Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

UPS Tries Delivery Tricycles As Seattle's Traffic Doom Looms (wired.com)

Posted by msmash on from the how-about-that dept.

An anonymous reader shares a report: Pushing the cargo bike across a rain-soaked parking lot at a UPS distribution center in Seattle, where the shipper showed off its newest delivery vehicle, I had a realization once the pedal assist kicked in. "Yep, this will totally work," I thought. Bike messengers have long known cycling is the fastest way to get around traffic-choked cities. More commuters are getting it too. Now UPS is giving it a shot: The 111-year-old delivery service has started moving packages around Seattle by electric tricycle, in a yearlong pilot.

The vehicle in question was designed and built by Truck Trike in Portland, Oregon. When the rider starts to pedal, human power pushes the front hub. With a thumb throttle, the rider can draw power from a pair of battery packs in the base of the trike to rear hub motors for the back two wheels, with enough juice for 12 to 18 miles of range. The extra power comes in handy because the trailer, made by Portland's Silver Eagle, can fit as many as 40 packages, or about 350 pounds worth of stuff. For UPS the move is pretty spot on, because while the Emerald City is always congested, it's less than two months from what its traffic engineers call the "period of maximum constraint."

That ominous-sounding constrained period arrives on February 4, when the Alaskan Way Viaduct elevated highway along the waterfront is torn down and the 2-mile tunnel Seattle dug to replace it comes online. Crews are finishing the ramps that connect the tunnel to surface roads, and for three weeks, the city won't have a road to get through downtown on the city's waterfront side. To dodge the traffic horror show, Seattleites are planning vacations, renting Airbnbs to stay downtown, anything to avoid driving, including working from home.

95 comments

  1. sounds like a shitshow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Like everything else related to the Pacific Northwest, this sounds utterly terrible. Perhaps some hipsters should be sacrificed to improve the situation.

    1. Re:sounds like a shitshow by rilles · · Score: 0

      Clean coal powered UPS trucks will create many more coal jobs.

    2. Re:sounds like a shitshow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Coal-powered UPS trikes, the next Republican bailout. "If we keep picking these winners and losers and forcing coal on them, eventually the south shall rise again... lol who am I kidding, pass me the meth, Cletus."

    3. Re:sounds like a shitshow by pgmrdlm · · Score: 1

      You ever seen mothers riding bikes with the trailers with their child in them? I have seen bikes pull carts behind them with animals also. Why wouldn't this work on deliveries? No, you won't have a truck full of deliveries. But you S.A.F. could deliver packages this way.

      --
      Anonymous comments are as pathetic as the anonymous "sources" that contaminate gutless journalism from the New York Time
    4. Re:sounds like a shitshow by mermeid007 · · Score: 1

      They should use quads. More stable and humorous to watch. Vroom Vroom!

    5. Re:sounds like a shitshow by sexconker · · Score: 1

      So instead of a big slow truck I need to give a wide berth, there's multiple, big slow tricycles I need to give an even wider berth?
      There will be more of them because they can't carry as many packages. They'll expect special treatment, run stop signs and red lights, etc. just like "cyclists". When they cause a collision with a regular vehicle, scorn will by default apply to the driver of the regular vehicle because the "cyclist" is more likely to end up with injuries despite it being their fault. Such attitudes will spill over into insurance dealings and even the courtroom.

    6. Re: sounds like a shitshow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, UPS is the #1 delivery service in the world. You would expect them to try innovative ideas, would you not?

    7. Re: sounds like a shitshow by Jack9 · · Score: 1

      The affected downtown Seattle area has bike lanes and separate bike stoplights. There is an existing culture wherein bikes are more commonplace that most metropolitan areas. Being very opposed to any solution without understanding the problem space is ignorant noise.

      --

      Often wrong but never in doubt.
      I am Jack9.
      Everyone knows me.
    8. Re: sounds like a shitshow by sexconker · · Score: 1

      The affected downtown Seattle area has bike lanes and separate bike stoplights. There is an existing culture wherein bikes are more commonplace that most metropolitan areas. Being very opposed to any solution without understanding the problem space is ignorant noise.

      Ah yes, bike lanes, where the bikes go and run red lights and stop signs, or where they comes from when weaving into traffic on the left or onto the sidewalk on the right to get around other bikes.

    9. Re: sounds like a shitshow by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was nearly hit TWICE by cyclists in a recent visit to Seattle; both times were on sidewalks (not crosswalks, the slightly raised pavement immediately next to buildings) even though in both cases there was an empty dedicated bike lane on the adjacent street.

      Police need to warn, ticket, and arrest for repeat offenses anyone over the age of 12 biking on a sidewalk. It's dangerous, and kills people.

    10. Re: sounds like a shitshow by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      "It's dangerous, and kills people."

      Citation needed. Lethal bicycle/pedestrian collisions are not a problem worth solving and bicycles are legally allowed on sidewalks in many places. Far more dangerous are bicycle/car collisions.

    11. Re: sounds like a shitshow by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      Sounds a whole lot like what cars do. How dare bikes want to get around other bikes, don't they know the world is a no passing zone?

    12. Re:sounds like a shitshow by BlueStrat · · Score: 1

      Like everything else related to the Pacific Northwest, this sounds utterly terrible. Perhaps some hipsters should be sacrificed to improve the situation.

      My questions are practical, engineering-types...will these tricycles be equipped with discarded-dope-needle-proof tires? Will they also have wide, full-coverage, flared fenders so as to not "fling poo" when they cycle through the human feces on the streets from all the homeless drug addicts?

      Such a lack of important engineering specifications and technical details is shameful for a tech site!

      Strat

      --
      Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
  2. Coal cars by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why not lay narrow gauge tracks and push coal carts around the city? Set up parking lots around the perimeter of the city and ban all cars downtown.

  3. As a republican, I'm outraged by this Seattle act by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WHERE is the TAILPIPE? This is clearly a liberal discrimination plot against Republicans. Shame, no exhaust! Shame, no exhaust! Whose exhaust? OUR exhaust!

  4. inb4 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Someone steals the tricycle while the delivery guy is waiting at the front door.

  5. Should have done that years ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Seattle is a hilly city. The guys downtown making deliveries up and down steep hills with carts and/or handtrucks full of parcels kinds of made this inevitable...

    1. Re: Should have done that years ago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The edge of the sidewalk can get a tad icy. You would think they would want to steer clear so as not to hit something and go sliding down one of those hills. Otherwise bikes are a good idea. I just love the way you can fly down some of these streets on a nice bike

    2. Re: Should have done that years ago by mschuyler · · Score: 1

      It's flying up them that is the problem. These are not small hills we're talking about here. Some of the sidewalks have cleats.

      --
      How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
  6. Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by YuppieScum · · Score: 2

    Bike messengers have long known cycling is the fastest way to get around traffic-choked cities.

    A bicycle can be much faster over short/medium distances in a congested city, because of their ability to trivially by-pass stationary traffic.

    However, a tricycle does not have this ability, being orders of magnitude wider than a bicycle. Now add the encumbrance of a trailer - especially one of sufficient capacity to make the exercise even remotely worthwhile - and you have no chance of moving through or around stationary traffic... unless you plan on riding on the pavements ("sidewalks" as the Americans call them).

    --
    This sig left unintentionally blank.
    1. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by Mal-2 · · Score: 3, Informative

      As long as they qualify to use the bicycle lanes -- which I'm pretty sure they do -- they can still pass the stopped traffic that can't use bicycle lanes. It remains to be seen how much motorists are willing to watch non-automotive traffic pass them on the right before driving in that lane themselves.

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    2. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they don't have a motor they can use the bike lanes. There may be other minor restrictions but I don't think so. It'd be nice if they had bells to warn people as they're bigger than bikes to maneuver around.

      But I don't think we need to regulate bells on bikes. That'd just be to piss the Republicans off, give them something to whine about for a few hours, lol.

    3. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by YuppieScum · · Score: 1

      Well, they're TRIcycles not BIcycles, so perhaps not. It also depends on whether the lanes are wide enough - some of the lanes here in the UK would not be.

      Then there's the matter of where they'll park while unloading and delivering - doubt that'll be allowed in the bicycle lane - and then how quickly the thing will be stolen once unattended.

      --
      This sig left unintentionally blank.
    4. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      But I don't think we need to regulate bells on bikes. That'd just be to piss the Republicans off, give them something to whine about for a few hours, lol.

      Ooh, that sounds fun! Let's do that.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    5. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 5, Informative

      Unless things have changed recently, Seattle allows bicycles to ride on the sidewalks. It also has a lot of bike lanes, thanks to a previous mayor who biked himself and decided to arbitrarily take lanes away from cars. Believe me, you don't want to be driving in Seattle.

      But the article has its dates and underlying assumptions wrong. The traffic nightmare up here is scheduled to start January 11, when the viaduct gets shut down - it ends on February 5, when the new tunnel is scheduled to open. The three-week closure is apparently necessary so they can finish the ramps from the old viaduct approaches into the tunnel. During that closure, all the cars which normally would use the viaduct (or the tunnel) are going to be shunted onto the already-overburdened Interstate 5 and downtown surface streets.

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    6. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And think of the poor bollocks.

    7. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by Shotgun · · Score: 0

      a tricycle does not have this ability, being orders of magnitude wider than a bicycle

      Has there been a recent, unpublished definition of what constitutes "orders of magnitude"? It used to be multiples of 10, but this usage implies that the meaning is now "a little less than x2".

      --
      Aah, change is good. -- Rafiki
      Yeah, but it ain't easy. -- Simba
    8. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless things have changed recently, Seattle allows bicycles to ride on the sidewalks. It also has a lot of bike lanes, thanks to a previous mayor who biked himself and decided to arbitrarily take lanes away from cars. Believe me, you don't want to be driving in Seattle.

      But the article has its dates and underlying assumptions wrong. The traffic nightmare up here is scheduled to start January 11, when the viaduct gets shut down - it ends on February 5, when the new tunnel is scheduled to open. The three-week closure is apparently necessary so they can finish the ramps from the old viaduct approaches into the tunnel. During that closure, all the cars which normally would use the viaduct (or the tunnel) are going to be shunted onto the already-overburdened Interstate 5 and downtown surface streets.

      Too much liability trying to dodge all the homeless people passed out on drugs on the sidewalk.

    9. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by sexconker · · Score: 2

      A bicycle can be much faster over short/medium distances in a congested city, because of their ability to trivially by-pass stationary traffic.

      You misspelled "cut over to the sidewalk, run stop signs and red lights, and otherwise break the law with impunity because cops won't try to stop you and if you get yourself injured/killed people won't dare blame the cyclist or hold them responsible for their actions especially since their shit won't be insured or registered".

    10. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unless the weather patterns have changed in Seattle, the pictured tricycle delivery guy is going to get very drenched.

    11. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by YuppieScum · · Score: 1

      According to the website, this tricycle is four feet wide - I don't think riding on the pavement (or, indeed, sidewalk) is going to be an option.

      --
      This sig left unintentionally blank.
    12. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There's nothing arbitrary about it. He wants to discourage driving.

      Roads, parking, car infrastructure are a handout to car owners. If I were in charge driving in a city would require a tax to offset the real costs, or a medical exemption.

      As urban areas continue to grow (And they're predicted to grow 40-70% in the next 30 years) this or other congestion mitigation strategies will become 100% necessary.

    13. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      If they don't have a motor they can use the bike lanes.

      It looks like Seattle is currently permitting electric bicycles with power assist up to 15 MPH not only in bike lanes (where it seems they were already permitted) but also on sidewalks and trails . (Apparently you can also have bikes assisted up to 20 MPH, but they're not permitted on sidewalks, and you have to be 16.)

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    14. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by DRJlaw · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Roads, parking, car infrastructure are a handout to car owners.

      Who, shockingly, don't pay gas taxes, title taxes, parking fees, sales taxes on their vehicles, income taxes, and other amounts that they expect to go in part towards roads, public parking, and car infrastruture...

      It's all just a "handout."

    15. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 0

      Who, shockingly, don't pay gas taxes, title taxes, parking fees, sales taxes on their vehicles, income taxes, and other amounts that they expect to go in part towards roads, public parking, and car infrastruture...

      Actually, you don't need title for any vehicle under $500, you don't use gasoline, a lot of places charge for parking bikes (bike lockers, bike cages), everyone pays sales taxes, WE HAVE NO STATE COUNTY OR CITY INCOME TAX, and our property taxes (which renters pay too) are what pay for roads here. Bikes aren't allowed to ride on highways, which is where the state gas tax goes.

      Try again, comrade.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    16. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by DRJlaw · · Score: 2

      Actually, you don't need title for any vehicle under $500

      What percentage are those?

      you don't use gasoline

      What percentage are those?

      a lot of places charge for parking bikes (bike lockers, bike cages)

      Which negates the charges paid by vehicles (including the electric vehicles costing less than $500) how?

      everyone pays sales taxes

      Which negates the sales taxes paid on vehicles (including the electric vehicles costing less than $500) how?

      WE HAVE NO STATE COUNTY OR CITY INCOME TAX

      You have federal income tax and federal transportation "matching" funds (which make up more like 80-90% of funds on many projects)....

      , and our property taxes (which renters pay too) are what pay for roads here.

      I'm sure that nobody, including renters, will object to the share of their taxes that are going to car infrastruture being expropriated for other purposes while they are told that their "handouts" are over and they should pay even more. If you aren't paying a tax specifically earmarked for something, then that something is obviously a handout. Like bike lanes, and sidewalks, and policing...

      Bikes aren't allowed to ride on highways, which is where the state gas tax goes.

      WRONG. "'Those taxes go to pay for Washington highways and local roads,' said [Washington State Department of Agriculture spokesperson Mike] Louisell."

      Try again, comrade.

      No, you try again, comrade. Those roads and that infrastructure have been paid for by car owners. If you think that tax rates could have been set as high as they have been without those services, then I have a bridge to sell you.

    17. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 0

      Wrong. Our roads were built for horse and wagon and bicycle and streetcar. Cars came later.

      Look, there are pictures of Seattle up till World War I showing throngs of cyclists and few, if any cars. Even our Public Market (which you know as Pike Place Market) was built for exactly that. Cars came much later.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    18. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by DRJlaw · · Score: 2

      Wrong. Our roads were built for horse and wagon and bicycle and streetcar. Cars came later.

      Look, there are pictures of Seattle up till World War I...

      So Seattle has not built any new roads or rebuilt and widened roads since World War I.... Good to know.

      Cars came much later.

      And infrastructure was purpose-built and upgraded to match. Horse and wagon and bicycle and streetcar do not require 8" thick pavements and foot plus subbases.

    19. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by Mal-2 · · Score: 1

      The way such vehicles are defined, human-powered vehicles with three or fewer wheels are treated the same. A trike and a bike are legally identical. Add power assist, and they may or may not be depending on how convoluted the state's law is. Licensing requirements for power assisted cycles also vary from state to state, notably between Kentucky (where 49cc mopeds do not require licensing on either the rider OR the vehicle) and Ohio (where anything with a power assist of any kind needs a driver's license and a DMV tag, and they're not allowed in the bike lane).

      --
      How is the Riemann zeta function like Trump rallies? Both have an endless number of trivial zeros.
    20. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by belg4mit · · Score: 1

      Then there's the matter of where they'll park while unloading and delivering - doubt that'll be allowed in the bicycle lane

      Why? That's never stopped a UPS truck before.

      --
      Were that I say, pancakes?
    21. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      "...being orders of magnitude wider than a bicycle."

      You clearly do not understand what an order of magnitude is. A car is not even one order of magnitude wider than a bicycle. It takes a double wide trailer to make that. A bicycle takes at least two feet of width, a tricycle maybe twice that.

      Also, bicycles are faster around town also because they are trivial to park. Tricycles share that advantage. Fact is, you're wrong.

    22. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      Ooooh, 4 feet wide, that is indeed "orders of magnitude" wider than a bike!

      Yeah, with width like that how could it possibly work on pavement? If only they made lanes that wide.

    23. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      "...people won't dare blame the cyclist ..."

      LOL you do live in a fantasy world. Sober up.

    24. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by holophrastic · · Score: 1

      Last I checked, it's very illegal for one road vehicle to pass another in the way that you're suggesting. No one's going to prosecute an individual on a bicycle, but everyone will prosecute a commercial business procedure doing the same thing for profit. Especially with cargo involved.

    25. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by YuppieScum · · Score: 1

      Well, my thinking - such as it was, being three pints in - was that a typical bicycle tyre width is approximately 1 inch wide, and the width of this particular trike is 48 inches, making the trike approximately 1.5 orders of magnitude wider than the bike. A reasonable result based on a slightly flawed premise.

      However, your contention that "a bicycle takes a least two feet of width" is clearly flawed. Have you ever watched bicycles moving through stationary or slow-moving traffic? They go through gaps much less than two feet wide - and this is an advantage erroneously being conferred on a four-foot wide tricycle.

      Likewise parking - dumping a four-foot wide vehicle (almost as wide as a smart car) on a busy city pavement (or "sidewalk" as we're talking about Seattle) crowded with pedestrians is not going to be successful, nor is it if left in the bicycle lane... unless the lane is considerably wider than any I've seen here in the UK, and has a specific exemption for tricycles in the "no parking in a bicycle lane" rules.

      The fact is, you cannot equate the convenience and mobility of a bicycle to that of a tricycle in a crowded urban environment. Even the promotional video by the manufacturer only shows it being used in very quiet suburban and commercial spaces.

      Fact is, you're wrong.

      --
      This sig left unintentionally blank.
    26. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by mjpaci · · Score: 1

      I've seen these UPS trikes in Munich, Germany as well. While we're not quite as gray and wet as Seattle, we're still not the sunniest place. Granted, there are a metric ass load of bike lanes for these to use and being able to get right up to the building makes it a lot easier.

    27. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      That notwithstanding, I'm sure some would give it the good old college try.

      These are UPS employees we're talking about.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    28. Re:Bicycle yes, tricycle no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No things have not changed, we still have a$$holes on bicycles thinking the road rules don't apply to them.. What am I? a predtrestion or on the road? Oh wait I just swapped what I am because I want to go from riding on the road to riding across the ped xing and down the sidewalk and I'll cut the f*** across peds and traffic to do that at 25 mph while being nearly silent and hard to see. Check!

      The viaduct has closed before, and people managed. Null point.

      Traffic doom looming? Dude it's already here. I5 is killer, SR 167 is killer. It's all choked up and then some. The only way to get anywhere now is on rail, and that's far from perfect because we have multiple transit operators that pretend the others don't exist..

      Oh your train is 5+ minutes late (common AF), you just missed that bus because they dont give a shizzle, and the driver will literally drive away while watching people exiting the train? Yeah Sound Transit and friends got you covered there. Now wait in the cold and dark for 35 minutes for the next one, or maybe walk 2 miles home long the side of a busy 4 lane road, the choice is yours.

      OMG now let's spend billions on a light rail extn into the south Puget Sound towards Tacoma that we don't need, and is completely useless for commuters because it already takes ~45 minutes to get from SEATAC airport to downtown. Please don't use that money to improve the heavy commuter rail, maybe add a few connector buses, develop a hub and spoke system of park and rides.. Or maybe even move all the freight traffic to the Union Pacific line, and free up the BNSF line for commuter rail and Amtrak.. No please don't do that, its an idea that'll work too well, and it'll let everyone enjoy leaving their stupid cars at home and enjoy their lives more.

  7. The fact is that cars are dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and nobody wants to take responsibility for it.

  8. The real reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The real reason that bike messengers get through quicker is that they mostly ignore traffic laws and signs, and take shortcuts across sidewalks and other places they are NOT supposed to be!

    1. Re:The real reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Yep. Pretty much. 98% of everyone on a bike is an epic douche.. it's up to 100% when they're delivering something.

    2. Re:The real reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "pgmrdlm" = abbrev. for "pigmolesterDavidLawrenceMcKenzie"

    3. Re:The real reason by Malc · · Score: 1

      I'm not a bike courier, but I cycle to work and this is by far the fastest way to do it. I don't do any of the things you say. In fact, my Garmin tells me that I'm only moving for ~43 mins of my 55 min of 13 mile commute across central London. Public transport is 65-90 mins. Driving is 90 mins.

      If you want to talk about law breakers on the road, look no further than car drivers. Funny how they have a blind spot to their speed on the motorway or thinking it's ok to squeeze through after traffic lights have turned red or parking half on the footpath in the no stopping zone outside my son's nursery.

    4. Re:The real reason by StikyPad · · Score: 1

      Speeding on a highway is not inherently unsafe, while running a streetlight or stop sign is. Additionally, speeding actually increases the traffic capacity of a road, and speeders contribute more money in the form of fines, both of which are of benefit to the general public. You're welcome.

      --
      https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
    5. Re:The real reason by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      In most places in the US they are "supposed to be" on sidewalks. Ignoring traffic laws is only a modest contributor and only a fraction of cyclists behave that way.

      Messengers can finish a job in the time that a car would require leaving a spot and finding parking, which it may need to do twice. That why they are faster, not for any ignorant reason you imagine.

    6. Re: The real reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course speeding on the highway is unsafe. Whatâ(TM)s safety got to with it anyway, when itâ(TM)s a matter of legality?

  9. Tuk Tuk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If they're going to use a shitty tricycle, they may as well use a tuk tuk. See: Piaggio Ape 50 Electric Van

  10. Thought you may be interested. by wolfheart111 · · Score: 1

    Have a look at this puppy. Its foldable solar charger, ect.. screecher.net/products/screecher-pedalcycle

    --
    [($)]
  11. New things in their home town by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Only fair to try something new in Seattle, it is their home town. (but they have tried it elsewhere as well.) The trikes will be less fun in the cold wet weather on the hills. Good luck.

  12. Need to stop stealing from bike lanes by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 2

    The major problem we have is all the wasted public space used for private car storage on our surface streets, which would be better repurposed to higher-capacity bike and transit usage.

    I for one look forward to our new Amazon-controlled UPS bike overlords, provided they don't get massive subsides like the private car storage on surface streets get.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    1. Re:Need to stop stealing from bike lanes by PPH · · Score: 1

      wasted public space used for private car storage on our surface streets

      Then you'd better have a word with Seattle's new policy allowing zero parking condominium and apartment development. Street parking in places like Freemont (for example) is turning into a real shit-show with all the residents chasing after fewer available parking spaces.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
    2. Re:Need to stop stealing from bike lanes by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      Nope, that was all the suburban drivers doing park and hide in Fremont so we set up a Residential Parking Zone to stop them from doing that. Most of us don't drive to work, actually, half the parking garages in our townhouses only have bikes and kayaks in our garages now. Only n00bZ drive, and old people.

      There are mostly empty parking garage structures right next to the Fremont Bridge, every time I go past them they're almost empty. Day and night. Real Seattleites bike walk skateboard or take transit.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    3. Re:Need to stop stealing from bike lanes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wasted public space used for private car storage on our surface streets

      Then you'd better have a word with Seattle's new policy allowing zero parking condominium and apartment development. Street parking in places like Freemont (for example) is turning into a real shit-show with all the residents chasing after fewer available parking spaces.

      Freemont beer. Worth fighting for the parking spaces. Got to look at the positive side.

    4. Re:Need to stop stealing from bike lanes by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      Nope, that was all the suburban drivers doing park and hide in Fremont so we set up a Residential Parking Zone to stop them from doing that. Most of us don't drive to work, actually, half the parking garages in our townhouses only have bikes and kayaks in our garages now. Only n00bZ drive, and old people.

      Love the logical self-consistency here. Only n00bZ and old people drive, which explains why Freemont needed to set up a Residential Parking Zone to ensure that all of that empty street parking stayed empty.

    5. Re:Need to stop stealing from bike lanes by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      The parking garages are empty. Not the streets.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  13. This is not (really) news by DontBeAMoran · · Score: 1

    UPS has been using electric-assist tricycles for a while in Europe.

    --
    #DeleteFacebook
  14. No need for the batteries by MobyDisk · · Score: 2

    The extra power comes in handy because...40 packages, or about 350 pounds worth of stuff.

    350 lbs requires power assistance huh? I guess UPS has never seen a guy on a bike in India deliver a package the size of a school bus on his own power.

    1. Re:No need for the batteries by azcoyote · · Score: 1, Funny

      350 lbs requires power assistance huh? I guess UPS has never seen a guy on a bike in India deliver a package the size of a school bus on his own power.

      This is America! They probably have to account for the fact that the fat American driver probably also weighs 350 pounds himself.

      --
      Incipiamus, fratres, servire Domino Deo, quia hucusque vix vel parum in nullo profecimus.
    2. Re:No need for the batteries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Even if the UPS guy could pedal it, OSHA would be unimpressed.

    3. Re:No need for the batteries by sexconker · · Score: 2

      The extra power comes in handy because...40 packages, or about 350 pounds worth of stuff.

      350 lbs requires power assistance huh? I guess UPS has never seen a guy on a bike in India deliver a package the size of a school bus on his own power.

      Hills are a thing.

    4. Re:No need for the batteries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let the outsourcing complaints begin....

    5. Re:No need for the batteries by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      350 lbs requires power assistance huh? I guess UPS has never seen a guy on a bike in India deliver a package the size of a school bus on his own power.

      We have seven hills in Seattle. Some are fairly steep, so steep that bus lines don't go up them, and our old streetcars used to have cables to pull them up.

      There are limits to what even strong UPS bike riders can do.

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    6. Re:No need for the batteries by mschuyler · · Score: 1

      Six. Denny Hill was taken down because it was in the way.

      --
      How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
    7. Re: No need for the batteries by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      350 lbs on wet, cold, maybe icy hills in Seattle...what could go wrong...ugh!!!

    8. Re:No need for the batteries by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

      Six. Denny Hill was taken down because it was in the way.

      It still lives in our hearts

      --
      -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
    9. Re:No need for the batteries by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      We have seven hills in Seattle.

      Six. Denny Hill was taken down because it was in the way.

      It still lives in our hearts

      But you don't have it, do you? Bus lines now cross it, don't they.

    10. Re:No need for the batteries by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      "comes in handy" != requires. I bet you've never seen a guy on a bike in India deliver a package the size of a school bus either.

      It's not about manhood, the electricity costs far less than the delivery person's time.

      Nice try though, not that you had anything remotely interesting to say.

  15. Idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is America! They probably have to account for the fact that the fat American driver probably also weighs 350 pounds himself.

    You're an idiot.

    UPS has one of the most fit workforces I've ever seen. Any member of their delivery staff male or female, could easily beat your pathetic smart-ass.

    1. Re:Idiot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This. Those UPS delivery people have great legs. All of them.

    2. Re:Idiot by MobyDisk · · Score: 1

      Both of them.

  16. Dry your vag, Republican whiners. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sexless clunker you don't live anywhere near this and you spend all of your days whining on the internet. This isn't a real concern for you, bitch. Dry your vag.

    1. Re:Dry your vag, Republican whiners. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lighten up, Francis

  17. Dry your vag republican whiner by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sexless clunker you don't live anywhere near this and you spend all of your days whining on the internet. This isn't a real concern for you, bitch. Dry your vag already. Keep a towel handy you leaky cunt. You're disgusting.

  18. Dry your vag sexless Republican whiners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sexless clunker you don't live anywhere near this and you spend all of your days whining on the internet. This isn't a real concern for you, bitch. Dry your vag already. Keep a towel handy you leaky cunt. You're disgusting.

  19. Motor assist is a good idea by steveha · · Score: 3, Informative

    350 lbs requires power assistance huh? I guess UPS has never seen a guy on a bike in India deliver a package the size of a school bus on his own power.

    Hi, I live in the Seattle area and I spend a lot of time riding bikes.

    Seattle is hilly. The downtown core where the packages most likely need delivery is... also hilly.

    If any packages need delivery to Queen Anne Hill, that's so steep I wouldn't want to ride that even with 10 pounds of packages. If any packages need delivery to the hospitals, we literally call that area "Pill Hill", as in there is a big hill with the hospitals on it.

    Wikipedia has a list of hills in Seattle: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_hills_of_Seattle

    And here's an article about how the hilly streets are challenging to folks with mobility issues: https://crosscut.com/2017/02/seattles-hills-are-the-worst-heres-a-way-to-cope

    The hills are sufficiently bad that there is an official city program of rights-of-way that go through skyscrapers downtown. Instead of walking up a hill you cut through a skyscraper and use their escalators. I say again this is an official thing... I spent some time working in one of the skyscrapers on one of the routes. (I haven't found anything about this online with Google searches, but I remember reading a plaque in the skyscraper where I worked listing the guaranteed hours that the escalators were open to the public as part of this program.) Of course, UPS tricycles can't use escalators and wouldn't be allowed to even if it were possible.

    It is entirely appropriate to have a motor assist if we are talking about 350 pounds of packages.

    Actually it wouldn't surprise me if UPS wanted to have a motor assist even in flat places (Kansas maybe?), because it won't add that much to the expense of a special delivery tricycle and the motor will provide more speed. More speed is more packages delivered and thus more money.

    So your comment is +1 snarky but -2 clueless.

    --
    lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely
    1. Re:Motor assist is a good idea by mschuyler · · Score: 1

      Yup. You can get from 1st avenue up to 7th avenue and only have to walk up half a block of hill. I've done it many times taking the ferry from Bainbridge and attending class on 7th avenue. Escalators for the win.

      --
      How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
    2. Re:Motor assist is a good idea by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      Yes, hills don't matter regarding value, they only make the difference between seriously beneficial and absolutely mandatory.

      I commute by e-bike 6 days a week and 12 miles a day. Electric saves me 3 hours a week of time and costs about $6 a year, far less than the maintenance costs of the bicycle itself. Electric assist on a delivery bicycle is an absolute no-brainer anywhere, doubly so in hills.

    3. Re:Motor assist is a good idea by MobyDisk · · Score: 3, Funny

      So your comment is +1 snarky but -2 clueless.

      *whooosh* Lemme teach you some math: +1 snarky x -2 clueless = +1 funny. ;-)

      Seriously, if you've never seen it, look up some pictures of Indian guys loading like entire sofas and stuff onto a bicycle and peddling it. I've been there: it's real, and it's crazy. And when people joke about cows being on the road and cars swerving into oncoming traffic to get around them -- that's real too.

  20. So it works like post in Sweden. Nothing new. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So it works like post in Sweden. Nothing new. In Gothenburg we get also horizontal rain and our postmen were using bikes since they were invented, recently started to add electric assist. Same in Norway and Denmark. There is no bad weather, just inadequate clothing. I feel like America is rediscovering the wheel here.

  21. re: 350 pounds worth of stuff by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    why do they measure in British pounds sterling? or does the article mean pounds (weight)?

  22. Not Just Seattle by StikyPad · · Score: 1

    I saw one of these in Rome last month. Perfect for getting around the narrow streets and alleys there, I assumed it was just a local adaptation. I would be interested to know how long they've been in use in Italy, or elsewhere.

    --
    https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
  23. Japan cities trikes prevalent by spinitch · · Score: 1

    Yamato aka Black Cat using in Japan cities for quite a while peddle trikes, bikes with trailers, including some with electric assistance. These bikes move slow and easier to park.

  24. Manual throttle? How quaint by hackertourist · · Score: 1

    Electric bikes automatically regulate motor power based on pedal power (for every W the cyclist produces, the motor produces n W). This level is adjustable in steps, but once set, no manual operation is necessary.

    Thumb operation seems a crappy solution in comparison.