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

We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

citylab.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 561 posts

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#531

Post by clarry »

gbrown wrote: post #316
mcv wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think cycling is inherently more a local thing than cars. Nobody needs interstate or international bicycle paths, because nobody cycles that far. So it makes sense that the interest is more local, and maybe that's also why smaller countries like Denmark and Netherland are more successful at it. Bicycle infrastructure is primarily about towns and cities. So if you want this big push, you have to do it at the city le…

> Nobody needs interstate or international bicycle paths, because nobody cycles that far. IMHO, this is 120% just a chicken and egg problem. Sure, nobody bikes that far to work, but if you build it people can and will travel large distances to visit just to go on bike tours. In my state, we have an annual event which attracts thousands in which people bike hundreds of miles from one side to the other. Rural highways…

I've done some 50 to 90 km (one way) intercity trips on bike. I'd love to do more with the help of extended range and speed with electric assist but they have a silly 25 kph speed limit. If you get a faster electric, it'll be treated like a moped -- you need license, insurance, registration. Largely defeats the point of cycling for me.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#532

Post by 205guy »

smt88 wrote: post #2

> Cars are the slowest, lowest-bandwidth forms of urban transportation. This is the kind of thing I read a lot in micromobility advocacy articles, but it seems like it can't be true. How can a bike, scooter, or moped be either faster or higher-bandwidth than a car? Also, serious question: if electric SDCs became widespread, would it still make sense to advocate things like bikes? You can't transport a family of three…

Here is photographic evidence of transporting 3 kids, including a newborn in a childseat, on a bicycle:

https://www.dcrainmaker.com/2019/10/continued-expansion-of-t...

Of course it's the Netherlands, and it is safe to do so when there is infrastructure for it like there.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#535

Post by clarry »

swebs wrote: post #285
cgrealy wrote: post #3

I live in Christchurch, NZ. After a massive earthquake in 2011, I had high hopes that we might redesign the city for the next 100 years instead of the previous 50 (i.e. for people, not cars). Instead the city council built a few bike lanes and even then people lost their goddamn minds. "You're taking away parking space!" "All these bike lanes are slowing traffic" "No one wants to bike into the city" Meanwhile, cyclis…

>"You're taking away parking space!" "All these bike lanes are slowing traffic" Just put the bike lanes on the sidewalk instead of in the street then. That's how it's done in Finland and it seems much safer for everyone involved.

They work ok in areas that aren't particularly congested. Even then, many of these shared bike/pedestrian ways are just packed full of little things that slow cyclists down in a way a cycle lane wouldn't. They're also poorly maintained as compared to the street that gets re-paved every so often while they just fill the worst holes & cracks on the sidewalk.

That's why some enthusiasts in .fi choose to cycle in traffic (even though that's not really legal if there's a bike path on the right).

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#536

Post by cyborgx7 »

CDSlice wrote: post #496
cyborgx7 wrote: post #485

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty sure that was you.

> I disagree. There is no need for a "balancing act" between cars and public transport. More public transport and less cars is always an improvement. Sound familiar?

I'm not denying that this was a quote from me. I'm denying that this is what brought it into this weird theoretical extreme area.

You also haven't responded to my response yet. You just ignored it and are trying to derail the discussion with a meta argument. Unless you are going to address the actual content of the arguments, I'm done with this conversation.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#537

Post by cyborgx7 »

criddell wrote: post #417
cyborgx7 wrote: post #377

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How silly of me. We should definitely organize MORE of our society around the needs of car owners. /s

We should organize society however we the people want. That means a bottom-up rather than top-down approach that will vary greatly depending on local demographics, climate, etc... All of us think we know what is needed, but the reality is different ideas need to be floated and we vote for the solution we want to see for our area.

What kind of non-argument is that? Of course we should organize society however we want. That is why I'm trying to persuade people into agreeing with me on what the right way to organize society is.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#539

Post by criddell »

cyborgx7 wrote: post #537
criddell wrote: post #417

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We should organize society however we the people want. That means a bottom-up rather than top-down approach that will vary greatly depending on local demographics, climate, etc... All of us think we know what is needed, but the reality is different ideas need to be floated and we vote for the solution we want to see for our area.

What kind of non-argument is that? Of course we should organize society however we want. That is why I'm trying to persuade people into agreeing with me on what the right way to organize society is.

My point is that it's a little pointless to argue on global forum like HN because it's such a local issue. You don't need to convince anybody here, it's the people in your local community that are going to make the change.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#540

Post by cyborgx7 »

criddell wrote: post #539
cyborgx7 wrote: post #537

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What kind of non-argument is that? Of course we should organize society however we want. That is why I'm trying to persuade people into agreeing with me on what the right way to organize society is.

My point is that it's a little pointless to argue on global forum like HN because it's such a local issue. You don't need to convince anybody here, it's the people in your local community that are going to make the change.

Public transport infrastructure is definitely a global issue.
Post reply on HN