Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > > >

Vehicular Cycling (VC) No other subject has polarized the A&S members like VC has. Here's a place to share, debate, and educate.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-16-09, 06:14 PM   #26
danarnold
Kaffee Nazi
 
danarnold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Richland, WA
Bikes: 2009 Kestrel RT800, 2007 Roubaix, 1976 Lambert-Viscount
Posts: 1,374
Quote:
Originally Posted by randya View Post
Real sharrows are BIG and hard to miss, like 3' x 6', according to the proposed MUTCD standard.

IMO, the more important reason to use sharrows doesn't have much to do with cyclists themselves, it's more about educating motorists that cyclists belong on the road, in the lane.
+1 That's it. Sharrows make that statement without implying cyclists must stay in the bike lane or shoulder.
danarnold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-09, 09:45 AM   #27
High Roller
Guest
 
Bikes:
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by danarnold View Post
+1 That's it. Sharrows make that statement without implying cyclists must stay in the bike lane or shoulder.
Sounds reasonable to me, though I have yet to see any in my neck of the woods and therefore can't comment on their effectiveness. When bike lanes started popping up around here a few years ago, I started to get more harrassment when riding on roads that lack such lanes. Hopefully the same phenomenon would not occur if sharrows became more prevalent.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-09, 09:54 AM   #28
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
i'm suprised danarnold can comment on the effectiveness of them also. i doubt he's ridden across even one in eastern washington.

i've ridden miles of sharrowed roadscape, in three states.

motorists can and will still honk if they think a bicyclist is 'obstructing' even with a shared lane arrow. if widths are sufficient, a bikelane is a preffered facility to facilitate bike travel along significant traffic corridors.

Hey, high roller, you're an LCI ,aren't you?

quit disparagin bikelanes, dude! didn't you get the memo?

Quote:
Originally Posted by LAB policy paper to LCIs about bikelanes
bike lanes also make cycling much more accessible to many
more people and that benefit far outweighs the relatively minor costs incurred by
a limited number of highly skilled and traffic tolerant cyclists.

and new roadscaping designs include quite innovate and thoughtful, site specific infrastructure that combines the best features of wide lane, narrow sharrowed lane, or bikelane depending on traffic patterns on the roadscape.

In a discussion about sharrows, one thing germane to the conversation is this:

sharrows will be installed as part of bikeway planning and will be implemented along roads that are of hybrid bikeway design. these hybrid roadscapes combine best localized implementations of shared lane narrow outside lanes, bikelanes, or unmodified wide or narrow lane.

this is something to keep in prspective in ANY discussion of sharrows: that they will be used in conjunction with other bikeway striping patterns.

Last edited by Bekologist; 09-17-09 at 10:04 AM.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-09, 12:51 PM   #29
John Forester
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 4,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
i'm suprised danarnold can comment on the effectiveness of them also. i doubt he's ridden across even one in eastern washington.

i've ridden miles of sharrowed roadscape, in three states.

motorists can and will still honk if they think a bicyclist is 'obstructing' even with a shared lane arrow. if widths are sufficient, a bikelane is a preffered facility to facilitate bike travel along significant traffic corridors.

Hey, high roller, you're an LCI ,aren't you?

Originally Posted by LAB policy paper to LCIs about bikelanes
bike lanes also make cycling much more accessible to many
more people and that benefit far outweighs the relatively minor costs incurred by
a limited number of highly skilled and traffic tolerant cyclists.

quit disparagin bikelanes, dude! didn't you get the memo?




and new roadscaping designs include quite innovate and thoughtful, site specific infrastructure that combines the best features of wide lane, narrow sharrowed lane, or bikelane depending on traffic patterns on the roadscape.

In a discussion about sharrows, one thing germane to the conversation is this:

sharrows will be installed as part of bikeway planning and will be implemented along roads that are of hybrid bikeway design. these hybrid roadscapes combine best localized implementations of shared lane narrow outside lanes, bikelanes, or unmodified wide or narrow lane.

this is something to keep in prspective in ANY discussion of sharrows: that they will be used in conjunction with other bikeway striping patterns.
What Bek inaccurately calls the "LAB policy paper" about bike lanes has been quite effectively disputed. It is rather ingenuous to quote it as if it were "a policy paper" and as if it had not been strongly questioned.
John Forester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-09, 11:29 PM   #30
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
Actually, john, I believe that's an official dictat from the League of American Bicyclists to its instructors.

(your views are pretty much irrelevant to the LAB regards bikelanes, johhny! )


John Forester, how nice to see your commentary!! I thought you had forgotten our discussions in the other threads!!

have YOU ever ridden a sharrowed roadscape on your bicycle? Ever ridden Market Street in San Francisco across the sharrows there?

do you have any commentary germane to the conversation about sharrows that isn't distilled from your fallaciousness regarding bikeways?

Last edited by Bekologist; 09-17-09 at 11:34 PM.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-09, 10:53 AM   #31
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
sharrowed streetscape



that's a 3 minute video of a ride along a hybrid sharrowed streetscape in Seattle, Stone Way Ave N.

this is part of a hybrid roadscape bikeway plan for this transportation cooridor. there are bike lanes on the uphill side of the street, sharrows for the main part of the downhill, a section of unmodified two narrow lane configuration leading to a bikelane road diet that feeds into a RTO and bikes lane (restriction on cars, not bikes).

thoughtful intersection treatments depending on traffic movements and well designed bike specificity at two five way + intersections.

this is southbound and downhill, on the sharrowed side of this road dieted street.

auto traffic thruput was increased on this corridor as a result of the road diet. this traffic corridor sees 10 percent rider modal share during peak rush hours.

Last edited by Bekologist; 09-18-09 at 03:08 PM.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-09, 11:33 AM   #32
John Forester
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 4,071
Originally Posted by LAB policy paper to LCIs about bikelanes
bike lanes also make cycling much more accessible to many
more people and that benefit far outweighs the relatively minor costs incurred by
a limited number of highly skilled and traffic tolerant cyclists.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
Actually, john, I believe that's an official dictat from the League of American Bicyclists to its instructors.

(your views are pretty much irrelevant to the LAB regards bikelanes, johhny! )


John Forester, how nice to see your commentary!! I thought you had forgotten our discussions in the other threads!!

have YOU ever ridden a sharrowed roadscape on your bicycle? Ever ridden Market Street in San Francisco across the sharrows there?

do you have any commentary germane to the conversation about sharrows that isn't distilled from your fallaciousness regarding bikeways?
The LAB has policy statements, and the quoted item is not an LAB policy statement. It is an official statement to LAB instructors, issued by Clarke. However, it is also inaccurate to call it a diktat, which means a command, for it contains no instruction about providing instruction. It just is, and it has only the credibility that Clarke commands. While Clarke's statements regarding the operation of LAB have reasonable credibility, because he appears to be in charge, his statements regarding bicycle transportation engineering have earned no credibility whatever.
John Forester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-09, 11:37 AM   #33
John Forester
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 4,071
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
:
do you have any commentary germane to the conversation about sharrows that isn't distilled from your fallaciousness regarding bikeways?
I recognize that some bicyclists feel the need to have their right to use the roadway demonstrated by sharrows. Just so long as it never gets to the point of people arguing that sharrows produce the right to use the roadway, it doesn't bother me.
John Forester is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-09, 11:43 AM   #34
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
that statement i quoted is an offical dictat of the League of American Bicyclists.

why even try to argue semantics over the meaning of 'dictat'?

Ever ridden a bicycle on a sharrowed roadscape, john forester, or are you unable to comment from direct experiences?

Armchair bicycling, so to speak

Quote:
Originally Posted by jf
I recognize that some bicyclists feel the need to have their right to use the roadway demonstrated by sharrows. Just so long as it never gets to the point of people arguing that sharrows produce the right to use the roadway, it doesn't bother me.
doesn't bother you?

so your neutral stance would also not care about other vehicular roadway enhancements like RTO and bike lanes, and pocket bike lanes and bikelanes that do not contradict the adopted rules of the road for drivers of vehicles as part of hybrid, sharrowed streetscaping and bikeway design across communities, eh?

Last edited by Bekologist; 09-18-09 at 11:49 AM.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-09, 11:56 AM   #35
randya
Senior Member
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Bikes: who cares?
Posts: 13,689
does John even ride anymore? Chances are he's never even ridden on any of these new facilities he continues to bad mouth.
randya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-09, 12:20 PM   #36
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
perhaps we can keep the discussion centered on sharrows and not cantenkery.

Germane to the discussion is that sharrows are part of bikeways planning that includes bikelaned sections, sharrowed or completely unmodified narrow or wide lanes as shown in my video above.

hybrid roadscape design rather that 'sharrows OR bikelanes'. it's going to be a combination of both. high speed arterial or multilane collector roads that are identified as significant bicycle transportation corridors, for example. Bicycle travel along these corridors will be served best by mostly preffered class bikelanes with sharrows deployed as part of hybrid roadscaping approaching intersections, versus a wide lane with limited intersection treatments.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-09, 02:26 PM   #37
High Roller
Guest
 
Bikes:
Posts: n/a
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
I recognize that some bicyclists feel the need to have their right to use the roadway demonstrated by sharrows. Just so long as it never gets to the point of people arguing that sharrows produce the right to use the roadway, it doesn't bother me.
I would like to agree with this. But my experience indicates that once such road markings come into widespread use, the public perception, as evidenced by aggressive driving behavior and harrassment, is that my rights are diminished when such markings are absent.

Last edited by High Roller; 09-18-09 at 02:35 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-09, 03:05 PM   #38
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
so, your "solution" to better roadway treatment from motorists is no bike specificity.

you guys are SO OUT OF TOUCH as to what happens in communities that raise rider share thru infrastructure-

as riders increase in share, motorists tolerance is raised because, yes, that's right, there's more riders on streets both with and without bike specificity across communities.

complaining about perceived agressions towards traffic tolerant vehikular ideologues isn't a compelling enough argument against sharrows or bikeways planning.

that's folly and one the LAB would consider 'irrelevant' when considering the 21st century american roadscape!


Steve- what did YOU think of the sharrowed streets I showed in the video? see how it's part of a road diet, and contains elements of sharrow, narrow lane, wide lanes and bikelanes with varied intersection treatments?
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-09, 03:34 PM   #39
sggoodri
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
sggoodri's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Cary, NC
Bikes: 1983 Trek, 2001 Lemond, 2000 Gary Fisher
Posts: 3,073
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
Steve- what did YOU think of the sharrowed streets I showed in the video? see how it's part of a road diet, and contains elements of sharrow, narrow lane, wide lanes and bikelanes with varied intersection treatments?
I think some of the sharrows were too close to on-street parking, and the position taken by the bicyclist illustrates how the sharrows are too far right for other conditions as well, including descents. I also saw at least one sharrow curbside near an intersection corner where right turns are permitted (3:18). I think this video supports your position that right-biased sharrows are undesirable compared to center-biased sharrows.

However, I liked the sharrow sections better than the door-zone bike lane sections. I saw a couple of bike lanes to the left of RTO lanes, which was good, but the rest of the bike lanes were so close to parked cars that only the leftmost portion of the lane, very close to the left line, is safely usable. I'd rather have no stripe (just a sharrow) if I'm going to ride right on top of the left stripe location.

As for the "road diet" issue of reducing the travel lane count to two travel lanes plus center turn lane, I do think this design is more pleasant for cycling than what I assume was previously a 4-lane cross section without center turn lane.

Now, I need a few minutes to get over my motion sickness. My stomach prefers bar-mounted cameras with a wide angle lens, passed through the video stabilization software I developed, and not helmet cameras.

Last edited by sggoodri; 09-18-09 at 03:41 PM.
sggoodri is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-09, 03:50 PM   #40
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
i'll be working on better video.... I had previously been using solely handheld and have been recently been experimenting with an inexpensive Go2Pro helmet camera.

I want to set up a boom system for it, i am more interested in touring video footage than city riding but hey my interests in bike advocacy extend further and further. I'm interested in becoming an LCI, btw, to counter the marginalizations i see bandied about in this forum by many of you LCIs about the value of the facilitated roadscape.

I've got some more video that better illustrates right biased sharrows that, even in the absence of curbside parking, encourages too far right behavior or at least does little to discourage unsafe lane sharing by bicyclists in marginally wide sharrowed lanes.

that will be next up, just have to process and annotate it.

Last edited by Bekologist; 09-18-09 at 03:57 PM.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-09, 06:06 PM   #41
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
are these sharrows too far right? video...

are these sharrows too far right?
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-18-09, 10:05 PM   #42
randya
Senior Member
 
randya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Bikes: who cares?
Posts: 13,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
are these sharrows too far right? video...

are these sharrows too far right?
I would say yes, 'cause their position might encourage a motorist to share a too-narrow lane; OTOH there are no parked cars so there is no dooring hazard. IMHO they should be centered in the lane, and/or be accompanied by 'cyclist allowed full lane' signage.
randya is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-09, 01:59 AM   #43
RobertHurst
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Denver
Bikes:
Posts: 1,621
Quote:
Originally Posted by randya View Post
...IMHO they should be centered in the lane, and/or be accompanied by 'cyclist allowed full lane' signage.
The current MUTCD standards say to center the sharrow at least 11 feet from the curb on streets with side parking, and just a few feet from the curb on streets without parking. I don't think sharrows really need to be in the centers of lanes on most streets, but these standards put the sharrow too far right by about one foot. That single foot makes a huge difference. In Denver we've seen sharrows centered 12 feet from the curb that seem very effective and pro-cyclist; on the same streets are badly placed sharrows, centered 10 feet from the curb, which seem much too close to parked cars. The city has promised to repaint them eventually at 12 feet.

The sharrows have been improved greatly but are also still too small, imo. The current standard is one meter by three meters. The ideal sharrow I think would be about 2 meters wide and 5 meters long. It sounds a lot bigger than it really would be on the street. I would be curious to find out how sharrows work on all different kinds of streets, but I doubt we ever will.
RobertHurst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-09, 08:59 AM   #44
Bekologist
totally louche
 
Bekologist's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: A land that time forgot
Bikes: the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
Posts: 18,025
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertHurst View Post
The current MUTCD standards say to center the sharrow at least 11 feet from the curb on streets with side parking, and just a few feet from the curb on streets without parking. I don't think sharrows really need to be in the centers of lanes on most streets, but these standards put the sharrow too far right by about one foot. That single foot makes a huge difference. In Denver we've seen sharrows centered 12 feet from the curb that seem very effective and pro-cyclist; on the same streets are badly placed sharrows, centered 10 feet from the curb, which seem much too close to parked cars. The city has promised to repaint them eventually at 12 feet.

The sharrows have been improved greatly but are also still too small, imo. The current standard is one meter by three meters. The ideal sharrow I think would be about 2 meters wide and 5 meters long. It sounds a lot bigger than it really would be on the street. I would be curious to find out how sharrows work on all different kinds of streets, but I doubt we ever will.

+1 . Robert mentions sharrow size as needing to be marginally larger, like a foot larger and a foot further left..

Seattles' sharrows have been developing, the ones seen in the 'sharrows too far right?' video have been supplanted on some streets by nearly center of the lane sharrows that are a bit larger and a foot or so further left.

as sharrow standards develop in the US, I hope a foot or two larger and a foot or two further left gets codified in future MUTCD, current minimum sizes are just too small to be maximally effective.
Bekologist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-09, 06:51 PM   #45
The Human Car
-=Barry=-
 
The Human Car's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Baltimore, MD +/- ~100 miles
Bikes:
Posts: 4,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by High Roller View Post
I would like to agree with this. But my experience indicates that once such road markings come into widespread use, the public perception, as evidenced by aggressive driving behavior and harrassment, is that my rights are diminished when such markings are absent.
Having experienced tons of harassment and aggressive driving behavior with near zero facilities I have a hard time supporting no facilities. While I have experienced some junk near facilities for the most part having facilities has improved the overall tone of drivers as more cyclists hit the streets.
__________________
Cycling Advocate
http://BaltimoreSpokes.org
. . . o
. . /L
=()>()
The Human Car is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-09, 07:01 PM   #46
danarnold
Kaffee Nazi
 
danarnold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Richland, WA
Bikes: 2009 Kestrel RT800, 2007 Roubaix, 1976 Lambert-Viscount
Posts: 1,374
Smile

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
i'm suprised danarnold can comment on the effectiveness of them also. i doubt he's ridden across even one in eastern washington.
Bek, I'm going to introduce you to a new concept: logic. Your post carries the implication that anyone who hasn't had direct experience with a phenomenon, cannot use reason to analyze it. If you were correct, formal logic and all of mathematics would be a waste of time since they involve pure analysis of abstractions.

It takes neither a mathematician nor logician, nor anyone who has ever seen a sharrow in the pigment to be able to reason that a sharrow should be placed more to the center of the road and outside the door zone.

One also needn't have ever seen a sharrow to be able to reason that a sharrow is less directive and restrictive than a three foot painted lane.

'[P]erhaps [now] we can keep the discussion centered on sharrows and not cantenkery,'
_Bekologist.


_ Dan
danarnold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-09, 07:04 PM   #47
The Human Car
-=Barry=-
 
The Human Car's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Baltimore, MD +/- ~100 miles
Bikes:
Posts: 4,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
are these sharrows too far right? video...

are these sharrows too far right?
So far I have found right most sharrows helpful if I choose to be considerate to traffic and ride to the right and of no consequence if I take the lane. The camera misses the car passing a cyclists riding along the curb up ahead, unsafe passing events are the true test if sharrows are too far right.
__________________
Cycling Advocate
http://BaltimoreSpokes.org
. . . o
. . /L
=()>()
The Human Car is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-09, 07:05 PM   #48
danarnold
Kaffee Nazi
 
danarnold's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Richland, WA
Bikes: 2009 Kestrel RT800, 2007 Roubaix, 1976 Lambert-Viscount
Posts: 1,374
Originally Posted by High Roller
I would like to agree with this. But my experience indicates that once such road markings come into widespread use, the public perception, as evidenced by aggressive driving behavior and harrassment, is that my rights are diminished when such markings are absent.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Human Car View Post
Having experienced tons of harassment and aggressive driving behavior with near zero facilities I have a hard time supporting no facilities. While I have experienced some junk near facilities for the most part having facilities has improved the overall tone of drivers as more cyclists hit the streets.
Then we can all agree that one effective solution is to at least have sharrows and 'bicycle' signs on all roads where cycling is appropriate?
danarnold is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-09, 11:21 PM   #49
The Human Car
-=Barry=-
 
The Human Car's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Baltimore, MD +/- ~100 miles
Bikes:
Posts: 4,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by danarnold View Post
Bek, I'm going to introduce you to a new concept: logic. Your post carries the implication that anyone who hasn't had direct experience with a phenomenon, cannot use reason to analyze it. If you were correct, formal logic and all of mathematics would be a waste of time since they involve pure analysis of abstractions.

It takes neither a mathematician nor logician, nor anyone who has ever seen a sharrow in the pigment to be able to reason that a sharrow should be placed more to the center of the road and outside the door zone.

One also needn't have ever seen a sharrow to be able to reason that a sharrow is less directive and restrictive than a three foot painted lane.

'[P]erhaps [now] we can keep the discussion centered on sharrows and not cantenkery,'
_Bekologist.


_ Dan
danarnold, I'm going to introduce you to a new concept: validation of logical theories through observation and study. Your post carries the implication that no one has studied center of the lane bike symbol placement this is incorrect as a "bike in a house" (a bike in a arrow outline) has been studied and has been found lacking to be included in the next version of AASHTO. Since I am not on the committee that makes such decisions I cannot relay the logic of that decision but I can offer my observations with sharrows which is that I do not think they would improve conditions for cyclists being placed in the center of the road consistently (though I am thinking that 6" to 1' further left might be a good idea.)

If you were correct, formal logic would be all that is needed to prove that bikes belong on sidewalks and not mixing with faster traffic as that would certainly be found unsafe by some arbitrary logical standard.

It takes neither a mathematician nor logician, to see that it is through observation and not logic alone that determines if something works or not.

'[P]erhaps [now] we can keep the discussion centered on sharrows and not cantenkery,'
__________________
Cycling Advocate
http://BaltimoreSpokes.org
. . . o
. . /L
=()>()
The Human Car is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-19-09, 11:31 PM   #50
The Human Car
-=Barry=-
 
The Human Car's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Baltimore, MD +/- ~100 miles
Bikes:
Posts: 4,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by danarnold View Post
Then we can all agree that one effective solution is to at least have sharrows and 'bicycle' signs on all roads where cycling is appropriate?
Personally I see new road treatment as a way of shaking up the status quo on roads. If cyclists are being harassed or endangered then yes something should be done but I have seen the effect of bicycle accommodations carry over to roads with no bicycle accommodations so I don't think ALL roads are in need of treatments.
__________________
Cycling Advocate
http://BaltimoreSpokes.org
. . . o
. . /L
=()>()
The Human Car is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:34 PM.