Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

dumberthenhelooks t1_jbhte75 wrote

The one on the upper east side is being paid for by chic fil a, bc of how much everyone hates the rows of bikes outside their location on 86th street. DoorDash and Uber should be renting the spaces tbh.

Ofc I still think they should have a space, but clearly no one wants it on their block. And the people who are ordering their lunch burrito from chipotle done exact go to community board meetings

194

sumgye t1_jbi07nv wrote

If Doordash/Uber/Grubhub want to do business in our city, we should charge them a fee. They charge us enough fees. Charge them a fee and put that towards these rest stops.

Edit: let me clarify, we do charge taxes, so do they. We should charge an additional fee for them. There is no way they will pass that extra cost down to the consumer. They won’t have the nerve.

103

Mrsrightnyc t1_jbi7nma wrote

Exactly - why can’t they rent a space for the people that make them money and offer them bathroom access and break spot.

50

marclande t1_jbighln wrote

The funny thing is DoorDash doesn’t actually make money, they reported a net income loss of over like a billion bucks, but people are stupid enough to still invest in them so I guess they could probably afford it

25

AnacharsisIV t1_jbk8jgt wrote

Because that would be an "employee perk" and these guys are explicitly not employees.

6

spoil_of_the_cities t1_jbi2mlj wrote

They pay a fee it's called tax

14

jewkidontheblock t1_jbi7pkk wrote

I take your point but the slew of unsafe e-bikes speeding down already busy avenues is a negative for everyone else that they should take responsibility for (separately from their taxes)

10

heiebdbwk877 t1_jbibdaf wrote

Agreed, NYC can amend tax law to capture this new externality no one predicted 30 years ago but oh the angry billionaires

7

AnacharsisIV t1_jbk8nb8 wrote

We pay for the NYPD with our taxes, if the ebikes are unsafe it's the NYPD's job to enforce traffic laws. Don't be mad at Uber, be mad at the cops

2

heystarkid t1_jbjktlq wrote

There’s no way they’ll pass the extra cost down to the consumer? That’s exactly what they’ll do. Uber makes users pay the congestion surcharge if you travel below 96th st.

10

CGNYC t1_jbjr17a wrote

These delivery services are not a necessity… if the cost of them go up to make the drivers job halfway decent while making it fair to the community in which these rest stops are, I have no problem with that. If paying delivery fees and service charges are not within your budget, pick up.

3

heystarkid t1_jbjswlv wrote

I agree! Just wanted to point out that it’s unrealistic to think that it wouldn’t be passed down to the consumers.

1

MobileJackfruit8 t1_jbkzwdu wrote

Yep. Of course they will. When VC money starts to run out and companies need to turn a profit the prices go up. Happened with ride share and will happen/is happening with food delivery

1

Linearts t1_jbl21gw wrote

>We should charge an additional fee for them. There is no way they will pass that extra cost down to the consumer. They won’t have the nerve.

This is complete nonsense. Of course they will pass extra costs onto customers. The only way that would not happen is if supply is completely inelastic (they cannot change how much food they deliver, for any amount of money) and/or demand is completely elastic (food sales would drop to 0% if any of the fee goes into the final price of delivered food).

5

Shreddersaurusrex t1_jboo6lu wrote

They’ll pass it on to the drivers by paying them less or just charge the customers more

1

Soap_ t1_jbiycwy wrote

Then they won't operate in your city, and you won't have delivery service. The margins are poor as it stands already.

−7

coldbruise t1_jbjfrgn wrote

There's no way in hell a delivery service would decide to not operate in NYC.

13

Soap_ t1_jbm6j40 wrote

Even with negative margins?

1

someliskguy t1_jbjn8ov wrote

I was so confused when I first walked past that location because it has a chick-fil-a logo on the door and I thought they’d opened some kind of mini store or something.

It’s a great thing though— it has among other things alleviated the delivery people from taking over the public space at 84th & 3rd and provides these folks with much needed bathrooms and a climate controlled space to rest.

15

StrngBrew t1_jbhu7ws wrote

Story does mention that the chik fil a one doesn’t allow e-bikes

12

dumberthenhelooks t1_jbhucnd wrote

no one wants the e-bikes in their actual building because of the fire hazard.

31

Defiant-Sentence-303 t1_jbjekf3 wrote

Putting NIMBYism aside, which is a huge problem on the UWS. One of the main issues here is how unsafe refurbished lithium ion batteries are. A recharging station that brings them all together, especially on the same circuit, is a good way to cause an explosion. I would be way more receptive if the batteries were regulated in some way.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/06/realestate/e-bikes-fires-danger.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

https://www.axios.com/2022/11/14/apartment-building-ban-e-bikes-battery-fire-micromobility-scooter

10

L0L303 t1_jblw1jr wrote

thats not how electricity works ...

4

Defiant-Sentence-303 t1_jblx6g7 wrote

It's not an issue with electricity it's an issue with the bikes being in close proximity to each other

1

UniWheel t1_jbn3gw4 wrote

>It's not an issue with electricity it's an issue with the bikes being in close proximity to each other

You could design to handle that in the sense of preventing one burning from putting adjacent ones in thermal runaway.

Of the places to charge these things, an outdoor location dedicated to that purpose would by far be the best, even if there are a bunch of them there.

1

atheros t1_jbleq0k wrote

> A recharging station that brings them all together, especially on the same circuit, is a good way to cause an explosion.

Did you just make this up?

Putting e-bikes together in one non-flammable place is safer than spreading them out into various places, some of which are flammable. Putting them on one circuit isn't particularly risky. If the bikes are each three feet apart, the probability that a fire will spread between them is low.

3

Defiant-Sentence-303 t1_jblfwap wrote

Did you read the articles I linked?

Lithium batteries, especially refurbished ones, can overheat and can cause fires/explosions especially when overcharged. What do you think will happen when one battery explodes when it's in proximity of a bunch of other batteries with the same issues? This is why newer buildings are moving towards fireproof bike rooms

−1

atheros t1_jblhdai wrote

I did.

I am well aware that they have fires and explode. Did my comment imply otherwise? It did not.

To answer your question, I think that if one e-bike-sized battery explodes three feet from other batteries then the fire has a very low probability of spreading directly to the other batteries. This is because the outside of these batteries are much less flammable than combustible substances like wood. I doubt that there is a single instance of one e-bike directly igniting another e-bike without the fire first spreading to the surrounding structure.

EDIT: I see that you edited your comment and added the sentence: "This is why newer buildings are moving towards fireproof bike rooms". You see that that contradicts the rest of your comment and supports mine, right?

6

No_Cap_3837 t1_jbi7x34 wrote

It's interesting to see how businesses like Chic Fil A are stepping in to address the issue of bike clutter in front of their stores, but it's unfortunate that it's come to this point. It's important for the city to find a solution that works for both delivery workers and local residents.

6

dumberthenhelooks t1_jbjivxz wrote

They are definitely not stepping in out of the goodness of their hearts. They are opening a second location that is about equidistant from where they put this pit stop. I’m also pretty sure that the number of complaints they’ve been getting means they have to do something to ease the congestion. The community will act at some point is they don’t

1

hollow-fox t1_jbjq87a wrote

It’s almost like we could convert two free parking spaces that serve two people for a hundred or so bikes. Why are they competing for sidewalk space?

3

dumberthenhelooks t1_jbjyrom wrote

I’m always happy to get rid of parking spaces, but the reason they congregate where they do is bc it’s an easy location for them to pick up deliveries and that’s the fault of the apps. So it would be a moving target at which point you’re giving a business free real estate. I would like the apps and the restaurants to pay for this inconvenience personally. I should note. I don’t use DoorDash or Uber eats and almost never seamless, I’d rather just call a local restaurant with its own delivery people and not a chain restaurant

0

hollow-fox t1_jbjzckd wrote

I stopped ordering door dash after VC stopped subsidizing it - maybe like 5 years ago haha. I just realized the solution was for me to call a restaurant for pickup and bike myself. Turns out it was quicker, cheaper, and plus side of exercise.

But yeah, in reality pedestrians suffer because the side walk is so much smaller than roads with parking for cars. I am all for eliminating all free parking and returning the space to bikes and pedestrians.

1