
Cycling to Redefine Urban Mobility in the Era of Coronavirus - Stubb
https://finishermag.com/cycling/cycling-to-redefine-urban-mobility-in-the-era-of-coronavirus/
======
liminal
Not a great article, which is unfortunate given that pro-cycling articles
always get the same tired responses in defense of driving (it doesn't work for
my particular situation, it's too cold some of the year in some places,
etc...).

Public transport doesn't allow for social distancing and there's no space for
additional cars.

For urban society overall, more people cycling results in decreased travel
times due to less traffic congestion, a healthier population (both from the
exercise and distance) and reduced air pollution. Plus there are great
economic benefits. Not everyone needs to cycle for everyone to benefit.

------
nradov
If American local governments want people to use bikes for urban mobility then
they need to tell law enforcement and prosecutors to actually take bike theft
seriously. In many cities it's tough to even get police to file an official
report for a bike theft. And the few thieves that are apprehended are
typically released with a slap on the wrist. I've seen homeless camps in the
Bay Area filled with bike parts, obviously stolen, and the police do nothing.

I'm not going to ride my bike to the store unless I can be sure it will still
be there when I come out.

~~~
btrettel
I use both a heavy U-lock and a thick cable lock. I've never had a bike stolen
though I have had accessories stolen.

You don't need to make your bike impervious to being stolen, just harder to
steal than another bike near it so that the thieves pick that one instead.
That isn't particularly hard in my experience. In my case I have two different
types of locks as that increases the chances that a thief won't have the right
tools to defeat one of the locks. E.g., if a thief has something to pry a lock
off that would work on the U-lock, that won't work on the cable lock.

Having an ugly bike probably also helps.

~~~
zimpenfish
Yeah, I use a heavy D/U-type, a thick cable, and a bar-type (like an Abus
Bordo). Pain in the arse carrying them about but I've never had a bike stolen
in London.

~~~
JAlexoid
Abus now has lightweight versions of their locks.

------
TYPE_FASTER
We recently moved to a community where we can bike to school, work, and shop
on a path that is separate from the road. It has exceeded my expectations on
how easier it is to use my bike for daily transportation.

Having biked in NYC pre and post bike lanes, I will say that, while riding in
downtown traffic was a fun unique experience if you're into that sort of
thing, riding a bike share bike in the bike lane made me feel the same way,
that bike as a primary transportation could be real there as well.

There are lots of cheap used bikes on Craigslist that will last a long time.
Maintaining them is way cheaper than maintaining a car. Cheap bikes are not as
targeted for theft, a cheap lock will go a long way towards protecting from
theft.

~~~
newleaf
If you don't mind me asking, what state is this community in? I've been
looking for a change and the western states seem appealing. Something like
this would factor into my decision.

~~~
TYPE_FASTER
Vermont

------
ogre_codes
In general I think this is more about cities using the reduced traffic and
shutdowns to accelerate their existing infrastructure plans. There are a
reasons why cycling & walking ties in to COVID-19 (mostly getting people off
of public transportation), but all of the places which are doing this were
already heading down this path (for good reasons).

~~~
JAlexoid
NYC has a problem - the debt that MTA has cannot be repaid, unless ridership
increases... but ridership has been dropping due to cycling, uber, etc.

(I suspect that this problem is also in other cities with large mass transit
investment)

NYC is also horrible at keeping bike lanes unobstructed and street parking is
literally the worst thing in NYC for a road user.

~~~
andrewprock
One wonders how the accrued debt for the roads and streets - which services
the MTA and other traffic - will be repaid.

~~~
JAlexoid
Road construction and maintenance can be paid off using taxes on various
things(property taxes and gas taxes).

Mass transit relies much more on ridership. (NYC Subway is massively
underpriced)

Also - road maintenance is highly dependent on road use. Biggest degrading
factors for the westside bike path on Manhattan have been natural(weather and
flora). I've been on bike paths that were paved in the 60ies and are still in
great condition... without maintenance.

------
programminggeek
Sounds a lot like "This Is The Year Of The Linux Desktop" meme articles from
the early 2000's.

------
yalogin
This feels like trying to shove this into the opportunity available. There is
no indication that cycling is better for the virus. If anything it might make
things bad. You now have people sweating all over and trying to take showers
and so touching everything.

I thought the page will talk about scientific advantages to cycling or
something like that but it just rambles hope about cycling benefiting from
this.

~~~
kristo
Not defending the article, but if the alternative is for everyone to drive
cars, I think you need to think about what that means for a second.

1\. Everyone in the US has to own and maintain a car. (I've saved $85k by not
owning a car over the past 10 years.)

2\. We have an increase in the number of 2000 lb steel boxes driving around,
polluting, being built and trashed.

3\. More drivers, more deaths. Driving is already a leading cause of death in
the US.

4\. Further sprawl, growing infrastructure costs, higher taxes.

5\. Further decline of spontaneous interactions in the US.

There are many many other negative externalities of car dependence. Cycling is
an opportunity to reduce our car dependence, and is safer than public
transportation for COVID.

Yes, sitting in your personal, 40 thousand dollar, 2 ton steel box anytime you
leave the house is the best way to avoid COVID transmission. But it also
destroys the earth, social ties, lives, etc.

~~~
the_gastropod
> Yes, sitting in your personal, 40 thousand dollar, 2 ton steel box anytime
> you leave the house is the best way to avoid COVID transmission. But it also
> destroys the earth, social ties, lives, etc.

I think there's _another_ point you've missed. _You_ sitting in your personal
2 ton steel box is good for _you_ , but it practically takes up the entire
street space, and forces pedestrians to stay on the much narrower sidewalks,
breaking the 6 foot social distancing rule-of-thumb. Opening up the streets to
bicycles and pedestrians allows people to use the street to maintain safe
distances.

~~~
astrea
I think this is a cute ideal for a world in which we all live in dense cities
and have no business going anywhere but other places in the city. But in
reality, I have business in other cities, even states. Work-related travel as
well as visiting family. The former could surely be adjusted, but not the
latter.

~~~
the_gastropod
How many pedestrians do you typically see on the highways between cities?

I'm talking _strictly_ about streets inside cities. Cars are great tools for
traveling great distances. They're a ridiculous tool for traveling inside
cities. They should be looked at with a similar level of absurdity as taking a
cruise ship out on the lake for a weekend fishing trip.

It's a very American attitude that this is "cute" or "idealistic". In cities
like Copenhagen and Amsterdam, bicycles dominate intra-city transportation.
And what's funny about these cities is that they have worse cycling weather
than most US cities.

~~~
astrea
But if you remove streets from within the cities, where people also live, how
would you propose having a car?

~~~
the_gastropod
A couple things:

1\. Nobody's proposing an elimination of streets. What _is_ being suggested is
that streets become more open to cycling and even pedestrian use without an
implicit serious threat of death.

2\. Re-thinking cities, where we design not around personal car ownership and
convenience is possible. There are countless solutions that still allow for
automobile use. For example, a number of parking garages throughout—or on the
edges of—the city. Think about amusement parks, for example. You can't drive
your car right up to Space Mountain when you go to Disney World. You park your
car in a massive lot, and a shuttle (glorified golf-cart) takes you into the
park where there are miraculously no cars, and no threat of being killed as
you cross the "street" to get a cotton candy.

As I said in my previous post—there are working examples here. There's no need
to pretend these are unsolvable problems—or even difficult-to-solve problems.
Would we need to re-shuffle some things in most US cities? Absolutely... but
that's exactly what we're talking about doing.

------
perfunctory
> Now is a good time for urban planners and authorities in the country to look
> for ways to promote and enable cycling.

Unfortunately, urban planners and authorities is not how you promote cycling.
This is how you promote cycling [0]. You rebel.

[0]
[https://file.ejatlas.org/img/Conflict/2797/stop_de_kindermoo...](https://file.ejatlas.org/img/Conflict/2797/stop_de_kindermoord_lay_down.png.jpg)

~~~
btrettel
As a transportation cyclist for over a decade, I never liked the disruptive
activities some cycling activists do. I'm not convinced that they're effective
at anything other than angering drivers.

~~~
adrianN
Not angering drivers hasn't worked _at all_ , bike infrastructure has become
worse over time. On the other hand, angering drivers did work in Netherlands.

~~~
btrettel
To be clear, I'm not opposed to angering drivers _period_ , just certain
activities which accomplish nothing other than angering drivers. For example,
I will often briefly take the lane if it is the safest option for me or
legally required (e.g., making a turn). Yes, many drivers _hate_ this but the
benefits seem clear to me, and their anger really is misplaced here.

I don't know much about the history of cycling in the Netherlands. Where can I
read about how angering drivers helped there?

~~~
adrianN
I found this video pretty good:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQk0O09gP4g](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iQk0O09gP4g)

------
msla
This page is extremely difficult to read.

~~~
Stubb
Reader view is your friend.

------
ravenstine
So... the poor get punished again?

People who can afford cars are going to continue driving them. Given the
option between bicycling and driving, someone who can afford a car or already
has one will likely opt to drive if public transport becomes impractical
because of reduced capacity, mask wearing, etc. The poor are left to either
ride "filthy" buses and trains, ride a bike, or walk.

~~~
ogre_codes
> People who can afford cars are going to continue driving them.

Right now businesses and residential units are required by law in most cities
to provide parking, take that away and the cost of owning a car goes up quite
fast. If you have to pay $500/ month to park your car, it won't just be the
poor who live the car-free lifestyle, lots of people with opt out of that.

In the Netherlands, almost everyone rides a bike (rich/ poor) because it's the
best way to get around cities. In the US, nobody rides bikes because the
infrastructure is designed for cars. In the UK and Paris (where this article
is focused), they are somewhere in-between and trying to get closer to where
the Netherlands is.

~~~
doteka
In the Netherlands, most people who don’t live in a major city center (and
many who do) still own a car. Us riding bikes isn’t an either/or thing, people
do both.

------
cipritom
One point people overlook is that cars are an existing item that many people
already posess. A fast change to biking can put a high demand on their
production, which is also based on steel or, even worse, carbon fiber. And
then in 6 months many people are going to trash or forget about the bike,
essentially just causing a temporary production spike with lasting effects on
the environment.

I think more accent should be put on NMF bikes, Natural Material Frame, like
those made of bamboo [0] or wood. These materials absorb CO2 from the air to
grow, unlike steel or carbon which produces it.

[0] [https://diverahub.com/](https://diverahub.com/)

~~~
C1sc0cat
And these sorts of articles forget that

1 A lot of us cant or prefer not to live in the heart of the city

2 Most offices are not built with showers and secure bike parking - for longer
distance commuters last time I worked in central London I wanted to use a
Brompton but boss said no I cat store it in the office so that was that.

~~~
dionidium
It's kind of silly to protest the feasibility of cycling because it requires a
certain kind of infrastructure given the truly enormous costs we've endured to
create -- and _recreate_ in the case of cities that predate the automobile --
cities that accomodate the automobile. That all looks baked-in and natural to
you, because it's always been that way, but make no mistake, it's the largest
engineering project ever undertaken by mankind.

------
throwawaysea
This article doesn’t really say much. It makes a vague claim that cycling
promotes social distancing, but so do cars. In fact, enclosed cars are much
more distant than bikes trailing each other at ten feet lengths. As far as I
can tell the author is asking for driving infrastructure to be repurposed
under the guise of the pandemic, but it just comes off as an opportunist grab
while everyone who might care about driving convenience is distracted by the
virus.

~~~
throwawaygh
Most cities with a subway or significant bus infrastructure have very high
population densities. "Everybody drive" is not going to work in places where
driving isn't already the default mode of transit.

Plus, few people can afford it. Have you looked at the price of a parking spot
in e.g., major parts of Boston or NYC? 5-6 figures to buy, or hundreds/mo to
rent, and that's with working mass transit. I guess that those prices would at
least triple if everyone started driving. Lots of wealthy people take the
subway and commuter rail.

I don't think cycling is the solution. But cars are _definitely_ a non-
starter.

~~~
JAlexoid
I can attest.

Own a car in NYC. $400 for the lease. $200 for insurance. $400 for parking....
or about $200 every 2 months in parking violation tickets.

But... Even in NYC a car is the difference between going to one of the packed
urban parks... vs going to the woods upstate.

