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

After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 317 posts

Re: After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

#271

Post by nemo44x »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #205
nemo44x wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Make it simple with a 5% tax on any new bike purchased in the city. Call it the “bike lane preservation fund”.

Why would we want to make it more expensive to bike, when it's better for the environment and saves the city money as it is? Some German cities are going in the opposite direction, giving subsidies for people to purchase electric cargo bikes.

Lost revenue from parking tickets. The city is in a very precarious situation right now with debt of 81k per resident and high tax paying citizens leaving the city faster than they are being replaced. Pension obligations are exploding and since 1% of the population funds 50% of the tax revenue, we can’t afford to lose anymore.

Building bike lanes is very kumbaya but these types of things are not sustainable as-is. Someone has to pay for it, why not the ones that use it? Make it great to attract more bikers and raise more money.

Or maybe just raise taxes on the place with the highest tax burden in the country? Will only chase out the small group of people that actually pay the bills even more.

I suppose we could also setup red light cameras for bikes but this would require registrations and license plates. The alternative is to tax bike sales.

Re: After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

#272

Post by objektif »

a13n wrote: post #233
objektif wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why muct we accomodate the needs of bikers? Why do they hold a special place? Can we instead invest in subway?

They're literally dying and you think the solution should be "don't bike"?

That is a strange way to look at it. Question I am asking is not whether biking should be made safer instead I am asking why biking should be considered a form of transportation at all that needs to be funded by taxpayers? This is a serious question try to answer without getting emotional. Should we have another lane for skaters? How about hand walkers?

Re: After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

#273

Post by cylinder »

situational87 wrote: post #218
jacobreg wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not ridiculous to say the urbanest area should try to set an example for other urban areas

NYC is kind of a joke in urban planning circles, they have a lot of crazy ideas and have executed on approximately one of them in 20 years. Many other cities are heads and shoulders ahead when it comes to rolling out proper separated bike lanes. Nobody is looking to NYC for leadership on anything in this field.

Soon you will be able to ride continuously around Manhattan on top of scaffolding. Problem solved!

Re: After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

#274

Post by cylinder »

lonelappde wrote: post #250
chaosbutters314 wrote: post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This. NYers do not respect crosswalks, jaywalking or rules of the road. It is chaos. People walk wherever and drive wherever. It is chaos. I was shocked to see the contrast between NYC and Montreal in terms of respecting the rules of road

That's because the rules are unjust. The cars shouldn't be there, for the most part, and the ones that are there should be driving slowly and carefully and paying for the privilege of commandeering space.

It makes no sense for 30 pedestrians to stand at a crosswalk waiting so 7 people can drive their cars through an intersection.

Re: After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

#275

Post by cylinder »

kristo wrote: post #200

I moved from NYC to Amsterdam a bit more than a month ago because getting around in NYC is too unpleasant and dangerous. Have been hit on my bike thrice in 5 yrs. Have been run down by psycho drivers. Have been doored. In the last month in Amsterdam I’ve had more pleasant interactions on the streets than in my entire time in nyc. It’s pure magic what cities are like when they embrace the fact that they are a city.

NYC just sucks, man. Left overseas after five years myself, and I sometimes watch ActionKid's NYC walking videos on youtube and cannot believe I used to live there.

Re: After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

#276

Post by Alex3917 »

kansface wrote: post #26
pwthornton wrote: post #5

This is big time for America. If our biggest city can’t show leadership on pedestrian and bicyclist safety, we can’t expect any other city to as well. New York is really lagging behind where it should be. Despite being by far the biggest American city, it is overrun with cars. Protected bike lanes, street improvements to make crossing the street safer, and dedicated bus lanes will improve the city for all New Yorkers…

How popular is biking in New York - eg, do people bike in the winter?

Depends whether you're looking at people using bikes for commuting, take out delivery, exercise, etc. Ostensibly 800,000 people are biking multiple times a month, but this can mean wildly different things. As a data point, the most popular bike path in the city (and country) has had 6,600 Strava users this year.

Re: After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

#277

Post by frabbit »

u801e wrote: post #258
physguy1123 wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When there's a stopped vehicle in the lane you're in, you can simply check for traffic in the next lane and switch lanes. > You're not restricted to the bike lane if there's an obstruction. These comments proves my whole second point. If a car were to just park in the car lane because it felt like it, there would be outrage, tickets, and the car would get towed immediately. Nobody would say "no big deal, just chang…

> If a car were to just park in the car lane because it felt like it, there would be outrage, tickets, and the car would get towed immediately. And drivers of those cars would switch lanes to get around it in the interim. Cars can develop mechanical issues that prevent them from proceeding and if they driver can't get to the side of the road, then they remain in the general purpose traffic lane (which isn't for the e…

This is definitely not victim blaming. It is sound advice based on the usual flow of traffic and the uniform vehicle code.

Bike lanes of various types are experimental parallel transport systems dropped into an existing system with which most people have experience and education. The bizarre undertaking on the inside and right-hook problems at intersections are completely predictable.

Re: After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

#278

Post by frabbit »

u801e wrote: post #213
bobthepanda wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot of bike lanes in New York do not have six feet of separation from parked cars.

A lane that instructs you to ride in the door zone should be ignored. It's safer to ride in the center of the general purpose lane that's far enough from parked vehicles to avoid the risk of getting doored. Your safety is far more important than someone else's convenience.

From bitter experience I concur: take the lane! It is safer for everyone.

Re: After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

#279

Post by sirsar »

objektif wrote: post #272
a13n wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're literally dying and you think the solution should be "don't bike"?

That is a strange way to look at it. Question I am asking is not whether biking should be made safer instead I am asking why biking should be considered a form of transportation at all that needs to be funded by taxpayers? This is a serious question try to answer without getting emotional. Should we have another lane for skaters? How about hand walkers?

Cycling is the most energy efficient mode of transportation, ever. More than walking, more than skating, more than motorcycles, more than gliding birds, and yes, more than the subway.

That on top of its health benefits, relative safety to those hit by bikes, its traffic efficiency, parking space efficiency, benefit to retail...

You bring up taxpayers. It is far, far cheaper to subsidize a bike lane than a new subway tunnel. And the bike lane is open more hours of the year, with more entrances and exits, more interchanges to other lines, a shorter distance point-to-point, with drastically lower maintenance costs. Taxpayers should be rioting over the costs spent on trains and traffic relative to bikes.

Re: After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes

#280

Post by frabbit »

nemo44x wrote: post #271
TulliusCicero wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would we want to make it more expensive to bike, when it's better for the environment and saves the city money as it is? Some German cities are going in the opposite direction, giving subsidies for people to purchase electric cargo bikes.

Lost revenue from parking tickets. The city is in a very precarious situation right now with debt of 81k per resident and high tax paying citizens leaving the city faster than they are being replaced. Pension obligations are exploding and since 1% of the population funds 50% of the tax revenue, we can’t afford to lose anymore. Building bike lanes is very kumbaya but these types of things are not sustainable as-is. So…

Someone has to pay for it, why not the ones that use it?

Just tax the GHG-emitters fairly and there cities coffers will be over-flowing.

That will help shift the incentive for those too dim and slothful to make a change on their own.

Post reply on HN