Quote:
Originally Posted by OldDartmouthMark
On the other hand, since you have no problem with sacrificing a safe walking space for bike traffic, I wonder why you have such a problem with using a barely-driven-on side street for bicycle traffic, which still allows cars to drive on it, but with some restrictions that just reduce convenience, not safety. The cohesion of your ideology is missing a crucial link in logic.
|
I’m not going to try and rebut your long-winded treatise on why nothing else will work, since most of your arguments come with their own self-destruct mechanism already. The problem is one you allude to in the last paragraph above. I have no issue with cyclists having a bike lane on residential streets. Paint them on every non-arterial street if you wish. The problem is the way they are implemented here, with largely useless and ineffective things installed at huge expense to no great effect. It is analogous to building a 6-lane freeway to every new subdivision before any buildings go up. Paint some lines, put up some signs, and see what happens. Most motorists are not the bloodthirsty monsters HRM seems to think they are.
I will touch specifically on one of your points. I hope that cyclists will indeed stop at cross-streets where that is required, even if that does go against the cyclist activist DNA. If we’re sharing the roads, we’re sharing the rules of the road.
Threaded Mode