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

US DOT deleting bike lane references

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 129 posts

Re: US DOT deleting bike lane references

#71

Post by cosmicgadget »

techjamie wrote: post #70
transitorykris wrote: post #3

"Since nearly 80% of the population uses cars to get to work and their important medical appointments, we are taking a closer look at federal guidance to ensure American families have the infrastructure they need," the spokesperson said. "This is a common sense approach despite the Left's belief that everyone should ride a bike to their shoebox-sized apartment to eat crickets to achieve a phony climate agenda." Jumpi…

This logic fails on a couple levels. One, bike lanes are often not wide enough to support another car anyway. Two, Braess's paradox[1] is an effect that's been noticed for as long as we've had cars that adding a lane to a roadway will often show no improvement, and perhaps even add detriment, to a local traffic system. So I guess it's a common sense solution if you don't understand the first thing about roadway desig…

They understand it, they're just in the middle of a culture war.

Re: US DOT deleting bike lane references

#72

Post by cosmicgadget »

jeffbee wrote: post #11
transitorykris wrote: post #3

"Since nearly 80% of the population uses cars to get to work and their important medical appointments, we are taking a closer look at federal guidance to ensure American families have the infrastructure they need," the spokesperson said. "This is a common sense approach despite the Left's belief that everyone should ride a bike to their shoebox-sized apartment to eat crickets to achieve a phony climate agenda." Jumpi…

[flagged]

Seems awfully newsworthy. And using direct quotes makes it difficult to brush aside as "librul media bias" or whatever.

Re: US DOT deleting bike lane references

#73

Post by aendruk »

idontwantthis wrote: post #50
transitorykris wrote: post #3

"Since nearly 80% of the population uses cars to get to work and their important medical appointments, we are taking a closer look at federal guidance to ensure American families have the infrastructure they need," the spokesperson said. "This is a common sense approach despite the Left's belief that everyone should ride a bike to their shoebox-sized apartment to eat crickets to achieve a phony climate agenda." Jumpi…

This kind of rhetoric is actually going to get cyclists killed. There are enough drivers on the road already who intentionally try to scare cyclists. This will push some of them over the hill to murder someone with their pickup truck.

Just last week in Texas:

The driver, identified as 31-year-old Charles Medina, then sped past the couple from behind. Rapp’s boyfriend responded to the maneuver by raising his hands and yelling, at which point Medina slammed his brakes, skidded to a stop and accelerated in reverse. Medina ultimately hit Rapp so forcefully that his “rear windshield was shattered completely”. He also allegedly left skidmarks from having “rapidly accelerated backwards” as well as apparently “steering towards something while backing up”. Emergency responders found Rapp unresponsive and lying face down in the roadway. She was pronounced dead after being taken to a hospital.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jul/22/boxer-hannah...

Re: US DOT deleting bike lane references

#74

Post by macintux »

AlexandrB wrote: post #33
CamperBob2 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing can be done about it, so (shrug) praise the Lord and pass the Shell 93 octane, I guess. Can't fight a hundred-million strong cult.

No idea what you guys are talking about. The Christian faction of the right has waned significantly since the Bush presidency.

The current administration is not remotely shy about proclaiming its interest in a Christian theocracy.

Re: US DOT deleting bike lane references

#75

Post by jerlam »

supern0va wrote: post #52
VariousPrograms wrote: post #6

I have friends who despise cyclists but oppose bike lanes. Bike lanes would take cyclists out of your lane and into their own lane. Plus if more people start cycling because there's infrastructure, that's less car traffic in the way of your truck! It just seems like a win-win for everybody. I've given up hope on transportation in the USA. It certainly won't be fixed within my lifetime.

Yep, I'm perfectly content to use the full lane if there's not another option. And that doesn't mean squeezing into the shoulder. No, that means riding left of center to prevent assholes from passing unsafely on my left. The funniest thing is that tactical use of bike lanes, neighborhood greenways, etc, actually serves to funnel cyclists into specific protected routes such that the majority of other roads have fewer…

You are assuming that with or without bike infrastructure, there is a fixed number of cyclists.

Many drivers either believe there are no cyclists; or that the number of cyclists should be reduced to zero, and they should drive instead, like normal people.

Also, everything is zero-sum, so any money spent on bike infrastructure is less money spent to widen the freeways or subsidize parking.

Re: US DOT deleting bike lane references

#76

Post by idontwantthis »

aendruk wrote: post #73
idontwantthis wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This kind of rhetoric is actually going to get cyclists killed. There are enough drivers on the road already who intentionally try to scare cyclists. This will push some of them over the hill to murder someone with their pickup truck.

Just last week in Texas: The driver, identified as 31-year-old Charles Medina, then sped past the couple from behind. Rapp’s boyfriend responded to the maneuver by raising his hands and yelling, at which point Medina slammed his brakes, skidded to a stop and accelerated in reverse. Medina ultimately hit Rapp so forcefully that his “rear windshield was shattered completely”. He also allegedly left skidmarks from havin…

This one 5 years ago - https://www.thedrive.com/news/43060/coal-rolling-teen-that-h...

I couldn't find out if he ever got convicted or sentenced to anything.

But any cyclist, including myself, can tell you that there are people out there with murder in their hearts who want you to die just for the crime of delaying them by a few seconds.

Re: US DOT deleting bike lane references

#77

Post by Spooky23 »

mothballed wrote: post #58
Spooky23 wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a nearby suburban town, the GOP Chair forced a referendum on a road project. New York has a complete streets program where bike lanes and pedestrian friendly crossings are included in most projects. Iirc 4-5 people have died crossing this road. The call to action was that “those people” would use the bike lanes to leave the city, connect to the Democrat bike trail and rape, murder and rob the townsfolk. Old fearfu…

I think there's a good faith possibility here that the taxpayers just don't see themselves biking to "the hood" rather than some sinister plan against black people. I mean I wouldn't vote for a bike route to the white trash trailer park, not because I hate them but because there is no reason for me to bike there whereas I might bike to a nice gentrified district for some drinks. I would reframe most things more in te…

It’s actually a super popular bike route as it’s a 20 minute path to the central business district downtown. And again, 4-5 people have lost their lives in as many years.

In this case most of the hubbub was really about a pedestrian island that would block left turns to a business the guy was friends with. The woke people were out to get them for some reason, etc.

The racist dog whistle was very deliberate and targeted at Nextdoor. The messaging in more mainstream outlets was about lane width reductions causing a traffic nightmare. It was almost taken from Blazing Saddles.

Re: US DOT deleting bike lane references

#78

Post by pandaman »

VariousPrograms wrote: post #6

I have friends who despise cyclists but oppose bike lanes. Bike lanes would take cyclists out of your lane and into their own lane. Plus if more people start cycling because there's infrastructure, that's less car traffic in the way of your truck! It just seems like a win-win for everybody. I've given up hope on transportation in the USA. It certainly won't be fixed within my lifetime.

I don't know if you noticed that, but when they make bike lanes they don't cut them off the sidewalk, they cut them into the car lanes, either taking a lane out or making the existing lane very narrow. Unlike a cyclist, which you see once in a blue moon, the reduced lanes are there forever, you drive through them all the time. Does this explain the paradox to you?

I, for one, cycle and still oppose bike lanes - they don't make cycling much safer (a car can easily jump a curb and most of these don't even have a curb, just some paint and plastic bollards in the best case) but impede traffic for everyone. If you want to increase cycling adoption you will piss off much fewer people and be 1000% more efficient by reigning in bike theft instead of building these lanes.

Re: US DOT deleting bike lane references

#79

Post by hakfoo »

jimbokun wrote: post #67
foco_tubi wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not that there's any credence to the idea, but many residents of low-income neighborhoods in urban areas see bike lanes as a dinner bell for gentrification. Never mind that a ton of bicycle commuters in urban areas are from low-income neighborhoods themselves...

I will never understand the fight against “gentrification”. You want property values in your neighborhood to go DOWN?

Property values going up is only appealing if you own property.

For renters, it means they're going to try to increase rents.

For everyone, it presents a pressure on favourite local businesses-- higher costs, and an influx of well-bankrolled outside competitors.

Re: US DOT deleting bike lane references

#80

Post by foco_tubi »

muwtyhg wrote: post #68
foco_tubi wrote: post #17

Great, more ammunition for bad faith arguments from all sides. Unfortunately there's a healthy subset of the Democratic party which is also against road infrastructure improvements like bike lanes and traffic calming. Car brain is an affliction which does not discriminate.

What does it add to both-sides this issue? It's not even addressing the post, it's just redirecting some of the blame to a group who have nothing to do with what the article addresses.

The point is it is very much a “both sides” issue and some of the talking points across the aisle are pretty similar. That the administration is saying it only lends naysayers more authority, even if it’s not a moral or logical one.
Post reply on HN