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

11–20 of 561 posts

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#11

Post by jalgos_eminator »

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…

The key word here is "urban". I ride my bike around the city core sometimes just for fun and I can easily keep up with cars because they are going so slow. Now imagine how many bikes you could fit on a two lane road vs how many cars. Obviously if the car is coming from the suburbs its going to be faster.

> Also, serious question: if electric SDCs became widespread, would it still make sense to advocate things like bikes?

Yes, absolutely yes. The cars would still have to go somewhere after they have dropped off their occupants. Hopefully we will get on-demand carpool services that allow us to have vastly fewer vehicles on the road, which would free up space for bikes and other public transit.

> You can't transport a family of three or a baby as safely in a vehicle smaller than a car

Not everyone can use a bike of course. Some will have to use public transit, and yes some will have to use a car for various reasons. The streets don't have to be car-less, we just need to get enough cars off the road to ease congestion and be able to turn existing lanes into bike lanes or public transit lanes. Once good reliable and quick public transit exists, there won't be such a strong incentive to own a car.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#12

Post by WizardAustralis »

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…

The irony here is that the bikes aren't slowing traffic, the endless road works are. Also Chch is basically one giant Wilsons parking lot now.

I love the place and I intend to settle there in a few years time but it is very disheartening to see a once in the life time opportunity to solve these issues get squandered in the space of a few years.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#13

Post by jeffnappi »

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…

One reason micromobility has higher bandwidth is that cars typically only have a single occupant, yet occupy the space of perhaps 5 bikes.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#14

Post by geofft »

SllX wrote: post #8

You know what? Fine. I think the increased trend in cycling in day, San Francisco is neat. I have questioned the sanity of those who thought plastic pylons were adequate “protection” wherever I’ve seen them. Streets are typically city-owned and managed though, and if you’re in a place with a tax regime like California’s, then you’re in a place that relies heavily on things like sales taxes and capital gains taxes whi…

None of this extended, anti-American rant has anything to do with bikes in particular. You're just complaining about doing anything at all with the government and with unions.

So, build some private bike infrastructure. If Elon Musk wants to make Hyperbike, sure, let's see if it gets built and forms part of a functioning network.

Also - how come your arguments don't apply to building roads themselves? How did Central Freeway get built? How did the Bay Bridge get built and rebuilt?

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#15

Post by dcolkitt »

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…

The biggest counterpoint here is what about families? A mom with three young kids in tow pretty much needs a car to get around. Or elderly people? I can't really take my 90-year old grandma out to dinner if it requires her to bike her way to the restaurant.

Thinking about non-car based transportation methods is great. But the reality is that large segments of society are always going to need some sort of car-based option. You can't just ban cars from a city center without totally excluding a lot of young people.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#16

Post by vecinu »

dcolkitt wrote: post #15
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…

The biggest counterpoint here is what about families? A mom with three young kids in tow pretty much needs a car to get around. Or elderly people? I can't really take my 90-year old grandma out to dinner if it requires her to bike her way to the restaurant. Thinking about non-car based transportation methods is great. But the reality is that large segments of society are always going to need some sort of car-based op…

How are other cities solving this problem? Does Grandma never go out to dinner in Tokyo or Bogota?

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#17

Post by ako »

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…

I had no problems transporting my children, even when still a baby, in a cargobike (bakfiets).

It's a pretty convenient way of transporting your children in and out of the city, as it actually gets you to where you need to go. Compare this to a car: you cant really get to the store you need to be, instead you have to park in a parking garage and then carry your baby in the maxi-cosi to the store. I prefer a bike.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#18

Post by samcheng »

I really think the concept of bike boulevards is one that needs more attention than bike lanes. Take a network of side roads and make them inconvenient for large vehicle through-traffic via bollards and other obstacles. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_boulevard

The result is a quiet, safe setting for 'micro-mobility' bicycles and scooters with decreased bike-car interaction. You don't even need bike lanes, because almost all of the traffic on those roads is bike traffic.

The article talks about bus + bike roads, sort of like Market St. in San Francisco, but I don't think that's optimal. For one thing, buses should be able to go much faster than bikes, especially Bus Rapid Transit, and as such pose collision danger. Also, BRT should be upgradeable to light rail, and rails are very dangerous for micro-mobility devices with small tires. Buses and cars coexist easily on the road. Buses should have their own lane, next to the cars.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#19

Post by mdorazio »

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…

A lot of micromobility advocates also seem to really hate public transit for whatever reasons, even though it's often superior to cycling in time, safety, and throughput.

To your second question, though, I think the answer is it depends on your intended location and use case. Most micromobility and cycling advocates want changes made to dense urban centers, which are less likely to cater to families with children. SDCs might actually make traffic worse in these places the same way ridesharing has since they will be spending some time driving around empty and also causing congestion when they pick up or drop off passengers. In more suburban settings, though, SDCs make a lot more sense.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#20

Post by adrianN »

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…

A bike needs maybe five to ten square meters of road space at a speed of 20-30km/h. A car needs around fifteen square meters standing still. Buses and trains are better still.
Post reply on HN