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

331–340 of 561 posts

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#331

Post by tjr225 »

briandear wrote: post #175
enriquto wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> My car gets parked across the street from my apartment building. Offtopic, but this has to end. I do not understand how it is socially acceptable to put huge pieces of your private property on the public streets. You cannot just put your washing machine on the street because you have nowhere else to put it! Why can you do that with a car?

Because I pay taxes for those spaces — often I even pay for the parking space itself. I pay gasoline taxes to pay for those roads. What gasoline taxes are bikes paying to use the roads? Are bikes paying registration fees? Tolls? Are they getting mandatory inspections each year?

This is such a goofy argument.

> What gasoline taxes are bikes paying to use the roads?

Bikes can't pay taxes, neither can cars. People that own them can, and most cyclists I know also own a car. So if you're attempting to stipulate that people that ride bikes don't pay taxes on the infrastructure that they use, you're wrong- at least in my experience.

In any case, bicycles cause far, far less damage - maybe even 0 damage - to the roads used by motorists. So, if a side effect of motorists paying taxes to build and maintain roads is that cyclists also get to use them for free, a sensible person would be okay with that.

> Tolls?

I can't think of a single toll road that I have ever been on in the US that was not a highway. Cyclists don't ride on highways unless absolutely necessary. In most cases this probably isn't even legal for the cyclist to ride on the toll road.

> Are they getting mandatory inspections each year?

Can you find even one example of a poorly maintained bicycle causing someone other than the rider's death/injury?

Anyway, I don't even suspect that you read the article. Instead you just came in here to rant about how anti-cycling you are, which is not a great look, but suit yourself.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#332

Post by brnt »

openfuture wrote: post #321
brnt wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So in NL, this is tackled with a tiered classification, in which the lowest tier ( This is not ideal, as the (fast) electric bike is new, also in NL, and people will misanticipate them (which I've experienced first hand). You're right, mixing speeds is a bad idea. This will improve with better infra (wider cycling paths, bike highways) and getting used to this new vehicle. On the other hand, the problem is similar to…

It should be classified by acceleration not velocity. Weight and velocity are also important (potential energy which could cause harm) but acceleration is the right way to sort things into lanes, there can also be an energy constraint for the lane but acceleration is about being able to anticipate the behavior of something so that you can avoid the accident in the first place. Electric bikes can accelerate fast and t…

Well, acceleration may be non-linear (bikes accelerate 0-10 faster than anything else, which is why sometimes in NL bikes may wait in front of cars before stoplights[1]). Top-speed and weight are also important factors in whether or not it would be smart to mix. However, this results in a matrix of separated lanes that is impractical ;)

Finding a good compromise (such as [1]) I think is a better idea. Lowering car speeds such that we can mix is a good one, as well as the introduction of speed limits on cycling paths [2], which would force certain bikes to slow down.

[1] https://gratistheorie.nl/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/opgeblaz... [2] https://www.fietsersbond.nl/nieuws/een-maximum-snelheid-op-h...

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#333

Post by jamil7 »

brnt wrote: post #309
fennecfoxen wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> electric biking is expanding your reach a few times over. Electric bikes are motorcycles, and I don't want vehicles with the speed and acceleration characteristics of a motorcycle in my bike lane, if you please. postscript: my very concerns for my safety seem to be getting voted down a lot considering that our friend the Dutchman here has given a rather nice reply recognizing the substantive nature of this conflict

So in NL, this is tackled with a tiered classification, in which the lowest tier ( This is not ideal, as the (fast) electric bike is new, also in NL, and people will misanticipate them (which I've experienced first hand). You're right, mixing speeds is a bad idea. This will improve with better infra (wider cycling paths, bike highways) and getting used to this new vehicle. On the other hand, the problem is similar to…

I cycled through Rotterdam recently, bikepacking to the UK. I found the scooters in the bikelanes to be massively unsettling. I've cycled all over the place and honestly found riding with the cars to be preferable, at least I'm used to being amongst them.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#334

Post by rapnie »

willis936 wrote: post #325
brnt wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a Dutchman who's lived in a few places abroad, the cycling 'problem' is quite simple: it needs to be the norm. No helmet, because neither do you require them for pedestrians. You can cycle in all weather, just as you would walking (a hard mental one, my non-Dutch partner can't get over the idea cycling is for sunshine). Public space design must start with safe (no sharp turns, looking at you France!) and separate…

Are you suggesting that helmet not be the norm when riding bikes? Biking is more dangerous than walking, even if you did it on an isolated trail. Is looking cooler worth the increased risk of a traumatic brain injury? I’m okay with society thinking it isn’t.

This is addressed in the article I referenced:

> David Roberts: The Dutch don’t wear bike helmets. How safe is it to ride a bike in the Netherlands?

> Chris Bruntlett: We — like you — live in a place where helmets have been mandated by law, because they’ve been accepted as a commonsense safety device, normal as a seatbelt. But the Dutch show that [for them], safety in infrastructure, safety in slowing cars, and safety in numbers are all far more important than safety in body armor.

> David Roberts: Yeah, the US approach seems to be to up-armor the cyclist so that cars don’t have to change.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#335

Post by u801e »

jakecopp wrote: post #203
sunstone wrote: post #174

While it sounds preposterous right now this problem will soon solve itself with already built "bike lanes". And bicycles are not the solution. The solution, as this article touches on, is light weight electric transport using the existing road structure. There's a strong indication of this future in the fact that last year the Dutch bought more electric bikes than normal bikes in total. And they paid twice as much fo…

So...electric motorbikes means you don't need bike lanes? Why don't we put children on motorbikes again? NHTSA: "For every mile traveled, motorcyclists have a risk of a fatal accident that is 35 times higher than a car driver." [1] In my experience, light weight electric transport mingles great with bikes, as long as they're limited to something reasonable. I can clock up pretty high speeds on a normal bike! So no -…

> we do need bike lanes because cars are too dangerous

Cars only are a danger when the driver can't easily see you. A bike lane tells a cyclist to ride close to the edge of the road. That's not where most drivers focus their attention on. Bike lanes also encourage cyclists to pass traffic making a right turn on the right, make cyclists harder to see for traffic making a left turn, and can catch drivers pulling out from side streets and driveways off guard.

If cyclists rode in the middle of the rightmost general traffic lane, then they are much more easily seen by others, get more clearance when passed by faster traffic, and don't have issues with right it left turning traffic or traffic pulling out from side streets.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#336

Post by sunstone »

stinos wrote: post #311
sunstone wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To me there's a big difference, in terms of urban transport, between a pedal bike and an e-bike, mostly because of the acceleration capability of the e-bike, which is even better than fossil fuel engines. My feeling is that initially the 'e' revolution will start with e-bikes but ultimately will end up with electric mopeds (no fiddly gears) and electric tricycles (two wheels at the front) with seat belts and modest r…

To me there's a big difference, in terms of urban transport, between a pedal bike and an e-bike Sure, the difference can be substantial depending on model, but my point here was that I interpreted your comment as the latter not being a bicycle anymore.

Yes that's right. To me an e-bike behaves much more like a small motorcycle than it is like a much lighter pedal bicycle.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#337

Post by seanmcdirmid »

ivanhoe wrote: post #244
systemtest wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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. Thi…

In 1438 there was no supermarkets with huge parking lots that will lure away all your customers. It's not just that people will have to walk to you (so competition located closer will win), they will also have to carry the stuff they buy back to the car, so they'll probably not be willing to buy a lot, or anything heavier. If you're selling souvenirs or t-shirts it's not a big deal, but for people selling say wines o…

People in European city centers shop differently. They more likely don’t even have cars, the stores are smaller, they shop daily or bi-daily rather than weekly like suburbanites do. They aren’t carrying a few bottles of wine and olive oil, they have one bag, and everything is pretty fresh.

You can have the same lifestyle almost in the states, just live in a downtown area. Watch out for all the cars though, and wading through huge parking lots can still be a problem (I currently live in downtown Bellevue WA, which is only halfway pedestrian friendly, especially compared to Lausanne CH where I lived as a post doc).

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#338

Post by Dumblydorr »

jka wrote: post #257

It's excellent to see momentum building like this. Cycling: - Has lower cost-of-entry in terms of purchase/rental - Keeps you healthier, which can also contribute to remaining active and mobile in older age - Provides easier self-maintenance for most common faults - Requires less fuel (particularly combustible/fossil) - Can be just as fast, or faster, for transit from A to B in urban environments (especially with e-b…

So many great points. Bikes are the number one carbon cutting technology we need to scale up.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#339

Post by willis936 »

jamil7 wrote: post #328
willis936 wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you suggesting that helmet not be the norm when riding bikes? Biking is more dangerous than walking, even if you did it on an isolated trail. Is looking cooler worth the increased risk of a traumatic brain injury? I’m okay with society thinking it isn’t.

Downhill mountain biking or something similar maybe, casually cycling along a trail isn't really anymore likely to course traumatic brain injuries than jogging. Cars are the only reason cycling in a city is dangerous. Once you introduce helmets as a requirement you put cycling firmly into the category of some kind of risky sport, making it difficult for it to become a casual, normal thing that people do in everyday c…

I disagree. Kinetic energy increases with the square of speed. Jogging at 6 mph is simply an order of magnitude less dangerous than biking at 20 mph. This isn’t a simple footnote. You make a mistake while jogging and you scrape a knee. You make a mistake while biking and you may have your mental faculties permanently reduced and lifelong personality issues that drive loved ones away. Barrier to entry isn’t worth arguing about. It’s simply the safety precautions that need to be taken.

Re: We Need to Dream Bigger Than Bike Lanes

#340

Post by cyborgx7 »

rapnie wrote: post #232

What I see a lot in this thread is people's either/or opinions. Love cars / hate bycicles or vice versa. No. It is a balancing act, where cars, bycicles and public transport co-exist, and infrastructure is developed strategically in smart ways and in a prolonged effort. When I was young in The Netherlands for the most part the cars still dominated the streets. Over time I've seen cities and road networks gradually be…

I disagree. There is no need for a "balancing act" between cars and public transport. More public transport and less cars is always an improvement.
Post reply on HN