[HN Gopher] Paris Will Become '100% Cyclable'
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Paris Will Become '100% Cyclable'
        
       Author : tosh
       Score  : 254 points
       Date   : 2022-10-01 10:39 UTC (12 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.bloomberg.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.bloomberg.com)
        
       | tiku wrote:
       | Just drove to Paris by car, the homeless population is getting
       | big. Lots of tents/ghetto huts next to the roads through Paris. I
       | hope they fix that as well.
        
       | jscipione wrote:
       | Is Paris safe enough to cycle in? I'd rather drive so that I
       | might survive the journey.
        
         | zahma wrote:
         | Yes it is.
        
         | retinaros wrote:
         | it isnt safe. you need to be careful all the time of many
         | things. many people have serious injuries on bikes in paris. if
         | you know driving rules, have experience riding a bike and a
         | helmet then it becomes less dangerous but to give you an
         | example when u bicycle on a straight line you will be allow to
         | continue and the drivers will be allowed to turn. 50% of the
         | drivers dont understand that you can go straight will they can
         | make a right turn. it is really dangerous and you always need
         | to be careful of cars turning on you. people who tell u
         | otherwise are just drinking their koo. aid or working for
         | lobbies
        
         | noelwelsh wrote:
         | Yes, Paris is quite easy to cycle around. This article, though
         | mostly about plans for new cycling infrastructure, also
         | mentions cycling has increased in Paris in recent years along
         | with the existing infrastructure, some of which is temporary
         | bike lanes added during the pandemic:
         | https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-10-22/how-paris...
        
           | BlargMcLarg wrote:
           | Needs more than just infrastructure to be safe for cycling.
           | E.g. preventing harassment and theft of bicycles, or low
           | crime rates.
        
             | noelwelsh wrote:
             | If you read the article you would see it claims there are
             | almost 1 million bike journeys per day in Paris. Paris only
             | has a population of about 2 million. Counting the
             | surrounding area brings that up 12 million, but however you
             | cut it that statistic means a significant portion of
             | Parisians are cycling and clearly they feel safe enough to
             | do so.
        
           | pookah wrote:
           | I'm guessing by safe he means crime. And Paris has always had
           | crime and I wouldn't want to be one of those tour-de-france
           | dudes cycling through the north-east. LOL
        
         | pyb wrote:
         | As a local, I still wouldn't recommened cycling here to
         | inexperienced tourists.
        
       | agumonkey wrote:
       | And this is making a lot of people angry, alas.
        
         | jeffbee wrote:
         | Drivers should be thrilled every time they see someone on a
         | bicycle.
        
         | amelius wrote:
         | Most car drivers in big cities are in an angry state of mind to
         | begin with.
        
         | cm2187 wrote:
         | Mostly it makes it impossible to drive in Paris. When I come to
         | Paris from the UK, I now try to fly because gare du nord is
         | surrounded by a gigantic moat of traffic jams. Not sure it is a
         | win for the environment.
        
           | netsharc wrote:
           | Your statement really confuses me. You say Gare Du Nord
           | because presumably you've been taking the Eurostar. Do you
           | then take a rental car either way? (from GdN or from the
           | airport). Seems like a nitpick to excuse your behaviour: that
           | the traffic is bad in one specific area of Paris (as if it's
           | bad only around there), so it means you'd have to take the
           | plane...
        
             | cm2187 wrote:
             | uber/taxi. Metro doesn't really work for the local leg
             | beside being filthy and with very long connections
             | (chatelet) + luggage.
        
               | netsharc wrote:
               | Well, having a few more pieces of the incomplete puzzle,
               | my thought would be, maybe you can take the metro 1 or 2
               | stations to a less jammed area and then Uber from there.
               | But well, maybe that's out of the question if you can't
               | deal with the "filthy" conditions.
        
               | antihero wrote:
               | It really isn't that bad unless you're a total snob.
        
           | ohbtvz wrote:
           | As if there weren't traffic jams to/from the airport? You're
           | in Paris, which has extensive public transport. Just use
           | that!
        
             | Scoundreller wrote:
             | And in the roads in the airport.
        
           | micromacrofoot wrote:
           | why does anyone need to drive in paris
        
             | pookah wrote:
             | During the crazy pandemic situation I'd much rather be
             | driving in my own car than chilaxing on a bus with forty
             | random people. Driving has it's place.
        
               | micromacrofoot wrote:
               | indeed, public transportation is for poor people
        
               | amrocha wrote:
               | No it doesn't, feel free to bike if you don't want to
               | ride the subway
        
             | nickserv wrote:
             | ... and why would you want to?
        
             | abainbridge wrote:
             | Commercial traffic needs to drive - trucks and vans need
             | cannot easily be replaced with public transport. I live on
             | a busy road in Cambridge UK. At rush hour the traffic is
             | about 50% commercial. I don't know what the proportion is
             | in Paris, but my expectation is that the roads would still
             | have lots of motor vehicle traffic even once you convert
             | everything that can be to bike/public transport.
        
               | antihero wrote:
               | I would suggest that if people only used motor vehicles
               | when absolutely necessary the roads would be blissful.
        
               | SECProto wrote:
               | > At rush hour the traffic is about 50% commercial.
               | 
               | Note that the removal of the other 50% of traffic would
               | easily shift the road from a traffic jam (Level of
               | Service E or F) to a free-flowing road (LOS C). Even if
               | only a fraction of the overall traffic is removed,
               | traffic would easily get down to LOS D.
               | 
               | This is exactly why encouraging other modes of
               | transportation (cycling, walking, bus, train, etc)
               | actually causes big improvements for all road users.
        
               | micromacrofoot wrote:
               | Why does commercial traffic drive during rush hour
        
               | abainbridge wrote:
               | Good question. I'm thinking of morning rush hour because
               | that I did a traffic survey then. I noticed a lot of
               | building trades vehicles. All the trades people seem to
               | want to be at their site for the day by 8.30am. I guess
               | that is so they can do a full day's work before it gets
               | dark (which is at 3.30pm in winter). There is also a lot
               | of food suppliers delivering in time for catering teams
               | to make lunch in schools, offices, cafes etc.
               | 
               | I probably shouldn't have called it rush hour. The
               | traffic is busy from 7am until 7pm on weekdays.
        
           | bluecalm wrote:
           | Traffic jams are caused by cars. Just look what's in front of
           | you 99% of the time. Cars make it
           | dangerous/inconvenient/slower to use more reasonable (which
           | means smaller) means of transportation. It's high time we
           | stop prioritizing them and giving them 90% of city space.
        
           | Schroedingersat wrote:
           | If there are literally enough people in an area that you
           | physically cannot fit a car with safe following distance for
           | everyone there then maybe forcing them all into cars isn't
           | the best way to solve congestion?
        
           | antihero wrote:
           | Unlucky, perhaps don't add to it? :)
        
           | andylynch wrote:
           | Maybe take a local train onward from one of the other forty
           | platforms? By several counts that is the busiest railway
           | station in the world outside of Japan so of course it's a
           | busy area.
           | 
           | I wouldn't seriously consider driving to St Pancras either
           | barring a taxi for an early trip.
        
         | antihero wrote:
         | Good, they can go be angry in the suburbs or motorways.
        
       | socialismisok wrote:
       | This is the year I finally got an e-bike (a tern hsd). I
       | basically never want to drive my car now. I just did a run to the
       | nursery to pick up 4 cubic feet of potting soil on my bike, and
       | it's incredible to be able to use both the roads and the paths to
       | get there.
       | 
       | As a bonus, cyclists don't have to stop at stop signs in Seattle,
       | so you can maintain 20 miles an hour easily.
       | 
       | All with none of the feeling of isolation and alienation that a
       | car brings.
       | 
       | I strongly encourage folks to go do a test ride on an electric
       | bike. Absolute game changer.
        
         | 7e wrote:
         | Seattle cyclists don't have to stop at stop signs, but they do
         | need to yield. Unfortunately the new law didn't change
         | anything: cyclists still refuse to yield, even to pedestrians,
         | and in general act like entitled assholes. Even the lazy ones
         | on ebikes!
        
           | oangemangut wrote:
           | Seattle I find is a few decades away from really getting
           | things right. We're in North Seattle and the EW routes are
           | sorely lacking. I end up being on a couple arterials that are
           | likely not safe for me. My spouse, however, doesn't feel safe
           | on those roads and so won't do the EW trips on the bike.
           | Seattle drivers are getting better at giving space and
           | respecting cyclists. On 8th NW I used to get close passes
           | multiple times per trip, now I have them every other trip.
        
             | socialismisok wrote:
             | Yeah, I'm also in North Seattle, there's a few routes I can
             | use with some key crossings and a lot of use of stay
             | healthy streets.
        
           | anonporridge wrote:
           | I'm inclined to suggest that cyclists have the right to be
           | entitled assholes (with the exception of not yielding to
           | pedestrians).
           | 
           | On the grand scale of things, cyclists, even the _lazy_
           | e-cyclists, are actually doing their part to contribute to a
           | climate change solution, unlike the extraordinarily lazy and
           | entitled drivers who refuse to modify their lifestyles to
           | actually do something real to reduce their carbon impact.
           | 
           | Even EVs pale in comparison to e-bikes for the actual
           | contribution they make to reducing carbon emissions
           | (especially since half of a car's lifetime emissions comes
           | from its production).
           | 
           | There's also some evidence that when you account for the
           | energy cost of calories from food and its associate carbon
           | emissions that ebikes are actually drastically better than
           | regular bikes in terms of distance traveled per unit energy
           | used. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_efficiency_in_tran
           | sport.... So your degrading language of lazy ebike riders
           | might be completely misaligned with reality. And that's not
           | even considering the possibility that ebikes enable
           | drastically more biking and less driving since they make the
           | choice to bike rather than drive much more palatable for more
           | people and situations. e.g. I can do a full Costco run on my
           | ebike and cart home 50lbs of product no problem. If I only
           | had a regular bike, I'd be drastically more likely to make
           | that shopping trip in a car.
           | 
           | Drivers are the assholes in city life and should entirely
           | submit and yield to cyclists while bowing to thank them for
           | their service for our collective environment. A service
           | drivers themselves are too weak or selfish to participate in.
        
             | socialismisok wrote:
             | The fact that electric bikes might be more energy efficient
             | than regular bikes is wild, but makes sense. And I've been
             | able to replace probably 60% of my car trips with bike
             | trips so far, and I'm still a fairly novice biker.
             | 
             | It's amazing how much even a small cargo bike can haul.
        
               | anonporridge wrote:
               | What's even more wild is that even regular cycling is
               | double the energy efficient as walking. And ebikes are 5x
               | more energy efficient than walking.
        
             | kevincox wrote:
             | In my mind yielding should be based on the relative
             | efficiency of the transportation. Mass public transit
             | should have priority, then bikes, then pedestrians. Cars
             | should obviously be last. Of course this shouldn't be all
             | the time. Even when this is the system in general people
             | should follow rules and take their turn to keep everyone
             | safe.
        
               | jraph wrote:
               | I would prefer pedestrians > cyclists > tramways > bus >
               | cars.
               | 
               | - Pedestrians are the most vulnerable and should be
               | protected. Also most people are supposedly regularly
               | pedestrians so it seems it would benefit everyone to have
               | them prioritized. They also don't usually form
               | uninterrupted flows like bikes or cars can.
               | 
               | - Then, bikes are very efficient and quite vulnerable.
               | 
               | - Then, I really want public transport to be as smooth as
               | possible and cars should be discouraged (if not forbidden
               | except for specific good reasons), especially the ones
               | that only have one or two people in them, so tramways and
               | bus should always be prioritized.
               | 
               | - Tramways should win against buses, they also don't
               | usually form uninterrupted flows and we want them to be
               | fast.
               | 
               | I believe a really efficient public transport is very
               | important for a working city, and cars are usually the
               | only thing forming continuous streams and are, I think,
               | the only reason we have traffic and traffic lights.
        
           | vkou wrote:
           | As a pedestrian, I've certainly ran into more bikes than cars
           | failing to yield to me, but that's because if I'm at all
           | uncertain, I don't even _try_ to see if a car will yield to
           | me. For two reasons.
           | 
           | 1. When a bike does something stupid and dangerous, I expect
           | them to _usually_ not run into me. When a car does something
           | stupid and dangerous, collision is a very likely possibility.
           | 
           | 2. The difference in consequences of collision with one
           | versus the other is drastic.
        
           | socialismisok wrote:
           | Thankfully they are at least better than drivers around here.
           | But yes, bikes absolutely need to yield!
        
       | lifeisstillgood wrote:
       | I wonder how you measure that? I have a one sentence goal that I
       | think is more measurable - "Every child should be able to cycle
       | to school on car-free paths"
       | 
       | That sets a different tone and yet achieves very similar goals.
        
         | Someone wrote:
         | > "Every child should be able to cycle to school on car-free
         | paths"
         | 
         | That implies every house should be connected to a car-free
         | path. I don't see that as feasible. I would aim for having all
         | houses in 30km/hour zones and requiring any crossings of
         | higher-speed car lanes to be on segregated cycle paths. That's
         | doable.
        
         | mytailorisrich wrote:
         | In Paris I suspect that every child can walk to school.
         | 
         | It is a very dense city with primary schools in every
         | neighbourhood. I am sure most children already walk to school.
        
           | lifeisstillgood wrote:
           | But car free paths is a deep standard to meet. Pavements
           | (sidewalks) don't quite make it - you still cross roads.
           | Although pretty safely.
           | 
           | A cycle path that is car free is much harder - especially as
           | you get into the elongated roadways of suburbia and car
           | centric towns.
           | 
           | There is a venn diagram with the Strong Towns argument of
           | density and taxable value, the car-agnostic approach of
           | Barcelona or Tokyo and i think the thin sliver of overlap
           | with the modern world looks like car-free paths. A mobility
           | network that is local and human powered and will engender
           | path-side amenities and opportunities to spring up.
           | 
           | Basically, just keeping the current town planning approach,
           | with long car centric roads and amenities and just slapping a
           | cycle path in is not transformative
        
       | m348e912 wrote:
       | Hijacking this thread to comment that Atlanta (while hot and
       | humid during the summer months) is ripe for extreme bike-ablity.
       | It would involve additional expansion of the beltline bike paths,
       | reclaiming roads for dedicated (and protected) bike lines.
       | Encouraging commuters from the suburbs to park near the perimeter
       | and bike/ebike the last several miles to work.
        
         | Mountain_Skies wrote:
         | Atlanta has a dismal history for their bike infrastructure
         | projects that betrays an deep-seated disinterest in them being
         | anything other than window dressing and the ability to check a
         | box on some urbanist dream list. Bike tracks are almost
         | instantly taken over by taxis and the city does nothing about
         | it. If not taxis, then the city will designate them as loading
         | areas for "special events" where special is a weekly occurrence
         | and thus the bike tracks or lanes can't be relied on to be
         | available without contacting city hall first to find out their
         | daily status. Even the Beltline suffers greatly from too many
         | uses being crammed into too little space, making it quite often
         | poor quality for all users.
         | 
         | If Atlanta was serious, they'd convert Peachtree (THE Peachtree
         | Street) through downtown and Midtown into a two lane street,
         | remove as many curb cuts as possible (not 100% achievable but
         | probably 90%), and force turns every couple of blocks to ensure
         | there is no through traffic. Peachtree Street is shady and
         | relatively flat, while the wide, highspeed mostly one-way
         | streets that run parallel to it where the bike lanes have been
         | placed are hilly and mostly unshaded. Plus the bike lanes are
         | filled with debris and storm grates. Push most vehicular
         | traffic off Peachtree Street onto those streets instead.
         | 
         | The space gained by making cars and trucks the minority users
         | of Peachtree could be used for multiple bike lanes, pedestrian
         | paths, small linear parks, and perhaps even a low speed lane
         | for those electric scooters that are so popular.
        
           | m348e912 wrote:
           | Great ideas. Yes the bike lanes HAVE to be segregated from
           | vehicles because it's clear that Atlanta motorists have
           | little regard for bike lanes and cyclists. I like the idea of
           | dedicated streets. Bottom line is it has to be more
           | convenient to bike downtown than to drive downtown.
        
       | shtopointo wrote:
       | Such good news!
       | 
       | The more I think about it, the more I realize cities don't need
       | cars.
       | 
       | (ok, maybe if you have a city like LA or Houston that is so
       | sprawled out that anything other than cars is impractical... but
       | even with bikes, those cities would create pockets every 5-10
       | miles... anyway onto my larger point)
       | 
       | At 10mph, you can cover a lot of ground in a city, get your
       | exercise, pay less for car insurance / upkeep / upfront cost and
       | reduce pollution. It's a win-win-win.
       | 
       | Add electric bikes into the mix and you are set to cover maybe 20
       | miles without breaking a sweat.
       | 
       | Having lived in Holland before, it's such a treat to be able to
       | bike anywhere. And keep in mind that Holland sucks for biking
       | because it rains all the time (Paris might as well, still oceanic
       | climate). Anything with 2,000+ hours of sunshine per year is in
       | an ideal spot for bikes, but that is A LOT of cities in the
       | world.
       | 
       | Anyway, very much hoping that this will lead to more cities
       | following suit.
        
       | Scoundreller wrote:
       | But when will Paris become '100% kayakable'?
       | 
       | The corporatization and hijacking of the Seine by commercial
       | ships must end!
        
         | joachim4 wrote:
         | They plan to make the water clear enough to swim in it by 2030,
         | so it might also be kayakable.
        
           | Scoundreller wrote:
           | I thought it was in time for the Olympics next year, but we
           | both know neither will happen :)
        
       | croisillon wrote:
       | (2021)
        
       | buggythebug wrote:
       | Bye bye driving around without blowing your brains out from
       | frustration
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | throw101010 wrote:
         | In Paris? Where exactly are you driving without frustration
         | right now? You must be a pretty patient person if the current
         | traffic/traffic jams aren't already frustrating you.
        
           | buggythebug wrote:
           | I'm saying it will get worse.
        
             | bambax wrote:
             | Yeah, that's the point. The less drivers, the better. It
             | would be unpopular (and perhaps illegal?) to forbid cars,
             | but they can sure make it incredibly unpleasant to drive,
             | so that people simply give up. I support this.
        
               | howinteresting wrote:
               | I love bikes but also have a car which is an absolute
               | necessity. Simple example: picking up a friend or partner
               | from a medical appointment where they're in a state that
               | would be unsafe for them to ride public transit or even a
               | rideshare. They could pay through the nose for a
               | specialized medical rideshare, or I could just pick them
               | up in my car.
        
         | bluecalm wrote:
         | Yeah but it's already very bad and will be worse. It's just
         | cars are too big and they will clog whatever space is
         | designated to them sooner rather than later.
        
           | buggythebug wrote:
           | That's exactly what I'm saying
        
       | viraptor wrote:
       | That sounds great. They were already very close to that in the
       | centre / touristy areas 5 years ago. I could take a bike path
       | pretty much everywhere I wanted, from the accommodation, all the
       | 20+min ride to the interesting spots.
       | 
       | But I'm surprised that the article doesn't mention scooters at
       | all (correction - 1 mention in passing). I feel like the bike to
       | e-scooter ratio was around 3:1. They use the same infrastructure
       | and also have significant numbers.
        
         | SECProto wrote:
         | It's interesting to watch. I was in Paris 10 years ago and it
         | felt very car-centric/bike-hostile. Hopefully I'll get back in
         | the next 5 and see how much it has changed.
        
       | robrenaud wrote:
       | I loved the contraflow bike lanes in Paris[1]. In Paris, as far
       | as I could tell, every street, including very narrow streets that
       | basically only fit a single car, are still two way for bikes. It
       | was confusing at first since I didn't expect to be allowed to
       | travel against car traffic. It sounds dangerous, but it worked
       | well. Even when a very wide garbage truck took the street as I
       | was biking towards it, I just pulled over and stopped on the side
       | walk so it could pass.
       | 
       | As someone who bikes a lot in Manhattan and Brooklyn, it really
       | felt like bikes were much a first class citizen in Paris.
       | 
       | [1] https://nacto.org/publication/urban-bikeway-design-
       | guide/bik....
        
         | bombcar wrote:
         | Pedestrians should be allowed to walk any which way including
         | stairs and other shortcuts.
         | 
         | Bikes should have dedicated lanes that are always two way.
         | 
         | Vehicles should be the most inconvenienced (one way streets,
         | one turn direction, etc) as "going around" isn't a major
         | problem.
         | 
         | Designing to minimize interaction between the various forms
         | helps tremendously-if bikes and pedestrians keep interacting
         | negatively it gets harder to get support for more bike
         | infrastructure (even though that's usually the solution). Just
         | like bollards can keep cars container, steps can help keep
         | bikes contained.
        
         | 2-718-281-828 wrote:
         | Very common in Germany. I don't like it too much as I'm always
         | a bit skeptical whether the car driver noticed the additional
         | sign.
         | 
         | https://www.knetfeder.de/fahrrad/bilder/radfahrerfrei.png
        
         | Mordisquitos wrote:
         | I love them as an idea. I wish the Barcelona local government
         | would understand the simple concept of contraflow bike lanes on
         | one-way streets.
         | 
         | Instead they keep building more and more _two-lane_ cycle paths
         | on either side of one-way streets, fully segregating bicycle
         | traffic from motor traffic. While they surely believe that
         | makes it even safer for cyclists, in my opinion it is a
         | terrible (and less safe) design for multiple reasons.
         | 
         | Firstly, it continues to encourage the idea that cyclists are
         | second-class parts of urban traffic, who _may_ use the streets
         | when by the benevolent grace of the Barcelona local authority
         | they have been provided with their own mini-street on certain
         | grown-up car streets.
         | 
         | Secondly, having to divide the dedicated bicycle space in two,
         | one for each direction of traffic, increases the risk of bike
         | collisions and makes overtaking slow cyclists more of a hassle.
         | 
         | Thirdly, it often makes cycling from A to B _harder_ than
         | driving if your route happens to follow the  "standard"
         | direction of the one way street and you need to make a turn to
         | the side opposite the side where the cycle lane happens to be.
         | This forces you to cross the ordinary one-way motor traffic
         | lane, which you wish you were using in the first place, with
         | the added difficulty that the cars are coming to you from
         | behind.
         | 
         | Finally, it really messes up with the crucial factor of
         | _predictability_ in road safety. So many dual-lane cycle paths
         | on arbitrary sides of one-way streets make each intersection
         | have its own personality, and you 'd better hope the drivers
         | you'll encounter are locals who know to expect surprise
         | bicycles sprouting out in the opposite direction on their
         | right-hand side. While one could argue that contraflow lanes
         | also mess with predictability they do not, for the simple fact
         | that traffic continues to follow the standard logic of
         | circulating on the right of the road.
        
           | marcandre wrote:
           | Lack of predictability can be a feature, at least according
           | to Hans Monderman, famous Dutch traffic engineer. He believed
           | drivers become more alert and cautious when there's more
           | uncertainty on the road. [1]
           | 
           | From my experience, segregating biking lanes, and having more
           | than one so as to allow passing is a definite plus. Bike
           | collisions can be scary, but it's cars I'm really afraid of.
           | 
           | FWIW, I cycle all the time, often in Paris, Montreal and
           | Barcelona and have strong preferences for doing so in that
           | particular order.
           | 
           | [1] https://bigthink.com/the-present/want-less-car-accidents-
           | get...
        
             | masklinn wrote:
             | > Lack of predictability can be a feature, at least
             | according to Hans Monderman, famous Dutch traffic engineer.
             | He believed drivers become more alert and cautious when
             | there's more uncertainty on the road.
             | 
             | I think lack of certainty and lack of predictability are
             | very different concepts, and you want the former but not
             | the latter.
             | 
             | Lack of certainty means you don't know what's going to
             | happen because you have blind corners or obstacles (e.g.
             | trees, planters), this requires paying attention and leads
             | to slowdowns because the driver is not confident.
             | 
             | Lack of predictability is its brain-damaged cousin, it's a
             | drunk driver or a dump truck with an open gate.
        
         | pxmpxm wrote:
         | This seems like a far better idea than the segregated bike
         | lanes with stuff in the middle (parking etc), because you can
         | actually see any potential intersection contentions from afar.
         | I'm still unclear how the former is ever a good idea, unless
         | you have traffic signals on every intersection.
        
         | WanderPanda wrote:
         | I recently moved to NY and I'm surprised by how bike friendly
         | Manhattan and Brooklyn are. More bike friendly than most German
         | cities (except e.g. Munster) imo
        
           | pookah wrote:
           | Not pedestrians or runners though. Very common for cyclist's
           | to blatantly mow through intersections and crosswalks like
           | psychopaths. In Manhattan there's a famous local that uses a
           | bullhorn to call them assholes. I've nearly gotten clipped by
           | bikes multiple times. Americans also hardly ever use bell's
           | or announce themselves. And then there's the silent killers
           | on the E-Bikes...I think bikes and cyclist paths are good,
           | it's just the US hasn't figured out how to integrate these
           | things into society so you wind up with anti-social tour-de-
           | france cyclists bogarting through children on tricycles and
           | the general public. It's not a good situation.
        
             | atdrummond wrote:
             | My father and stepmom, after trying to avoid them countless
             | times, were wiped out by an e-bike in Manhattan going much
             | faster than the car traffic. Both of them are now
             | frightened to walk in their neighborhood after having so
             | many close calls. I thought they were being a bit
             | hypersensitive given the accident but after visiting this
             | week it's unlike anything I've seen in any other "bike
             | friendly" jurisdiction.
        
               | NegativeLatency wrote:
               | I'm not going to defend irresponsible bikers but it's
               | important to consider that if it was a car they'd
               | potentially be dead.
        
               | splistud wrote:
        
               | netsharc wrote:
               | Well my guess is, if it was a car, the driver probably
               | wouldn't be a total wanker speeding, sometimes on the
               | sidewalk, inches away from pedestrians. It seems the main
               | issue is located between the saddle and the handlebars.
        
               | atdrummond wrote:
               | I 100% agree - my point is that cars are easier to dodge
               | in NYC right now with the relative slow speed in their
               | neighborhoods. The e-bikes often go well above 30mph and
               | pay no heed to lights or other traffic signals. I was
               | honestly shocked after having biked myself on multiple
               | continents and having seen much better bike etiquette
               | pretty much everywhere else.
        
               | sergers wrote:
               | I think it has to do with general lawless enforcement
               | increase in NYC, that among other things, leads to people
               | just blatantly doing whatever they want.
               | 
               | I haven't seen roaming mobs of cyclists in other city
               | like NYC, lane splitting through traffic and blocking
               | traffic
        
         | onlyrealcuzzo wrote:
         | I don't understand why bike lanes on one-way street don't go in
         | the opposite direction of cars.
         | 
         | It's easier for you to avoid the car and for the car to get
         | around you.
        
           | blacksmith_tb wrote:
           | My personal experience with riding in 'contraflow' bike lanes
           | is they are often very handy, but can get unpleasant where
           | they intersect with car (or even bike) traffic that's flowing
           | normally. I'd generally rather ride in a protected bike lane
           | (with a curb/berm between the car lanes and the bike, or even
           | bigger barriers like planters or parked cars).
        
           | cma wrote:
           | Sightlines are often tuned only for seeing oncoming traffic
           | far enough to turn into it and not for seeing fastish stuff
           | going the opposite way.
        
         | josephcsible wrote:
         | > I just pulled over and stopped on the side walk so it could
         | pass.
         | 
         | I wish cyclists did this even for traffic going the same
         | direction as them.
        
           | carlob wrote:
           | Note that contraflow lanes are a European directive for all
           | places with a speed limit of 30 km/h. I'm Paris they just
           | started marking them.
           | 
           | If you are in a street where it's too narrow to safely
           | overtake a bike without them climbing on the sidewalk, then
           | you probably shouldn't be going much faster than the bike
           | anyway...
        
             | avgcorrection wrote:
             | What is a European directive? An EU directive?
        
             | BrianHenryIE wrote:
             | Have you got a link to the EU directive? I haven't heard of
             | that and a quick search didn't bring anything up.
        
           | II2II wrote:
           | It is far safer for a motorist coming from behind to
           | determine when it is safe to pass. It is also far more
           | dangerous for a cyclist to exit then attempt to rejoin the
           | flow of traffic. The only time a cyclist should consider
           | pulling over for traffic is if it would be otherwise unsafe
           | for vehicles to pass.
        
           | analog31 wrote:
           | I do this. I've got a mirror on my bike, I know what's coming
           | up behind me, and I let cars pass when I can. I also pull
           | over when driving on 2-lane roads if there's a string of cars
           | behind me.
        
             | LtWorf wrote:
             | Most cyclists in non-urban roads I met in italy will just
             | cycle in pair and keep 20 cars behind them going at 20km/h
             | while chatting with each other.
        
               | amrocha wrote:
               | Good. Slow down cars and maybe they'll stop killing
               | thousands of people every year.
        
               | Karrot_Kream wrote:
               | So where does the yielding logic stop? Do vans need to
               | stop for sports cars? Do sports cars need to stop for
               | tanks? If you make cycling this cumbersome, nobody will
               | cycle. People try their best to yield but it's best
               | effort.
        
               | downvotetruth wrote:
               | "Motor"cyclists pull the same trick & violate the slower
               | traffic keep to the side rule, which seems to make
               | "lanes" redundant.
        
               | analog31 wrote:
               | Indeed, I don't ride my bike on multi-lane roads if I can
               | avoid them, so I'm only talking about roads where my
               | choices are riding in the traffic lane or ducking into
               | the parking lane. In my locale it's pretty easy to get
               | around on neighborhood streets and bike paths, so I'm
               | actually rarely sharing the road with a lot of car
               | traffic.
        
         | markus92 wrote:
         | These are extremely common in The Netherlands, too. Pretty much
         | all streets that are one way for cars, are two way for bikes.
        
           | dr_dshiv wrote:
           | In the Netherlands, bikes don't care
        
       | gregsadetsky wrote:
       | From an outsider's perspective, Paris seems well positioned for
       | this. It's a dense city, cars don't feel like first class
       | citizens outside of the large boulevards, the Velib [1] bike
       | sharing system is well implanted (and that's not even considering
       | all of the shared/kick/electrical scooters..!)
       | 
       | Montreal is having a mini cycling renaissance as well. Our mayor
       | didn't let the pandemic crisis go to waste and transformed one of
       | the city's main streets by adding two semi-protected bike lanes
       | [2]. The whole area is stunningly different than what it was
       | before. A telling (Canadian newspaper) editorial on the subject:
       | "Is the war against bike lanes finally over?" [3]
       | 
       | Finally, I personally just joined a group of volunteers (as a
       | tech/developer) that are using DALL-E/AI to generate visions of
       | improved streets in the US! If you're curious / want to join
       | (fullstack and especially css developers are always needed),
       | check out https://transformyour.city/ and the twitter account
       | [4]. The goal is to be a "change.org for urban transformation".
       | Feel free to email me as well.
       | 
       | Cyclists/urban idealists unite :-)
       | 
       | [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V%C3%A9lib%27
       | 
       | [2] https://montreal.ca/en/articles/rev-express-bike-
       | network-466...
       | 
       | [3]
       | https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/editorials/article-i...
       | 
       | [4] https://twitter.com/betterstreetsai
        
       | AtlasBarfed wrote:
       | What's really important about this isn't bicycles in the
       | traditional sense, it's infra that can be used with e-bikes,
       | e-skateboards, e-mini-scooters, etc.
       | 
       | I think the sweet spot is a 50 mile range single person
       | miniscooter (similar to birds, etc), that will be lightweight and
       | foldable and charge quick on 110V. You take that to work, fold it
       | up, charge it whjile you work, use it for lunch/errands, fold it
       | up again, commute home.
       | 
       | The current Birds/etc scooters are juuuust a bit to heavy. I
       | think it's well within the next-gen LFP and sodium ion to produce
       | usable 50 mile scooter that weight 2/3 to 1/2 of a the scooter
       | sharing service designs.
       | 
       | Those should practically be free to any resident of a city in the
       | world in terms of tax rebates or a stipend. I really can't think
       | of a bigger carbon bang for the buck than a 200$ free credit to
       | buy an e-scooter and $1000 for an e-bike+trailer for basic
       | groceries errands.
       | 
       | The portable/foldable e-scooter is a very natural integration
       | with mass transit and intercity as well, while bikes are a lot
       | harder to integrate.
        
         | Matthias247 wrote:
         | > I really can't think of a bigger carbon bang for the buck
         | than a 200$ free credit to buy an e-scooter and $1000 for an
         | e-bike+trailer for basic groceries errands.
         | 
         | Assuming people would use those - totally! The risk is
         | unfortunately that people just get them because they are free,
         | and in the end are still driving cars for convenience. I guess
         | one would need some system where the credit is earned via
         | actual usage. You pay for it full price, but for ever ridden km
         | you get credit. You already mentioned tax rebates, and those
         | might indeed be a good way. However those already exist in
         | countries for other kinds of commuting - e.g. if I commute by
         | any kind of vehicle in germany I get a 30ct/km tax discount -
         | whether it's a car or scooter. Picking a higher number for a
         | vehicle which is cheaper to own doesn't really sound logical -
         | but maybe just the marketing effect of it would drive adoption.
        
         | Scoundreller wrote:
         | I think the future is much shorter range out of the box, but
         | you slide a supplemental battery when you need extra range.
         | 
         | (This applies to cars too: would love to have a battery pack
         | that slides out for the lawnmower/snowblower/chainsaw and then
         | recharges in the car and gives extra miles of range when
         | needed).
         | 
         | There are some shared electrified scooters in Taiwan where you
         | slide in and out battery packs from something like a vending
         | machine.
         | 
         | https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yGwmPcClWrE
        
       | LeanderK wrote:
       | Is it getting done? In germany progress is mixed because some
       | cities are way to cautious to introduce bike lanes. They are
       | sometimes planned to death, little strips of a few hundred meters
       | of bike lane takes years (different proposals, input of
       | stakeholders, revision of proposals, detailed planning and then
       | implementation) so nothing is getting done. I think there's only
       | an noticeable improvement if there's a strong buy-in from the
       | government and the ruling party. I think this is due to forces
       | working against these transformations. To overcome those tedious
       | planning processes the city has to be open to experimentation,
       | which they are not accustomed to so they need to change habits to
       | do this. And every bike lane has opponents, which you also need
       | to overcome to plan the cycling infrastructure (sometimes
       | compromises are impossible, not every street is wide enough to
       | accommodate everyone).
       | 
       | In munich, the city where I grew up in, there's a strong public
       | pressure to create better biking infrastructure. It was put up on
       | popular vote and was the historically best performing yet. But
       | that's not represented in every party and ruling coalitions can
       | be slowed down by forming a coalition with a bike-sceptical
       | party, like the last. But the pressure is growing because there's
       | really no progress yet, it's not possible to evade the issue in
       | the near future.
       | 
       | Is this disconnect present in other countries? I feel like this
       | situation is at least prevalent in quite a few german cities.
       | Which is understandable from a political point of view, to build
       | bike-infrastructure you have to take road away so you will always
       | anger someone and create public opposition.
        
         | noelwelsh wrote:
         | Paris is brought up in conversations about improving cycling
         | and cycle infrastructure because it has really rapidly
         | increased the number of journeys done by bike. This has mostly
         | happened since the start of the pandemic, and has also
         | coincided with creating many more bike lanes.
        
           | dopidopHN wrote:
           | It's in the making since a solid decade too.
           | 
           | I remember the introduction of velib, throwing lot of new
           | users on the ill adapted roads.then the city fumbling to
           | adapt.
           | 
           | It's also in grain in the culture at this point.
           | 
           | That city is so dense and small ... people got the message
           | that you can be anywhere in 30 min of biking.
        
         | BlargMcLarg wrote:
         | >Is this disconnect present in other countries?
         | 
         | To ruffle some feathers, yes. And this in the country that
         | always seems to be the first example given: The Netherlands.
         | 
         | Don't get me wrong. Relative to most countries, NL is great for
         | cyclists. Specifically Amsterdam and Utrecht are great for a
         | car-free life, as well as some other cities. Areas close to
         | train stations, connected to any bigger city, tend to do well
         | too.
         | 
         | That's about where it ends. Public transport took humongous
         | hits and roads are being expanded. Why? Because despite
         | everything, car usage is going up and traffic jams are once
         | again increasing. Specifically on Tuesdays and Thursdays, when
         | most people are expected to be at the office. Since public
         | transport is increasingly _worsening_ , most people will simply
         | take the car all the way rather than doing a bit by bicycle and
         | then using the bus/train.
         | 
         | Housing prices make the above even worse (more people have to
         | live outside locations ideal for cycling, PT or a combination),
         | and the government is actively playing into car ownership. I
         | hope I don't need to explain why propping up individual car
         | usage makes building more housing even more problematic (hint:
         | you need to park them, for one).
         | 
         | "But Amsterdam is doing great! But Utrecht is doing great! But
         | I can get from Almere to Amsterdam really easily!" Sure, they
         | are. Now please, overlap Paris, London, or any other big city
         | on top of the Netherlands. Achieving a 100% cyclable Paris is a
         | far bigger achievement than Amsterdam and Utrecht combined. And
         | the writing is on the wall what happens when cars are more
         | affordable and commutes by motorized vehicle are 1 hour a day
         | minimum: car usage continues to go up.
         | 
         | This isn't to be discouraging either. Rather, it's to show that
         | governments can't slack off and take the easy path out. The
         | easy path leads to congested roads, traffic jams, frustrated
         | drivers, mass pollution and a highly inefficient use of ground
         | area.
        
           | b3orn wrote:
           | > Achieving a 100% cyclable Paris is a far bigger achievement
           | than Amsterdam and Utrecht combined.
           | 
           | If I'm not mistaken the goal of 100% cyclable Paris is
           | limited to the city of Paris which has half the area of
           | Amsterdam. AFAIK there's a lot less interest in cyclability
           | in the surrounding areas of Paris and they are somewhat
           | annoyed because a lot of people from there commute to Paris
           | by car.
        
             | jtwaleson wrote:
             | Half the size of Amsterdam? I had to look this up but
             | you're right. The "City of Paris" has 2M inhabitants and
             | 105 sq km. Amsterdam has 0.9M inhabitants and 219 sq km.
             | Learned something new, thanks :)
        
             | sofixa wrote:
             | > If I'm not mistaken the goal of 100% cyclable Paris is
             | limited to the city of Paris which has half the area of
             | Amsterdam
             | 
             | But twice the population.
             | 
             | > AFAIK there's a lot less interest in cyclability in the
             | surrounding areas
             | 
             | Depends on the city, but the majority are also working on
             | making themselves more cyclable, even when the terrain
             | isn't great for it (western suburbs are quite hilly).
        
         | Tobu wrote:
         | Progress is fast (much better than when Velib was launched in
         | 2007), most arrondissements (except maybe 15th/16th) are
         | convenient to get around, the center has some huge lanes that
         | bode well for the future, and there's roadwork at just about
         | every large intersection that hasn't been upgraded yet.
         | 
         | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sI-1YNAmWlk
        
       | throw__away7391 wrote:
       | I was in Paris for the first time in four years this summer, and
       | I have to say I was quite impressed, even by European standards
       | the city stands out as extremely bike accessible, much more so
       | than before (at least the city center). It completely changes the
       | way you see certain parts of the city. I've been many times in
       | the past and returning to the same places now where the area used
       | to be dominated by a busy street now you see the buildings, if
       | you're on a bike or walking on a pedestrian designated street you
       | see them from the angle looking from the center, as they were
       | originally designed to be seen, rather than looking up from under
       | from the sidewalks.
        
         | jorl17 wrote:
         | I was in Paris for work two weeks ago and fell in love with it.
         | What a wonderful city!
         | 
         | Even though I (shamefully) don't know how to ride a bike, I was
         | amazed at how many bikes there were and how bike accessible
         | everything was.
        
           | retinaros wrote:
           | dont worry a good chunk of the paris people on a bike cant
           | ride a bike either. no respect of laws , dangerous for
           | pedestrians and to other bikers
        
           | TedDoesntTalk wrote:
           | how did it happen that you don't know how to ride a bike?
           | Genuinely curious.
        
             | aembleton wrote:
             | I guess they never learnt. If you never learn then you
             | won't know how to ride. Tom Scott made a video, as an adult
             | learning to ride a bike
             | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7GKK3liv8M
        
         | oceanplexian wrote:
         | I was in Paris a few weeks ago and while I think they have
         | decent bike infrastructure, the car infrastructure was
         | terrible.
         | 
         | In Manhattan (which has 4x the population of Paris) you can get
         | an Uber and go a few km in maybe 15-20 minutes. In Paris it's
         | an hour+. Sure, stealing infrastructure from cars to give to
         | bikes will make biking quicker, but it's a zero-sun game.
         | You're basically stealing resources from people who are
         | elderly, disabled, have families, etc. to prioritize
         | bicyclists. Great for some people at the expense of others.
        
           | retinaros wrote:
           | 100% right. there is also a very weird feeling when you see
           | paris mayor hating so much on cars but loving cabs so much
           | (the g7 taxi, biggest taxi company in france, is a gigantic
           | donator to the socialist party and has been for decades)
           | 
           | at the end her dream is for paris to be copenhagen , a city
           | for the rich people living in the center. if they re healthy
           | theyll bike if they re old theyll have a cab or private
           | driver (just like our dear mayor) and of course lets not
           | forget rich tourists who will ride cabs to go by hermes bags.
           | 
           | this is totally disrespectful toward people living in suburbs
           | and having the need to commute by car
        
           | Fricken wrote:
           | Old people, young people, poor people, disabled people: they
           | can't drive. It adds up to a lot of second class citizens.
           | 
           | A friend of mine is a quadruple amputee. He cannot drive, but
           | he can use his motorized wheelchair in bike lanes and travel
           | independently.
        
           | hiq wrote:
           | > you can get an Uber and go a few km in maybe 15-20 minutes.
           | In Paris it's an hour+.
           | 
           | From where to where? That's not my experience at all.
           | 
           | > it's a zero-sun game
           | 
           | It's not, given that you fit way more people on bikes that
           | you would if they were driving cars.
           | 
           | Public transportation is also meant to be usable by the
           | people you mentioned (especially families), you can debate
           | whether they currently foot the bill, but staying stuck on
           | cars is not the solution.
        
           | throw__away7391 wrote:
           | > You're basically stealing resources from people who are
           | elderly, disabled, have families, etc. to prioritize
           | bicyclists.
           | 
           | I am really sick of this "think of the children" argument for
           | why the US needs to persist in this dysfunctional car-centric
           | model, particularly when they're applied to the only part of
           | the country with halfway decent transportation alternatives.
           | I live in lower Manhattan, we need LESS cars and we're going
           | to get it sooner or later. If you don't like that, please
           | stay out of the city, you have practically the entire
           | continent of cities already suited to live your car-centered
           | suburban life.
        
       | satysin wrote:
       | As someone that lives in Lyon I _really_ hope we do something
       | similar in the centre (around Bellecour). There are way too many
       | cars in a small area it is just ridiculous.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | jmfldn wrote:
       | Please please please do this to London too! I understand the
       | geography is tough and that the haphazard 'planning' evolved
       | organically over 2000 years from its origin as Roman Londinium.
       | Anything is possible with the right will behind it though.
       | 
       | Investing in cycling infrastructure is a magic bullet to help
       | advance three key policy areas for any society. Public health,
       | overcrowded public transport / congested roads and CO2 reduction.
        
         | kergonath wrote:
         | > evolved organically over 2000 years from its origin as Roman
         | Londinium
         | 
         | Just as that other Roman town Lutetia. Paris and London are
         | _very_ similar in a lot of respects.
        
           | jmfldn wrote:
           | Paris' road system was redesigned. It seems far less
           | haphazard than London to me, at least the bits I've seen.
           | 
           | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haussmann%27s_renovation_of_Pa.
           | ..
        
         | juujian wrote:
         | I do not understand why a 2000 year old organically grown city
         | should somehow work for cars but should be impossible to
         | traverse by bike. That does not make any sense. Certainly it
         | would be easier to fit bikes in there than cars. That is,
         | unless you see the space yielded to cars as a void that has
         | been absorbed and cannot be regain.
        
           | ReptileMan wrote:
           | London doesn't work for cars. I endearingly call central
           | london and m25 the biggest open space parking lots in the
           | world
        
           | jmfldn wrote:
           | I didn't say it was impossible.
           | 
           | However, it's really your last point I was thinking of. It's
           | a haphazard city of narrow streets given over to cars. That
           | makes it a hard problem to solve.
           | 
           | As I said, anything is possible with enough will.
        
         | walthamstow wrote:
         | The biggest problem in London is the fragmentation. 32 boroughs
         | + the City + TFL. It's planning chaos.
         | 
         | My borough of Waltham Forest, at least the parts inside the
         | north circular, has segregated cycle lanes pretty much
         | everywhere. Nextdoor in Haringey, not so much.
        
           | case0x00 wrote:
           | Is it even tenable to attempt this for the entirety of
           | Greater London? Should the focus be on just improving Central
           | London I wonder?
        
             | [deleted]
        
           | doublesocket wrote:
           | > The biggest problem in London is the fragmentation. 32
           | boroughs + the City + TFL. It's planning chaos.
           | 
           | It's chaos for just about everything else too, especially
           | when it come to IT. Every council outsources the exact same
           | functions to different companies and almost none of them do
           | it well. It's a collosal waste of resources.
        
       | panick21_ wrote:
       | I don't like to cycle but I am 100% in favor of major investment
       | in walk-ability and cycleable. Even if you prefer public
       | transport, or even cars, it much better to operate in a city that
       | is designed around the principles of walkability.
       | 
       | New Urbanism has been pushing this for a long time, walkability
       | is at the core of both high and low density urbanism. An the
       | bicycle is the natural extinction of that.
        
       | diebeforei485 wrote:
       | The energy shortage might be a great catalyst to
       | walkable/bikeable cities in Europe this year.
        
       | jmyeet wrote:
       | People want lots of things until they realize it'll take
       | something away from cars. Paris won't be as bad as the US is but
       | it's still there.
       | 
       | I see a lot of cities that measure bike lanes in total length,
       | which misses the mark in two ways:
       | 
       | 1. It often includes lanes that are shared with cars. These
       | shouldn't count except on side streets. Basically anywhere where
       | the speed limit is <25kmh; and
       | 
       | 2. Focus needs to be given on _contiguous_ cycling routes. It
       | doesn 't matter if you have 1000km of cycle routes if no section
       | is longer than 2km and they're only connected by highways you
       | have to share with cars.
       | 
       | Of course Amsterdam is the gold standard here and it shows how
       | much you can do without necessarily taking up more space (eg the
       | intersection design that puts cyclists in front of cars, which is
       | much safer).
       | 
       | In a city like Paris having physically separate bike lanes will
       | often mean taking away parking spaces or lanes of traffic. That's
       | where the resistance will be.
        
         | Wilya wrote:
         | The resistance is already there, it's already happening. Car
         | owners in Paris are furious, and bike infrastructure is already
         | taking away space from roads. High traffic roads in the center
         | have been downright closed and made bike-only.
         | 
         | It is feasible because Paris (the city itself, excluding
         | suburbs) is a _very_ crowded city, where owning a car has
         | always been a luxury. People living in Paris itself who can
         | afford a car, with the associated parking space and everything,
         | are a minority.
         | 
         | People living in the suburbs are more likely to own cars and
         | drive through Paris, but they don't elect the Paris mayor, so
         | their opinion doesn't have much weight.
        
           | retinaros wrote:
           | problem is car owners are not only from paris but from the
           | suburbs and need a car to commute and cant afford to live in
           | paris to ride a bike
        
       | mitchbob wrote:
       | Archived: https://archive.ph/lcxwf
        
       | bsaul wrote:
       | Has any city or bike maker found a solution to bike theft ?
       | 
       | I used to bike in Paris until my bike got stolen. It got me so
       | furious i stopped.
        
         | JofArnold wrote:
         | I ride a Brompton; folds up and I take it into the shops with
         | me.
        
         | jtwaleson wrote:
         | I live in Utrecht, we have tons of guarded bike garages in the
         | inner city, including the biggest bicycle parking garage in the
         | world at the central station with room for 10k bikes (look it
         | up, it's amazing!). I park my EUR2.5k bike at home and at the
         | station and have 0 worries. When going to other places I often
         | bring a crappy bike, or park it for short bits.
        
           | ruuda wrote:
           | Fun fact, the signs that show how many parking spaces are
           | left run NixOS!
        
             | sofixa wrote:
             | That is a fun fact! Do you have any more public information
             | you can share?
        
               | ruuda wrote:
               | It is built by https://lumi.guide/portfolio-
               | items/p-route-bicycle-utrecht/, I just happen to know
               | some people who worked there. The Haskell community is
               | pretty small :)
        
             | jtwaleson wrote:
             | Cool! The numbers are not that accurate though :') That's
             | probably an issue with the sensors and not the software.
        
         | INTPenis wrote:
         | I live in bicycle heavy Malmo and a part of growing street wise
         | here is to know how and where to secure your bike. It's really
         | risk mitigation since portable bike locks have limited
         | security. But it works for me and my 2014 Specialized Awol
         | daily driver for everything from city to camping.
         | 
         | But a hugely important factor are well designed bike racks. My
         | favorite is the steel loop that comes up from the ground, like
         | a long U.[1] There are tons of variations but the point is to
         | have a solid point to anchor the bike with your lock. In my
         | case I mostly want to save the frame, but a longer chain and I
         | could probably save a wheel. Gotta balance comfort and security
         | too tho
         | 
         | 1. https://maps.app.goo.gl/iDK4CUx853oxoKhz6
        
           | occz wrote:
           | >But a hugely important factor are well designed bike racks.
           | My favorite is the steel loop that comes up from the ground,
           | like a long U.
           | 
           | I believe they are called Sheffield Racks.
        
         | Fricken wrote:
         | I've had many bikes stolen over my life and the total costs are
         | still a fraction of what it would cost to have used public
         | transport instead.
        
         | aikinai wrote:
         | Vanmoofs have a built in alarm, are trackable, and the company
         | sells theft insurance.
         | 
         | Japan has very little theft, but it's cultural and not
         | something you can implement with policy. Maybe widespread bike
         | registration helps?
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | beowulfey wrote:
         | My solution is to ride a junky bike, but it definitely does not
         | work for everyone
        
           | Scoundreller wrote:
           | That strategy worked for me in Toronto until the pandemic
           | hit. Dunno if it's the culture of some people or genuine
           | parts shortage, but had a not-exactly-true wheel stolen (and
           | the bolts loosened on the other that was locked...), a saddle
           | with a crack covered with tape (found the tape on the
           | ground!), and someone tried to tear off my dollar-store bell
           | and destroyed it (my anti-theft screw was a Robertson :) ).
        
           | magicalhippo wrote:
           | Some friends of the family have been buying expensive top-of-
           | the-line MTBs for decades. They said the first thing they do
           | when they buy a new bike is go to the store and pick up a
           | couple of spray cans with suitably horrible colors, and then
           | spray paint the bike until it looks totally janky.
           | 
           | Worked for them so far, none of their bikes have been stolen.
        
         | shtopointo wrote:
         | Maybe a long sturdy chain + good lock to wrap around both
         | wheels of the bike and the frame. When I lived in Holland and
         | used to buy second-hand bikes for like 120 euros, they used to
         | say to buy a chain of equivalent value :-)
        
         | schrijver wrote:
         | In big cities bikes get stolen, it's always been that way. Of
         | course it would be nice if it were different but it's sad if
         | that stops you from riding!
         | 
         | The Dutch approach in cities has been to drive something old
         | and or cheap that you can afford to get stolen. It works
         | because the country is pretty flat so you don't need a fancy
         | light bike with many gears. Paris is pretty flat too.
         | 
         | Lately subscription services like swapfiets have become popular
         | that include maintenance and theft insurance. Through economies
         | of scale, I think it's competitive with ownership especially
         | for city dwellers without a garage with tools.
         | 
         | I now live in a city with more hills, so I needed a bit more
         | capable bike-I bought a cheap second hand bike with 21 gears. I
         | put some permanantly attached bags on the back which are
         | practical and make the bike look less desireable. I use an axa
         | lock attached to the frame and a separate chain. From day one I
         | accepted it would get stolen at some point--so I feel like I've
         | been on a six year lucky streak.
         | 
         | Defeatist? Sure! But I bike without worries.
        
           | lloeki wrote:
           | > Paris is pretty flat too
           | 
           | someone here never tried to climb Montmartre (e.g, there are
           | many steep hills inside and around Paris)
        
         | zahma wrote:
         | I have one of these but haven't put it to the test. Combined
         | with another type of lock for the front wheel (+frame), I'd say
         | you're in a good place.
         | 
         | https://hiplok.com/product/hiplok-d1000/
        
         | Scoundreller wrote:
         | Electrified bikeshares. Overcomes their tank like structure and
         | performance.
         | 
         | Some cities do have badge access bike rooms, but you have to
         | subscribe to those.
         | 
         | I just have a rusty 12spd that performs well, U-lock rear wheel
         | within the triangle, minimal chain for the front wheel, and an
         | old bike chain looped on the saddle.
         | 
         | I refuse to deal with bike locking rooms, paid or not. Lock
         | outside and oil frequently and I can lock up precisely at my
         | destination.
        
         | occz wrote:
         | I believe cities that have attempted some form of bicycle
         | registration system has had good success with reducing bicycle
         | theft, but that does require the local police to actually give
         | a damn about bicycles, which is very uncommon.
        
       | zahma wrote:
       | Great news, but building the lanes doesn't mean it will be
       | cyclable. Paris leadership suffers from myopia when it comes to
       | equating bike lanes with how cyclable the city is. Yes, dedicated
       | infrastructure is necessary to accomplish this goal, but it won't
       | happen without accommodating the needs of others and changing how
       | the city operates.
       | 
       | 1) Stop giving carte blanche to taxis, ride-shares, and scooters.
       | These vehicles are allowed unrestricted access, whether legal or
       | illegal, to bus lanes, which tend to double as bike lanes and the
       | unofficial express lane for scooters. They are aggressive and
       | tend not to follow rules that ensure safety and circulation
       | fluidity. We also have Uber Eats and the like for this shitshow
       | -- so thanks to all of you for making it that much easier to
       | order McDonald's at rush hour.
       | 
       | 2) Stop pretending like everyone wants to bike. They don't, and
       | that's OK. Real effort needs to be made to get cars off the road
       | for those who do want to bike every day across the city. That
       | means double down on mass transit so that it is desirable. I
       | really mean that: fix the RATP. Gut it if need be. Leverage it
       | until the mayor has to sell her second property -- I don't care.
       | The metro/RER is a disgusting place fraught with maintenance
       | issues, and certain lines at certain hours are not safe.
       | 
       | 3) Change the way Parisian and suburban drivers behave around
       | cyclists, which I really view as tandem to point 2 above. Safety
       | is a major disincentive for would-be cyclists. There are any
       | number of corners with painted bicycle memorial commemorating
       | someone who tragically died on his/her bike. Unfortunately, it is
       | the mentality of drivers that they are the rulers of the road,
       | and I have seen this get worse with the pandemic's wide-reaching
       | effects on mental well-being. But we can either get drivers off
       | the road or force them to conform to basic respect for other
       | commuters, which leads me to the following.
       | 
       | 4) Actually enforce traffic laws. Paris police don't enforce much
       | of anything, let alone reckless driving or even speeding.
       | Recently the speed limit in paris went down to 30kph (~20mph).
       | Nobody respects this rule -- indeed some commuting cyclists can
       | even break 30kph on a stretch of boulevard. It is the nature of
       | cars to try to pass a cyclist.
       | 
       | Parisians drive "n'importe comment" because they have to in order
       | to get somewhere. There are simply too many people on the road
       | and too much chaos, and cyclists are certainly part of this
       | problem and then follow suit. I have done this far too many
       | times, though I like to think I'm not harming anyone. Getting
       | cars off the road and doing a better job to create a partnership
       | between commuters to get everyone where they want to be is the
       | missing piece here.
       | 
       | What I'm asking for here is everything -- infrastructure,
       | mindset, enforcement -- to be fixed at once, which is not
       | realistic. Drivers will certainly balk at this news, and they are
       | right -- it's just that they are on the wrong side of history.
       | The more bike lanes that pop up and retract space from automobile
       | lanes will create more congestion unless people are given viable
       | alternatives into the city. I would like to demonize them for
       | having sought a better life outside Paris while the urbanites
       | suffer with the effects of noise and air pollution and difficulty
       | sometimes finding a place to walk. There's also a role for
       | discussing telecommuting as a way of reducing the strain on the
       | city's roadways, which is also an enormous budgetary constraint.
       | A larger transition toward a city for its inhabitants is
       | necessary -- not merely more bike lanes. I want to hear that
       | articulated. Give people a chance to live outside. Paris is not
       | what it used to be and building 100mi of bike lanes won't return
       | it to former glory unless we start thinking more about what makes
       | a city worth living in.
        
         | retinaros wrote:
         | this totally and ill add that riding a bike would need a permit
         | or an exam where you learn the driving code. bikers are awful .
         | ibike myself and very often im the only one respecting the
         | code. they just reckless and dangerous to pedestrians
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-10-01 23:01 UTC)