Advertise on Bikeforums.net



User Tag List

Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 202
  1. #1
    genec genec's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    san diego
    My Bikes
    custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
    Posts
    22,904
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    "the essense of the VC vision?"

    From the comments section of this site:
    http://www.copenhagenize.com/2009/10...ng-spaces.html

    Well,I guess that finally I've gotten an even clearer picture of what Vehicular Cycling, by courtesy of kfg.

    In essence the VC vision is about superhighways integrating high speed motor traffic with bicycles and slowing down motortraffic by having the cyclists play a role of some human shields among cars - all in the name of "effective" transportation.

    One may guess that its not any coincidence that the inception of this vision coincides with the era of hippies and psychedelia. Don't get me wrong; I do believe that todays lack of the political awareness, commitments and movements of that era (at least as it was in europe) is a clear weakness to the society.

    The VC vision, however, does seem to nicely integrate the love message with psychedelia and, well... hallucinogens.
    Could it be?

  2. #2
    totally louche Bekologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    A land that time forgot
    My Bikes
    the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
    Posts
    18,026
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    whatever the essence of the VC vision is,

    it's based on a outdated paradigm rapidly falling out of favor in america. Just about anyone with common sense, not just bike nuts, but community planners and health officials and environmentalists and just about anyone now recognize car culture as damaging to public health and welfare -

    Yet the VC buffoons continue to play into the 'supremacy of the autocentric road system' as acceptable public rights of way planning.

    people by and large don't WANT to live in a sprawling suburban dystopia facing lengthy, congested commutes and incur high transportation costs to feel isolated from any sense of community while being forced into big box consumerism attendant with economic development sprawl.

    That is not by any means a realization of the american dream no matter how green the grass is in the subdivision.

    The american, largely urban and suburban public is clamoring for walkable bikeable communities.



    VCists suffer from a ludicrous inability to stay connected with reality in 21st century transportation planning.
    Last edited by Bekologist; 10-11-09 at 11:33 AM.
    "Evidence, anecdote and methodology all support planning for roadway bike traffic."

  3. #3
    Kaffee Nazi danarnold's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Richland, WA
    My Bikes
    2009 Kestrel RT800, 2007 Roubaix, 1976 Lambert-Viscount
    Posts
    1,374
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
    whatever the essence of the VC vision is,

    it's based on a outdated paradigm ....
    ...Just about anyone with common sens,....
    ...Yet the VC buffoons continue to....
    ...VCists suffer from a ludicrous inability to stay connected with reality ....
    Bek, did you ever stop to think that maybe, just maybe, you might need some consensus to get some of your ideas promoted? To the extent you want to recruit others to your way of thinking, you might consider a different rhetorical style.

    Treating everyone who does not precisely agree with your particular vision and your exact and specific way to implement it as 'buffoons without common sense who believe in outdated paradigms, having a ludicrous inability to stay connected to reality' is not conducive to consensus building.
    DISCLAIMER: Nothing here should be taken as legal advice, even if it seems silly enough to have been written by a legislator, and especially not if it appears (by remote chance) to display any evidence of erudition.

  4. #4
    totally louche Bekologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    A land that time forgot
    My Bikes
    the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
    Posts
    18,026
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If you think I'm trying to build consensus with those that stand opposed to any type of bicycling facilitated roadscape you're fooling yourself.

    I'm calling them the stick in the mud, obsolete don quixotes and fringe lunatics that they are. you dropped a significant qualifier in my quote
    Quote Originally Posted by bekologist
    Just about anyone with common sense, not just bike nuts, but community planners and health officials and environmentalists and just about anyone now recognize car culture as damaging to public health and welfare
    did you ever think, danarnold, that there's a growing movement afoot in america from all sides to reduce the dependence on the private automobile for all its attendant ills?

    there's a big thread about this called 'other agendas' started by some Texas VC buffoon that is critical of the far ranging interests directed towards increasing bicycling ride share in the USA.




    'exact and specific ways'?? you think i've got some master plan to stripe a bikelane on every road in america?



    I recognize value in roadscape design that facilitates bicycling, specificity is not required.

    oh that's right you can see the value of bikelanes on higher speed roadways i guess you need some concessions

    Last edited by Bekologist; 10-11-09 at 05:41 PM.
    "Evidence, anecdote and methodology all support planning for roadway bike traffic."

  5. #5
    High Roller
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
    whatever the essence of the VC vision is,

    it's based on a outdated paradigm rapidly falling out of favor in america. Just about anyone with common sense, not just bike nuts, but community planners and health officials and environmentalists and just about anyone now recognize car culture as damaging to public health and welfare -

    Yet the VC buffoons continue to play into the 'supremacy of the autocentric road system' as acceptable public rights of way planning.
    I prefer lower speed limits, shareable roads, more law enforcement, and enhanced cycling competency to over-engineered roadways, and that automatically makes me an autocentric supremacist buffoon?

    Bek, you're stereotyping again. I share your goal of increasing bicycle transportation modal share. But my experience convinces me that dumbed-down roadway designs are a poor substitute for lawful and defensive cycling practices as a means to achieve it.

    As danarnold suggested above, perhaps your cause would benefit from having a more reasonable and articulate spokesperson.
    Last edited by High Roller; 10-14-09 at 12:40 PM.

  6. #6
    totally louche Bekologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    A land that time forgot
    My Bikes
    the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
    Posts
    18,026
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    consider your polarized, stereotyped false arguments of 'defensive cycling' as substitutions for 'engineering'. consider the reality that these two disparate elements work in concert with one another and we've got a deal.

    you're not a member of the buffoon club because you stand for 'prefer lower speed limits, shareable roads, more law enforcement, and enhanced cycling competency to over-engineered roadways' you're a buffoon because you stand opposed to any bike specificity in roadway design.

    You use the term 'shared roads' loosely as you refuse to accept federal guidelines on how shared roads are designed using current AASHTO guidelines for roadway design under federal policy directives to keep and increase lawful roadway bike ridership while emphasizing bicyclists' right to the roadway in concert with enhancing safety for the vast majority of american bicyclists.

    pehaps your cause could benefit from getting a clue.

    'enhanced cycling competency' how about 'enhanced roadways', it will be easier and more effective

    why blame the riders for the problems of road design? lame.

    My 'cause'? I direct you to the FHWA, have you heard of them?
    Last edited by Bekologist; 10-14-09 at 01:12 PM.
    "Evidence, anecdote and methodology all support planning for roadway bike traffic."

  7. #7
    Senior Member randya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    in bed with your mom
    My Bikes
    who cares?
    Posts
    13,696
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    the essence of the VC vision is that adherence to the VC agenda will result in never getting more than a fraction of a percent of so-called 'elite' cyclists in lycra on road bikes onto the streets.

  8. #8
    genec genec's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    san diego
    My Bikes
    custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
    Posts
    22,904
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by High Roller View Post
    I prefer lower speed limits, shareable roads, more law enforcement, and enhanced cycling competency to over-engineered roadways, and that automatically makes me an autocentric supremacist buffoon?

    Bek, you're stereotyping again. I share your goal of increasing bicycle transportation modal share. But my experience convinces me that dumbed-down roadway designs are a poor substitute for lawful and defensive cycling practices as a means to achieve it.

    As danarnold suggested above, perhaps your cause would benefit from having a more reasonable and articulate spokesperson.
    Actually your preferences are noble goals... and would lead to quite livable cities. However, the motoring masses want speed, speed and more speed, and both the designers of motor vehicles and the designers of new roadways are bending over backwards to accommodate those wishes.

    Even John Forester is a member of the faction that believes that a plethora of high speed roads is the ticket to "personal freedom."

    Of course the reality of any fairly dense city is a mockery of that "need for speed," but never mind that...

  9. #9
    Senior Member randya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    in bed with your mom
    My Bikes
    who cares?
    Posts
    13,696
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    ^^ once again, the lack of any proposal for improving motorist education is a glaring deficiency in the VC agenda.


  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,070
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by randya View Post
    ^^ once again, the lack of any proposal for improving motorist education is a glaring deficiency in the VC agenda.

    "A glaring deficiency in the VC agenda"? Your bikeway program has been up and running for thirty years now, and you are still complaining like hell about motorist behavior. Looks just like your program has accomplished either nothing, or, indeed, made things worse, about motorist behavior. If this isn't a glaring actual deficiency in the bikeway program, then it cannot, equally, be a glaring potential deficiency in the VC agenda.

    The term "glaring deficiency" conveys the meaning of something lacking that is of great importance. I presume that when you state this in specific terms of "motorist education" you mean exactly that. Education imparts knowledge; what, precisely, is the additional knowledge that you would impart to motorists? And, of course, you need to justify this additional knowledge as producing some greatly required change in behavior. I think that you should specify what knowledge is lacking and why it is of great importance.

    As I have written frequently, I see little probable result from the provision of additional knowledge to motorists, and hence see that the potential effort to do so should be directed in far more useful directions, as in training cyclists, police, and the judicial system.

    You have not specified what knowledge you desire to impart, and what results you expect from that additional knowledge. But, if you actually know these things, why is it that the bikeway advocates, who have been in charge of America's bicycle transportation program for thirty years, haven't solved the problem?

  11. #11
    Senior Member randya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    in bed with your mom
    My Bikes
    who cares?
    Posts
    13,696
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
    "A glaring deficiency in the VC agenda"? Your bikeway program has been up and running for thirty years now, and you are still complaining like hell about motorist behavior. Looks just like your program has accomplished either nothing, or, indeed, made things worse, about motorist behavior. If this isn't a glaring actual deficiency in the bikeway program, then it cannot, equally, be a glaring potential deficiency in the VC agenda.

    The term "glaring deficiency" conveys the meaning of something lacking that is of great importance. I presume that when you state this in specific terms of "motorist education" you mean exactly that. Education imparts knowledge; what, precisely, is the additional knowledge that you would impart to motorists? And, of course, you need to justify this additional knowledge as producing some greatly required change in behavior. I think that you should specify what knowledge is lacking and why it is of great importance.

    As I have written frequently, I see little probable result from the provision of additional knowledge to motorists, and hence see that the potential effort to do so should be directed in far more useful directions, as in training cyclists, police, and the judicial system.

    You have not specified what knowledge you desire to impart, and what results you expect from that additional knowledge. But, if you actually know these things, why is it that the bikeway advocates, who have been in charge of America's bicycle transportation program for thirty years, haven't solved the problem?
    IMO, motorist education is essential regardless of whether you go with the VC or the facilities model, John. So actually, I'm pointing out a glaring deficiency in both approaches.

    Most motorists in the US are under the false impression that cyclists don't belong on the roads because they don't pay for the roads, and it has nothing to do with the arguments between cyclists over a stripe of paint, the semantics of that argument will fall on deaf ears as far as motorists are concerned. So what motorists need to be taught is that the public roads are for the use of the public, regardless of their means of conveyance.

    Neither painting stripes nor taking the lane convey anything useful to motorists in the way of education if they don't think cyclists have a legal right to be on the road in either case.

  12. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    4,070
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by randya View Post
    IMO, motorist education is essential regardless of whether you go with the VC or the facilities model, John. So actually, I'm pointing out a glaring deficiency in both approaches.

    Most motorists in the US are under the false impression that cyclists don't belong on the roads because they don't pay for the roads, and it has nothing to do with the arguments between cyclists over a stripe of paint, the semantics of that argument will fall on deaf ears as far as motorists are concerned. So what motorists need to be taught is that the public roads are for the use of the public, regardless of their means of conveyance.

    Neither painting stripes nor taking the lane convey anything useful to motorists in the way of education if they don't think cyclists have a legal right to be on the road in either case.
    I agree that many American motorists think that cyclists don't belong on the roads, but I think that the motivations for this view are much more complicated than just the tax issue. I think that the tax issue is merely an easy excuse for the belief, and militant motorists certainly advance several more arguments as soon as the subject occurs. Many states (I don't know how many, and the roster probably changes over the years) recognize this to the extent of inserting statements into the official driver instruction manuals that cyclists are legitimate road users. However, none that I know of has applied detailed arguments as to the various issues in this subject. I think that doing more than the bare statement is not likely to occur, partly because of space and partly because of controversy.

    If the existing official motorist manuals are deemed to be always insufficient, through what other medium could cyclists deliver it? Where would we get the money to do that?

    In any case, what is the actual desired message? That cyclists pay taxes that contribute toward roads? That cyclists don't need to be licensed? That even cyclists who disobey the law are legitimate road users? Or messages that would be so maliciously interpreted by militant motorists?

    I mentioned controversy. Consider the governmental official with responsibilities for the bicycle transportation program. Sure, he can say that cyclists are legitimate road users, and that won't raise much controversy. But does he say that they should be treated as drivers of vehicles? Doesn't the controversy about that issue within this group indicate how great would be the controversy in the political world with the militant motorists chiming in? America has had probably the longest history in the motoring world of motorist dislike of bicycle traffic. No government anywhere familiar to me has been able to reverse the dislike. I suspect, though nobody I know of has measured this, that Germany is likely to have the next strongest anti-cyclist tradition, and it must be only half the duration of America's.

    I wrote of controversy, but have you considered the effect of such controversy on your position, if the change became anywhere near to being successful? I can imagine the effect of the clearest and most obvious social and governmental implementation of cyclists' right to use the road like anybody else, something far greater in effect that any financially possible propaganda program. That is, the demonstration that cyclists have the normal right to use the roads implemented by removing the bikeway program (except for some recreational off-road paths), repealing the discriminatory anti-cyclist laws, undertaking to make the roads better for lawful cyclists, and insisting that cyclist obey the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles. That would be the most powerful demonstration of cyclists' right to use the roads that I can imagine. But who are the few in this group who would support such a demonstration of cyclists' rightful rights to use the road?

  13. #13
    Infamous Member chipcom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    My Bikes
    Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
    Posts
    24,373
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by John Forester View Post
    "A glaring deficiency in the VC agenda"? Your bikeway program has been up and running for thirty years now, and you are still complaining like hell about motorist behavior. Looks just like your program has accomplished either nothing, or, indeed, made things worse, about motorist behavior. If this isn't a glaring actual deficiency in the bikeway program, then it cannot, equally, be a glaring potential deficiency in the VC agenda.

    The term "glaring deficiency" conveys the meaning of something lacking that is of great importance. I presume that when you state this in specific terms of "motorist education" you mean exactly that. Education imparts knowledge; what, precisely, is the additional knowledge that you would impart to motorists? And, of course, you need to justify this additional knowledge as producing some greatly required change in behavior. I think that you should specify what knowledge is lacking and why it is of great importance.

    As I have written frequently, I see little probable result from the provision of additional knowledge to motorists, and hence see that the potential effort to do so should be directed in far more useful directions, as in training cyclists, police, and the judicial system.

    You have not specified what knowledge you desire to impart, and what results you expect from that additional knowledge. But, if you actually know these things, why is it that the bikeway advocates, who have been in charge of America's bicycle transportation program for thirty years, haven't solved the problem?
    This is one of those areas where I agree with John. While it is true that more bike specific facilities have increased ridership, at the same time it has kept us 'out of the way' of motorists who have become very possessive of their exclusive (in their minds) right to the road. I agree 100% in motorist education, but I also believe 100% in resources for cyclist education...if people don't learn and use the skills required to operate safely on the road (which are really quite simple and even widely known when you consider that most cyclists also drive), sooner or later we're gonna lose our right to operate on the roads at all.

    There ain't no single magic bullet if you wanna make progress you have to tackle multiple problems at the same time. Think if it like body building...would you work only one arm and delay working the other until you get the first to the tone you wish?

  14. #14
    Senior Member randya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    in bed with your mom
    My Bikes
    who cares?
    Posts
    13,696
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    ^^ I'm fine with an approach that educates both cyclists and motorists at the same time; but John is saying that we should address the former at the expense of the latter. More ADC / VC blather.


  15. #15
    High Roller
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by chipcom View Post
    This is one of those areas where I agree with John. While it is true that more bike specific facilities have increased ridership, at the same time it has kept us 'out of the way' of motorists who have become very possessive of their exclusive (in their minds) right to the road. I agree 100% in motorist education, but I also believe 100% in resources for cyclist education...if people don't learn and use the skills required to operate safely on the road (which are really quite simple and even widely known when you consider that most cyclists also drive), sooner or later we're gonna lose our right to operate on the roads at all.
    chipcom hits one out of the park and recognizes the fundamental concern driving the same roads/same rights/same rules movement.

    Many of the roads I ride on now have not changed in forty years, long before the term “bike lane” was part of our language. When biking on these roads, I experience much more harassment now than I did then. Now I’m repeatedly told to “get in the bike lane” or “get on the sidewalk”, often when neither exists on the route upon which I’m travelling. Is this because people are now just angrier and more self-entitled and less civil in general than they were then? Or has the creation of bikeways conveyed the notion to them that I no longer belong on the same roads I’ve been cycling on all these years?

  16. #16
    totally louche Bekologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    A land that time forgot
    My Bikes
    the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
    Posts
    18,026
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    you think on road bikelanes as part of a considerate bikeway network somehow indicates to the public that bicycles are not supposed to be riding on the road in that community?



    that's RICH.

    maybe if there were no bikelanes or sidewalks motorists would yell "get on the back of the bus!" or "Get on the banana boat" or the "hysteria train" instead.

    maybe the motorists are upset they have to share the road with bicyclists regardless of the attendant infrastructure.

    is society less polite and more self serving, agressive and provincial behind the wheel? absolutely. what do you think, 'high roller'?
    Last edited by Bekologist; 10-15-09 at 09:21 AM.
    "Evidence, anecdote and methodology all support planning for roadway bike traffic."

  17. #17
    Senior Member rando's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Tempe, AZ
    Posts
    2,967
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    the essence of the VC vision: Tunnel!
    "Think of bicycles as rideable art that can just about save the world". ~Grant Petersen

    Cyclists fare best when they recognize that there are times when acting vehicularly is not the best practice, and are flexible enough to do what is necessary as the situation warrants.--Me

  18. #18
    High Roller
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
    maybe the motorists are upset they have to share the road with bicyclists regardless of the attendant infrastructure.
    No, you missed the point entirely.

    The probability of friction with motorists on roads without shareable width lanes and without bikeways is higher today than in the past, before any bikeways existed.

    The probability of friction with motorists on roads with shareable width lanes, regardless of whether bikeways are present, is low and similar to the past.

    Connect the dots.

  19. #19
    Infamous Member chipcom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    My Bikes
    Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
    Posts
    24,373
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by randya View Post
    ^^ I'm fine with an approach that educates both cyclists and motorists at the same time; but John is saying that we should address the former at the expense of the latter. More ADC / VC blather.

    hence the working one arm and not the other till the first is finished analogy.

    both sides seem to have that problem.

  20. #20
    Senior Member randya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    in bed with your mom
    My Bikes
    who cares?
    Posts
    13,696
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by High Roller View Post
    No, you missed the point entirely.

    The probability of friction with motorists on roads without shareable width lanes and without bikeways is higher today than in the past, before any bikeways existed.

    The probability of friction with motorists on roads with shareable width lanes, regardless of whether bikeways are present, is low and similar to the past.

    Connect the dots.
    as danarnold would say I think you are confusing correlation with cause and effect

  21. #21
    Senior Member randya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    in bed with your mom
    My Bikes
    who cares?
    Posts
    13,696
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by chipcom View Post
    hence the working one arm and not the other till the first is finished analogy.

    both sides seem to have that problem.
    I don't think so. I'm not against educating cyclists, in fact I'm all for it. But I don't think it should be done in a vacuum and the motorists need to be educated as well, perhaps more so than the cyclists.

    OTOH, John thinks educating motorists is 'a waste of time' and wants to focus solely on the cyclists.

  22. #22
    Infamous Member chipcom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    My Bikes
    Surly Big Dummy, Fuji World, 80ish Bianchi
    Posts
    24,373
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by randya View Post
    I don't think so. I'm not against educating cyclists, in fact I'm all for it. But I don't think it should be done in a vacuum and the motorists need to be educated as well, perhaps more so than the cyclists.

    OTOH, John thinks educating motorists is 'a waste of time' and wants to focus solely on the cyclists.
    Sure, but even education for both cyclists and motorists isn't addressing the entire transportation system 'body'. We still have to address laws for both all vehicles and specific classes of vehicles, or infrastructure, cycling specific, motorist specific and in general, etc, etc. As cyclists we tend to want to work out only the cycling related extremities of the transportation system, rather than the whole body.

  23. #23
    totally louche Bekologist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    A land that time forgot
    My Bikes
    the ever shifting stable loaded with comfortable road bikes and city and winter bikes
    Posts
    18,026
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    one of the issues vehikular cyklists have to admit to themselves is that AASHTO compliant bike infrastructure by design allows vehicular cycling.
    "Evidence, anecdote and methodology all support planning for roadway bike traffic."

  24. #24
    Senior Member sggoodri's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Cary, NC
    My Bikes
    1983 Trek, 2001 Lemond, 2000 Gary Fisher
    Posts
    3,068
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Bekologist View Post
    one of the issues vehikular cyklists have to admit to themselves is that AASHTO compliant bike infrastructure by design allows vehicular cycling.
    Sometimes, but not always, depending on what you mean by "allows."

    Where mandatory bike lane use laws exist, many people may interpret the law as not allowing vehicular cycling techniques that involve more leftward positioning at junction approaches or to avoid other hazards. Many intepret the placement of the bike lane by the DOT as being the ultimate authority on where cyclists are allowed to operate, even if the lane is poorly designed and maintained (which includes many AASHTO compliant lanes). Even without such laws, bike lanes that are marked in locations contraindicated by defensive bicycle driving stigmatize cyclists who operate more safely and this increases motorist harassment.
    Last edited by sggoodri; 10-15-09 at 12:10 PM.

  25. #25
    Senior Member randya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    in bed with your mom
    My Bikes
    who cares?
    Posts
    13,696
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by sggoodri View Post
    Where mandatory bike lane use laws exist, many people may interpret the law as not allowing vehicular cycling techniques that involve more leftward positioning at junction approaches or to avoid other hazards. Many intepret the placement of the bike lane by the DOT as being the ultimate authority on where cyclists are allowed to operate, even if the lane is poorly designed and maintained (which includes many AASHTO compliant lanes). Even without such laws, bike lanes that are marked in locations contraindicated by defensive bicycle driving stigmatize cyclists who operate more safely and this increases motorist harassment.
    I agree with Steve on this

Page 1 of 9 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •