Hacker News Reader

Comment by rrdharan | Hacker News Reader

I agree that they change traffic flow. But it is interesting there's an implicit car-prioritization bias in the behavior you're describing.

The delivery/service vehicles choose to block the bike lane instead of blocking a lane of traffic.

This gets complicated quickly once you factor in total impact and so on, but I just want to point out that a person on a bike doesn't necessarily deserve less priority than a solo driver, for example.

Plus there's the fact that blocking the bike lane is indeed illegal as noted by the other commenter. Although I sometimes think that we don't really know how bad it would be if all delivery drivers had to comply with all parking laws - maybe we'd all be starving in the nicely flowing streets due to a lack of food.

View on HN

A bicyclist can get past any inconveniently parked vehicle, with some effort.

Cars, OTOH, just have to stand there and wait, and it doesn't take many minuted for a major gridlock to form.

And that's why I think it's reasonable to block bike lanes over car lanes. Why you have to block anyone is maybe the more important, but much harder question.

> A bicyclist can get past any inconveniently parked vehicle, with some effort.

The whole point of bike lanes is that mixed traffic with bikes and cars is highly dangerous for bikes. Frequently blocked bike lanes that force cyclists to suddenly merge into car traffic defeats the point of having the lanes in the first place.

Not to mention, there's an implicit assumption on your part that we're universally talking about confident, healthy adult cyclists. Do you think it's cool to push pre-teen cyclists in traffic? What about grandma? A parent with kids on their bike?

If we just accept dangerous infrastructure and behavior, biking for transportation will always be an activity only for the tiny minority of people who are highly tolerant of physical danger.

> Do you think it's cool to push pre-teen cyclists in traffic?

When you try to choose the lesser evil, there are no "cool" options.

I think the real problem here is that SF streets are so overcrowded that basic delivery has to be done by blocking live traffic lanes.

I wonder where you live where drivers will just sit patiently behind a double parked vehicle rather than just swerving into the opposing lane to pass it?

There are few places in SF where a car can pass a vehicle that's half in the car lane and half in the bike lane where the car couldn't also pass if the illegally parked vehicle was completely in the car lane.

A bicycle has to veer into the car lane (dangerous) or go on the footpath (illegal and dangerous).

A car has to go from one lane to another lane.

Cyclist here. When a delivery/service/taxi/etc vehicle is parked in car lane right next to bike lane, I'm very uncomfortable when passing it.

I'm afraid to get doored. I'd be stuck in between car and raised sidewalk with nowhere to go. Whenever possible, I pass such vehicle using opposite (or 2nd) car lane.

Passengers/workers getting in/out vehicles or loading/unloading vehicles frequently stand on bike lane during process. Or put their stuff on bike lane. Which is totally fine by me, they do what they gotta do.

I'd rather have them parked in bike lane and pass it in car lane. IMO it's safer and less stressful both for them and me.

Almost like a question for democracy to decide as opposed to vigilante justice?

the dynamic between the bike riders and cars is pretty complicated and there is lots of bad behavior on both sides.

but i really feel for the delivery guys. if they park on the right they have angry bike riders screaming at them and shooting past them at high speed when they are trying to work. if they park in the middle of the street they have to somehow negotiate pallet jacks full of food across active traffic.

so sure, lets make it harder for single occupancy vehicles. they use the most resource and are arguably impossible to sustain going forward. but the bikes are directly in conflict with deliveries, contractors, busses, subway riders, and pedestrians. how do we deal with that?

Aren't delivery drivers and contractors also in conflict with buses? 80% of the problem of delivery parking could be resolved by removing car parking spaces and putting in dedicated loading zones.

I haven't seen a transit system yet where bikes are allowed to ride on the rails in underground tunnels, so I don't see how bikes are directly in conflict with subway riders?

How are bikes more in conflict with pedestrians than cars already are?

Yes, I think if the more militant of my fellow bicyclists could move past their calls to "enforce the illegal blocking of bike lanes at all costs!" we could actually have a reasonable discussion about traffic flow prioritization for cars vs bikes.

I don't know if everyone would necessarily be safer if vehicles who decide to stop did so by blocking a lane of auto traffic while leaving the bike lane clear. It would introduce a visibility issue which would prevent cyclists from seeing anyone walking in front of the stopped vehicle to and from the curb, for instance.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com