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

The Economics of Bike Lanes

economicsintelligence.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 203 posts

Re: The Economics of Bike Lanes

#71

Post by pessimizer »

joebadmo wrote: post #26
rjprins wrote: post #2

This discussion about the value and use of bike lanes keeps amazing me. It seems many people hold a negative view without having good arguments, almost religiously. Living in the Netherlands, the benefits of separate bike lanes (to point of a separate transit system) are so incredibly obvious. It's not some cultural particularity, it's because cycling has been made easy, nice (most of the time) and safe here. (see ht…

I'm a daily bike commuter and I would love to see a Netherlands-like biking network in the US, but it's hard for me to imagine anywhere that's not as flat as most of the Netherlands. I could see it here in Portland or maybe Philly, but I don't think it would really increase the numbers of cyclists that much in, say, Seattle, where I used to live (and bike).

Chicago is as flat as a board. Reclaimed swamp.

Re: The Economics of Bike Lanes

#72

Post by [deleted] »

bkor wrote: post #16
Jun8 wrote: post #7

I totally agree with the idea in the OP (not that we have much free parking left in Chicago). But I have to get something off my chest, although it's tangential to this post. (I know this will be sacrilege to the many HN bikers but here it goes): First a disclaimer: I, at 40+, cannot ride a bike reliably (yeah, I know, it funny, there's a long backstory), in fact I learned how to ride about 10 years ago, not by apply…

All those things would happen way less if there were dedicated bike lanes. And you should speak up when someone on a bike is creating a dangerous situation. I don't get why you would not.

[deleted]

Re: The Economics of Bike Lanes

#73

Post by hugh3 »

bkor wrote: post #16
Jun8 wrote: post #7

I totally agree with the idea in the OP (not that we have much free parking left in Chicago). But I have to get something off my chest, although it's tangential to this post. (I know this will be sacrilege to the many HN bikers but here it goes): First a disclaimer: I, at 40+, cannot ride a bike reliably (yeah, I know, it funny, there's a long backstory), in fact I learned how to ride about 10 years ago, not by apply…

All those things would happen way less if there were dedicated bike lanes. And you should speak up when someone on a bike is creating a dangerous situation. I don't get why you would not.

And all these things would happen way less if bikes were banned altogether.

Re: The Economics of Bike Lanes

#74

Post by sliverstorm »

msellout wrote: post #61
Goronmon wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find the behavior of most bikers in traffic to be dangerous, obnoxious and rude. Bikers often say that they should be treated on par with cars (in matters of passing, etc.), but they themselves operate somewhere between vehicles and pedestrians, combining the worse characteristics of each. I have observed many bikers not to stop at stop signs or red lights, because, you know, they're for cars, jeopardizing pedestri…

Conversely, I've decided that automobile drivers just don't belong on the roads. It truly is worse for everyone involved--health of the driver, safety of everyone around them, health of the community, etc. The economic growth issues are also murky.

So what does belong on the roads, oh paragon of wisdom?

Re: The Economics of Bike Lanes

#75

Post by jrockway »

dasil003 wrote: post #35
hack_edu wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... all these things would happen way less if there were dedicated bike lanes that were strictly enforced as DEDICATED bike lanes. Next time you're on a busy street with bike lanes, pay attention to the number of double-parked delivery trucks and other stationary non-bike business. These make the road more dangerous and slower (an important factor in route choice) than a non-bike lane street.

I agree that bike lanes have safety problems, but let's not take it out on delivery drivers. Have you ever driven a delivery truck? Quite often there is not physical possibility of legal parking. At some point lanes are going to be blocked, and not just the bike line. The best we can hope for is enough courtesy not to entirely block the street.

So the OP is ranting about cyclists running stop signs, but now we've decided it's OK for a delivery truck to block an entire street?

This is what annoys me most about drivers of cars: they are quick to criticize cyclists, but are very slow to criticize their own actions.

Re: The Economics of Bike Lanes

#76

Post by kgermino »

mturmon wrote: post #48
Jun8 wrote: post #7

I totally agree with the idea in the OP (not that we have much free parking left in Chicago). But I have to get something off my chest, although it's tangential to this post. (I know this will be sacrilege to the many HN bikers but here it goes): First a disclaimer: I, at 40+, cannot ride a bike reliably (yeah, I know, it funny, there's a long backstory), in fact I learned how to ride about 10 years ago, not by apply…

It turns out, lots of people have this very same "little thing" to get off their chest. Every discussion of urban cycling goes off on this particular tangent. It's tiresome. If you talk to people who cycle in cities, you'll find a lot of anger and rage at drivers also. These people may be eccentric, but their opinion seems based on facts as well. So consider the other side. As a further catalyst, I challenge you, as…

Where do you live that people go 65 in a 60?

Where I'm from (Chicago/ Milwaukee) you're lucky if traffic's only going 70 in a 50/55.

Re: The Economics of Bike Lanes

#77

Post by polymatter »

Jun8 wrote: post #52
sliverstorm wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bias in both these comments is so thick I could cut it with a knife. One can barely ride a bicycle; one wishes he didn't own a car.

Couldn't understand why you are referring to my comment as "biased", I was trying to portray how bikers are seen from the viewpoint of the non-avid-biker pedestrians. Do you think my points were wrong or made-up? If so, it would be more useful to comment on those aspects.

Well everyone has a bias as everybody has a different perspective on the world. That you can't appreciate biking (through your own choice or no), makes yours particularly "thick" (in the context of biking).

I also think its not unusual for people in this thread to be able to drive, and thus the need to portray how bikers are seen largely unnecessary (in my view). Drivers are the majority, and even keen cyclists will probably be drivers too.

As an occasional cyclist, I get particularly annoyed with bad cyclists when I'm driving, as I feel they bring me down with them by association.

Re: The Economics of Bike Lanes

#78

Post by jrockway »

Jun8 wrote: post #7

I totally agree with the idea in the OP (not that we have much free parking left in Chicago). But I have to get something off my chest, although it's tangential to this post. (I know this will be sacrilege to the many HN bikers but here it goes): First a disclaimer: I, at 40+, cannot ride a bike reliably (yeah, I know, it funny, there's a long backstory), in fact I learned how to ride about 10 years ago, not by apply…

I've noticed that cars run as many stop signs as cyclists. The rule is come to a complete stop and yield to your left. Cars treat the rule as "sort of lower your speed and yield to people that haven't stopped quite as much".

This is chaos. The cyclists are just doing what the other vehicles do.

(Also, you can't be surprised that there are cyclists on the Lakefront Trail. If they ride on the streets, their average speed goes down to approximately walking speed because the traffic lights are timed for people going 35, not 20. If I ride a Roosevelt / Damen / Fullerton / Wells loop, it takes well over an hour and a half and is about 12 miles. If I ride from the museum campus up to the end of the Lakefront Trail and back, that's 20 miles and only takes an hour. If you want to be safe as a pedestrian, either ban cyclists completely or ask for them to widen the trail. "Slower traffic keep right" largely works, it's just that the trail is very narrow in a few key places.

My solution is to avoid the trail if it's a day where people are going to be having picnics in the middle of the road, which is basically only warm weekend days after noon. Any other time, nobody uses the trail and it's perfectly safe for cyclists to ride fast on.)

Re: The Economics of Bike Lanes

#79

Post by yxhuvud »

dpark wrote: post #10
barrkel wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't much care for cycling; I did it for years when I was in school, had enough of it, now I prefer motorbikes. But it's a gross overstatement to say that there is no justification for an increase in bike lanes when they're currently being underutilized; you're completely ignoring network effects. If the cause of under-utilization is lack of cycle paths that cover enough of the journey (i.e. there would be too muc…

> (If parking is available for 30 USD, then it appears that parking is not actually difficult in NYC. It is expensive, not difficult.) That's the key takeaway. When property is at a premium, parking is also at a premium, by necessity. As someone who lives in a city, I like cheap parking as much as anybody else. But cheap parking is just city-subsidized parking.

As someone who lives in a city without owning a car, I prefer expensive parking because that mean the space is used better (for me!).

Re: The Economics of Bike Lanes

#80

Post by quinedstatement »

Jun8 wrote: post #7

I totally agree with the idea in the OP (not that we have much free parking left in Chicago). But I have to get something off my chest, although it's tangential to this post. (I know this will be sacrilege to the many HN bikers but here it goes): First a disclaimer: I, at 40+, cannot ride a bike reliably (yeah, I know, it funny, there's a long backstory), in fact I learned how to ride about 10 years ago, not by apply…

I always tell people: if you knew you wouldn't get a ticket in a car for running a red light safely, you would do it. As soon as the police start ticketing for running red lights and stop signs on a bike, I'll stop.

I ride in Philadelphia and I try to be somewhat considerate to drivers. I slow down for every stoplight and stop sign, but if nobody's coming, I'm going to go through it, because I'm not going to get in trouble.

Post reply on HN