
Guerrilla Bike Lanes in San Francisco - duck
http://www.fastcoexist.com/3062788/world-changing-ideas/guerrilla-bike-lanes-show-cities-how-easy-it-is-to-make-streets-safer
======
dasil003
I've spent most of my life with cycling as my primary mode of transportation,
living in Minneapolis, Santa Fe, London and SF/Oakland. I ride fast and
generally try to go with the flow to avoid inconveniencing drivers while also
being considerate to pedestrians. I think this traffic cone thing is pretty
cool, but I have a larger observation to make:

Here's the thing about SF: everyone is way too fucking agro. Drivers freak out
when they can't drive 50mph down a city street. The cyclists are banging
u-locks on hoods because someone cut them off. Everyone is road raging like
crazy.

I lived in London for 3 years, with all the narrow streets and everything
overcrowded to the bursting point. Central London is 10x as crowded as SF in
every way, and yet somehow the pedestrians, cyclists and drivers all manage to
co-exist. It's not a panacea for sure, it obviously can't compare to
Amsterdam, but the whole Keep Calm and Carry On mentality definitely applies
to transportation. You know what happens? Buses pass other buses by going into
the oncoming traffic lane and oncoming traffic moves over to accommodate them.
Pedestrians spill into the streets sometimes, and cars don't kill them. Vans
and lorries sometimes drive up onto the pavement (ie. sidewalk) in order to
get around an obstruction. Pedestrians pull off to the side of the walk way if
they need to pay attention to their phone. Everyone implicitly acknowledges:
hey, it's crowded, we have to cooperate to get where we're going.

SF could use a lot more of that attitude. I thought the west coast was
supposed to be chill.

~~~
jrockway
The thing we need in the United States are traffic tickets. A lot of people
get tickets on freeways (where there is a dedicated highway patrol that exists
only to write speeding tickets), but nobody gets ticketed on surface streets,
no matter how badly they drive. I see garbage trucks barrelling through red
lights at 45mph. I see taxis driving the wrong way down one-way streets. I see
black cars driving 60mph down narrow residential streets. This has to be
stopped, or people will keep dying in traffic.

The city-wide speed limit in NYC is 25mph, unless marked down to 20mph in
special areas. This law needs to be enforced aggressively. Drivers don't need
a big fine; I bet people will adjust their behavior from just a stern talking-
to and a $20 ticket or something.

As it stands right now, people are needlessly dying for no reason. Driving in
the city, all your time is sucked up by sitting at traffic lights. It doesn't
matter how fast you get to the next traffic light, because if you're speeding,
it's going to be red.

(There was an interesting pilot program to give $50 tickets to people
exceeding the speed limit by 30mph in school zones. Tons of opposition. This
makes me think what we really need to do is just start closing roads to
private vehicles. People think they're entitled to run over children at 50mph,
just because they fucking feel like it. Where did we go so wrong!?)

Looking out my window on a small residential street in Brooklyn, I'm always
amazed at the traffic snarl. It's basically a dead-end street. And yet someone
is always double-parked, preventing fire trucks from going through. One time a
fire truck got boxed in by someone double-parked, and an MTA service vehicle
that double-parked behind it. Eventually the MTA vehicle got towed away, and
the fire truck slowly backed out. Hope it wasn't an important building that
was burning down.

~~~
philbarr
If you're blocking an emergency vehicle in the UK by bad parking they have the
right to smash your vehicle to get past - and it's your fault.

~~~
teh_klev
I'd like a citation for that, I don't think that's true. I imagine they can
legally tow your vehicle away, but I reckon damaging the bodywork of your
ambulance or fire appliance to move another vehicle out of the way is not
standard operating procedure.

There is however an act called the _The Emergency Workers (Obstruction) Act
2006 [0]_ which makes it an offence to obstruct emergency vehicles.

[0]: [https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-emergency-
wor...](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-emergency-workers-
obstruction-act-2006)

~~~
Symbiote
Fire And Rescue Services Act 2004 says they can "move or break into a vehicle
without the consent of its owner". I don't know if that's sufficient.

[http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/21/section/44](http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2004/21/section/44)

~~~
teh_klev
Sure, but GP's comment suggests ramming the vehicle out of the way on the way
to a shout.

------
andrewem
I don't have time now to write a comment laying out a comprehensive rebuttal
of all the foolishness that some people have suggested here (bicyclists need
to be licensed! bicyclists should have to follow exactly the same rules as
drivers! we shouldn't have bicyclists on many roads because cars go too
fast!).

Instead, I'll say that just as people walking need physically protected
infrastructure on essentially all roadways - these are called sidewalks - so
too people on bicycles need physically protected infrastructure on essentially
all roadways - these are called protected bike lanes, or cycle tracks, or
various other names.

For some recent commentary on this topic from Boston, see the following. The
first is from a columnist, and the second from the President of the Boston
City Council:

[https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/08/12/bikes/yOFRBYH...](https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/08/12/bikes/yOFRBYH8zy5jBiVEFYUUVN/story.html)

[https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/07/11/the-road-
fear...](https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2016/07/11/the-road-fear-free-
biking-boston/UBnj30slkPwBIzggL70uwJ/story.html)

~~~
oarsinsync
> I don't have time now to write a comment laying out a comprehensive rebuttal
> of all the foolishness that some people have suggested here ... bicyclists
> should have to follow exactly the same rules as drivers

In the UK, all vehicles on the road are required to abide by the highway code.
Yep, that means bicycles have to follow the same rules as drivers.

In the 1990s, schools in the UK ran cycling courses to ensure that children as
young as 9 were already learning the highway code, and would be able to cycle
on the roads safely. The London police to this day continue to run cycling
courses to provide the same level of training.

I can't speak to the rest, nor in other countries, but in the UK, it is
absolutely not foolish, but actually required by law, for cyclists to follow
the same rules as drivers.

~~~
gaff33
This is what happens when bikes follow rules designed for cars:

[http://archives.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2015/07/30/this-is-
wh...](http://archives.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2015/07/30/this-is-what-
happened-when-bicyclists-obeyed-traffic-laws-along-the-wiggle-yesterday)

It's patently stupid to have the same rules for bikes as it is for cars since
they are completely different vehicles.

Now perhaps this is a case of semantics: The Highway Code has rules for all
users of highways, but obviously within those rules some apply to cars, some
to pedestrians, and some to cyclists. Still point remains that the specific
rules are different depending on what vehicle you're in, and we'd be wise to
think critically about this.

A good example of this is the Idaho Stop:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop)

~~~
soneil
This is the crux of the issue. Many of the laws we're supposed to follow
aren't fit for purpose.

I do stop at red lights - and I can tell you it pisses people off no end.
People want to gun it off the lights, and instead they're stuck behind me. I
have been involved in an 'accident' where the driver behind me tried to
overtake off the lights, through the junction, and into the traffic island on
the other side.

At the same time, it's obvious cyclists don't get carte blanche either. Anyone
who's seen a bicycle plow through a pedestrian crossing like a god-given
right, can see that much.

We need rules that make sense, and then enforce them. Meet us in the middle.
Trying to enforce rules that don't make sense doesn't work (and not just for
us - many of these cause us to frustrate or hinder other road users too)

~~~
Doctor_Fegg
Yep.

I observe red lights in London. I observe red lights in Oxford. Locations
where, however imperfectly, the highway authorities consider cyclists in the
design process.

I used to work in Burton-on-Trent (ex-industrial town in the English
Midlands). My daily commute involved one particular intersection so badly
designed that the only way to avoid a dangerous and potentially fatal car/bike
interaction, if you were at the front of the queue, was to set off 5 seconds
before the lights went green. (It has since been redesigned, thankfully.)

If you build infrastructure and formulate laws to benefit motorists and to
potentially kill cyclists, don't be surprised if cyclists break those laws.

------
zo7
I don't think non-cyclists realize how much risk you take on when you ride in
the city.

In my town we really only have bike lanes on the two main roads that go up and
down the bulk of the city, and they ride dangerously close to lines of parked
cars. I was riding downhill once when someone opened their door in front of me
without looking -- luckily I managed to get past, but had they opened it a few
moments earlier I would've slammed into it and possibly fallen into traffic.

Another time I was riding down a street without a bike lane. There was a row
of parked cars on the side so I was rode roughly a door's length away from
them, enough to keep me safe but taking on enough of the lane that other
drivers wouldn't be able to pass without driving in the opposite lane. I hear
a car suddenly rev up behind me and blare their horn as they sped past,
sideswiping me and almost knocking me off my bike. I managed to confront the
driver at the next intersection, "Hey were you trying to kill me?" "Yeah, I
was" (he had two kids in the car too)

Cones are a smart way of tricking people into respecting these boundaries, but
I wonder how long it'll be until drivers start violating them when they
realize they're not official or the city starts removing them. In the meantime
I might get my own cones though...

~~~
shard972
As a driver it's the main reason I refuse to ride a bike, I don't want to die.

Even here in perth that is generally trying to help bike riders I just don't
see how it's safe to ride around at 20-30km when the speed limit is 70km and
there isn't enough room to overtake without going into the other lane.

I just don't see how you can be safe when people are trying to overtake you in
giant utes going twice your speed trying to get home/to work.

~~~
brokenmachine
In NSW it is illegal to pass within 1m of a cyclist. I ride to work, and every
single day people ignore that rule.

I have never seen anyone fined for it. Our police/government just doesn't
care, and attitudes like yours don't help. Cycling on the road is legal and
until it isn't, just saying, "I don't see how it's safe" is irrelevant.

I also drive, but I'm capable of not losing my mind and putting other people's
lives in danger to save a few seconds on my trip.

If another road user is going too slow for you, you need to suck it up and
find a safe, legal place to overtake.

~~~
adrianratnapala
Now I cycle to work and recently let my drivers license lapse. But the 1m rule
sounds draconian to me. It means drivers have to keep about two metres from
the kerb. That's not always possible on Sydney roads.

Sure, if the cars are moving fast then I would like a wide space. But in
heavier / slower traffic (which was the common case when I lived in London),
then I only need a "lane" wide enough for me to ride through. And heck,
usually I'm the one doing the overtaking.

~~~
brokenmachine
That's the law, draconian or not. I personally don't want to come within 1m of
a 1500kg vehicle, probably driven by someone playing with their phone, going
faster than I am.

It is possible on Sydney roads if drivers wait until there's an overtaking
lane, which is actually the only legal solution.

Anyway, it's never enforced so what difference does it make? Drivers will
continue to only care about themselves and cyclists will continue to be maimed
and die.

Countries with governments that aren't crap have separate tracks for cyclists,
which is really the only safe solution.

We have painted pictures of bikes in car lanes right in the door zones for
parked cars. And that's in the good places. It's an absolute joke.

~~~
adrianratnapala
> Countries with governments that aren't crap have separate tracks for
> cyclists,

It's not about crap governments. It's about practical responses to the world
as it is.

Now I live in Munich and enjoy riding on dedicated bike lanes. But these are
built on seriously wide roads. In Sydney that space is used for other things.

Such land-use decisions were locked in during the early 20th century. Now it's
perfectly reasonable to think the Nazis made better land-use decisions than
Labor and the UAP. But it's no use crying over spilled milk.

~~~
Symbiote
> Now I live in Munich and enjoy riding on dedicated bike lanes

You do realise the lanes in Munich almost certainly weren't built by the
Nazis? And the layout of roads, especially major ones, will have been altered
since then, and can be altered in the future?

I'm not familiar with Munich, but the Netherlands got their bicycle lanes
after lots of public campaigning in the 1970s [1].

In many European cities, the streets have been significantly remodelled within
the 20th century. Just last month, a large road I use in Copenhagen was
altered to increase the size of the bicycle lanes [3], reducing the width of
the car lanes. Late last year, a road near the hospital was altered to block
off parking close to a junction, which made visibility much better for
everyone.

London is currently building a major east-west route [4].

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycling_in_the_Netherlands#Ove...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cycling_in_the_Netherlands#Overview)

[2] [http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-geography-travel-germany-
mu...](http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-geography-travel-germany-munich-
theatinerstrasse-view-1950s-50s-street-16007713.html)

[3] [http://www.kk.dk/nyheder/bredere-cykelstier-i-
gothersgade](http://www.kk.dk/nyheder/bredere-cykelstier-i-gothersgade)

[4] [https://tfl.gov.uk/travel-information/improvements-and-
proje...](https://tfl.gov.uk/travel-information/improvements-and-
projects/cycle-superhighway-east-west)

~~~
adrianratnapala
I'm saying there is little relation between quality of current governments and
what bicycle lanes you have.

It seems to me that continental european cities often have very wide roads
once you get out of the old towns. Given the location, these must have been
built around the mid-20th century. By all kinds of governments.

~~~
Symbiote
There is a strong relation between current (or recent) governments and bicycle
lanes. For decades, people in London said the streets were too narrow for
cycling. Once the mayor declared maintaining car speeds was no longer a
priority above everything else, the traffic engineers found space.

I've never visited Sydney, but it seems to have plenty of wide roads — I
picked some central roads at random.

Oxford Street has a bus lane on either side, plus two car lanes in each
direction. On StreetView, the bus lane is filled with parked cars, and appears
to be also a cycle lane. Reducing the width of the car lanes, removing parking
from one side, or removing one lane of traffic would provide ample space.

Palmer Street has two lines of parked cars, and enough space for three lanes
of cars in between. Plenty of room for a dedicated cycle lane.

------
sampo
I googled for some statistics:

 __USA __

    
    
    1% of all trips is by cycle [1]
        743 cyclist fatalities per year (2013) [2]
        population 320 million.

__Denmark __

    
    
    17% of all trips is by cycle [3]
        33 cyclist fatalities per year (2013) [3]
        population 5.6 million.

Cyclist fatalities per 1 million people:

    
    
        USA:      2.3
        Denmark:  5.9
    

...per cycling frequency:

    
    
        USA:      232
        Denmark:   35
    

I guess I was expecting worse. American cyclists die only 7x more than Danish
cyclists.

[1]
[http://www.bikewalkalliance.org/storage/documents/reports/20...](http://www.bikewalkalliance.org/storage/documents/reports/2014BenchmarkingReport.pdf)

[2]
[https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/...](https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812151)

[3] [http://www.cycling-embassy.dk/facts-about-cycling-in-
denmark...](http://www.cycling-embassy.dk/facts-about-cycling-in-
denmark/statistics/)

~~~
Someone
_" American cyclists die only 7x more than Danish cyclists."_

reason that this is so 'low' is a difference in the population that cycles.

I don't know for Denmark, but in the Netherlands, about 60% of cyclists dying
in traffic are over 65 years old (106 out of 185 in 2014).

~~~
huherto
> I don't know for Denmark, but in the Netherlands, about 60% of cyclists
> dying in traffic are over 65 years old (106 out of 185 in 2014).

I am curious why is that. Reflexes, heart attacks, hip injuries ?

------
bsimpson
As a well-traveled cyclist, I yearn for the truely separated roadways my peers
ride in other places. In Holland, for instance, their cycletrack treatment is
closer to a special sidewalk for bicycles than a repainted stretch of highway.
Each mode of transportation (walking, riding, driving, mass transit, etc.) has
its own path. This separation of concerns (segmented by both mass and speed)
makes getting around safer and easier for everybody.

The thing that San Francisco has and Amsterdam doesn't is private garages in
most freestanding buildings. For instance, the northern-most section of the
Wiggle has the city's most protected bike lane - there are cement planters
separating the bike lane from fast-moving car traffic. Unfortunately, to
support private garages, there are gaps in these planters enabling homeowners
to enter/exit their driveways. Delivery vehicles and private cars frequently
idle in the spaces between these planters, trapping cyclists in the bike lane
and forcing them to merge into car traffic that isn't expecting them.

The city does nothing to stop this, and the drivers are incredibly hostile.
I've tried getting off my bike and asking people (as kindly as possible) to
move, explaining how parking in the bike path puts me life at risk. The nicest
response I've gotten was being told to go fuck myself: even the old man in a
bus driver's jacket idling in his car was shockingly violent in his reply.
Delivery drivers don't give you the light of day. There's a tow company on
this stretch of the Wiggle that frequently has trucks blocking the path. I
noticed someone had parked to deliberately keep the path clear one day and
earnestly thanked him for doing so. Even he threatened me.

San Francisco politicians respond with platitudes everytime once of us dies,
but they do fuck-all to actually protect us. Our local transportation board
reimagined one neighborhood street as a promenade, prioritizing pedestrians
and cyclists and creating a destination for people from all over the city to
come patronize local businesses. A handful of shop owners who came of age when
the car was the dominant form of transportation raised concerns about parking.
Rather than pointing out the plentiful parking on literally every nearby
street, offering to construct a garage, or pointing out that users of all
forms of transportation would flock to a human-scale shopping district in
numbers that more-than made up for the lost parking, the city caved with the
mayor scuttling the whole project.

~~~
zodiac
> I've tried getting off my bike and asking people (as kindly as possible) to
> move, explaining how parking in the bike path puts me life at risk. The
> nicest response I've gotten was being told to go fuck myself

Wow, this makes me so angry. Is it possible to call the cops on them?

~~~
bsimpson
I think I've done it once or twice - usually not until after I get home
though. Letting unhinged people know I'm threatening their anonymity is
something I try to avoid.

------
falcolas
As a former bicyclist, and a current motorcyclist and "cager", let me give one
piece of advice that has kept me alive to this day. Your safety and protection
is entirely up to you. No government, painted lines or traffic cones are going
to save you on the road. When you're on the road, the only thing that matters
is "the right of weight".

If you're hit by a car, and you're not in a protective cage of steel, it's not
going to matter if the other person was in the right or the wrong. You're
still dead.

If anything, these traffic cones are a dangerous placebo; making cyclists feel
safer than they actually are in their interactions with cars. Want to actually
be safe from cars when on the road? Ride in a cage of steel. Want to survive
on two wheels? Ride as if every person in a car is intentionally trying to
kill you.

Yeah, it's probably overly pessamistic; no, it's not fair. But I'm alive and
uninjured.

~~~
DarkTree
> Yeah, it's probably overly pessamistic; no, it's not fair. But I'm alive and
> uninjured.

Don't you think that's a little bit of survivorship bias? I'm sure there are
plenty of cyclist who have been killed who 100% agreed and rode in that way,
but they obviously can't speak on the matter.

Of course it is dangerous and potentially lethal when you get hit by a car,
but how can you suggest that it's not beneficial to have measures in place
that at least attempt to protect cyclist. It makes cyclist 'feel' safer,
because it is in fact safer. Look at countries like the Netherlands that have
excellent cycling lanes and safety measures. It makes drivers more aware that
there are cyclist around them, and urges them to be more cognizant of their
surroundings.

~~~
falcolas
Would additional space for bikes hurt bikers? I think it depends. If there is
enough room to add better bike lanes without affecting car traffic negatively,
the it will probably help. But if cars are forced into smaller spaces, I think
more cars "in a hurry" will disregard the lines in favor of a clear road.
Sure, they will be in the wrong, but it won't help the dead cyclists any.

And places like SF, with their already bad car traffic and limited land? They
would definitely fall in the latter case in my book.

~~~
hx87
> but it won't help the dead cyclists any

Perhaps if more bicyclists wore GoPros as a normal part of their travels (or
more CCTV were pointed at bike paths), the legal system will reduce the number
of violations and thus deaths.

------
staticelf
Bike lanes in SF:
[https://www.google.se/search?q=bike+lanes+SF&safe=off&client...](https://www.google.se/search?q=bike+lanes+SF&safe=off&client=firefox-
b-
ab&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiYwp75stTOAhWFiiwKHcPGA1IQ_AUICSgC&biw=2048&bih=1043)

Bike lanes in Stockholm:
[https://www.google.se/search?q=bike+lanes+stockholm&safe=off...](https://www.google.se/search?q=bike+lanes+stockholm&safe=off&client=firefox-
b-
ab&biw=2048&bih=1043&tbm=isch&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiu5YLostTOAhVJGCwKHQq5BNMQ_AUIBygC)

Bike lanes in Amsterdam:
[https://www.google.se/search?q=bike+lanes+amsterdam&safe=off...](https://www.google.se/search?q=bike+lanes+amsterdam&safe=off&client=firefox-
b-
ab&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiDjI6Xs9TOAhUGkiwKHdR_A4cQ_AUICCgB&biw=2048&bih=1043)

I guess SF / USA have something to learn from Europeans and that is to build
some shit between the bike lane and the car lane. Let it be cones, rails or
whatever just not a painted line.

~~~
brokenmachine
Don't worry, you're not alone.

Australia's bike infrastructure also sucks.

~~~
staticelf
Well, I do live in Sweden in a city where everyone bikes. So I am happy :)

I just like to promote our model of society since it's so much better on so
many levels.

------
raarts
This is an overview of how the Dutch do it as presented by a city planning guy
from Seattle. Lengthy, but I was glued to the screen.

[https://youtu.be/l0GA901oGe4](https://youtu.be/l0GA901oGe4)

------
brezina
If you live in SF and want to help, the team doing this is on Twitter at
@sfmtra and looking for volunteers and donations. Safe biking is good for the
health of humans,their communities, and the environment

------
vacri
Orange cones are a novelty. Put them everywhere and behaviour will eventually
return to where it was. The same thing happened with high-mounted brakelights
on cars - they significantly reduced rear-end collisions for a few years, but
eventually the trend returned to where it was beforehand.

~~~
princeb
> Put them everywhere and behaviour will eventually return to where it was.

don't understand this comment - you mean to say vehicle drivers will
eventually resume driving on lanes that are separated by traffic cones?

i suppose they can... but i assume most drivers will try to avoid
knocking/running these things over

~~~
bsimpson
Drivers in San Francisco don't hesitate to run over plastic posts that
separate some bike lanes from car traffic. Other lanes have cement planters
separating them - drivers still manage to park in the bike lane.

------
makecheck
Cyclists need to follow the rules in order to command respect, frankly.

I wish this wasn’t true but I see _dozens_ of cyclists every week (no
exaggeration at all) doing things that are _blatantly illegal_ and _definitely
dangerous_. FLYING through stop signs. Deciding to just “go” at a red light
when there seems to be no traffic. Turning wherever they want without
signaling. Assuming they have the right of way in pretty much any situation.
Multiple riders in parallel formations that make them move into the road
anyway. The list goes on, and on, and on. I am not kidding.

And that kind of behavior just makes me not want to help. I’m sorry, you have
to make sure you are at least doing everything possible to help _yourself_
before you expect drivers to make any more concessions.

------
Kenji
I love this! I feel so uncomfortable cycling on main roads, knowing that if
the person behind the wheel of the x-ton vehicle beside me does one small
mistake, I end up paralyzed or dead. The bicycle is a really great means of
transport that deserves more love (and space on the streets).

------
cmarschner
Here is an outside view, fwiw, the official recommendations for bike lanes in
Germany. In German, but lots of pictures!

[http://www.kompetenzzentrum-
radverkehr.de/fileadmin/redakteu...](http://www.kompetenzzentrum-
radverkehr.de/fileadmin/redakteure/pdf/LGB-ERA_2011.pdf)

Question: Is there an association like AAA is for cars that represents bikers
in the US? That could take on the discussions with the government.

~~~
cerebellum42
After reading some of that, it contains some recommendations that lead to
annoying and sometimes dangerous situations for cyclists that I recognize from
my everyday cycling experiences in Germany.

Just one example:

They seem to encourage usage of pedestrian paths with "bikes allowed" signs on
medium traffic streets with ~50km/h speed limit, think main road of a small-
ish town. These have become waaay too popular, especially in small towns and
some areas of bigger cities too.

They make the cyclist choose between these two options:

* share the pavement with pedestrians, but with barely any separation from the pedestrians; so you're either really really slow or you endanger pedestrians

* use the road and share it with drivers who think it belongs solely to them and endanger cyclists

So either way, it's a bad experience and potentially dangerous.

------
SomeHacker44
As a life-long New Yorker (Manhattan and more recently Brooklyn) I just don't
understand why anyone would ever ride a bike in NYC, period. I even stopped
rollerblading in NYC when some asshole driving backwards (presumably to get a
parking spot) nearly killed me and did knock me silly.

I have a motorcycle license I got one summer when I had free time. I learned
that cars and pedestrians are your enemy, and that you will probably regret
being a motorcyclist eventually. So I quickly stopped.

The simple answer is to not bike in NYC, or get rid of cars in NYC. Although I
have moved to Brooklyn, I think the "get rid of cars" is in Manhattan is a
great idea.

But, if we must bike, by all means, let's get segregated bike lanes. I have
seen them in Union Square, around Prospect Park, and other places. BUT!

That said, bikes are worse than cars IMO in yielding right of way to
pedestrians. I was nearly killed by a high speed biker IN A CROSSWALK ACROSS A
SEGREGATED BIKE LANE outside the Intrepid museum nearly a month ago, and the
moron had the gall to yell at me as he barely missed me to watch where _I_ was
going. Literally two seconds later nearly the same thing happens with another
biker. Insane.

Furthermore, bikes don't remotely follow the rules of the road. Stop lights?
Ignored. One way streets - or even one way bike lanes - ignored. No riding on
sidewalks? Well, mostly followed. Pfew.

As a pedestrian, I fear bikes more than cars. They are silent, they are
fearless (if they weren't they would not ride like this), and they don't care
about pedestrians.

Personally, I'd rather get rid of bikes entirely, or at least put a cop at
every corner writing expensive NYC moving violations to each bicyclist when
they inevitably break the law. A million citations a day would be fine by me,
and would help pay for more shared infrastructure like subways, bus lanes,
and, yes, even segregated bicycle lanes.

~~~
Frondo
Heh, just today I was biking down a hill in a segregated lane. Green lights
ahead of me, all the way to the waterfront.

Some guy in the crosswalk, going against the signal (I have green lights for
several blocks), left to right across the street. I'm half a block away but
I'm going downhill and going pretty fast. I yell, "Watch out!"

He keeps moving, so I start to veer to the left to go around him to the left.
THEN he stops, so I yell again, "Keep moving already!" I veer harder left to
get around him.

I still have green lights, he's going against the signal.

He steps backwards!!! Now I'm going to hit him for sure, so I brake hard,
skidding down the hill, veering now well out of the segregated lane, into a
car lane, barely avoiding a full-on collision. My leg hits his bag, and of
course I cuss up a blue streak.

I don't get it. I come to a complete stop at stop signs wherever there's any
traffic, and I always slow down because cars blow through them constantly.

I never cross against lights, and when I cross with lights, I do so with
caution because cars blow through those, too.

I do see more and more bikes on the roads, though, which makes me happy about
cars learning to share the roads a bit. We cyclists pay taxes, too, of course.

~~~
SomeHacker44
Yep. Pedestrians, especially New Yorkers, are j-walkers. I spent the last 12
days in various places in Japan and boy, there are none of those except in
places without crosswalks. It was weird!!

But yes, best thing to do is be predictable if you're doing something (even if
it is wrong).

People sometimes think New Yorkers are crazy drivers. To the inexperienced it
probably looks that way. However after driving here most of my life it's just
that we learn how all the other New Yorker drivers will react to what's ahead
of them so we can react, in a sort of organized chaos. Sometimes, anyway. And
we know to give out of state plates and certain vehicles extra
"unpredictability" points. It doesn't always help (like when a moron Georgia
plate minivan driver decided to merge directly into me at the Brooklyn Bridge
entrance from southbound FDR despite being on the wrong side of a solid/dashed
lane marker, back was only one lane to the bridge. And then not pull over!!!),
though.

Even though I am a car owner and driver I would still be an advocate of
limiting cars in the city.

~~~
danielrhodes
It's the same in Vietnam. Coming from the west, the driving there looks
verifiably insane. After a few weeks you learn their rules (or how to
compensate for lack thereof) and it doesn't feel as unsafe anymore.

~~~
Symbiote
However, Vietnam's roads _are_ unsafe.

I saw five road accidents within a three-week holiday, including one fatality.

The statistics are a quick search away, but I suspect accidents are
underreported in Vietnam. I saw a motorcyclist hit by a luxury car on a
mountain road, just outside a café. Most bystanders seemed more concerned
about possible damage to the car, than to the dazed rider. The car driver
didn't even get out of the car.

A bus ahead of mine slammed the brakes on, and I saw people were running into
the street. It took a while for us to pass the commotion, but when we got
there I saw a body covered with a sheet of cardboard and a flattened bicycle.
The bus driver stopped the bus a few minutes later, and wandered around it
waving incense, which he left in a special holder on the number plate. Neither
he nor his ticket collector wore their seatbelts when we resumed driving.

A man in Hanoi was wandering into the road in a daze, with blood coming from
his head. A motorbike was on the road on its side, and a helmet nearby. I
think he simply fell off, but I'd guess the helmet wasn't being worn properly.

------
steveax
Some similar grass roots efforts in PDX after a teen pedestrian was struck and
killed by a speeding (~55 in a 35) reckless driver earlier in the week:

[https://twitter.com/bikeportland/status/767223666014720000](https://twitter.com/bikeportland/status/767223666014720000)

------
rootusrootus
I would support a true separation of all vehicle modes. As an avid walker,
I've had far more run-ins with speeding bicycles nearly hitting me (and a few
which did hit me) than I have with cars. If it were easy to create a solid
separation that would keep cars and bikes separate, and prevent bikes from
using sidewalks, count me in, you have my vote and my tax dollars to make it
happen.

------
dzhiurgis
Why not put parking spots (where possible) outside the bike lane, so the cars
protect cycle path. Its done in some places in Denmark.

~~~
et-al
It's a good idea in theory, but having ridden this setup in Golden Gate
Park[0], I'm constantly worried about getting doored and ride as far away from
the cars as possible. I'd argue one's chances of getting doored are higher
than an auto rear-ending a biker, so it would take up a lot more space to
implement correctly.

Also, for passenger in a car, can you imagine (carefully) opening a door,
hoping not to door a biker, only to try to cross a stream of bikes to reach
the sidewalk? It's a bad scenario for all parties.

[0]
[https://www.google.com/search?q=golden+gate+park+bike+lane&b...](https://www.google.com/search?q=golden+gate+park+bike+lane&biw=1333&bih=858&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X)

------
koolba
> "Orange cones are really a great prototyping tool," says the activist. "They
> put something on the ground that's visible. Cars really slow down around
> orange cones—it's really a remarkable feat of psychology."

Keep this up and pretty soon it'll be like when CNN prefixes a headline with "
_BREAKING NEWS: ..._ ".

------
aquratic
I PhD student in Switzerland. Here, we just have a yellow marking for the bike
lane, and car drivers are surprisingly considerate towards bikers. I don't
know what the penalties are for hitting bikers, but biking here is a bliss.
Even in big cities like Zurich and Geneva!

Really, god bless this beautiful country :)

------
ph0rque
I wonder if these guerillas could paint a fake curb that looks real enough
that cars wouldn't want to cross it?

~~~
prawn
This is an idea I have proposed before. A 2D painted kerb that looks 3D when
viewed from the perspective of a driver. One response was that it would take a
while to adjust road marking standards, etc. I figured it'd be worth a cheap
trial with cameras watching car behaviour though.

------
sndean
Mostly unrelated, but does anyone have (or has seen?) an opinion on self
driving cars and how that may impact cyclists on the road? Do you think the
shift to autonomous vehicles will make the road safer for people on bikes?

~~~
wwalser
[https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2015/08/2...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/innovations/wp/2015/08/26/how-
fixed-gear-bikes-can-confuse-googles-self-driving-cars/)

I can't imagine how autonomous vehicles could make cycling less safe. The only
thing I'm coming up with is that the side profile of a bike at night could get
"filtered" as noise and ignored. That same scenario must happen just as often
with human drivers though.

My biggest concern while cycling in Sydney was going through roundabouts at
night. Cars in front or behind me with bright blinking lights? Just fine. Cars
potentially coming at me from the side where nothing but my own reflective
vest to identify me? Terrifying.

~~~
ygra
At least in Germany reflectors on the spokes are mandatory. And most tyres
have a reflective strip built in, so the night-time side profile of a cyclist
should usually clearly mark the shape, even if the cyclist isn't reflective.

------
collyw
Wow SF has some shitty looking roads considering how much money is in the
area.

------
warrenmiller
In London the cycle super highways are painted bright blue. Seems to work.

------
tajen
Several problems, which could be solved my municipalities, and illustrated by
this twitter feed:
[https://twitter.com/lyoncorrompu](https://twitter.com/lyoncorrompu)

\- Cars stop on the bike lane: It may sound reasonable to stop on the
rightmost lane, but in fact they obstruct both the bike lane and the car lane.
It would be more reasonable for cars to stop on the car lane.

\- Red lights: It's less dangerous for cyclists to ride the red light than the
green light. It's incredible, but there are less accidents, even if the
cyclist does it every day and isn't fully aware of his surroundings. But car
drivers go crazy when they see a cyclist burning the red light (which isn't
surprising because it's a penal infraction in France, like drunk-driving).

\- Bikes riding in the sidewalk or the wrong lane, sometimes in the opposite
direction, by night, when there are other solutions. Most infractions could
easily be sorted out by the police, but they're more busy acting like they're
fighting terrorism (by stationing under the Town Hall palace with weapons
drawn out) than checking for traffic infringements.

\- Pedestrians walking on the cycle lane, which is prone to injury, often due
to cars who park on the sidewalk.

\- Bikes without lights: That's not much of a risk for the cyclist, because
they know very well they may die from their own mistake and get a Darwin Award
of stupid deaths. No, I'd rather focus on the risk for the _car drivers_ , who
will be considered guilty of killing a cyclist, even though he was in the dark
without light, sometimes in the opposite direction than he's supposed to be.
Bikers without lights are a jail threat for all car drivers around.

\- Also note the counter-intuitive feat that not requiring the helmet saves
more lives across a country than the compulsory helmet law.

All in all, if justice were served, cars should be given the short end of
everything because they kill massively in four ways (accidents, immediate
pollution, carbon emissions, driver's health) and occupy more space.

------
sevenless
I propose the following modification to HN moderation:

Comments that fall along entirely predictable, nonproductive back-and-forth
lines: in this case, expressions of hostility between cyclists and non-
cyclists, should be deleted. There should perhaps be a link to previous
iterations of the discussion, or to neutral resources on how urban planning
can integrate cyclists.

This comment has been made with the deliberate decision to not read anything
else written in this thread. The topic and the fact there are 100+ posts tells
me everything I need to know about what's in it.

------
Larrikin
I don't mind giving up the road to cyclists in cities. I just hope that one
day they are finally treated like cars. Bikes on city roads should have to be
registered with plates. Bikes in many places in Japan are registered and it
makes it a lot easier to figure out when someone is riding a bike they aren't
supposed to have. The plates would hopefully go along with police actually
enforcing the traffic laws on cyclists so they can't simply blow through
traffic lights, stop signs, peddle through pedestrians on the sidewalk, drink
and peddle, etc. If cyclists want the same respect as cars on the road, they
should be expected to follow the laws just as seriously as someone with a car.

~~~
apathy
Yes because a 20 pound bike does exactly the same damage as a 6000 pound car.
Both to driver and victim. Excellent thought process.

Also slapping plates on bikes will totally fix the issue of theft. Cars never
ever get stolen, because they have plates.

I disagree with your underlying assumptions and your suggestions. What you are
suggesting would penalize the sorts of people who rely upon their bicycles to
get to work each day.

~~~
Etzos
I think the bigger problem is that people on bicycles don't always obey the
laws which are in place to protect both them and motor vehicle drivers. The
parent mentioned cyclists who run through traffic lights and similar
infrastructure with wanton disregard for the situation (I have witnessed this
many times myself). This creates a situation that is dangerous to everyone
involved and is quite illegal. However, there is no recourse as there is no
easy way to identify them as you would a motor vehicle as there are no plates
or identifying items on the bicycle.

Ultimately I agree that adding plates is a bit extreme, but I think it's also
disingenuous to say there is no problem and ignore them.

Edit: I would also like to note that I'm not commenting on motor vehicles
disobeying laws in similar situations, they routinely do, however that does
not take away from the fact that there is an issue here as well.

~~~
steveax
Stop sign/light honoring daily bike commuter here who often scolds cyclists
that do not obey the law, but I think you'll find that the statistics do not
bear out the danger you present. How many fatalities (or even serious
injuries) result from cyclists blowing through stop signs? If you remove the
offending cyclist from that stats, I'd guess you're looking at about zero. I
do remember a case in PDX a few years ago where a reckless cyclist struck and
killed a man, but it is exceedingly rare.

~~~
pjbster
I seem to remember a trial which was piloted in London (UK) a few years back
which permitted a cyclist to go through a red light if turning left. Can
anyone shed any light on how this worked out?

~~~
slavik81
Presumably fine? It's perfectly acceptable for any sort of vehicle to turn
right after stopping at a red light in Alberta, Canada and I've never heard of
it causing a problem.

I know that seems weird for people where right on red is illegal, but it's
really no different than what happens at a stop sign.

~~~
pjbster
Turns out it was only a proposal which was never tried after all:

[https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/oct/27/cyclists-
run-...](https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2015/oct/27/cyclists-run-red-
lights-paris-london-san-francisco)

 _Johnson and Transport for London requested permission for a trial back in
2009, but it never took place. TfL has concentrated instead on remodelling
junctions to allow “early release” (where cyclists get a green light before
cars) and “hold the left-turning traffic” (keeping cyclists and cars apart on
left turns)._

