7 ms·

>it's lack of protected bike lanes (or other "safe" routes), and lack of cultural acceptance of biking. In my opinion, it's because most people live too far aw

>it's lack of protected bike lanes (or other "safe" routes), and lack of cultural acceptance of biking. In my opinion, it's because most people live too far away from the places they need to go in order to bike there. I wouldn't want to ride a bike 20 miles a day, regardless of bike lanes or bike parking.

runarberg 7y ago
There are buses, trains, etc. That can take you most of the way. It is super handy to be able to bike to a well served direct bus route, take the bike on the bus, and bike to the destination without having to have to change from/to an underserved indirect lane.
- vonmoltke 7y ago
  > take the bike on the bus You make that sound so simple. There's no way I could bring a bike on the bus or train I use to get to work.
  - Johnny555 7y ago
    Buses in my community have bike racks on the outside, light-rail trains have racks inside the trains. But if yours don't, another option would be a folding bike. Which apparently works even on crowded Japanese trains: https://hokkaidowilds.org/traveling-with-a-tern-folding-bike-on-the-train-in-japan https://hokkaidowilds.org/traveling-with-a-tern-folding-bike...
  - jakecopp 7y ago
    Or just buy a $50 bike second hand and park it at the end of the bus route!
    - vonmoltke 7y ago
      That's fine, but that's not the point the OP was making and doesn't do anything about the last mile problem on the other end.
      - jakecopp 7y ago
        I'm posing having two bikes (one a cheapo one) as a solution to not being able to take your bike on the bus/train - solving the the first AND last mile problem.
    - wool_gather 7y ago
      A cheapo bike is not likely to be something that you want to use (and rely on) for your daily commute, though.
      - jakecopp 7y ago
        Fair point. Though if the "last mile" commute from the bus stop/train station isn't too far, and in a relatively urban area, you can get an Uber trip in the worst case scenario of the bike breaking and taking the bike to a repair shop the next day. It will likely still be more cost effective than driving all the time because you are unwilling/unable to take a bike on the bus/train.
  - Doctor_Fegg 7y ago
    Buy a Brompton.
  - runarberg 7y ago
    That is a solved problem. The only reason you can’t bring your bike on the bus/train is because of a policy that prevents your local transit system from investing in the necessary equipment. Why are they enacting this policy I don’t know. But I think it has to do with the larger problem of city transportation policies that generally cater only to private car users at the expense of every other forms of transportation. So perhaps you should be angry at your local policy makers from preventing you from being able to bike part of your commute.
    - bobthepanda 7y ago
      The bike rack on the bus is helpful but they have limited capacity. A local bus route where I used to live would often pass up cyclists because the rack in front was already full.
    - vonmoltke 7y ago
      > a policy that prevents your local transit system from investing in the necessary equipment What policy? Please show me an example of such a thing.
  - Lio 7y ago
    Why not? A fold up https://us.brompton.com/ https://us.brompton.com/ is a very good bike. They make an e-bike version if you’re not a strong cyclist and if you put it in a bag, then it’s just a bag shaped thing you are taking with you.
    - vonmoltke 7y ago
      I'm familiar with those, and I have considered it. I could not fit that in the bus I would use (I can barely fit my backpack). The train is a dicey proposition; the car config I am on this morning barely has enough space for people plus a small-ish bag. I'd be taking up a second seat if I had a folding bike. Other consists have better luggage space, though even they are optimized for moving the maximum number of people possible.
wutbrodo 7y ago
Public transit handles long distances rather neatly, but there's a chicken-and-egg issue where (support for) its development is in part stymied by the last-mile problem: covering 20 miles rapidly isn't useful if you have no good options for the last 2. Biking fills a very important slot in a healthy transit infrastructure. Unfortunately, we're pretty horrible as a society at reasoning about issues that involve more than one step, exacerbated by the fact that the pro-car bloc is probably the single most selfish-or-irrational voting bloc that I can think of, in terms of scale, intransigence, and magnitude of damage done.
- rayiner 7y ago
  The car bloc is 95% of the population and is completely rational. It makes no sense to take entire lanes out of service for the tiny minority of people who can integrate biking into their daily commute. And for most people in the US, public transit is not an option because you have a last mile problem at both the starting point and ending point. Consider, as an ironic example, the new development around DC’s New Carrolton metro station, where WMATA, DC’s subway operator, will have a major office. Although it is a metro stop, it’s not practically commutable by metro. Almost all of the housing in the area is outside walking distance from the station, and it would make no sense to live in the city (where the rent is very expensive and the schools are bad) and take metro when you could live in the surrounding suburbs and drive 15 minutes to work instead. This is a problem endemic to the US—because we put large employment centers in the suburbs (like Silicon Valley) we end up with suburb-suburb commutes with last mile problems at both ends. It kills transit and biking as viable options. Public transit is viable when your cities look like New York or Chicago. You put a little train station in a walkable/bikeable suburb, and then put all the jobs downtown. Most post-WWII cities don’t look anything like that. In those cities, it’s entirely rational to cater primarily to cars, because most people couldn’t use public transit and biking even if they wanted to.
  - AceyMan 7y ago
    >It makes no sense to take entire lanes out of service for the tiny minority of people who can integrate biking into their daily commute. Cart meet horse. I believe we have to "build it and they will come." It's a 'tiny minority' (well, minority) due largely to lack of infrastructure (bike lanes, sharrowed roads with modest speed limits, &c.). Then, you hit upon the other issue... >And for most people in the US, public transit is not an option because you have a last mile problem at both the starting point and ending point. America needs more transit everywhere, and maybe more importantly, we need to dissolve the notion that mass transit is not just how low-income people solve transportation. I love meeting New Yorkers and Chicagoans and their ilk because they are already on board with transit, they just don't continue use in newCity because the coverage is inadequate. Playing devil's advocate for the car culture we do face the fact that the USA is huge and our cities have sprawled as a result. This makes cycling end to end take way more effort and often dictates that there be some powered locomotion to cover the bulk of the distance. And that's where transport fits perfectly. Tl;dr. There's a symbiosis that needs to happen between bikes and transit to achieve critical mass and this wider adoption in urban centers. If we find strategies that get us to that tipping point then I think wider change is possible. (me: currently commute by bike-bus-bike and previously did bike only (26 miles/day. I'll admit, the LA climate is a big help with this, no doubt.)
adwww 7y ago
20 miles is very do-able on an electric bike. Decent models with 100 mile ranges are now around the $1,800 mark. Also, people live far from where they want to go because they (and city officials) have planned their lives around easy access to a car. You might think twice about accepting a future job 40 miles away if fuel prices doubled, or a new toll was constructed along that route.

runarberg 7y ago

There are buses, trains, etc. That can take you most of the way. It is super handy to be able to bike to a well served direct bus route, take the bike on the bus, and bike to the destination without having to have to change from/to an underserved indirect lane.

vonmoltke 7y ago
> take the bike on the bus You make that sound so simple. There's no way I could bring a bike on the bus or train I use to get to work.
- Johnny555 7y ago
  Buses in my community have bike racks on the outside, light-rail trains have racks inside the trains. But if yours don't, another option would be a folding bike. Which apparently works even on crowded Japanese trains: https://hokkaidowilds.org/traveling-with-a-tern-folding-bike-on-the-train-in-japan https://hokkaidowilds.org/traveling-with-a-tern-folding-bike...
- jakecopp 7y ago
  Or just buy a $50 bike second hand and park it at the end of the bus route!
  - vonmoltke 7y ago
    That's fine, but that's not the point the OP was making and doesn't do anything about the last mile problem on the other end.
    - jakecopp 7y ago
      I'm posing having two bikes (one a cheapo one) as a solution to not being able to take your bike on the bus/train - solving the the first AND last mile problem.
  - wool_gather 7y ago
    A cheapo bike is not likely to be something that you want to use (and rely on) for your daily commute, though.
    - jakecopp 7y ago
      Fair point. Though if the "last mile" commute from the bus stop/train station isn't too far, and in a relatively urban area, you can get an Uber trip in the worst case scenario of the bike breaking and taking the bike to a repair shop the next day. It will likely still be more cost effective than driving all the time because you are unwilling/unable to take a bike on the bus/train.
- Doctor_Fegg 7y ago
  Buy a Brompton.
- runarberg 7y ago
  That is a solved problem. The only reason you can’t bring your bike on the bus/train is because of a policy that prevents your local transit system from investing in the necessary equipment. Why are they enacting this policy I don’t know. But I think it has to do with the larger problem of city transportation policies that generally cater only to private car users at the expense of every other forms of transportation. So perhaps you should be angry at your local policy makers from preventing you from being able to bike part of your commute.
  - bobthepanda 7y ago
    The bike rack on the bus is helpful but they have limited capacity. A local bus route where I used to live would often pass up cyclists because the rack in front was already full.
  - vonmoltke 7y ago
    > a policy that prevents your local transit system from investing in the necessary equipment What policy? Please show me an example of such a thing.
- Lio 7y ago
  Why not? A fold up https://us.brompton.com/ https://us.brompton.com/ is a very good bike. They make an e-bike version if you’re not a strong cyclist and if you put it in a bag, then it’s just a bag shaped thing you are taking with you.
  - vonmoltke 7y ago
    I'm familiar with those, and I have considered it. I could not fit that in the bus I would use (I can barely fit my backpack). The train is a dicey proposition; the car config I am on this morning barely has enough space for people plus a small-ish bag. I'd be taking up a second seat if I had a folding bike. Other consists have better luggage space, though even they are optimized for moving the maximum number of people possible.

wutbrodo 7y ago

Public transit handles long distances rather neatly, but there's a chicken-and-egg issue where (support for) its development is in part stymied by the last-mile problem: covering 20 miles rapidly isn't useful if you have no good options for the last 2. Biking fills a very important slot in a healthy transit infrastructure. Unfortunately, we're pretty horrible as a society at reasoning about issues that involve more than one step, exacerbated by the fact that the pro-car bloc is probably the single most selfish-or-irrational voting bloc that I can think of, in terms of scale, intransigence, and magnitude of damage done.

rayiner 7y ago
The car bloc is 95% of the population and is completely rational. It makes no sense to take entire lanes out of service for the tiny minority of people who can integrate biking into their daily commute. And for most people in the US, public transit is not an option because you have a last mile problem at both the starting point and ending point. Consider, as an ironic example, the new development around DC’s New Carrolton metro station, where WMATA, DC’s subway operator, will have a major office. Although it is a metro stop, it’s not practically commutable by metro. Almost all of the housing in the area is outside walking distance from the station, and it would make no sense to live in the city (where the rent is very expensive and the schools are bad) and take metro when you could live in the surrounding suburbs and drive 15 minutes to work instead. This is a problem endemic to the US—because we put large employment centers in the suburbs (like Silicon Valley) we end up with suburb-suburb commutes with last mile problems at both ends. It kills transit and biking as viable options. Public transit is viable when your cities look like New York or Chicago. You put a little train station in a walkable/bikeable suburb, and then put all the jobs downtown. Most post-WWII cities don’t look anything like that. In those cities, it’s entirely rational to cater primarily to cars, because most people couldn’t use public transit and biking even if they wanted to.
- AceyMan 7y ago
  >It makes no sense to take entire lanes out of service for the tiny minority of people who can integrate biking into their daily commute. Cart meet horse. I believe we have to "build it and they will come." It's a 'tiny minority' (well, minority) due largely to lack of infrastructure (bike lanes, sharrowed roads with modest speed limits, &c.). Then, you hit upon the other issue... >And for most people in the US, public transit is not an option because you have a last mile problem at both the starting point and ending point. America needs more transit everywhere, and maybe more importantly, we need to dissolve the notion that mass transit is not just how low-income people solve transportation. I love meeting New Yorkers and Chicagoans and their ilk because they are already on board with transit, they just don't continue use in newCity because the coverage is inadequate. Playing devil's advocate for the car culture we do face the fact that the USA is huge and our cities have sprawled as a result. This makes cycling end to end take way more effort and often dictates that there be some powered locomotion to cover the bulk of the distance. And that's where transport fits perfectly. Tl;dr. There's a symbiosis that needs to happen between bikes and transit to achieve critical mass and this wider adoption in urban centers. If we find strategies that get us to that tipping point then I think wider change is possible. (me: currently commute by bike-bus-bike and previously did bike only (26 miles/day. I'll admit, the LA climate is a big help with this, no doubt.)

adwww 7y ago

20 miles is very do-able on an electric bike. Decent models with 100 mile ranges are now around the $1,800 mark. Also, people live far from where they want to go because they (and city officials) have planned their lives around easy access to a car. You might think twice about accepting a future job 40 miles away if fuel prices doubled, or a new toll was constructed along that route.