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

161–170 of 561 posts

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#161

Post by lostlogin »

dcolkitt wrote: post #135
deanCommie wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ask the Dutch. How do they do it? Or do you assume they do not have young kids or grandmas? Why is it that whenever people talk about designing cities for pedestrians and bikes, someone on hackernews thinks it means eliminating all cars entirely forever. For a forum ostensibly designed for entrepreneurs, it shows a tremendous lack of imagination. Answer: * Public transportation inside cities such as buses and trams *…

The difference is that Holland is entirely flat, has an average high of 71 in the summer, and rarely if ever gets icy. The Dutch experience simply doesn't translate to most of America because of the terrain and climate. Elderly people people will die if you make them walk in the Florida summer. 7 year old children lack the leg-strength to bike up California hills. Both groups are likely to slip and crack their heads…

> The difference is that Holland is entirely flat,

Most of Christchurch is pretty flat.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#162

Post by TulliusCicero »

chrismatheson wrote: post #151
TulliusCicero wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This will never work except for the tiny percentage of people who are extremely confident riding with cars. You're never going to get grandmas and grandpas and 8-year-olds comfortably riding in car traffic on regular roads. I don't understand why people keep suggesting this when bikes generally already can use the road, and this is clearly a failure as far as getting more people biking. Meanwhile, basically everywher…

A "simple" change could affect the way cars and bikes interact on the roads. It's always the cars fault. If the law were to change to favour the smallest, lest protected vehicle at all times then those driving cars would take much greater care when driving around them.

That would be a good, but insufficient change. People will drive fast on the wide, straight roads common in the states, for example, the road geography itself encourages it. Enforcement changes alone are not enough.

Parents are never gonna feel safe letting their kids bike just because hey, if they get hit by a car it'll be the driver's fault!

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#163

Post by bb101 »

Interesting how the author seems to think that cycling advocates have only a marginal impact on our built environment because they "ask for twigs".

I would have assumed that the lack of cycling infrastructure in cities is more influenced by the people who have power over our town councils and planners -- wealthy developers and transport lobbyists. How likely are these people to use bicycles over cars themselves?

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#164

Post by tralarpa »

glangdale wrote: post #91
glangdale wrote: post #46

I'm curious as to what planet you'd have to be living on to think that if we have billions of dollars to spare on huge transport infrastructure projects that aren't cars, that it should go to bikes and not public transport + walkability. I'm guessing it's a special magic planet with startlingly good weather year-round, without disabled people, where everyone gets to age into spry Euro-oldsters. Not wanting to kick of…

I appear to have kicked off a frenzy of folks eurosplaining to me that they personally ride in deep snow, howling gales, and see no reason that people in hot climates (including hot humid climates with near 100% humidity, or extreme heat events) can't cycle everywhere at all times. Also they will all be happily cycling when they are 80 just like Grandpa Josef and Great-grandma Helga, etc. Congrats, but the statistics…

> I appear to have kicked off a frenzy of folks eurosplaining

Ah, come on. You asked for it, didn't you? You wrote "I'm guessing it's a special magic planet with startlingly good weather year-round, without disabled people, where everyone gets to age into spry Euro-oldsters". Of course, such an extreme statement will trigger a reaction from people who actually experience every day what you claim to be impossible. It's not possible in every city and it's not possible for everybody, but it's possible in more places than we think once we accept the idea. One quarter of the Dutch population cycles every day and the number of cycling people (obviously lower than the average) over 65 is actually increasing thanks to better a infrastructure and, of course, e-bikes.

And talking about hot climates: You remember the pictures from South China in the 1970s or 1980s where everybody was cycling because cars were too expensive and public transport was bad? Now everybody has a car and nobody with a sane mind would cycle in China.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#165

Post by TulliusCicero »

innocentoldguy wrote: post #127

Fuck bicyclists. They are freeloaders on the infrastructure bought and paid for by people who buy gas for their automobiles (and heaped upon electric car owners where I live). In my city, there is a push to charge bicyclists an annual licensing fee, similar to cars, and to require they have license plates. Once bicyclists are paying their fair share for the roads, then we can start dreaming bigger than bike lanes.

Cyclists are already largely subsidizing drivers, because a) it's more than gas taxes and registration fees that go to roads, it's also general income taxes and local/state taxes, and b) bike infrastructure is radically cheaper than car infrastructure.

You're looking at at least an order of magnitude difference in cost, which overwhelms the difference in taxes paid. That cyclists may only be paying 50% or even 25% as much as drivers doesn't matter if the cost of bike lanes and paths is 10% of the cost of roads for cars.

Thus, it's actually drivers who are freeloading compared to cyclists.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#166

Post by briandear »

socialist_coder wrote: post #33
dcolkitt wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> A mom with three young kids in tow Ha! Go see how they do it in Europe. Bike trailers, extra seats in the front & back, built in cargo decks, longer bikes; there are lots of fancy ways to load a lot of kids & cargo onto your bike. And don't forget that kids can ride their own bikes too! My kid was riding a bike with me to daycare at 3-4 years old. Your thinking is too car-centric!

But why? It takes a long time to get kids helmeted up and they don’t ride very fast. Not everyone has the leisure to ride bikes everywhere. My kids schools are 10 miles from home and 5 miles from each other. Even with a dedicated bike lane, it would still take dramatically more work to drive. Then, if it rains.. I have to worry about it rain gear for everyone. Then if one kid gets sick at school, I’m supposed to ride my bike from Cupertino to Palo Alto, pick him or her up and then ride to the doctor in Mountain View or wherever?

Or little league practice in one part of town while another kid has gymnastics in another part of town?

It’s silly that a country as huge as the United States is being compared with the tiny, flat, Netherlands. Some American neighborhoods are larger than entire Dutch towns. The Netherlands doesn’t have Texas hot and humid summers, or California terrain, or Michigan winters. And a 3-4 year old riding to day care? Just how long does it take a kid to ride a bike 5 miles vs. me driving 5 miles? It’s absurd.

I get it “let’s hate cars,” but cars are freedom. If I have to run to a CVS at 2am, a bike is the last thing I want to ride. In the event of a natural disaster or an evacuation, are people supposed to ride their bikes to escape a wildfire or a hurricane?Or wait on the city bus? People literally die if they can’t evacuate quickly — and anyone expecting public transportation to be working or effective at evacuations is delusional or living in a perfect dream world where nothing bad ever happens.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#167

Post by koyote »

scrollaway wrote: post #152
knolan wrote: post #144

I cycle 24km to work across the city each way on an ebike. It’s the fastest mode of transport available to me, even limited to 25km/h. The bike takes an hour, the bus 90 minutes because of its indirect route, and the car about the same with morning gridlock. You could do it in 35 minutes with no traffic. When I take the bus I arrive to work tired and groggy. When I cycle I arrive energised. I don’t drive because park…

24km? What's your bike's range? Over here ebikes are just about limited to 25-30km on full charge. Do you charge it at work?

So I don't own an ebike but I've rented an MTB ebike a short while ago and was able to comfortably do 70km while still having over 1/4 battery left. That being said, I did not have it set to the max the whole way. Mostly spent in eco mode which is more than enough

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#168

Post by theaeolist »

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…

There you go: https://babyccinokids.com/blog/2010/02/02/do-as-the-dutch-do...

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#169

Post by systemtest »

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…

I live in a 750 year old European city. The medieval center is 1 kilometer in diameter. They wanted to make the center accessible only for cars of residents and suppliers of stores (up to 11am for suppliers). There are four underground parking garages directly surrounding the center and the walking distance from a garage to any location is never more than 450 meter. Free wheelchairs are provided from the garages. This change would make the center much more liveable for residents, guests and visitors.

I have never seen a collective group of people lose their shit during the town hall meeting that much. It was like the end of the world. Apparently during the 750 years history it has become mandatory to have visitors parking right on the monumental cobblestones. Walking 450 meter, even with the free provided wheelchairs, became impossible. I wonder how people survived back in 1438 without the ability to park their car right in front of the shops.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#170

Post by bb101 »

reilly3000 wrote: post #105

US Federal highways were built for homeland defense first, then commercial traffic, then individual automobiles. The infrastructure is built on government credit and maintained via gasoline taxes. A 50 mile segment of freeway might move more than $50 million worth of cargo and labor each hour. The same is true for city streets, on a smaller scale. Bikes, by their nature, are rather terrible at moving things around li…

Excellent analysis of the topic. Thank you.
Post reply on HN