
After Spike in Deaths, New York to Get 250 Miles of Protected Bike Lanes - frenchman_in_ny
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/28/nyregion/nyc-biking-deaths-lanes.html
======
pwthornton
This is big time for America. If our biggest city can’t show leadership on
pedestrian and bicyclist safety, we can’t expect any other city to as well.

New York is really lagging behind where it should be. Despite being by far the
biggest American city, it is overrun with cars. Protected bike lanes, street
improvements to make crossing the street safer, and dedicated bus lanes will
improve the city for all New Yorkers. If these changes take off in New York,
they will trickle down to the rest of American cities.

New York is marveled at for being such a safe big city from the standpoint of
crime, but when you factor in all of the carnage caused by cars, it’s a lot
less safe than you might think.

Violent crime has been falling across the country, but pedestrian and
bicyclist deaths have been surging. This is a sign of some very bad policy
making. Walking should be one of the safest and healthiest things a person can
do.

~~~
kansface
How popular is biking in New York - eg, do people bike in the winter?

~~~
crazygringo
A lot of biking isn't for your commute but rather a quick way to run an errand
5 avenues over using Citibike -- it's a 6 min ride instead of a 20 min walk.

For that, super common to bike even in the winter. After all, you're already
bundled up and will probably stay warmer just because you'll be outside for
less time.

~~~
chadlavi
Lot of this. Most bikehsare rides in NYC are quick one-way jaunts like this.

Anecdotally, I know a lot of women who ride bikeshare bikes for the 5-6 blocks
it takes them to get home from the subway in the early-sunset months as a
safety precaution against sexual harassment.

~~~
lonelappde
This must be a niche use case -- there aren't docks every 6 blocks or less

~~~
crazygringo
Of course there are! Just take a look:

[https://member.citibikenyc.com/map/](https://member.citibikenyc.com/map/)

I mean they're not evenly distributed according to a perfect pattern or
anything, but there's generally a bike within an avenue and a few streets.

------
OutsmartDan
As an avid cyclist in NYC, this is a huge step forward into cyclist
protection. I can't tell you how many times i've almost been hit, or doored,
by a car. Sometimes, it's a lot safer to run a red light to get in front of a
car versus waiting for the light to turn- but of course that's not legal.

Honestly, as huge and condensed NYC is, I am surprised this hasn't happened
years ago. It's much, much more efficient to get from Point A to Point B on a
bike vs taking the Subway, bus, or car. Would love to see something like the
14th street car ban to allow buses and cyclists only more widely adopted
across the 5 boroughs.

~~~
tombert
My biggest pet peeve is when cops treat the bike lane as additional parking.
I've seen cops do it just to walk into 7-eleven and buy a snack.

I wonder if that will be addressed at some point.

~~~
bobbylarrybobby
Cops all drive into the city from Long Island. They don't understand how New
Yorkers actually live and get around; to them a bike lane is a curiosity for
weirdos who like to get around on a child's vehicle.

Getting change in this regard will require either very serious change in how
cops are regulated, or a change in cops' mindsets regarding cars and bikes.
Not sure which I'd bet on happening first.

~~~
milkytron
Is parking in a bike lane illegal? If so, would it be possible to citizen's
arrest a cop for that? Or take them to court?

Maybe it's an overreaction to a small crime, but it would set a precedent, no?

Edit: I do not recommend trying to citizen's arrest a cop.

~~~
OutsmartDan
bike lane parking is just a form of "double parking", so theoretically it is
illegal- however the laws of the road do not apply in NYC :)

~~~
InitialLastName
Let me adjust that: The rules of the road (and common decency) do not apply to
the NYPD.

------
joegahona
> The dangers came into focus this year after 25 cyclists were killed on city
> streets — the highest toll in two decades.

The "highest toll in two decades" gives some context, but I wish writers would
share ratio metrics rather than absolute numbers in cases like this. I.e. the
number of active cyclists on the road might be outpacing the deaths, but we
don't know when you just say "25 cyclists were killed in 2019." Also, how does
that stack up to the number of pedestrians killed accidentally, etc.

~~~
bluntfang
Are you saying the value of these cyclist's lives is based on how many
cyclists there are?

~~~
randyrand
Don’t be purposely dull. Yes the value of the issue depends on how dangerous
bicycling is relative to other things. That’s no surprise. 1:100,000,000 !=
1:100

~~~
syndacks
Don't be purposely dull by implying the parent comment doesn't understand the
difference between one hundred million and one hundred.

~~~
randyrand
Using that to illustrate the point implies the exact opposite :)

------
viburnum
Even when America traffic engineers mean well, they screw up bike
infrastructure terribly. They get all the details wrong. Generally their
designs are too complicated, too cheap, and rely on paint instead of common
sense about how bikes actually work. However, good design is possible. There’s
even a book that explains how to do it well, in case anyone actually cares:

[https://peopleforbikes.org/blog/the-worlds-best-bikeway-
manu...](https://peopleforbikes.org/blog/the-worlds-best-bikeway-manual-just-
updated-and-its-in-english/)

~~~
schrodinger
One thing I like about the newer NYC bike lanes is they put them inside of
parked cars. It means you’re generally protected from traffic by a row of
parked cars. And there’s a large enough buffer that you don’t have to worry
about getting hit by an open door.

~~~
de_Selby
How does that work if the cyclist is going straight and cars are turning
across them (e.g. Making a right turn).

Does it not make it harder for the traffic to see the cyclist?

~~~
dublinben
Protected intersections for bicycles are possible, and compatible with this
kind of protected bike lane.

[http://www.protectedintersection.com/](http://www.protectedintersection.com/)

~~~
u801e
According to [https://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-
guide/don...](https://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/dont-
give-up-at-the-intersection/), they claim that a driver making a right turn
around a curb can react to a cyclist moving at 16 feet per second approaching
from behind while only being able to see about 8.2 feet to their right. Half a
second is well under the average reaction time for a driver who may not be
aware that the bike lane is present on the other side of parked vehicles. For
example: [https://imgur.com/a/JcS4RK5](https://imgur.com/a/JcS4RK5)

------
anonu
The "horrifying" crash mentioned in the article is indeed horrifying. I bike a
lot in NYC (consistently for 10+ years now) and I think I am pretty cautious
and defensive. But there's absolutely nothing the guy could have done in the
video.

I linked it below because its a good reminder that your fate is never 100% in
your hands.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0kqsUnpGlU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i0kqsUnpGlU)

~~~
thatswrong0
As a pedestrian in SF, I'm _always_ keeping my eyes peeled for bullshit like
this, esp. when I'm standing on the corner like that other fella was (he could
easily have been taken out instead). It just takes one idiot to ruin your day
/ life. I usually try to keep at least one somewhat substantial object (post /
utility box) between me and the road.. but otherwise I'm keeping an eye out
for an errant turn or red-light runner in case I need to book it.

Another thing I'd like to see are narrower roads along with wider sidewalks..
hopefully that would somewhat help deter speeding like in the above video.

------
aqme28
I doubt it.

> To gain Mr. de Blasio’s support, Mr. Johnson’s office agreed to push back
> the start date for the first streets plan, from this month to December 2021,
> around the time the next mayor takes office. Until then, the city will keep
> its current commitment to build 30 miles of protected bike lanes each year.

~~~
CydeWeys
Yup. de Blasio clearly doesn't care about this because he's not even doing it
during his term. And it could all easily be canceled and not ever happen
depending on who the next mayor ends up being (I'm pulling for Corey Johnson
personally).

This news isn't nearly as good as it appears at first blush; de Blasio is
completely abdicating his duty.

------
insickness
I'm amazed at some of the places where there are no bike lanes. For example,
on 7th avenue between 34th and 30th--going past MSG/Penn Station, the bike
lanes simply disappear. It's a five lane road and one of the most heavily
trafficked in the city. There's lanes North and South but not on the
throughway. Who's idea was that?

Instead of putting rinky-dink unprotected lanes on all these minor roads, they
should lay out fewer, uninterrupted, protected through-ways that travel the
length of the city. There's a few that run up and downtown but hardly any that
run east-west.

------
Silverwood
It's insane that a large part of our public infrastructure is reserved for
free private car storage. It's important that these lanes are protected
because without barriers the bike lanes would become obstructed by parked
cars.

~~~
bagacrap
The biggest offenders are actually cops and delivery vehicles, both of which
are legally allowed to park wherever they want (the latter due to contracts
with the city).

------
trenning
Don't get your hopes up, Uber drivers will still find a way to block the bike
lanes.

~~~
fennecfoxen
And the cops. And the firefighters parking outside the fire station. And when
a car does hit a bike and NYPD shows up... well...
[https://twitter.com/joemewler/status/1177042296900071425](https://twitter.com/joemewler/status/1177042296900071425)

~~~
btrettel
I've been thinking about starting a cyclist-oriented "neighborhood watch" type
organization because the police don't do much anything about violence against
cyclists, much less more "minor" issues like parking in the bike lane. At the
very least volunteers could document things like this properly.

~~~
pedantsamaritan
For NYC twitter helps a bit

[https://twitter.com/reported_nyc](https://twitter.com/reported_nyc)

[https://twitter.com/copsinbikelanes](https://twitter.com/copsinbikelanes)

What else do you have in mind for a cyclist-oriented neighborhood watch?

~~~
btrettel
Here are some examples of what I'd like to see a neighborhood watch
organization do:

Proper investigations of crashes, near crashes, and violence against cyclists.
The police generally don't care.

Keeping statistics. Those Twitter accounts are okay, but in my experience the
police will often say things like "we had no reported incidents there" when I
know that some were reported. I think having an independent database would be
valuable.

Tracking down repeat offenders and giving them a talking to, and/or hosting an
online wall-of-shame.

Helping cyclists handle bureaucracy, which seems to be designed to discourage
people in my experience.

Something like these guys in problem areas might help too:
[https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMrKscEv_Ri1pvlRsLxsqJQ](https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMrKscEv_Ri1pvlRsLxsqJQ)

~~~
JoeAltmaier
I have the uneasy feeling that police will never look into cyclist accidents
very seriously. Way too many cyclists disobeying the rules, weaving through
traffic, wandering from sidewalks to street and back again, ignoring signals,
and on and on.

Sure I bet _we_ all obey the rules. But there's that overwhelming mass of
cyclists that don't, it will be hard to interest police in trying to separate
the incidents.

~~~
btrettel
I've looked at the statistics and cyclists don't break the law significantly
more than drivers do. Drivers break different laws that are socially
acceptable to break, like speeding.

About 2/3 of drivers admit to speeding:
[https://news.uns.purdue.edu/x/2008b/081107ManneringSpeeding....](https://news.uns.purdue.edu/x/2008b/081107ManneringSpeeding.html)

That fits with my experience.

You can find wildly varying estimates of how often cyclists run red lights:
[https://bikeportland.org/2013/06/25/94-of-bikes-wait-at-
red-...](https://bikeportland.org/2013/06/25/94-of-bikes-wait-at-red-lights-
study-finds-89025)

[https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/06/26/...](https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/06/26/this-
is-what-makes-bicyclists-blow-through-red-lights/)

But even the most pessimistic estimate of the probability of cyclists running
reds linked to above (79%) isn't that much worse than drivers speeding. And in
my experience, it's actually quite rare for a cyclist to blow through a red
light without checking for oncoming traffic. Typically when a cyclist runs a
red light, it's safe. (Not that you should do it.) I think speeding is much
worse from a safety perspective.

~~~
JoeAltmaier
That's perhaps the least dangerous of the bicycle maneuvers. Its the dashing
from lane to lane, from street to sidewalk and back, into and out of blind
spots unexpectedly that makes bicycles a hazard to themselves.

~~~
btrettel
I agree that those maneuvers are more dangerous, but they're talked about less
often than red light running in my experience.

------
steelframe
Former road cyclist chiming in. I've been a regular bicycle commuter for over
10 years. Earlier this year I was hit by a motorist who demonstrated extreme
lack of judgement when passing me earlier this year, leading to some injuries
that will probably mostly heal in another year or so. I seriously dodged a
bullet and recognize how lucky I've been doing what I was doing.

In short, my platform now is that meatbag-controlled multi-ton steel boxes
hurling along at up to 60mph and meatbags sitting on top of some tubes stuck
together don't belong on the same infrastructure. It will never work.

I am categorically opposed to bike lanes delimited only by some paint on the
ground. If it is physically possible for a motor vehicle to occupy a space
designated for a bicycle, it isn't safe. It won't work. The marginal increase
in bicyclist safety isn't nearly enough. Any lobbying to try to build that
type of bicycle infrastructure out is a distraction from what actually needs
to be lobbied for. By consenting to bike lanes, the government has an "out."
They can say that they are "doing something" for bicyclists, so it's a fair
deal, and their job is done.

In reality, it isn't anywhere close to fair, and the job isn't anywhere close
to done.

Until bicycle tracks completely separated from vehicular traffic are
ubiquitous across all major metropolitan areas of the United States, the
country won't be able to begin to claw its way out of its self-inflicted
transportation apocalypse. Anybody who attempts to commute by car during rush
hour in a major United States metropolitan area knows what I'm talking about.
Millions are wasting away years of human life and productivity stuck in their
cars in stop-and-go traffic every single day.

There needs to be a will to spend _billions_ , not millions, on infrastructure
_only_ for pedestrians and bicyclists. Something on the scale of the the
Federal Aid Highway Acts of 1921 and 1956 needs to happen today, in 2019.

Congress needs to authorize federal funds to create something on the magnitude
of 50,000 miles of paved separate cycle/pedestrian tracks. There needs to be a
National Urban Mobility Trust Fund with a $100 billion infusion, for starters.
I for one will demand nothing less, and I won't ever stop demanding it.

We need to stop messing around with these in-the-trenches, one-city-council-
at-a-time battles that bicyclist clubs are trying to fight to eek out their
pathetic and ineffective lines of paint on the road.

------
choeger
Is there any sound comparison of protected bike lanes vs., for instance,
30kp/h zones with mixed bike/car traffic and sensible spacing? When cycling I
find the cramped and the fast streets the most dangerous. And the pedestrians
that cross into bikelanes. And slippery surfaces.

So from my very private pov (I go around 25 to 30kph) there are much cheaper
methods that I would want to give a try firat.

~~~
amalcon
American drivers (especially in places like New York) generally just ignore
20MPH speed limits (~=30km/h).

~~~
schrodinger
In my experience, cars actually go pretty slow in NY (Manhattan at least),
even when there’s not a lot of traffic. I’m usually able to easily keep up
with traffic on my bike.

~~~
CydeWeys
This is definitely not true on the multi-lane avenues. You're thinking of the
single-lane streets.

One good solution for the avenues would be to time their rolling green waves
for an average of 15 mph. They just recently started doing this in Brooklyn on
a particularly dangerous road.

~~~
schrodinger
I’m referring to 5th and 6th ave near the village which I commute on every
day. Some aves are worse.

~~~
CydeWeys
So you're referring to a few particular avenues in one neighborhood during
rush hour.

I'm just pointing out that that's hardly indicative of the overall speed of
traffic across Manhattan at all times. Vehicles go fast on the avenues when
they can, definitely faster than you would want to try to keep up with on a
bike.

------
eatbitseveryday
Why do deaths have to be the trigger to prioritize safety?

Examples: Boeing, this article, and a recent HN post [0], etc.

[0]
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21374525](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21374525)

~~~
bluGill
They don't. If I make a change that prevents a death you will never know about
it. If I make that change in response to a death you will hear about it, thus
biasing you into thinking I don't care until there are no deaths. In reality
though sometimes you need an actual situation to happen before you can imagine
that failure most. Trying to guess how your widget could kill something before
their are any deaths is hard. (in some cases you can look at existing widgets,
but there is always something new)

~~~
bdamm
Quite right. Also, trying to prevent harm through prediction is vastly more
expensive than trying a product out in the market, and gets more expensive the
more harm you try to prevent. It also causes product development paralysis, as
deeper predictive scenario analysis results in longer design times and design
lock-down ahead of product release, reducing agility.

While we might want all products and designs to be safe, in reality, we can
only economically do so much before the cost of predictably assuring safety
becomes exponential. See NASA.

------
kristo
I moved from NYC to Amsterdam a bit more than a month ago because getting
around in NYC is too unpleasant and dangerous. Have been hit on my bike thrice
in 5 yrs. Have been run down by psycho drivers. Have been doored.

In the last month in Amsterdam I’ve had more pleasant interactions on the
streets than in my entire time in nyc. It’s pure magic what cities are like
when they embrace the fact that they are a city.

~~~
cylinder
NYC just sucks, man. Left overseas after five years myself, and I sometimes
watch ActionKid's NYC walking videos on youtube and cannot believe I used to
live there.

------
ptaipale
Where do bike deaths happen in New York? On streets when riding straight, or
in intersections?

(On both, of course, but what is the distribution?)

~~~
Eric_WVGG
I don't have any numbers, but my impression is that it's mostly turns,
although there's also a big problem with people getting "doored" (which would
easily be solved by putting bike lanes between parking lanes and sidewalks,
instead of between parking lanes and automobile lanes).

I was surprised to learn that left turns account for "more than twice as many
serious injuries and fatalities as right turns."
[https://www1.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/about/leftturnstudy.shtml](https://www1.nyc.gov/html/dot/html/about/leftturnstudy.shtml)

~~~
schrodinger
> putting bike lanes between parking lanes and sidewalks

This is how all of the new NYC bike lanes work!

~~~
rossitter
On major avenues in Manhattan, but not necessarily on side streets[0] or in
other boroughs[1].

[0] -
[https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7740039,-73.9587169,3a,75y,1...](https://www.google.com/maps/@40.7740039,-73.9587169,3a,75y,124.31h,82.55t/data=!3m7!1e1!3m5!1shneI-
pDZtuS8pCvx0yEiCw!2e0!5s20190501T000000!7i16384!8i8192)

[1] -
[https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6757116,-73.9532197,3a,75y,2...](https://www.google.com/maps/@40.6757116,-73.9532197,3a,75y,20.35h,89.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1susJ9ZdFrMnGjZsdcZF4Y8A!2e0!7i16384!8i8192)

------
kylek
I wonder if they can do better than $12 million per mile a la seattle[0]

[0] [https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-
news/transportation/12-...](https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-
news/transportation/12-million-a-mile-heres-how-bike-lane-costs-shot-sky-high-
in-seattle/)

~~~
greglindahl
I read the article you cite and the section in question is 4.5 blocks long.
And the project included drainage, street lights on the far side away from the
bike lane, paving the whole road, sidewalks, etc.

The Seattle city-wide average was $2mm/mile.

Very informative article, and it is completely different from what I thought
I'd read based on your summary.

------
nemo44x
With more bikes because of bike lanes, I hope the city will begin enforcing
bike infractions more seriously. So many people on bikes are going way too
fast in the bike lanes (and pedestrian pathways) and do not stop at red
lights, etc. I was happy to see a person get stopped and ticketed for riding
down a walkway to a bike path when there was a sign explicitly stating that
riding on the path was not allowed.

I've seen so many pedestrians hit by people on bikes, in bike lanes that did
not stop at red while someone was crossing the walk. It's invariably a Lance
Armstrong type or a tourist on a City Bike with no idea what they are doing.

With the loss of revenue from parking tickets it will have to be made up
somewhere and people on bikes should be the targets for fines. There should
also be stricter requirements on registering bikes for a fee to be used in the
city with unlicensed bikes being fined.

~~~
TulliusCicero
Mandatory bike registration is a terrible idea, but I got no problem with
fining people who ride dangerously.

~~~
nemo44x
Make it simple with a 5% tax on any new bike purchased in the city. Call it
the “bike lane preservation fund”.

~~~
TulliusCicero
Why would we want to make it more expensive to bike, when it's better for the
environment and saves the city money as it is?

Some German cities are going in the opposite direction, giving subsidies for
people to purchase electric cargo bikes.

~~~
nemo44x
Lost revenue from parking tickets. The city is in a very precarious situation
right now with debt of 81k per resident and high tax paying citizens leaving
the city faster than they are being replaced. Pension obligations are
exploding and since 1% of the population funds 50% of the tax revenue, we
can’t afford to lose anymore.

Building bike lanes is very kumbaya but these types of things are not
sustainable as-is. Someone has to pay for it, why not the ones that use it?
Make it great to attract more bikers and raise more money.

Or maybe just raise taxes on the place with the highest tax burden in the
country? Will only chase out the small group of people that actually pay the
bills even more.

I suppose we could also setup red light cameras for bikes but this would
require registrations and license plates. The alternative is to tax bike
sales.

~~~
frabbit
_Someone has to pay for it, why not the ones that use it?_

Just tax the GHG-emitters fairly and there cities coffers will be over-
flowing.

That will help shift the incentive for those too dim and slothful to make a
change on their own.

~~~
nemo44x
I agree that fuel tax should increase. However, that appears to be political
suicide.

------
msoad
If you don't live in NYC you should know that a lot of bicycles in NYC are
delivery guys riding electrified bicycles that go up to 20MpH. Many of them
don't wear helmets and ride dangerously. I don't have anything to back this
tip but the raise of deaths can be linked to raise of electric bicycles

~~~
TulliusCicero
I mean, 20mph isn't actually _that_ fast. It's pretty easy to exceed that on a
road bike, even if you're not in the best shape.

Their stronger acceleration is probably a bigger problem.

~~~
kevin_thibedeau
It's more they they habitually run red lights and go the wrong way. It's very
easy to not see them coming from a direction that a car can't come from when
they're obscured by parked vehicles.

------
gok
This will get more people on bicycles, which will almost certainly make the
problem worse, unfortunately. No amount of lane protection prevents collisions
in intersections, which is where nearly all the deaths happen. The problem
isn't the amount of protected lanes; it's the rampant amount of comically
unqualified drivers. The two tearjerkers from the article are typical: an 18
year old blowing a red light and someone driving without a license.

~~~
TulliusCicero
Protected intersections are also a thing. They didn't exist in the US at all
until like 2015, but they're starting to become more common.

They don't make safety 100% perfect, obviously, but they do make things
substantially better.

~~~
gok
That just means they add bicycle setbacks in an attempt to scare drivers. It
doesn't solve the problem when people are routinely allowed to drive without
demonstrating an understanding of how a traffic light is supposed to be
interpreted.

~~~
TulliusCicero
It does partially solve the problem. Protected intersections make lanes of
walking and biking much more obvious to drivers, and the curbs are such that
drivers slow down more and have better visibility.

~~~
u801e
Except for the fact that the bike lane is hidden by parked cars until shortly
before getting to the intersection. What do you see in this image:
[https://imgur.com/a/JcS4RK5](https://imgur.com/a/JcS4RK5)

The other thing is that if you go by the figures and text in
[https://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-
guide/don...](https://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-guide/dont-
give-up-at-the-intersection/) on pages 12 and 13, you'll find that a right
turning driver can only see about 8.2 feet to their right when making a turn.
That's the only opportunity they have to see an approaching cyclist who comes
from behind them moving at 16 feet per second.

A half second to react to a cyclist appearing in the driver's field of view
(as shown as the picture on page 13) is not enough time for a driver to yield.

~~~
TulliusCicero
Not all protected bike lanes are parking protected. Don't think this is common
in the Netherlands. Parking protected is better than having bikes on the other
side of parked cars, but yes visibility is less than ideal.

Anyway, you're ignoring the other two things I pointed out about protected
intersections. It makes the bike lane itself more obvious, and the curb design
forces drivers to slow down more.

~~~
u801e
> Parking protected is better than having bikes on the other side of parked
> cars, but yes visibility is less than ideal.

Without visibility, the motorist and cyclist could be on a collision course
and not even know it until it's too late.

On the other hand, if the cyclist is on the road in the middle of the general
purpose traffic lane, the motorist will see them in advance and either change
lanes to pass or slow down and wait until it's safe to do so. At intersections
there won't be any turning conflicts because the turning motorist is either
directly in front or directly behind the cyclist (meaning the motorist won't
cross the path of the cyclist when making their turn).

The fact is that the vast majority of motorist/cyclist collisions occur at
intersections, so it makes more sense to cycle in a way such that you're
visible to other drivers between intersections and follow the vehicle traffic
rules when proceeding through one.

~~~
TulliusCicero
> Without visibility, the motorist and cyclist could be on a collision course
> and not even know it until it's too late.

No. You don't seem to understand how protected intersections work. The design
of the intersection itself forces cars to slow down quite a lot to make the
turn. You can see this here:
[https://images.app.goo.gl/XnppCCtEhs8vdgd39](https://images.app.goo.gl/XnppCCtEhs8vdgd39)

Plus, generally you make the parking lane end a bit before the actual
intersection, precisely to improve visibility.

Anyway, as I said, parking protected is not the ideal situation anyway. It's a
compromise with municipalities that aren't ready to give up more street
parking in the interest of safety.

What you're describing is vehicular cycling, which has been a complete
failure. There are zero countries that use it with high rates of safe biking,
whereas there are a bunch of countries that use protected lanes and
intersections with success that directly correlates with how much they're
used, with the Netherlands being the foremost example.

~~~
u801e
> No. You don't seem to understand how protected intersections work.

I'm well aware of how NACTO[1] claims they work.

> The design of the intersection itself forces cars to slow down quite a lot
> to make the turn.

According to NACTO, they make drivers slow down to about 10 mph to make a
right turn (see page 11, paragraph 2, sentence 1).

> Plus, generally you make the parking lane end a bit before the actual
> intersection, precisely to improve visibility.

This doesn't address the case where a cyclist approaches the motorist from
behind from the motorist's point of view. In other words, the only time the
motorist will have a chance to see the cyclist is when they're in the process
of making a right turn. We can't assume that the cyclist will yield to a
motorist or even be paying attention to the adjacent roadway (think of an 8
year old cyclist who doesn't have the concept of how intersections work).

The document makes the assumption that a cyclist will traverse 50 feet in 3
seconds (about 16.67 feet per second which is about 11.4 mph). On page 13,
they have a figure depicting the motorist's field of view as they make their
way around a protected at a speed of around 10 mph.

If you measure the bikeway setback line shown on page 12 and compare it with
the horizontal measurement from the drivers field of view cone (from the
origin to the left most extent), you'll find that the driver can only see
about 8.2 feet down the bikeway.

Remember that both the cyclist and the car are traveling at a speed of around
15 feet per second. Also, the average reaction time of someone who's not
expecting an event is around 1 to 1.5 seconds. This means that the motorist
will not have enough time to see the cyclist in order to yield to them. The
picture right below it showing the cyclist entering the intersection makes
that evident.

> What you're describing is vehicular cycling, which has been a complete
> failure.

Vehicular cycling is the safest way to cycle in the current environment and
addresses the problems of intersection conflicts by positioning the cyclist
right in front of the motorist who will have no trouble seeing them well in
advance of catching up to them.

The sidepath type intersection actually increases conflicts due to lack of
visibility as I described above.

[1] [https://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/NACTO_Dont-
Give...](https://nacto.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/NACTO_Dont-Give-Up-at-
the-Intersection.pdf)

------
yalph
I dont really want to hurt people’s feelings but why do we care about this
topic so much? I am kind of confused about why people are so passionate about
bike lanes. Isn't it better if we focus on improving the subway and the bus
lines before anything? I would like to see an open minded discussion about the
pros and cons of this.

~~~
TulliusCicero
Bikes are good/useful in a number of ways. They're a form of individual
transport, like walking or driving, with the advantages that that has over
public transport -- namely, less waiting, point to point, not beholden to a
schedule that might not match _your_ schedule -- and they slot in nicely
between walking and driving as a compromise between the strengths and
weaknesses of both. Much faster and longer range than walking, more cargo
capacity, but still much cheaper than driving, and without most of the issues
cars have with things like generating noise, pollution, and danger.

Bikes are also healthy for people, and they're certainly more space-efficient
than cars. Oh, and they're vastly less expensive for the city as well;
building subways is enormously capital intensive, and buses have high ongoing
operating expenses. Good quality bike infrastructure isn't exactly
cheap...except that compared to high quality car or transit infrastructure,
yeah it is relatively cheap.

So, altogether, replacing car space with bike space makes a ton of sense,
especially for a city as dense as NYC. Sure, bus and subways improvements
should happen too, but there's so much car space that's wasteful, and bike
stuff is so cheap, that it's really low hanging fruit. No good reason not to
develop it.

------
rapnie
This is great! For inspiration: "From The Netherlands to America: Translating
the world's best bikeway designs"

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kp3s2EP0zVo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kp3s2EP0zVo)

~~~
adventured
The US is in a fortunate position with regards to public transportation. It
doesn't need to invent anything new at all to dramatically improve its
position: copy the things in Europe and places like Japan that work. It makes
it all the more annoying that we're lagging so hard on the copying when it's
so obvious.

~~~
rapnie
Yes, true. Here is an overview (pdf) of bicycle infra design guidelines as
they are used in a number of countries:

[https://sutp.org/files/contents/documents/resources/F_Readin...](https://sutp.org/files/contents/documents/resources/F_Reading-
Lists/GIZ%20SUTP%20Overview%20Cycling%20plans%20and%20strategies_July%202016.pdf)

------
m3at
Too little too late?

[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21330761](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21330761)

------
bufferoverflow
Paywalled.

Here's a mirror: [http://archive.li/Hyxyf](http://archive.li/Hyxyf)

------
hsnewman
Didn't read because of the paywall, but I question if these changes will go
far because of the long winters, and where the bike lanes will be. Again, I
didn't read the article, but if the 250 miles are in areas that are not in a
congested area of the city they will do no good (a bike lane from Austin to
Dallas is 250 miles, but would be used infrequently).

