4 ms·

I’m pretty sure it went something like “so where are we allowed to pickup and drop off riders” and the city couldn’t answer. The problem isn’t really enforcemen

I’m pretty sure it went something like “so where are we allowed to pickup and drop off riders” and the city couldn’t answer. The problem isn’t really enforcement, the problem is that there are simply no alternatives, and the city shies away from enforcement because they know that. If they started enforcing the rules strictly, people would again ask questions that they aren’t prepared to answer. If you compare that to a country like the Netherlands, which is not only strict, but provides “solutions” so breaking the law isn’t necessary in the first place (they use explicit drop off and pickup locations instead of American chaos).

californical 6mo ago
Yes, in sane countries the rules are attempted to be defined in a fair way, and you can follow them. Not perfectly of course, but with that goal. Like the Netherlands, it is (A) not possible to park in bike paths without going intentionally out of your way, and (B) there are reasonable alternatives, such as specific “loading zones” for passengers on nearly every block, on major roads. On minor neighborhood roads, you can just block the road for a few seconds and it doesn’t matter The US is happy creating laws for everything that are impossible to follow, but only selectively enforced. It makes it so everyone always must break the law to exist in society, but will only face repercussions at the discretion of a police officer. It means that there are effectively no laws, because everyone has slightly different definitions of when something is “right” or not, and the police only enforce the most egregious cases, but they can also target you specifically for some other reason (discrimination, bias, etc) with no repercussions, since you were breaking the law after all.
- zdragnar 6mo ago
  It's because the bike lanes are great PR but bad for votes, at least in the short term. City leaders love the greenwashing effect, but in the short term the percentage of people actually biking everywhere is very low, so it doesn't make sense for them to spend a ton of time and money to do it right. In a few years they'll get to put together a committee to discuss "learnings" and maybe they'll fix it if there are enough complaints, or maybe they'll just spend their time elsewhere as usual.
  - seanmcdirmid 6mo ago
    I would bike more if the infrastructure was better and police aggressively dealt with our local bike theft problem (Seattle), as it stands it doesn’t make much sense to invest in it, not like when I was a college student. America suffers from a severe execution problem in the last couple of decades. We just can’t implement and follow through with real solutions anymore.
  - rsynnott 6mo ago
    Slightly long-term thinking is required. Every year, the city I live in, Dublin, does a survey where people crossing the canals (rough proxy for entering/exiting the city centre) are counted for a day. Twenty years ago, 50% of crossings were by public transport, 37% by car, 2% by bike (most of the remainder was talking). In 2024 (the last year for which figures are available; for whatever reason publishing this data takes _ages_), 58% was by public transport, 25% by car, 6% by bike. Cycling's definitely on the rise, and congestion would be worse without it, but it does take time for people to change their habits.
- jrowen 6mo ago
  The US is happy creating laws for everything that are impossible to follow, but only selectively enforced. Do you consider this insane? Your assertions that "everyone always must break the law" and "there are effectively no laws" seem a bit extreme. Ultimately, with any messy human affair, there is always going to be discretion involved, and I don't think implicitly codifying that is a bad thing. It does tend to work by and large. I've personally had much worse experiences with officials following the letter of the law than with them using discretion, but I admit I am not in any class that is often discriminated against.
spankalee 6mo ago
Blocking the right car lane for a drop off is perfectly legal outside of No Stopping zones. This is how taxis have always worked. It's just that other drivers get pissed off if you block a car lane when there's a bike lane next to it. That needs to be trained away by enforcing the rules.
- SR2Z 6mo ago
  That needs to be trained away by physically separating bike lanes from car lanes. Drivers (at least human ones) cannot safely coexist with cyclists or pedestrians unless there are actual physical obstacles between moving traffic and everyone else.
  - deleted 6mo ago
    [deleted]
- saelthavron 6mo ago
  Wouldn't it be safer for the bikers and people exiting on the bike lane side of the car if the bike lane was blocked?
  - gpm 6mo ago
    No. Cars entering the bike lane is dangerous. Bicycles being encouraged to enter the car lane to avoid the car illegally blocking it is dangerous. The car stopping in car lane, far enough from the bike lane that its doors won't enter it, and letting the passengers out into the road, is by far the safest. Yes, that means now-pedestrians end up crossing the bike lane. That's a lot better than a car. They move slower, and more predictably, while simultaneously not blocking it for long enough that anyone is motivated to deke (my spellchecker doesn't like that? Is that a word outside Canada?) out into traffic.
    - cwillu 6mo ago
      It's a canadian term from hockey, derived from decoy. I'm mildly-but-darkly amused at the notion of a cyclist needing to fake out a car trying to check them though :)
dualvariable 6mo ago
One question the city probably can't answer is what disabled persons in the taxi are supposed to do. If you strictly enforce bike lanes the result is probably the rider needing to walk a few blocks. If the rider is disabled, that could actually be a huge burden. Since I've got an 80+ year old disabled parent with a walker this is an issue for me that does compete pretty aggressively with my support for bikes.
- II2II 6mo ago
  First of all, the walk would rarely be more than half a block. Bike lanes go down a small number of streets, so one can usually unload on an intersecting street. Not ideal, but ... ... bike lanes are not the only thing that creates this issue. Any road that lacks parking, with or without bike lanes, will have the same problem. Even when there is parking, all of the parking spots may be occupied. In both cases, people may have to walk a few blocks. While they may be grouchy about the lack of (sufficient) parking, you don't see many people blaming motorists for placing a burden on the elderly. Finally, it is always possible to make accommodations. Having a carve-out for loading and unloading taxis will do far more for safety of everybody than letting people stop anywhere in bike lanes. It is also possible to have exceptions for people with disabilities, as long as non-disabled people don't abuse it.
- petre 6mo ago
  Designated drop off points with disabled person priority is the answer. How do you dropp off a disabled person in a lane with clogged street side paking? Shouldn't you be against street side parking by the same logic?
  - seanmcdirmid 6mo ago
    Would that be like LA where all the on street parking near UCLA is taken up by Luxury vehicles with handicapped placards? Drop off/pickup points are the answer, disabled drop off/pickup might be redundant but could make sense in certain high capacity situations.
  - dualvariable 6mo ago
JumpCrisscross 6mo ago
> The problem isn’t really enforcement The problem is street-side parking.
- kelnos 6mo ago
  Street side parking is fine. You can move the parking out a few feet and put the bike lane between the ordering and curb. Works well where I've seen it.
  - JumpCrisscross 6mo ago
    > Street side parking is fine It’s a massive subsidy that takes up space. If you have the space to move it and still permit e.g. delivery trucks from blocking the road, great. Many cities don’t have that space and yet cede it to parking.
    - stonogo 6mo ago
      Nothing's stopping you from charging for street parking. If it's a subsidy, that's a political decision, not an inherent flaw in street parking.
      - seanmcdirmid 6mo ago
        Charging for street parking is a good step, but American neighborhoods still don’t have great transit and most people still have cars even if they are living in a house/apartment without parking. We aren’t like Japan where car owners have to prove that they have ample parking for their cars.
        amanaplanacanal 6mo ago
        I would guess that there are very few houses and apartments without parking in the US.
        6mo ago

californical 6mo ago

Yes, in sane countries the rules are attempted to be defined in a fair way, and you can follow them. Not perfectly of course, but with that goal. Like the Netherlands, it is (A) not possible to park in bike paths without going intentionally out of your way, and (B) there are reasonable alternatives, such as specific “loading zones” for passengers on nearly every block, on major roads. On minor neighborhood roads, you can just block the road for a few seconds and it doesn’t matter The US is happy creating laws for everything that are impossible to follow, but only selectively enforced. It makes it so everyone always must break the law to exist in society, but will only face repercussions at the discretion of a police officer. It means that there are effectively no laws, because everyone has slightly different definitions of when something is “right” or not, and the police only enforce the most egregious cases, but they can also target you specifically for some other reason (discrimination, bias, etc) with no repercussions, since you were breaking the law after all.

zdragnar 6mo ago
It's because the bike lanes are great PR but bad for votes, at least in the short term. City leaders love the greenwashing effect, but in the short term the percentage of people actually biking everywhere is very low, so it doesn't make sense for them to spend a ton of time and money to do it right. In a few years they'll get to put together a committee to discuss "learnings" and maybe they'll fix it if there are enough complaints, or maybe they'll just spend their time elsewhere as usual.
- seanmcdirmid 6mo ago
  I would bike more if the infrastructure was better and police aggressively dealt with our local bike theft problem (Seattle), as it stands it doesn’t make much sense to invest in it, not like when I was a college student. America suffers from a severe execution problem in the last couple of decades. We just can’t implement and follow through with real solutions anymore.
- rsynnott 6mo ago
  Slightly long-term thinking is required. Every year, the city I live in, Dublin, does a survey where people crossing the canals (rough proxy for entering/exiting the city centre) are counted for a day. Twenty years ago, 50% of crossings were by public transport, 37% by car, 2% by bike (most of the remainder was talking). In 2024 (the last year for which figures are available; for whatever reason publishing this data takes _ages_), 58% was by public transport, 25% by car, 6% by bike. Cycling's definitely on the rise, and congestion would be worse without it, but it does take time for people to change their habits.
jrowen 6mo ago
The US is happy creating laws for everything that are impossible to follow, but only selectively enforced. Do you consider this insane? Your assertions that "everyone always must break the law" and "there are effectively no laws" seem a bit extreme. Ultimately, with any messy human affair, there is always going to be discretion involved, and I don't think implicitly codifying that is a bad thing. It does tend to work by and large. I've personally had much worse experiences with officials following the letter of the law than with them using discretion, but I admit I am not in any class that is often discriminated against.

spankalee 6mo ago

Blocking the right car lane for a drop off is perfectly legal outside of No Stopping zones. This is how taxis have always worked. It's just that other drivers get pissed off if you block a car lane when there's a bike lane next to it. That needs to be trained away by enforcing the rules.

SR2Z 6mo ago
That needs to be trained away by physically separating bike lanes from car lanes. Drivers (at least human ones) cannot safely coexist with cyclists or pedestrians unless there are actual physical obstacles between moving traffic and everyone else.
- deleted 6mo ago
  [deleted]
saelthavron 6mo ago
Wouldn't it be safer for the bikers and people exiting on the bike lane side of the car if the bike lane was blocked?
- gpm 6mo ago
  No. Cars entering the bike lane is dangerous. Bicycles being encouraged to enter the car lane to avoid the car illegally blocking it is dangerous. The car stopping in car lane, far enough from the bike lane that its doors won't enter it, and letting the passengers out into the road, is by far the safest. Yes, that means now-pedestrians end up crossing the bike lane. That's a lot better than a car. They move slower, and more predictably, while simultaneously not blocking it for long enough that anyone is motivated to deke (my spellchecker doesn't like that? Is that a word outside Canada?) out into traffic.
  - cwillu 6mo ago
    It's a canadian term from hockey, derived from decoy. I'm mildly-but-darkly amused at the notion of a cyclist needing to fake out a car trying to check them though :)

dualvariable 6mo ago

One question the city probably can't answer is what disabled persons in the taxi are supposed to do. If you strictly enforce bike lanes the result is probably the rider needing to walk a few blocks. If the rider is disabled, that could actually be a huge burden. Since I've got an 80+ year old disabled parent with a walker this is an issue for me that does compete pretty aggressively with my support for bikes.

II2II 6mo ago
First of all, the walk would rarely be more than half a block. Bike lanes go down a small number of streets, so one can usually unload on an intersecting street. Not ideal, but ... ... bike lanes are not the only thing that creates this issue. Any road that lacks parking, with or without bike lanes, will have the same problem. Even when there is parking, all of the parking spots may be occupied. In both cases, people may have to walk a few blocks. While they may be grouchy about the lack of (sufficient) parking, you don't see many people blaming motorists for placing a burden on the elderly. Finally, it is always possible to make accommodations. Having a carve-out for loading and unloading taxis will do far more for safety of everybody than letting people stop anywhere in bike lanes. It is also possible to have exceptions for people with disabilities, as long as non-disabled people don't abuse it.
petre 6mo ago
Designated drop off points with disabled person priority is the answer. How do you dropp off a disabled person in a lane with clogged street side paking? Shouldn't you be against street side parking by the same logic?
- seanmcdirmid 6mo ago
  Would that be like LA where all the on street parking near UCLA is taken up by Luxury vehicles with handicapped placards? Drop off/pickup points are the answer, disabled drop off/pickup might be redundant but could make sense in certain high capacity situations.
- dualvariable 6mo ago

JumpCrisscross 6mo ago

> The problem isn’t really enforcement The problem is street-side parking.

kelnos 6mo ago
Street side parking is fine. You can move the parking out a few feet and put the bike lane between the ordering and curb. Works well where I've seen it.
- JumpCrisscross 6mo ago
  > Street side parking is fine It’s a massive subsidy that takes up space. If you have the space to move it and still permit e.g. delivery trucks from blocking the road, great. Many cities don’t have that space and yet cede it to parking.
  - stonogo 6mo ago
    Nothing's stopping you from charging for street parking. If it's a subsidy, that's a political decision, not an inherent flaw in street parking.
    - seanmcdirmid 6mo ago
      Charging for street parking is a good step, but American neighborhoods still don’t have great transit and most people still have cars even if they are living in a house/apartment without parking. We aren’t like Japan where car owners have to prove that they have ample parking for their cars.
      - amanaplanacanal 6mo ago
        I would guess that there are very few houses and apartments without parking in the US.
        6mo ago