Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law • Hacker News Board

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#411

Post by analog31 » Thu, Apr 11, 2019, 10:49 PM UTC

kendallpark wrote: post #270

callinyouin wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "I hope you get hit!" This, to me, signals the general attitude people have towards bicyclists in the US. The average person either doesn't care or, for some misguided reason or another, actively hates bicyclists. I've been yelled at by drivers for no apparent reason so many times I've lost count. I've had so many friends hit by cars. My partner was struck by a car last fall and broke her leg in two places. She's s…

It's easier to change infrastructure to be pro-cycling than it is to change the culture. I'll take mindful drivers over protected bike lanes, any day. The only protected lane in my town (Madison) is one that goes against traffic. Drivers here are generally aware and accommodating when it comes to cyclists. I feel safer biking here (snow and all) than any other city I've lived in.

Man, that lane gave me the willies, first time I rode on it. ;-) But I agree about Madison. One other thing I've noticed is that here's also much less of a car culture. For instance it seems that people are outraged if their work commute is more than 10 minutes. And you don't see as many of the giant cars, SUV's, pickup trucks, etc.

One thing that may help is that a number of large employers are all concentrated near the center of town: Government offices, the university, and the hospitals. This makes it desirable to live within the city limits, but also to look for alternatives to the relatively expensive and inconvenient parking lots.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#412

Post by analog31 » Thu, Apr 11, 2019, 11:07 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #196

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…

How many people commute by bike in Cambridge versus by car? And what’s the cost of inconveniencing all those drivers by having bikes buzzing around?

Traffic congestion and inconvenience are caused by cars in vast disproportion to bikes. The sheer volume of car traffic is the primary predictor of congestion.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#413

Post by AcerbicZero » Thu, Apr 11, 2019, 11:12 PM UTC

apeace wrote: post #356

callinyouin wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "I hope you get hit!" This, to me, signals the general attitude people have towards bicyclists in the US. The average person either doesn't care or, for some misguided reason or another, actively hates bicyclists. I've been yelled at by drivers for no apparent reason so many times I've lost count. I've had so many friends hit by cars. My partner was struck by a car last fall and broke her leg in two places. She's s…

I would never yell at a bicyclist, and certainly would never hope one got hit. But I have to say, as an NYC pedestrian, I actively hate bicyclists. They don't follow the rules of the road-- at all . Red lights? Stop signs? Ignored. Pedestrians crossing in a crosswalk? Probably fine to whiz past them with 6 inches to spare. I almost get hit by fast-moving bikes once or twice a year. A car has never even come close to…

This mirrors my experience over the past few years in Portland. I don't mind bikes, but as a pedestrian having cyclists fly through red lights almost running into me on numerous occasions, I lost a lot of my empathy for them.

One of the other more difficult things to come to terms with (both as a pedestrian and a driver in that city) is that bikes can transition from sidewalk to street basically whenever they want, and however they want. Most cyclists were very careful about this, but there were plenty of occasions where I watched a bike cut across traffic at full speed, hop up onto the sidewalk and expect the pedestrians to just move out of the way for them.

Obviously its still up to drivers to drive safely, and we have a LONG way to go in that category, but cyclists need to do their part as well.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#414

Post by bsder » Thu, Apr 11, 2019, 11:16 PM UTC

callinyouin wrote: post #235

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…

> "I hope you get hit!" This, to me, signals the general attitude people have towards bicyclists in the US. The average person either doesn't care or, for some misguided reason or another, actively hates bicyclists. I've been yelled at by drivers for no apparent reason so many times I've lost count. I've had so many friends hit by cars. My partner was struck by a car last fall and broke her leg in two places. She's s…

> This, to me, signals the general attitude people have towards bicyclists in the US.

Maybe, but if you have ever tried to get around in Cambridge, MA, you would understand that it is a disaster for everybody.

Pedestrians walk into intersections when they shouldn't and block traffic, sometimes indefinitely. Bicyclists ignore signs, lights, people, etc. and cut off cars randomly. And cars have to shove their way through the mess or they will never get anywhere.

Cambridge traffic is simply dreadful. Go read Neal Stephenson's "Zodiac" for a taste.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#415

Post by pcwalton » Thu, Apr 11, 2019, 11:35 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #204

zymhan wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Atlanta is a great example of where it makes no sense to have bike lines. I lived in Atlanta for eight years. It’s a commuter city. The only people biking are relatively privileged yuppies living in the fancy new apartments and condos that have sprung up recently. Why spend public money, and inconvenience drivers in the process, for their sake? If we’re going to use up a lane, let’s do it in a socially responsible wa…

> The only people biking are relatively privileged yuppies living in the fancy new apartments and condos that have sprung up recently.

Not true in Houston, which is pretty much the same. (I couldn't find data for Atlanta, unfortunately.) https://kinder.rice.edu/sites/g/files/bxs1676/f/files/2015/1...

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#416

Post by sirmarksalot » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 12:03 AM UTC

apeace wrote: post #356

callinyouin wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "I hope you get hit!" This, to me, signals the general attitude people have towards bicyclists in the US. The average person either doesn't care or, for some misguided reason or another, actively hates bicyclists. I've been yelled at by drivers for no apparent reason so many times I've lost count. I've had so many friends hit by cars. My partner was struck by a car last fall and broke her leg in two places. She's s…

I would never yell at a bicyclist, and certainly would never hope one got hit. But I have to say, as an NYC pedestrian, I actively hate bicyclists. They don't follow the rules of the road-- at all . Red lights? Stop signs? Ignored. Pedestrians crossing in a crosswalk? Probably fine to whiz past them with 6 inches to spare. I almost get hit by fast-moving bikes once or twice a year. A car has never even come close to…

For all your apology, you're still basically arguing that since a few cyclists flout the rules, we should actively make traffic more dangerous for them and encourage them to drive more.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#417

Post by amanaplanacanal » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 12:06 AM UTC

hannasanarion wrote: post #405

lostphilosopher wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, I'll say it - bicyclists tend to annoy me. Obviously, I don't shout at them, or try to hit them, or make them think I'm trying to hit them. That's nuts. That seems like a problem separate for bike/car relations. I doubt someone who behaves that way in a car gets out of it and suddenly becomes a calm and reasonable person. But here's my assessment of why bikes annoy me. Not argument that they should, just some int…

>Space efficient? Yes and no. It is more space efficient for people whose options are bike vs car to ride a bike, but there's tons of people that doesn't apply to And those people can continue using roads. Nobody is asking for a nationwide ban of all cars. We just want to make bicycles a safe option. That means less cars on the road, which is better for everybody.

I suspect this is where some of the bike-hatred comes from. People are afraid that somebody is trying to take their car away from them.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#418

Post by toast0 » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 12:12 AM UTC

ahoy wrote: post #93

hirundo wrote: post #44

This is long term controversial issue. If you think the right answer is obvious you probably haven't dove down to the details, where it's much murkier. See in particular John Forester's _Effective_Cycling_. Forester believes that "cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles" and are not segregated from them. There are studies in this area pointing in both directions. One such concluded tha…

I don't know a single cyclist who agrees with that statement.

Ahoy ahoy.

I'm a single cyclist and I agree with that statement. Separated bike lanes, as implemented on my commute in Seattle are the places where I'm most concerned about my safety. I'm not yet to the point where I just bike with cars to avoid them, but it's probably going to happen. Some of the separated lanes are nice though, Western ave by the market, going uphill is a long stretch with pretty inactive driveways and it's nice to have space to go slow; although, the separation means street sweeping doesn't happen, so glass from broken bottles stays on the ground for weeks.

We could have a true scottsman argument about well implemented separate bike lanes vs vehicular cycling, but I don't have the opportunity to use a well designed system, I just have the system that's in place. Putting me on the wrong side of parked cars, so I can't see traffic, and traffic can't see me means instead of worrying about doors, I need to worry about whole cars taking my lane to turn right. If I needed to turn left at one of these intersections, there's no way for me to get in the right lane position at the right time, unless I avoid the lane for the whole block.

For me, biking is utilitarian; it's literally the fastest, least hassle way for me to get to the office, given I take a ferry to Seattle. Forcing me into a bike lane where I can't make turns, or pushing me onto a multi use trail with pedestrians slows me down and reduces the utility.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#419

Post by amanaplanacanal » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 12:13 AM UTC

wtetzner wrote: post #380

TulliusCicero wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many suburbs in Europe are set up with either lots of parking at the station, or such that people even in the suburb are within walking/biking distance of the station. I can show you examples if you're interested.

I don't think it's a problem that can't be solved. But Massachusetts needs to invest in that infrastructure before it will become viable. Just making the city more navigable by bikes doesn't solve the problem.

> Massachusetts needs to invest in that infrastructure

And that is the crux of the problem. Cities across the US don't have enough funding to maintain the infrastructure they currently have, let alone try to build anything new. Their only hope is to get a grant from the state or federal government.

None of this is sustainable.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#420

Post by jessaustin » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 12:14 AM UTC

u801e wrote: post #352

lostphilosopher wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ok, I'll say it - bicyclists tend to annoy me. Obviously, I don't shout at them, or try to hit them, or make them think I'm trying to hit them. That's nuts. That seems like a problem separate for bike/car relations. I doubt someone who behaves that way in a car gets out of it and suddenly becomes a calm and reasonable person. But here's my assessment of why bikes annoy me. Not argument that they should, just some int…

> They can enter the car plane from places I don't expect and didn't even realize existed That's a problem with cyclists who don't follow the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles. When I cycle, I will check my mirror and signal prior to changing lanes. I'll only make left turns from the left lane and right turns from the right lane. I won't pass right turning cars on the right or left turning cars on the left. >…

Cars, with their suspensions and ABS systems can stop as fast or even faster than a cyclist with excellent bike handling skills. The average cyclist will take longer to come to a stop from the same speed when compared to a motorist.

I don't have "excellent skills", but I personally have stopped a bike that was moving ~12 MPH quickly enough to not hit a child who jumped out from between parked cars. In a car, I would have killed her. I didn't stay on the bike, and it picked up some scuffs from the pavement, but then again child still alive.