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

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#451

Post by TulliusCicero » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 11:42 AM UTC

lkbm wrote: post #388

TulliusCicero wrote: post #336

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you're committed to high quality public transport, it's more efficient for both. Do you think there's a lot of cleaning ladies driving in and parking downtown in expensive major cities?

In Austin, a significant portion of the cleaning people work evenings/nights, and I believe frequently are given the option of parking in the garage of the office building(s) they're cleaning. It's not all, but it's a part. Of course, Austin's no NYC. I assume NYC doesn't have as many empty parking garages at night, and it definitely has better public transit.

People who are 'reverse commuting' are unlikely to be hurt by this, since there's not much traffic pressure going that way at that time.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#452

Post by TulliusCicero » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 11:43 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.

If you always wait for complementary infrastructure, you'll never do anything. Sometimes a half-assed compromise is just an intermediary step on the way to a full-assed solution.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#453

Post by Steltek » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 1:17 PM UTC

paulryanrogers wrote: post #440

noir_lord wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same boat, I could go buy a car in cash tomorrow but I don’t have a drivers license. People react with incredulity when I tell them I don’t have a car. I live a 15 minute walk from the center of town and work and the UK has reasonable bus service in most towns so why would I spend thousands on a car and hundreds a month to park a vehicle I never use outside my house. I cycle for fitness and pleasure though and most c…

Do you have children? I've noticed having a family had impacted my cycling lifestyle tremendously.

Fwiw, I bike to work in Cambridge and take my kids to school by bike on the way. It's by far the most consistent way to get to pickup on time. We bike through winter and wet weather.

Negatives? My wife doesn't feel comfortable riding the big bike with kids and there's only one bike with two seats. If the big bike goes into the shop, things get complicated but the same would go for a car-based commute.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#454

Post by Steltek » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 1:21 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…

For another perspective, my commute is a routine of watching cars break the law and endanger me with impunity. It's only superficially acknowledged by others and I have yet to see a cop pull over a car for committing an infraction against a bike.

So while I do obey the law as best I can, it should be easy to see why bikers would stop caring. The law is not enforced, even when a cyclist dies. So where's the merit in the law, if you're a cyclist?

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#455

Post by beat » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 1:46 PM UTC

wtetzner wrote: post #386

beat wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Take a bike on public transportation for longer-distance routes. I don't know what sort of barbaric backwater you live in, but in my bike-friendly city, all the buses and light rail have bike racks, and bike commuters regularly use them for the longer legs. In a super-dense city like Cambridge, it's even more true. Less need for long travel, more need for bikes in the congested center.

The problem is the people who can't afford to live in Cambridge. There isn't much in the way of public transportation to get you to Cambridge.

How many of those people can afford a car?

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#456

Post by SauciestGNU » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 2:06 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…

I live in Kalamazoo and know people both who survived and were killed in that attack. At least our community responded positively with new passing distance laws and broad community support.

ETA: I should mention that I got hit and run on my bicycle by a drunk driver years before the mass murder. My friends tracked down the driver, the police took statements, viewed the damage to the car exactly as I described it, driver matched the description my riding partner and I gave, and the prosecutor still declined to press charges. It wasn't a no-harm-no-foul thing either, I was pretty severely injured. Still pretty sore about that.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#457

Post by rayiner » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 2:25 PM UTC

pcwalton wrote: post #415

rayiner wrote: post #204

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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...

Interesting data point. Doesn't match my experience from Atlanta and D.C., but maybe I'm not looking for cyclists in the right places.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#458

Post by JohnFen » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 3:22 PM UTC

modoc wrote: post #409

JohnFen wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most people can't use a bike. What? How do you figure? My observation is that most people absolutely can (and many would seriously benefit from it). Maybe not for every situation, but for the rare ones where a bike won't do, a cab will.

Winter (ice, snow, freezing winds) Rain storms People who don't want to show up to work sweaty (my work never had showers and I'm the sort of person who creates a lot of sweat (and smell) even if I'm taking it easy on a bike People who live more than X miles from where they are going People who live up/down major hills etc..... I lived IN Boston for a while, and actually rode my bike to work during the summer (didn't…

There's a difference between "can't" and "don't want to". I'm not going to tell anybody what they should or should not do for their transportation. If you prefer driving, for whatever reason, go for it! I'm not going to say you're wrong.

My main point is that a lot of people assume that biking is the worse choice for them without actually knowing.

I have noticed that most people I know who have tried bicycle commuting and gave it up didn't really give it a fair shake. They used substandard or the wrong type of bikes, didn't use the accessories and clothing that make it feasible (rain gear, panniers, trailers, etc), and so forth. They just grabbed their old bike out of their garage and hopped on. That can work, but it's not usually the best experience.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#459

Post by JohnFen » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 3:25 PM UTC

noir_lord wrote: post #448

JohnFen wrote: post #403

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I consider this one of the big advantages to riding a bike: I can dismount and become a pedestrian almost instantly!

Bit harder for me as I ride with clipless pedals so I waddle like a duck when using cycling shoes. I think next time I'll look at MTB style where the clip is recessed so you can walk normally off the bike.

Makes sense. I tried using cycling shoes, but I found them really inconvenient and annoying, so I just use regular pedals & shoes. Still clipless, though.

Re: Cambridge's Ambitious Protected Bike Lane Law

#460

Post by JohnFen » Fri, Apr 12, 2019, 3:34 PM UTC

wheelie_boy wrote: post #315

techsupporter wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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. My experience as a pedestrian (I don't ride a bike on the street so I can't speak to that experience) mirrors this. More than once, I've been…

The only place I would cycle regularly is the Netherlands, because of the infrastructure and the attitude of drivers. In the US, I have heard that the statistics around biking to work every day is that the median lifespan is higher, but the variability is much higher. I barely feel safe around other drivers when I'm in my own car, a marvel of technology designed to keep me safe.

> The only place I would cycle regularly is the Netherlands, because of the infrastructure and the attitude of drivers.

There are parts of the US where the infrastructure and attitude isn't so bad. Not as good as much of Europe, but good enough to make it OK. This is extremely variable, though. I've seen many parts of the nation where I wouldn't dare to bike.

Where I live, for instance, there is a law that requires a percentage of all road funds to be used for bicycle infrastructure. As a result, there is quite a lot of well maintained bike paths that are completely separate from the streets. About 2/3rd of my daily commute route is physically separated from road traffic -- to the point where the only time I even see a car is when they're going across an overpass of the bike path.