7 ms·

That would take a lot of political will to do something like that though and it would take YEARS! I don't think the US is a great market (right now) for city-bi

That would take a lot of political will to do something like that though and it would take YEARS! I don't think the US is a great market (right now) for city-bikes. Outside of maybe Manhattan & SF I can't think of any major city where a bike would take you places faster/better than another way of transportation would. When you consider all the hassles that biking as a transportation comes with, I doubt this has any large potential (compared to the Uber scale). Could be wrong though. I actually really hope I am!

electricEmu 9y ago
Seattle? Portland? Minneapolis/St. Paul? You might consider bicycling while you travel more. In Seattle alone, OFO, LimeBike, and Spin are all competing. American bicycle infrastructure is behind, but it exists. I don't own a car. I get around those cities on bike without issue. It's as fast or faster than a car in many cases and I'm peddling the old fashioned way (with legs).
- eckmLJE 9y ago
  Washington, DC is a big bike commuting city. Jump bikes are everywhere here.
- s5fs 9y ago
  Regarding Seattle and Portland, while it's true there are bike share programs, I don't see them used very often. The few who are using the bikes are either tourists (minority) or the homeless on stolen bikes. Additionally, just about half the limebikes that I see are abandoned under bridges or broken and unusable. Portland itself is a very bikeable city and a lot of time/energy is spent to improve and grow this infrastructure. Traffic is getting to the point where cycling is faster for inner-city trips, but as I live outside of the city it's a non-starter because public transportation from my end of town is severely limited. Seattle doesn't seem nearly as bike friendly, and while it's certainly faster to bike or walk during rush hour, it doesn't seem nearly as safe as Portland. I certainly have no interest in cycling in Seattle, driving is bad enough.
  - prolikewhoa 9y ago
    I rode up Capitol Hill at 4:30PM every day last spring/summer, took me 10-15 minutes to get home from 2nd & Seneca and never had any safety issues. Drivers in Seattle are fairly aware of their surroundings with everyone walking randomly at all times and the city is adding new bike lanes often. Going up the hill on a Lime, Spin, or Ofo...no way -- you see those at the bottom of every hill.
    - codereflection 9y ago
      I'm in Seattle as well, I have to disagree. Drivers here are mostly clueless. I know many who bike or ride motorcycles, and they have many stories to tell about the cluelessness of Seattle drivers. It's a dangerous city to ride a bike.
      - prolikewhoa 9y ago
        I would argue it's fairly safe, especially comparing to rural areas. I now live south a few miles outside of the normal Seattle walking/biking and I've already experienced a few near-death situations, but didn't have any problems in my two years downtown. This is just a personal anecdote, but I still do feel people driving Seattle downtown & on the hill are fairly aware of bikers and people walking at any time they want.
      - lev99 9y ago
        Every biker in every North American city has stories about clueless drivers and close encounters, if not full impacts. Seattle is probably in the top 5 cities for driver awareness, but it has room for improvement.
  - seanmcdirmid 8y ago
    If you live on the Burke Gilman trail, biking in Seattle can be pretty good. And they even have a bike lane over 520 now for those hardcore Microsoft bike commuters.
- phil21 9y ago
  Minneapolis? As someone who commuted via bike "before it was cool" in Minneapolis I want to ask what you're smoking :) The density simply isn't there, and the infrastructure is pretty horrible aside from some exceedingly small areas of the city proper, and of course the amazing bike paths (which typically are not useful for anything other than leisure). If that's what you consider a high bar for "bike infrastructure" in the US, I think the situation is pretty dire. I moved to Chicago largely due to transit-related reasons, and the bike commute here isn't exactly stellar - but it's at least night and day compared to the average suburban-oriented city in the US. That said, spending significant time in the Netherlands may have raised the bar too far for me to really think of any US bike infrastructure as being much more than an afterthought at best.
  - r27d 9y ago
    Not sure who you are but I bet we were friends. Left MPLS for SF. MPLS is "the best city" for nearly anything if you ask a local. Too bad they wasted the Non-Motorized Transportation Pilot $20M on shitty latex paint bike lanes at $75,000 per block.
    - ghostly_s 9y ago
      What do you think they should have spent that on?
      - r27d 8y ago
        They treated it like a slush-fund with no accountability. All of the projects were late and gave a feeling of "a little paint cost how much?" Now they're spending more money to make better bike lanes they could have built in the first place. That's a MPLS thing though. They're always trying to reinvent the wheel instead of using the good infrastructure that's been tried other places.
  - ams6110 9y ago
    I don't understand biking in Chicago or Minneapolis. What do you do when it rains, or snows, which is like 2/3 of the year? And after that it's 95 degrees and 98% humidity. There are probably no more than 30 to 45 days a year where it's really decent biking weather.
- lev99 9y ago
  For most trips in Seattle more than half a mile and less than 5 miles in distance biking is the fastest way to travel. It stays competitive for east-west travel and places without mandatory parking minimums for longer distances.
bnjms 9y ago
There are a lot of cities with older areas which have gentrified into concert/eating/drinking-hang-out hubs. These areas weren't planned so they may be too spread out for foot traffic and adding bikes may increase travel in the area. People aren't about to bring their own bikes but if they're already there why not use them. And if the bike sharing startups prove to cities that people are willing to ride bikes cities, especially those with universities, may begin planning to have dedicated bike lanes. As drivers learn to look for bicyclists it will become safer and easier politically to plan for bicyclists. I'm all for it.
clairity 9y ago
los angeles is perfect for bike transport. it's sunny and doesn't get too hot or too cold most of the year (in the LA basin proper, the san fernando and inland valleys are a different story). the city government is pro bike path and installing more bike lanes every day. biking is faster during the 6 hours of rush hour a day. most amenities are within 2-3 miles (~15 minutes) of where you live. you can take your bike on buses and trains for the daily commute. the biggest challenge is bike security (not getting it stolen). bike racks and locks are a poor solution if unattended. if we could put bike racks right in front of the gate attendant booths that most public parking garages have, it would be a much better deterrent to theft. and for residential buildings, you could have lockers or a locked bike storage room (possibly with security cameras too).
- alangibson 9y ago
  I think this is the first time I've ever heard someone make an argument for LA as a bikable city. Very interesting indeed.
- bogomipz 9y ago
  >"los angeles is perfect for bike transport." Except that LA is a sprawl and almost nothing is close together. Maybe if you live at the beach its nice.
  - k_sh 9y ago
    True, but generally folks live within 5 miles of 90% of the places they go. Also, a bicycle can serve as a last-mile connector to the transit system - imagine someone who lives at Wilshire and La Brea but works in West Hollywood, and would like to take the Red Line, but doesn't want to lose an hour to walking.
    - ghostly_s 9y ago
      > True, but generally folks live within 5 miles of 90% of the places they go. Isn't LA like, the single place on earth where this is least true?
prolikewhoa 9y ago
Seattle seems like it's doing well with Ofo, Limebike, and Spin however it will never be a replacement for a car, and they're 40-70lb bikes that can't make it up Seattle's hills which makes them kind of useless outside of downtown. They are used often and I see people riding them all day down by the waterfront, especially in the late spring/summer. I unfortunately don't see them being any kind of major replacement for anything in Seattle anytime soon unless the Mayor actually puts high tolls on downtown exits -- especially since we have fairly good public transit.
- adjohn 9y ago
  Limebike now has electric assist bikes[1] scattered throughout Seattle which makes climbing those hills a breeze. [1] - http://www.limebike.com/electric-assist-bike http://www.limebike.com/electric-assist-bike
  - prolikewhoa 9y ago
    I haven't tried the Lime e-bikes yet, but I'm definitely interested because I see them all around my workplace now. Have you tried and confirmed you can make it up the hill with little to no issues?
    - lev99 9y ago
      I've watched people go up the hills on e-bikes. It looks easy enough.
- mulmen 8y ago
  Are any of them actually making money? We had Pronto too but it was hopeless as a business.
patorjk 9y ago
I'll throw Baltimore's name out there. They even have a Bike Share program (https://www.bmorebikeshare.com/ https://www.bmorebikeshare.com/), which is, interestingly enough, sponsored by Lyft.
andechs 9y ago
I live in Toronto - a bike is ALWAYS the fastest way to get anywhere in the city under about 5km (although it's pretty close). Traffic is pretty bad at core times and the hassle of parking adds quite a bit of time at each end.
joncrane 8y ago
City bikes are huge in Washington, DC. I think there are now four brands of bike shares in the city. It's also a great fit because traffic SUUUUCKS and there are a lot of healthy people who buy into the concept.
unexpected 8y ago
This seems to be a little bit of coastal elitism. Do you know what the largest market is right now for Bike Share? It's....Dallas! We have over 20,000 bikes in the city now. http://www.dallasobserver.com/news/dallas-bike-share-regulations-to-wait-until-the-fall-10414712 http://www.dallasobserver.com/news/dallas-bike-share-regulat...

electricEmu 9y ago

Seattle? Portland? Minneapolis/St. Paul? You might consider bicycling while you travel more. In Seattle alone, OFO, LimeBike, and Spin are all competing. American bicycle infrastructure is behind, but it exists. I don't own a car. I get around those cities on bike without issue. It's as fast or faster than a car in many cases and I'm peddling the old fashioned way (with legs).

eckmLJE 9y ago
Washington, DC is a big bike commuting city. Jump bikes are everywhere here.
s5fs 9y ago
Regarding Seattle and Portland, while it's true there are bike share programs, I don't see them used very often. The few who are using the bikes are either tourists (minority) or the homeless on stolen bikes. Additionally, just about half the limebikes that I see are abandoned under bridges or broken and unusable. Portland itself is a very bikeable city and a lot of time/energy is spent to improve and grow this infrastructure. Traffic is getting to the point where cycling is faster for inner-city trips, but as I live outside of the city it's a non-starter because public transportation from my end of town is severely limited. Seattle doesn't seem nearly as bike friendly, and while it's certainly faster to bike or walk during rush hour, it doesn't seem nearly as safe as Portland. I certainly have no interest in cycling in Seattle, driving is bad enough.
- prolikewhoa 9y ago
  I rode up Capitol Hill at 4:30PM every day last spring/summer, took me 10-15 minutes to get home from 2nd & Seneca and never had any safety issues. Drivers in Seattle are fairly aware of their surroundings with everyone walking randomly at all times and the city is adding new bike lanes often. Going up the hill on a Lime, Spin, or Ofo...no way -- you see those at the bottom of every hill.
  - codereflection 9y ago
    I'm in Seattle as well, I have to disagree. Drivers here are mostly clueless. I know many who bike or ride motorcycles, and they have many stories to tell about the cluelessness of Seattle drivers. It's a dangerous city to ride a bike.
    - prolikewhoa 9y ago
      I would argue it's fairly safe, especially comparing to rural areas. I now live south a few miles outside of the normal Seattle walking/biking and I've already experienced a few near-death situations, but didn't have any problems in my two years downtown. This is just a personal anecdote, but I still do feel people driving Seattle downtown & on the hill are fairly aware of bikers and people walking at any time they want.
    - lev99 9y ago
      Every biker in every North American city has stories about clueless drivers and close encounters, if not full impacts. Seattle is probably in the top 5 cities for driver awareness, but it has room for improvement.
- seanmcdirmid 8y ago
  If you live on the Burke Gilman trail, biking in Seattle can be pretty good. And they even have a bike lane over 520 now for those hardcore Microsoft bike commuters.
phil21 9y ago
Minneapolis? As someone who commuted via bike "before it was cool" in Minneapolis I want to ask what you're smoking :) The density simply isn't there, and the infrastructure is pretty horrible aside from some exceedingly small areas of the city proper, and of course the amazing bike paths (which typically are not useful for anything other than leisure). If that's what you consider a high bar for "bike infrastructure" in the US, I think the situation is pretty dire. I moved to Chicago largely due to transit-related reasons, and the bike commute here isn't exactly stellar - but it's at least night and day compared to the average suburban-oriented city in the US. That said, spending significant time in the Netherlands may have raised the bar too far for me to really think of any US bike infrastructure as being much more than an afterthought at best.
- r27d 9y ago
  Not sure who you are but I bet we were friends. Left MPLS for SF. MPLS is "the best city" for nearly anything if you ask a local. Too bad they wasted the Non-Motorized Transportation Pilot $20M on shitty latex paint bike lanes at $75,000 per block.
  - ghostly_s 9y ago
    What do you think they should have spent that on?
    - r27d 8y ago
      They treated it like a slush-fund with no accountability. All of the projects were late and gave a feeling of "a little paint cost how much?" Now they're spending more money to make better bike lanes they could have built in the first place. That's a MPLS thing though. They're always trying to reinvent the wheel instead of using the good infrastructure that's been tried other places.
- ams6110 9y ago
  I don't understand biking in Chicago or Minneapolis. What do you do when it rains, or snows, which is like 2/3 of the year? And after that it's 95 degrees and 98% humidity. There are probably no more than 30 to 45 days a year where it's really decent biking weather.
lev99 9y ago
For most trips in Seattle more than half a mile and less than 5 miles in distance biking is the fastest way to travel. It stays competitive for east-west travel and places without mandatory parking minimums for longer distances.

bnjms 9y ago

There are a lot of cities with older areas which have gentrified into concert/eating/drinking-hang-out hubs. These areas weren't planned so they may be too spread out for foot traffic and adding bikes may increase travel in the area. People aren't about to bring their own bikes but if they're already there why not use them. And if the bike sharing startups prove to cities that people are willing to ride bikes cities, especially those with universities, may begin planning to have dedicated bike lanes. As drivers learn to look for bicyclists it will become safer and easier politically to plan for bicyclists. I'm all for it.

clairity 9y ago

los angeles is perfect for bike transport. it's sunny and doesn't get too hot or too cold most of the year (in the LA basin proper, the san fernando and inland valleys are a different story). the city government is pro bike path and installing more bike lanes every day. biking is faster during the 6 hours of rush hour a day. most amenities are within 2-3 miles (~15 minutes) of where you live. you can take your bike on buses and trains for the daily commute. the biggest challenge is bike security (not getting it stolen). bike racks and locks are a poor solution if unattended. if we could put bike racks right in front of the gate attendant booths that most public parking garages have, it would be a much better deterrent to theft. and for residential buildings, you could have lockers or a locked bike storage room (possibly with security cameras too).

alangibson 9y ago
I think this is the first time I've ever heard someone make an argument for LA as a bikable city. Very interesting indeed.
bogomipz 9y ago
>"los angeles is perfect for bike transport." Except that LA is a sprawl and almost nothing is close together. Maybe if you live at the beach its nice.
- k_sh 9y ago
  True, but generally folks live within 5 miles of 90% of the places they go. Also, a bicycle can serve as a last-mile connector to the transit system - imagine someone who lives at Wilshire and La Brea but works in West Hollywood, and would like to take the Red Line, but doesn't want to lose an hour to walking.
  - ghostly_s 9y ago
    > True, but generally folks live within 5 miles of 90% of the places they go. Isn't LA like, the single place on earth where this is least true?

prolikewhoa 9y ago

Seattle seems like it's doing well with Ofo, Limebike, and Spin however it will never be a replacement for a car, and they're 40-70lb bikes that can't make it up Seattle's hills which makes them kind of useless outside of downtown. They are used often and I see people riding them all day down by the waterfront, especially in the late spring/summer. I unfortunately don't see them being any kind of major replacement for anything in Seattle anytime soon unless the Mayor actually puts high tolls on downtown exits -- especially since we have fairly good public transit.

adjohn 9y ago
Limebike now has electric assist bikes[1] scattered throughout Seattle which makes climbing those hills a breeze. [1] - http://www.limebike.com/electric-assist-bike http://www.limebike.com/electric-assist-bike
- prolikewhoa 9y ago
  I haven't tried the Lime e-bikes yet, but I'm definitely interested because I see them all around my workplace now. Have you tried and confirmed you can make it up the hill with little to no issues?
  - lev99 9y ago
    I've watched people go up the hills on e-bikes. It looks easy enough.
mulmen 8y ago
Are any of them actually making money? We had Pronto too but it was hopeless as a business.

patorjk 9y ago

I'll throw Baltimore's name out there. They even have a Bike Share program (https://www.bmorebikeshare.com/ https://www.bmorebikeshare.com/), which is, interestingly enough, sponsored by Lyft.

andechs 9y ago

I live in Toronto - a bike is ALWAYS the fastest way to get anywhere in the city under about 5km (although it's pretty close). Traffic is pretty bad at core times and the hassle of parking adds quite a bit of time at each end.

joncrane 8y ago

City bikes are huge in Washington, DC. I think there are now four brands of bike shares in the city. It's also a great fit because traffic SUUUUCKS and there are a lot of healthy people who buy into the concept.

unexpected 8y ago

This seems to be a little bit of coastal elitism. Do you know what the largest market is right now for Bike Share? It's....Dallas! We have over 20,000 bikes in the city now. http://www.dallasobserver.com/news/dallas-bike-share-regulations-to-wait-until-the-fall-10414712 http://www.dallasobserver.com/news/dallas-bike-share-regulat...