3 ms·
> there are busy streets without bicycle lanes The real problem is that the lane isn't wide enough for a cyclist and motor vehicle to travel side by side with
by u801e 10y ago
> there are busy streets without bicycle lanes
The real problem is that the lane isn't wide enough for a cyclist and motor vehicle to travel side by side with the motor vehicle remaining in the same lane. When a bicycle lane is added despite that, it leads to a bicycle lane that's too narrow and vehicles will pass without leaving sufficient clearance (at least 3 feet).
> (or even sidewalks)
Riding on the sidewalk isn't safe (and in many jurisdictions, is illegal). Mixing unpredictable pedestrian traffic with cyclists is not safe, and the number of potential conflicts that cyclists have with motor vehicle traffic when approaching an intersection is far greater compared to riding on the road and following traffic rules.
Also having to slow or stop for each driveway and intersection will significantly lengthen the time of the trip.
- khedoros 10y ago> The real problem is that the lane isn't wide enough for a cyclist and motor vehicle to travel side by side with the motor vehicle remaining in the same lane. If that were true, it would be the real problem. As it is, even though there is space, cars frequently ride the shoulder. Most of the streets around here are pretty wide. > Mixing unpredictable pedestrian traffic with cyclists is not safe A problem, in theory...but not much of one with the low volume of foot+bike traffic around here. People here love their cars.