| Did you catch Barbra Walters pointed comments about bikers going
the wrong way on one way streets, and that bike lanes are a waste
because the bikes don't use them, and how bikes are always weaving
in and out of traffic causing problems.
What little I saw was enough to make me angry, so pfftttt to the
"pay" ch. where I don't have to listen to that crap.
News media bias stinks!!
John
|
| > <<< Note 1619.1 by WFOV11::SISE >>>
> -< media bias stinks! >-
>
> Did you catch Barbra Walters pointed comments about bikers going
> the wrong way on one way streets, and that bike lanes are a waste
> because the bikes don't use them, and how bikes are always weaving
> in and out of traffic causing problems.
She's making some valid points by the sound of it, even if
accidentally. A lot of cyclists do ignore traffic laws.
I think the reasoning behind this is that they can pretend to be
pedestrians where convenient, also one feels as a cyclist that there
are certain advantages that should be grabbed to make up for the
disadvantages. For example we get rained on, but why the hell shouldn't
we advance up a stopped traffic queue?
Bike lanes are a sore point. A local authority can paint a metre-wide
strip down the side of the road and call that provision for cycling.
However cars will park on it, it will have the worst road surface, and
it will disappear just before a roundabout (rotary) or other tricky
intersection. If the authority goes further and designates a pavement
(sidewalk) as a cycle lane, then it will twist and turn, go through
sharp right angles and be covered in broken glass. No wonder many
cyclists, myself included, prefer to take our chances on the roads.
Long-term, the attitude of drivers has to change. (God, does that look
like a pitiful hope or what?)
Rod
|
| > sharp right angles and be covered in broken glass. No wonder many
> cyclists, myself included, prefer to take our chances on the roads.
A study was done by somebody (I think he was commissioned by the L.A.W.)
a number of years back which indicated roughly that you had about a 3-4
times better (worse?) chance of being seriously injured on a bike path
or bike lane than by riding in traffic. This due to a number of factors
- multiple use (joggers/skateboards/etc), bad paving, improper design,
conflicts with vehicle traffic, etc. The author spoke at our club - his
conclusion was something to the effect of, bike lanes/paths could be improved,
but are never going to be as safe as road riding......
FWIW, ken
|
| While traveling in Munich a few years ago, I noticed a very well-designed
bike lane. In general, the lane paralleled the roadway, but was separated
from it by either a curb or a small median. More significantly, it was
separated from the wide sidewalk by a row of trees and 5-10 feet of green
space. At intersections, there were traffic lights specifically for
the cyclists (small, at riding height). The pavements, like most German
roadways, were exceptionally smooth and well-marked, even at intersections.
This lane was adjacent to a large, four lane automobile thoroughfare.
For a case study in bad bike lane design, I submit the alleged bike
path along Memorial Drive in Cambridge, MA. In reality, this is a
standard-width sidewalk, with curb cuts and ramps at street intersections.
This is fine for wheelchairs (and hooray for that), but the curb cuts are
inconsistently placed so that one cannot ride with any speed. More
significantly, the sidewalk is almost always crowded with pedestrians,
joggers, etc., many of whom are equipped with Walkmen and are oblivious
to the outside world. This of course didn't prevent an MDC policeman
from telling me to get my bike out of the roadway and onto the bike path!
The moral of the story: if you can't do it right, don't do it at all.
If your town won't allocate money for a properly-designed bike roadway,
tell them to spend the money instead for safety classes or "Share the
road signs" (a common sight in the Raleigh, NC area) or maps of recommended
roads for cycling.
-David Buffo
|