Segregation
01-22-05, 05:26 PM
#26
Sumanitu taka owaci
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 8,945
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Originally Posted by DnvrFox
Okay! I'm done.
Originally Posted by John E
Bicyclists ARE segregated / excluded from most Interstate highways.
I tend to be pragmatic, rather than dogmatic. Some of you will flame me for this, but I favor a few forms of bicycle-motor vehicle segregation, such as well-designed bicycle or mixed use bypasses around, over, or under inherently dangerous interchanges.
I tend to be pragmatic, rather than dogmatic. Some of you will flame me for this, but I favor a few forms of bicycle-motor vehicle segregation, such as well-designed bicycle or mixed use bypasses around, over, or under inherently dangerous interchanges.
I also agree that some degree of separation between differing modes of transportation, for example, between high-speed motorists and low-speed motorists (freeways,) between pedestrians and motor traffic (sidewalks,) and between cyclists and pedestrians (roadways) is prudent. Some forms of transportation do not mix well.
But without being dogmatic, the point is simply this: if cyclists are segregated from motor traffic, where will they ride? While I agree that creative solutions can be applied where motor-centric design excludes us, too often "solutions" are implemented to "protect" cyclists that amount to no more than scraps from the table (and some scraps can be downright dangerous.)
__________________
No worries
No worries
Last edited by LittleBigMan; 01-22-05 at 05:31 PM.
