the rules of the road then they should not be driving. That's like saying you can't expect a car driving 30MPH to have to stop because their a person in the crosswalk in front of them, pedestrians crossing streets is a situation engineered to fail.

Re: Pop-up bike lanes show that demand exists

#80

Post by ehnto »

coldpie wrote: post #48
Tommyixi wrote: post #45

I'm a biker in Boston; I cycle 5 miles to work and 5 miles home on a daily basis. I think the city is doing an amazing job with what they are given but so many of the roads are just too narrow for dedicated bike lanes. Most streets have "sharrows" which is great but honestly what it comes down to is a lack of understanding on how to share the road. I'm constantly honked and shouted at for commanding full use of the d…

It is pretty frustrating to be forced to go 10 MPH on a 30 MPH road. The roads also aren't designed for traffic to go 20 MPH slower than it ought to be, traffic starts to build up, causing more delays and frustration. I think we should be more accommodating of bikers, but asking them to share the road and be treated the same as cars is not the answer.

We need to figure out a harmonious scenario, sharing the road is absolutely the answer right now because the road is all we have to work with at the moment.

In a perfect for me world the CBD would have zero cars and everyone would be on bikes, foot or mobility devices after they parked on the CBD fringe carparks or caught public transport in.

That will never happen.

So the next best step for me is dedicated bike lanes separated with enough room for everyone.

More likely, but not everywhere is getting this right or has enough space.

So what we have to work with until something better arives is what we have now. Cyclists don't want this any more than you do but this is what we have and we would just appreciate some understanding. I try to get out of the way as soon as it is safe and I make sure I am at least trying to keep pace. I have never had cars behind me for more than 30 seconds and I honestly don't think that's much to ask for my safety and ability to get to work. If I were in a car you would be stuck behind me the whole way and then I would take your parking spot.

Post reply on HN