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

In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars (2009)

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 206 posts

Re: In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars (2009)

#161

Post by alaithea »

fortes wrote: post #107
run4yourlives wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here in Belgium, when a car hits a bicyclist, the car driver's insurance will always pay for bodily damage of the bicyclist, even if the bicyclist is at fault. Sorry, but doesn't anyone have an issue with this? Why is there an expectation that cyclists cannot possibly be held responsible for their actions? By this logic, if my mini hits a bus, I shouldn't be responsible, even if I ran a red light. I tend to agree wit…

Well, there's a huge asymmetry between a car hitting a bike and vice-versa. So I'd guess it's not that the bike can't be held responsible, but that the potential downside for a biker is death, while the car would likely just suffer some dents. Whether or not that causes reckless behavior on the biker's part, I don't know. But I can imagine the argument.

I wouldn't want to get hit by a car on my bike no matter who was going to pay for it.

Re: In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars (2009)

#162

Post by natrius »

run4yourlives wrote: post #138
BrandonM wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I upvoted you, but I found myself wondering why you have a 30km commute. You mention that you would be more humanly fulfilled if you spent more time with your kids; why are you fine with wasting an hour commuting every day? I've been paying more attention lately to perceived requirements. So often we assume that we have to continue living or working where we currently are, and that we have to build our lives around t…

why you have a 30km commute. Because, if you understand Vancouver, you realize that if you want a house, and don't have millions, you need to live in the burbs. It's just too damn expensive here. That said, I see it as an issue to be corrected, however that takes time. Sorry, but I'm not raising a family of 4 in a condo, based on the experience of raising a family of 3 in a condo.

What particular problems did you run into while raising a family of three in a condo? It's not a common occurrence around here, but I've concluded that more of it would be a good thing, so your input would be helpful.

Re: In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars (2009)

#163

Post by run4yourlives »

natrius wrote: post #162
run4yourlives wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

why you have a 30km commute. Because, if you understand Vancouver, you realize that if you want a house, and don't have millions, you need to live in the burbs. It's just too damn expensive here. That said, I see it as an issue to be corrected, however that takes time. Sorry, but I'm not raising a family of 4 in a condo, based on the experience of raising a family of 3 in a condo.

What particular problems did you run into while raising a family of three in a condo? It's not a common occurrence around here, but I've concluded that more of it would be a good thing, so your input would be helpful.

1. Space 2. Noise, specifically, boom boom boom on a Friday night... 3. No yard (inline with space, but slightly different.)

Re: In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars (2009)

#164

Post by run4yourlives »

alaithea wrote: post #160
run4yourlives wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Biking by itself is not that dangerous It is if you are a pedestrian. This is also typical of a cyclist's attitude that their vehicle is the only one that matters; impossible to do any harm - it is most certainly possible for a cyclist to cause an accident between two other vehicles that is caused by their lack of due care. (e.g. car A hits car B instead of hitting cyclist C that is running a red.) You're suggesting…

From a legal and personal responsibility standpoint, the law is lopsided, but it may act as a deterrent to driving in the first place, thereby encouraging bike use . I think that's what the OP of this thread was trying to get at.

I don't think encouraging behaviour of any sort should trump personal responsibility and (more importantly) legal liability.

Re: In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars (2009)

#165

Post by Luc »

run4yourlives wrote: post #102
Luc wrote: post #56

I think having the right legal framework helps a lot to get a good bicycle culture. Here in Belgium, when a car hits a bicyclist, the car driver's insurance will always pay for bodily damage of the bicyclist, even if the bicyclist is at fault. Most streets where I live (in the center of Antwerp) are one-way for cars, but two-way for bicycles. And cars are limited to 30 km/h. My wife goes to work on her bicycle and ge…

Here in Belgium, when a car hits a bicyclist, the car driver's insurance will always pay for bodily damage of the bicyclist, even if the bicyclist is at fault. Sorry, but doesn't anyone have an issue with this? Why is there an expectation that cyclists cannot possibly be held responsible for their actions? By this logic, if my mini hits a bus, I shouldn't be responsible, even if I ran a red light. I tend to agree wit…

The law is more complex than I perhaps made it seem. The car's insurer can for example sue the bicyclist afterwards to get some money back if they think they can prove something (but they have to pay first, that's the default). There's also a provision that it doesn't apply for knowingly getting into a dangerous situation (but, on the other hand, if a bicyclist runs a red light thinking it's safe, this provision wouldn't be triggered).

I haven't heard anyone call it ridiculous before, so it's probably down to me not explaining it very well or not knowing all the details.

It's also not a law tailor-made for bicyclists, it applies to all 'vulnerable road users', i.e. pedestrians, skaters, also passengers in cars...

Re: In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars (2009)

#166

Post by natrius »

toumhi wrote: post #81
edash wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm sure US cities have a relatively long way to go, but biking in Austin is feasible and safe. I don't own a car (and neither do many of my friends) and it's great. Just live in Austin (the actual city) and not Round Rock, Pflugerville et al. Leave a few minutes early and take roads meant to accommodate bikers. It can be challenging when it's 100+ degrees, but you learn to adjust. And with the new car sharing progra…

I lived in Austin itself, and I would consider many of the roads seriously dangerous. There are no really roads meant to accommodate bikers, only roads for cars (Anderson Mill Road and Parmer Lane come to mind). The stupid thing, from a biker point of view, is that even if you try to bike on smaller roads, at some point you are forced to join a big road. Also, since urban planning didn't take into account alternative…

Both Parmer and Anderson Mill have bike lanes on some stretches now, but when most people talk about Austin being bikeable, we're talking about central Austin. Anderson Mill is barely Austin.

You're definitely right about many of the safe routes being a little convoluted.

Re: In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars (2009)

#168

Post by natrius »

edash wrote: post #73
toumhi wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've lived for two years in Austin, now in Amsterdam (the one in Europe). Amsterdam (and actually, most of Europe) is infinitely better for biking than Austin. Actually I almost never rode my bike in Austin. Always cars passing at high speed right next to you. I think USA cities have still a lot more to do to be real bike-friendly.

I'm sure US cities have a relatively long way to go, but biking in Austin is feasible and safe. I don't own a car (and neither do many of my friends) and it's great. Just live in Austin (the actual city) and not Round Rock, Pflugerville et al. Leave a few minutes early and take roads meant to accommodate bikers. It can be challenging when it's 100+ degrees, but you learn to adjust. And with the new car sharing progra…

Car2Go and and biking (and an office with a shower) are an awesome combination. The only things we really need are better, more frequent transit and a bike sharing program so you can get to and from bus stops from a further distance without needing to take your bike on the bus, which often have full bike racks.

Re: In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars (2009)

#169

Post by zwieback »

train_robber wrote: post #4
bitboxer wrote: post #3

I lived in Münster, Germany for a few years. Münster is THE bike town in germany. Statistically every citizen has 1.8 bikes. And i begann to love biking there. A lot is done in that city to make biking the #1 way of transportation. Now I am living in Cologne, Germany and see the difference. I miss the good bike lanes but I kept biking in cologne. Nothing is better for your head than biking a few miles home after a ha…

Yes absolutely. I used to live in a suburb of Stuttgart, and that was around the first time I really tried biking. It was definitely worth it, the well maintained bike lanes, the free burning of the fat, lovely relaxing scenery and off course a few extra bucks saved per day. Biking lanes, is in my book a top investment a city can make, wonder why not many keep it high on their priorities.

I grew up in a suburb of Stuttgart and rode my bike everywhere - the hills are execellent to speed down and burn fat on the way up.

Now I live in Corvallis and it's a great bike town as well.

Re: In German Suburb, Life Goes On Without Cars (2009)

#170

Post by run4yourlives »

Luc wrote: post #165
run4yourlives wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here in Belgium, when a car hits a bicyclist, the car driver's insurance will always pay for bodily damage of the bicyclist, even if the bicyclist is at fault. Sorry, but doesn't anyone have an issue with this? Why is there an expectation that cyclists cannot possibly be held responsible for their actions? By this logic, if my mini hits a bus, I shouldn't be responsible, even if I ran a red light. I tend to agree wit…

The law is more complex than I perhaps made it seem. The car's insurer can for example sue the bicyclist afterwards to get some money back if they think they can prove something (but they have to pay first, that's the default). There's also a provision that it doesn't apply for knowingly getting into a dangerous situation (but, on the other hand, if a bicyclist runs a red light thinking it's safe, this provision woul…

Thanks, that addresses some of the things in my response.
Post reply on HN