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

Why Amsterdam Works So Well for Bikes

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 107 posts

Re: Why Amsterdam Works So Well for Bikes

#61

Post by AstralStorm »

jozzz wrote: post #21
gxs wrote: post #5

Queue comments about what a travesty it is that US cities were built to accommodate the automobile. To be honest, I think it's one of the coolest things that we take for granted. I can step outside, hop into my car right now, and drive literally anywhere in the US. I drive home from the Bay Area to LA all the time and I always find this very cool. Do I think we need more public transportation? Absolutely. And more bi…

> I can step outside, hop into my car right now, and drive literally anywhere in the US. Where can't you do this? It's possible to drive from London to Beijing if you really want to.

And comparatively easy to use trains as well. Likely much more convenient, faster and safer too.

Or if you do not care about climate change, a plane trip is still better than a car trip.

Re: Why Amsterdam Works So Well for Bikes

#62

Post by Broken_Hippo »

wnevets wrote: post #27
everdev wrote: post #10

Culture helps a lot. In the US bikes are seen as an annoyance by many drivers. I was in Amsterdam this summer and without much knowledge of the city, found it easy, safe and fun to get around by bike. Went to Paris and Barcelona as well and didn't feel as comfortable on a bike in either of those cities.

>Culture helps a lot. In the US bikes are seen as an annoyance by many drivers. Which is a silly opinion for drivers to have IMO. The more people are biking the less cars that are in my way.

True, but with the infrastructure setup in the US, more people biking means more bicycles on the road for you to deal with and drive around. Most places don't have bicycle routes and the ones that do have them usually just have a single, fairly narrow painted lane between parked cars and traffic. In some places, you aren't allowed to ride on sidewalks because you are technically a vehicle.

So while it is a silly opinion to have in some cases, in others there are actual reasons for it which have some solutions.

Re: Why Amsterdam Works So Well for Bikes

#63

Post by dsfyu404ed »

sampo wrote: post #44
vvanders wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you are traveling so fast that you cannot stop at the limits of your vision ... I could stop just fine, I'm worried about the idiots behind me. Taking the moral highground doesn't help if you end up dead in the end. There's a ton of motorhomes, boats and equipment trailers on these roads. Even at 35mph they may not be able to stop in time when they are towing ~15-20k GVW. There's a large difference between being…

So those roads would require lower speed limits?

And then they'd be even more dangerous since you'd have fast cars vs slow cars vs bikes instead of just fast cars vs bikes.

People don't follow the speed limits. They optimize for a constant amount of risk. Depending on conditions that's 20-over or 15 under or anywhere between.

Re: Why Amsterdam Works So Well for Bikes

#64

Post by latch »

watwut wrote: post #31
mfoy_ wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Call me cynical, but: Anything that threatens the current way of life, the current status quo, or is representative of a school of thought that clashes with the aforementioned can cause cognitive dissonance. Simple as that. Many people don't really believe that driving is wrong, or harmful. But supporting radical infrastructure changes to accommodate an alternative means admitting to that to a further extent that mos…

Driving is neither wrong nor harmful. And if you want that bike acceptance, maybe talk about advantages without framing everyone else as "bad". If you do, you are guaranteed to create yet another pointless culture war instead of damm bike lane.

It is harmful, isn't it? It pollutes, impacting health and the environment. It requires a lot of infrastructure (roads, parking, salting, ....) that is costly to maintain.

I feel like I could go on (road-related injuries, manufacturing sustainability, ...).

Re: Why Amsterdam Works So Well for Bikes

#65

Post by dep_b »

oconnore wrote: post #9

I'm totally confident that we could replicate Amsterdam in any US city if we wanted to. But before we get there, I need an article about what to do about the fact that so many of my fellow Denver Coloradans hate : bike lanes, buses, trains, places to live, sidewalks, wind turbines, solar panels (but also normal road maintenance and traffic). It's like there is a conscious effort to create more smog and traffic jams.…

Bike lanes are a result not the reason of having so many people driving bicycles in Amsterdam. Being a shitty town to drive in let alone parking even when the car was still king really helped pushing people towards bicycles, but you can't retroactively apply medieval road structures and canals to US cities. On the other hand Rotterdam has a post war road structure and still a lot of people use their bicycle, perhaps that's not even a hard requirement.

What you really see is that because so many people were using bicycles everywhere people just got fed up having cyclists criss-crossing between cars and pedestrians and finally gave them their own lanes - out of pure annoyance.

So every US citizen that wants to have those nice lanes simply needs to make sure enough people on bicycles annoy the shit out of everybody else in the streets and you will get your lanes. Be sure to ride like a real asshole and practice flashing vulgar gestures while riding. Pretend you're invulnerable. Learn sequences of insults with lots of hard sounds in them. Nothing beats swearing in Dutch though. Every tourist almost hit by a cyclist in Amsterdam knows exactly what I mean! ;)

Re: Why Amsterdam Works So Well for Bikes

#66

Post by khedoros1 »

the_gastropod wrote: post #20
vvanders wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's because most us roads aren't safe for biking. Just a couple weeks ago I was heading down 101, 55mph with blind curves and came around the corner to a pack of bikes doing 5mph uphill. I managed to slow down in time but the people behind me almost lost it. I don't know if they had a deathwish or what but I can't imagine why they thought biking on 101 was a good idea.

This is victim blaming. If it was a stalled car that you nearly ran into, whose fault would it be? Clearly, yours. If you are traveling so fast that you cannot stop at the limits of your vision, you are diving dangerously. Full stop.

> If it was a stalled car that you nearly ran into, whose fault would it be?

I see the point, but that's a different situation. A stalled vehicle is an accident. A group of cyclists going slowly uphill is a deliberate choice, on their part. I have a hard time laying blame completely on one party when both parties have made choices that increase the danger of a situation.

I don't know exactly what happened in the previous comment's story (conditions on the 101 may be different in other areas), but large groups of bicycles in my area tend to spill out of the marked bike lanes and into motor vehicle lanes, but bicycles aren't common enough that their presence is always expected. Anytime something less-than-expected happens, there's a higher risk of someone getting hurt.

Re: Why Amsterdam Works So Well for Bikes

#67

Post by rockostrich »

sampo wrote: post #33
ballenf wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Cold is much easier to handle on a bike than heat/humidity. You can wear warmer clothes and take them off at work, but you usually can't shower and change into a new set of clothes.

Is it common that American workplaces don't have showers?

It's the only thing that I don't like about my office, even though we're a start-up and I was a little surprised to learn that we didn't have any showers installed. I'm probably going to sign up for a gym near work once winter comes so that I can shower after biking in.

Re: Why Amsterdam Works So Well for Bikes

#69

Post by metawhatnow »

AstralStorm wrote: post #61
jozzz wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can step outside, hop into my car right now, and drive literally anywhere in the US. Where can't you do this? It's possible to drive from London to Beijing if you really want to.

And comparatively easy to use trains as well. Likely much more convenient, faster and safer too. Or if you do not care about climate change, a plane trip is still better than a car trip.

> Or if you do not care about climate change, a plane trip is still better than a car trip.

IIRC it's actually better than a car trip greater than a few hundred miles, especially if you're driving alone.

Re: Why Amsterdam Works So Well for Bikes

#70

Post by ufo »

mrybczyn wrote: post #22
mfoy_ wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Call me cynical, but: Anything that threatens the current way of life, the current status quo, or is representative of a school of thought that clashes with the aforementioned can cause cognitive dissonance. Simple as that. Many people don't really believe that driving is wrong, or harmful. But supporting radical infrastructure changes to accommodate an alternative means admitting to that to a further extent that mos…

Nothing wrong with driving. Just drive appropriately. Car sharing. Taxi / Uber. Hybrids. Electric cars. Self driving cars. The freedom to transport yourself is a powerful force for good, and socialized public transport and bikes are not a real solution in many / most places. (am a biker, love biking, only commute by bike to work 3 months of the year)

Cheaper taxis and self driving cars should reduce the need for parking space but I would expect that it would result in more cars using the road overall.
Post reply on HN