View Single Post
Old 10-12-09, 08:48 AM
  #42  
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Posts: 18,023

Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times in 9 Posts
got to stand against mandatory bikelane and sidepath use laws. FRAP is applicable to all vehicles regardless of specificity of traffic code.

the devil IS in the details.

In a citiy with 5 percent enhanced bikeway'd roads (still allowing operation in accordance with the rules of the road), the remaining 95 percent of the roads remain unenhanced. communities have expectations of lawful, vehicular cycling on all the roads and notably, the vast majority of unenhanced streets.

just a relevant aside...


but to address concerns about a few hundred yards of cycletrack spelling the demise of roadway cycling in Portland, I say, REALLY?

municipalities can easily place sharrows adjacent to a cycletrack or bike path. Perhaps this should be part of MUTCD but i can see problems implementing this. Yet federal design guidelines are pretty clear that roads should be designed to acommodate bicyclists.

in the case of urban cycletracks sharrows in road adjacent make the most sense IMO.

Last edited by Bekologist; 10-12-09 at 08:55 AM.
Bekologist is offline