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

Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 382 posts

Re: Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

#51

Post by adrianN »

option wrote: post #40

I wonder how a bike or even public transit is going to replace a car? 1) How am I supposed ro go to the beach with two kids, stuff for picnic and surfboards on a bike or even on a bus?!! 2) Public transit is all good, but have you ever been in a PEOPLE jam during rush hour in a subway? Because I had. And I will take SV traffic jam over it any day. The truly bad things happen because of radicalism - it should not be b…

Maybe you should keep your car for the rare occasions where you actually need to transport a lot of stuff (you could rent a car if that happens infrequently enough) and not clog the roads every day when a bike and public transit could take you to the office just as quickly.

Re: Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

#52

Post by modzu »

zoul wrote: post #7

I’d love more bikes in our town, but it’s not very flat. Is there some data on how much flat does the town have to be to get around on a bike? (I guess electric bikes change that equation a bit, but they’re still quite expensive.)

hopefully carbon fiber continues to get cheaper, because having a lighter bike really does make a difference on climbs. that said, anybody can go up a hill in a low enough gear(!), but psychologically it can still feel like a lot of work to pedal so much and go up so slowly. so part of it is learning how to ride. for that reason i agree hills are a (surmountable) barrier to entry and probably hillier places have less cycling. everyone quotes Amsterdam as a great model, but its flat geography is easily suited for cycling -- a better model would be a place that has challenging geography AND still succeeds with great infrastructure. i do think things are moving in the right direction though, people are starting to wake up and realize that there are countless personal and social benefits to cycling

Re: Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

#53

Post by csixty4 »

xapata wrote: post #41
jbob2000 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's this weird thing that happens in northern climates where all the bikers and scooter riders magically disappear sometime around October and don't reappear until sometime in April. I can't figure out why this happens, we should really aim to understand that before we push bikes and scooters on half the human population. I don't think it's the car lobby that causes this disappearance.

Not all. I just put on my balaklava and some knobby tires. It's not that bad with the right clothes. I wouldn't walk around in Boston winter without my face masks either.

I'm genuinely curious: do you wear glasses? How do you keep them from getting fogged up/iced over when riding in the winter?

Re: Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

#54

Post by brightball »

village-idiot wrote: post #46
chrissnell wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ship sailed on low-density suburbs 60 years ago. We're past the point of return on those. Outside of San Francisco, Manhattan, and downtown Chicago, most people live in the 'burbs and that's not changing. We will be living with this housing stock for decades--if not centuries--to come. It's best to engineer around that reality, not to daydream of an Amsterdam-like utopia that will never happen for 99% of this cou…

You are far too certain. 70 years ago a prognosticator wouldn't be considered insane to say "the ship sailed on cities 50 years ago, Americans live in downtown and that's not changing". These things do change, often quite quickly. Personally, I think the Boomers are in for a big shock when they try to sell their homes for a "fair" price, and discover that Millennials neither want nor can afford large suburban homes.…

> Millennials neither want nor can afford large suburban homes

I see this often. Very few people want large homes when they are either single or don't have kids.

As soon as you do have kids and they start to grow to an age where they want to play outside, having space to run, play sports, be away from traffic, have their own room, etc gets a lot higher on your priority list.

You can also get a suburban home without it being "large" and still get a lot of space to go with it. People used to get "starter homes" and then periodically trade up if/when their incomes increased or they had some equity in the home.

It seems like the biggest barrier to this today is that people want to go straight to the HGTV home. I can't tell you how many people I've known who, straight out of school, overextend to the most expensive house they can afford.

If you want more house, for your money...that usually means buying farther away from density.

Re: Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

#55

Post by chasedehan »

adrianN wrote: post #20
village-idiot wrote: post #9

Anyone who's believed that the key to sustainable futures is simply swapping out ICE for electric motors simply is being wishful at best, willfully difficult at worse. The biggest problem I have with electric cars is that they continue to encourage low density low efficiency suburbs with hours long commutes into the high density cities. This is economically unsustainable, roads are expensive, and will only get worse…

Other forms of electric transport, like scooters and electric bikes should be pushed more. Together with decent mass transit they solve the last mile problem quite nicely imho. But unfortunately the car lobby is extremely strong and doesn't want to lose its market.

Here in Salt Lake City there are a number of people who commute year round. It really isn't bad as long as the snow is removed - which they do quite well here.

Unfortunately, my bike commute only happens occasionally now that I work in the 'burbs - which, at least here, is where all of the new office complexes are moving.

Re: Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

#56

Post by liveoneggs »

brightball wrote: post #48
village-idiot wrote: post #9

Anyone who's believed that the key to sustainable futures is simply swapping out ICE for electric motors simply is being wishful at best, willfully difficult at worse. The biggest problem I have with electric cars is that they continue to encourage low density low efficiency suburbs with hours long commutes into the high density cities. This is economically unsustainable, roads are expensive, and will only get worse…

Another way to look at the problem: Locating offices unnecessarily in the middle of high-density cities creates long commutes.

locating them in random suburban office parks is much worse, except for those in that particular 'burb.

Re: Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

#58

Post by option »

village-idiot wrote: post #50
option wrote: post #40

I wonder how a bike or even public transit is going to replace a car? 1) How am I supposed ro go to the beach with two kids, stuff for picnic and surfboards on a bike or even on a bus?!! 2) Public transit is all good, but have you ever been in a PEOPLE jam during rush hour in a subway? Because I had. And I will take SV traffic jam over it any day. The truly bad things happen because of radicalism - it should not be b…

People got along just fine before the car. And heaven forbid that you have to interact with other people on public transit. How ever will you survive?

being forced into strangers’ armpits is not the kind of interaction I am looking forward to. Of course, “happens only during rush hours”. Sorry, but I actually lived in an Eastern European city and had to commute like that to work.

Re: Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

#59

Post by jbob2000 »

adrianN wrote: post #45
jbob2000 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's this weird thing that happens in northern climates where all the bikers and scooter riders magically disappear sometime around October and don't reappear until sometime in April. I can't figure out why this happens, we should really aim to understand that before we push bikes and scooters on half the human population. I don't think it's the car lobby that causes this disappearance.

In the Netherlands the fraction of cyclists that keep riding in Winter is much larger than in cities with similar climate. Cycling in winter is not that hard, it's not worse that going on foot. What's important is that snow is removed.

There are sooo many things that you need to do to make cycling in winter possible; snow must be cleared, you need special tires, you need extra warm weather gear, you need to wait for the blizzard to end, etc. etc.

Or I could just get in my car with a light jacket and blast the heat. Rain, shine, snow, blizzard, whatever. I'm good.

Re: Cycling Is Key to Safer, Healthier, More Vital Cities

#60

Post by modzu »

5parks1 wrote: post #49
alonmower wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

San Francisco is a big biking town and is very much not flat. You can get around on a bike in a hilly city, it's a combination of learning slightly longer but flatter routes to where you're going and getting used to the hills as you get in better biking shape.

This seems to contradict the 8-80 rule mentioned in the article. "Getting in better biking shape" is a realistic goal for someone healthy and middle aged, but notsomuch for an 8 or 80 year old.

i knew an 80 year old who cycled a fair bit every day, and this guy was not exactly in great shape. he just had a nice little bike with a lot of gears so he could ride it at a comfortable pace
Post reply on HN