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

Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 485 posts

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#291

Post by CydeWeys »

asdff wrote: post #190
CydeWeys wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My biggest problem with unprotected bike lanes here in Manhattan is that they are so frequently illegally blocked, not just by Taxis/FHVs but also by people parking in them. And a lot of the unprotected bike lanes are basically just the door zone of a line of parked cars, so you need to ride to the far outside of it to avoid getting doored. There's entire block-long stretches that I'll stay out of the unprotected bik…

The fine for parking your car in a bike lane should really be a tow. Predatory towing companies in my town can grab a car in 10 minutes; it's spooky. They even have scouts. I feel like towing companies should be chomping at the bit to get action on this parking ignorance with bike lanes, which seems to be universal in any city with them.

Definitely. There's so much money to be made here in ticketing and towing people that are parking illegally. You would easily pay the salaries of the people doing it and then also send a lot more revenue back to the general treasury.

It always astounds me that they don't have more enforcement agents out there. On my 10 minute bike ride I routinely see at least one ticketable infraction per minute. Hell, give me a ticket book (and a percentage cut for my trouble) and I'll gladly go earn ticket revenue for the city myself.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#292

Post by framebit »

mkoryak wrote: post #233

I found a "simple trick that makes all drivers around me nice". I put a pigeon on my helmet 8 years ago[1]. Everywhere I go I see smiles. I really makes every ride fun. One of my friends recently started also doing it, so its starting to catch on. Pigeonriding transforms me from an awkward software engineer into an interesting person who people want to talk to. I have only had a handful of bad experiences[2] with dri…

This is brilliant!! It's such a fun, friendly, subversive way of communicating "I'm a person and not a roadblock/obstacle." I started bike commuting 3-4x per week and I may consider doing this.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#293

Post by amalcon »

rayiner wrote: post #197
bluejekyll wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've experienced this same anecdote in similar situations for the past 20 years as well. There has been a long push by auto manufacturers to make anything other than cars that use the roads seen as both illegitimate and illegal. For example, see the history of Jaywalking laws: https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26073797 . Starting around 1920's the auto-industry encouraged laws around the US to make crossing the stree…

> We need to slow down auto-traffic and encourage more non-vehicular use of the roads, while making those roads safer for pedestrians, cyclists, scooter riders, skate boarders, etc. Is that the most efficient use of the roads? Especially in a place like Boston, where most people in the metro area don’t live in (and can’t afford to live in) the city itself. At a certain point doesn’t creating a preference for pedestri…

> Note that bicyclists and skateboarders also slow down busses, which are what lower income people use to get around.

Bicyclists are substantially faster than downtown buses (due to stop frequency). It seems unlikely that they are slowing down the buses very much. Push skateboarders use the sidewalk; electric skateboarders move at the same speed as bicyclists.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#294

Post by novok »

teddyh wrote: post #237
rayiner wrote: post #222

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see that graphic a lot, but it's not a very useful one, because it ignores residential patterns. Most people can't use a bike. So if you displace one car, you're not going to replace it with one bike, much less than 5 that would otherwise fit in the same space. The efficiency question is: what minimizes the amount of collective time people spend getting where they need to go. Bike infrastructure might actually make…

> Most people can't use a bike. Huh? What kind of people are you referring to? In my simple observation, most people can indeed use a bike. And in some countries, like Denmark, or China, it is my impression that most people do use a bike.

If your elderly or disabled. Although if you that level of elderly, you might not be able to use a car either, and the disabled often have motorized wheelchairs that could go as fast as bikes.

For people who say 'but the disabled need cars', I want to offer some ancedata: I know a retired couple that bought a house in SF years ago because they wanted a working transit system when they can't drive cars anymore.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#295

Post by r_klancer »

mkoryak wrote: post #233

I found a "simple trick that makes all drivers around me nice". I put a pigeon on my helmet 8 years ago[1]. Everywhere I go I see smiles. I really makes every ride fun. One of my friends recently started also doing it, so its starting to catch on. Pigeonriding transforms me from an awkward software engineer into an interesting person who people want to talk to. I have only had a handful of bad experiences[2] with dri…

OMG DID I JUST SEE YOU IN UNION SQUARE, SOMERVILLE? (Or was it your friend?) I noticed the pigeon.

(File under: it's a small world, I probably shouldn't act so surprised.)

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#296

Post by maw »

zymhan wrote: post #158
viburnum wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing about cycling is that it’s basically fast walking. In places where cycling dominates people only ride as fast as a quick jogger (10 mph is a 6 minute mile). The correct model for cycling isn’t space on the road, it’s an extra sidewalk with an accommodating turning radius. This is what you actually see in The Netherlands. People think of public spaces as roads and as roads as places for cars to drive and par…

You won't find a cyclist who opposes dedicated, protected lanes that are separate from roads and sidewalks. It is almost always the car drivers who don't want to sacrifice the single lane required to make a two way, protected bike lane. Case in point, Peachtree St in Atlanta ~3 years ago. https://www.ajc.com/news/traffic/bike-lane-plan-for-peachtre... https://www.ajc.com/news/local/bike-lanes-peachtree-road-for...

In the city where I live, there are one-way lanes on either side of many largeish streets. Even so, every day you can expect to see people riding the wrong way in them. It's dangerous, and unnecessarily so.

I won't go so far as to say that I'm opposed to them outright, but when there's a choice between a street with a protected lane and a quiet street without one that runs parallel, I'll almost always choose the street without.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#297

Post by btrettel »

justinator wrote: post #170
just_steve_h wrote: post #61

I've lived in Cambridge or neighboring Somerville every year but one since 1989. The cycling infrastructure is much improved and still deadly. Just yesterday, I approached an arterial Street from a side street at 6pm. Cars on the arterial were moving about 8 MPH. I dismounted my bike, and began walking across the arterial in the crosswalk. As I re-mounted on the other side and resumed riding, a white man in a mid-siz…

a white man in a mid-size SUV leaned out his window and said loudly to me, "I hope you get hit!" My usual retort to this, as the cyclist: "I hope you find true Love!"

I cycle with a helmet cam, and I typically inform the driver that they are being recorded. While I haven't done a scientific study, I believe this causes some drivers to restrain themselves.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#298

Post by adrianN »

eots wrote: post #276
adrianN wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know the statistics for the US, but here in Germany 75% of the accidents between cyclists are cars are caused by the car.

I drive a car now and then in Cambridge and Boston, and I have to be constantly on a lookout for misbehaving cyclists. It's like most of cyclists are not even familiar with basic traffic regulations. If I was not paying extra attention, and was simply following traffic regulations on my end, I would be involved in more that a few car/bicycle accident.

I'm sure you'd say the same about cars if you were a cyclist. Both bicycles and cars are driven by humans and they generally don't give a damn about the rules unless they benefit personally. The difference is that cyclists usually endanger themselves, while motorists endanger others.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#299

Post by novok »

mjevans wrote: post #266
viburnum wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thing about cycling is that it’s basically fast walking. In places where cycling dominates people only ride as fast as a quick jogger (10 mph is a 6 minute mile). The correct model for cycling isn’t space on the road, it’s an extra sidewalk with an accommodating turning radius. This is what you actually see in The Netherlands. People think of public spaces as roads and as roads as places for cars to drive and par…

How about elevating those public spaces up two floors and leaving all of the level beneath to motorized transport (preferably electric only)? The safest engineering solution is to separate heavy motorized vehicles from human scale things.

Cars crashing into supporting pillars might create a disaster for the people above. And it's also a lot more expensive.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#300

Post by matthewaveryusa »

just_steve_h wrote: post #61

I've lived in Cambridge or neighboring Somerville every year but one since 1989. The cycling infrastructure is much improved and still deadly. Just yesterday, I approached an arterial Street from a side street at 6pm. Cars on the arterial were moving about 8 MPH. I dismounted my bike, and began walking across the arterial in the crosswalk. As I re-mounted on the other side and resumed riding, a white man in a mid-siz…

Anecdotally I cycle into Cambridge almost every day. I cross three cities: Medford, Somerville and Cambridge for an approximate 20 minute commute (vs 40 by car.)

I have never had issue with cars, granted I've only been doing this for the two years (and in college I used to commute from Roxbury to Cambridge for 2 years and only had 1 freak-out with a drunk-driver, but that's another story.)

On the other hand I've seen entitled cyclists lose their shit for no reason at cars.

I feel like there's a subset of cyclists that don't understand that cars may have blind spots and freak out at drivers when there's literally nothing the driver can do about it.

Post reply on HN