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

US DOT awards $800M toward street safety

smartcitiesdive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 82 posts

Re: US DOT awards $800M toward street safety

#71

Post by stouset »

notch898a wrote: post #38
stouset wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds right, but the actual statistics show that—for the average American—every minute of cycling increases expected lifespan by at least one minute. Obviously this is an average and won't hold true for every American in every locale.

The average American is biking for leisure. If they had to bike on their commute it totally changes and instead of a planned low-risk leisure route you're on the highway to hell in the thick of rush hour traffic. It's completely incomparable.

What does this have to do with my comment? I was replying to the statement that

> If you live in most American cities, biking is basically a life hazard on par with smoking imo

That said, I used a bicycle as my primary mode of transportation in the Atlanta, Decatur, and Northern suburban areas for several years. It wasn't really all that bad despite a near-total lack of cycling infrastructure (this was before the Beltline).

Re: US DOT awards $800M toward street safety

#72

Post by kevviiinn »

notch898a wrote: post #38
stouset wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sounds right, but the actual statistics show that—for the average American—every minute of cycling increases expected lifespan by at least one minute. Obviously this is an average and won't hold true for every American in every locale.

The average American is biking for leisure. If they had to bike on their commute it totally changes and instead of a planned low-risk leisure route you're on the highway to hell in the thick of rush hour traffic. It's completely incomparable.

To be entirely honest the average american isn't biking at all, they barely even walk

Re: US DOT awards $800M toward street safety

#73

Post by giantg2 »

zamzoid wrote: post #62
giantg2 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That political decision is due to a lack of support. Preferences have to change. One major factor standing in the way is the overwhelmingly poor service by most cities. So it's a bit of a catch-22 since service can't improve without money. I'm not even going to bring up places like rural or lower density suburbs as the service there is almost non-existent.

I agree with everything you said in this comment, except for the lack of support. It's kind of a meme in online urbanist circles at this point that in the US you can pick either walkable or affordable. There's incredible demand for walkable places where you don't have to use a car, to the point where these places are not affordable for most people (I'm not saying all the demand for these dense places comes from walka…

I agree that the government isn't always following popular opinion. However, there is also a difference between idealistic opinion and reasonable opinion. People want better transit, but fewer people with to raise taxes for it, and fewer still can pock a tax they want to raise.

https://transweb.sjsu.edu/research/What-Do-Americans-Think-a...

"To bring up one more thing related to your point on rural and suburban areas, the low-density car-dependent development across the vast majority of the US is a deeply ingrained problem here."

If it's such low density, is it really a problem?

Re: US DOT awards $800M toward street safety

#74

Post by rootusrootus »

pkulak wrote: post #41
rootusrootus wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> they cause all the deaths And have all the utility, too. It's not a simple problem.

Are you serious? A BMW driving some schmuck to an office park has "all the utility"?

I'm hoping that is just a bad faith attempt at trolling. Because otherwise I'm speechless. Though it sure would explain a lot about how some folks on HN arrived at the conclusion they did.

Re: US DOT awards $800M toward street safety

#75

Post by SQueeeeeL »

brucedawson wrote: post #44
SQueeeeeL wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you live in most American cities, biking is basically a life hazard on par with smoking imo

Just remember that this is a societal choice. Biking can be safe and efficient. In Vancouver BC they have prioritized modes of transportation other than driving, including creating a dense network of cycling paths and slow-streets. There is a big difference between what is, and what must be. Improvements are possible, which is what the linked article is all about. These are baby steps, but if you want to bike more (a…

It's more of a choice by the elites which deprioritize the needs of the actual populace. Often they do this by mixing the zoning of cities with surrounding suburban areas who have deeply conflicting interests and lifestyles

Re: US DOT awards $800M toward street safety

#76

Post by kyleee »

notch898a wrote: post #53
brucedawson wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I bicycle commuted for years in an American city. It is as safe as your local council decides it should be, and my commute always felt safe. Don't give in to the belief that unsafe cycling is inevitable.

Alright, here's my anecdote in kind. I biked for over a decade without incident for leisure. Then I started bicycle commuting. Within one year I had not one but two occasions where I was knocked unconscious by angry rush hour drivers. I no longer could plan my destination but rather had to fight the entirety of traffic trying to get downtown at the same time at once. I still have trouble with one arm and the other ti…

Hard won wisdom, I am glad you made it through your injuries. I generally will only cycle in my area on weekdays around 09:30 to 13:30 or so in order to avoid any rush hour or high traffic times as much as possible. It makes a significant difference.

As you note and in my experience the school drop off / pick up times are the scariest as you near schools and arteries on the school destination paths. There are frequently backups and gridlock situations at these times, coupled with palpable driver anxiety and hurriedness, which just seems like a recipe to get killed or maimed as a cyclist

Re: US DOT awards $800M toward street safety

#77

Post by Rebelgecko »

giantg2 wrote: post #22
zip1234 wrote: post #17

> $10.4 million to address roadway departure crashes along approximately 50 miles of roadway through shoulder widening, rumble strips and other low-cost treatments. They including a road widening as 'street safety'. Very generous interpretation of the term.

How so? Your quote is talking about shoulders, not additional lanes.

The grants include $60m to "upgrade" I-44 and I-75 from 4 to 6 lanes for a short stretch

Re: US DOT awards $800M toward street safety

#78

Post by rhaway84773 »

8f2ab37a-ed6c wrote: post #32
SQueeeeeL wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you live in most American cities, biking is basically a life hazard on par with smoking imo

And good luck not having your bikes get regularly stolen in places like SF or NYC. You better ride the most revolting beater you can find, and even then.

I’ve had a $300 used bike service me just fine for over 11 years now.

There was a period right during/after the pandemic where things were really bad but it’s settled to a fairly decent situation.

If you ride a $500 bike then you will probably be fine factoring in a $50-$100 theft cost at most.

Finally, most bike theft is covered under rental insurance, which isn’t all that expensive to begin with, and is highly recommended anyways.

Re: US DOT awards $800M toward street safety

#79

Post by notch898a »

rhaway84773 wrote: post #78
8f2ab37a-ed6c wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And good luck not having your bikes get regularly stolen in places like SF or NYC. You better ride the most revolting beater you can find, and even then.

I’ve had a $300 used bike service me just fine for over 11 years now. There was a period right during/after the pandemic where things were really bad but it’s settled to a fairly decent situation. If you ride a $500 bike then you will probably be fine factoring in a $50-$100 theft cost at most. Finally, most bike theft is covered under rental insurance, which isn’t all that expensive to begin with, and is highly reco…

Might want to check the deductible on your renters insurance. For me it'd be a total loss. Basically only worth it if someone drives up with a moving truck and just steals half the house or if someone gets hurt and sues me for medical bills.

Re: US DOT awards $800M toward street safety

#80

Post by ultrarunner »

hammock wrote: post #68
ultrarunner wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've alluded to this before on Hacker News, but the supposedly residential road that I live on is wide enough to fit approximately 7 full-size Hummer H1s side by side. The posted speed limit is 30 mph, and just riding with my elderly father-in-law today I noticed he was going 45 mph and being tailgated. I have personally lost a (thankfully parked and unoccupied) car to a collision, which wound up 100 ft down the road…

It sounds like your specimen road is out of code/guidelines. If you want to do something about it you can lobby for a traffic study

They're all like that here… Phoenix is used as a case study in urban planning failure. The point isn't that it can or cannot be fixed (it's been decades; I'm not holding my breath), the point is that wider roads do not lead directly to safer outcomes-- probably by the same mechanism that better safety equipment in sports do not make for better injury outcomes.
Post reply on HN