bshanteau

I see a future where bicyclists are seen as first class road users, with the same rights and duties (as far as the rules of the road are concerned) as drivers of vehicles . In fact, I see a future where bicyclists who are traveling slower than other traffic are seen as drivers with the same right to use lanes as other drivers.

That doesn't mean that bicycles and cars are equal, no more than cars and trucks are equal. What I mean is that the people who operate them follow the same rules of the road. For instance, in almost every state, all drivers who are traveling slower than other traffic, regardless of what vehicle they are driving, are required to use the right-hand lane. There is no such rule in those states as "If you can't keep up, you have to stay at the right edge of the right-hand lane." (This is not true in Europe.)

I see a future where bicyclists who are traveling at less than the speed of other traffic can use the right-hand lane, turning out occasionally where it is safe to let faster drivers pass, just like other drivers. And bicyclists who are traveling at the same speed as other traffic can use any lane, just like other drivers.

I see a future where a bicyclist using a full lane is seen as normal and reasonable, even if the bicyclist is going slower than other traffic.

I see a future where bicyclists would no longer be afraid of being intimidated, threatened, bullied, buzzed, yelled at, had things thrown at them, forced off the road, accused of being rude and cited for riding in travel lanes. And without these fears, more people would ride bicycles on the public streets and highways.

B. Carfree

I believe many/most states give us the right to the full lane unless it is quite wide and clear of debris, so we're part way to your vision. Unfortunately, the cultural/law enforcement portion is sorely lacking. What good is a right that cannot be exercised but under fear of death? Did blacks really have the right to vote in Alabama in the 1950s?

I guess I'm only halfway down with your vision anyway. I don't have a problem with some well-done segregation. I don't mind the occasional bike path and bike lane as long as they are sufficiently wide, well maintained, kept free of hazards like door zones and parked cars and don't cause excessive delays/stops. So few of them meet these minimal criteria that I spend far more time trying to convince my city traffic planners to remove poor implementations than I do advocating for new ones.

genec

Nice dream Bob, but it doesn't work well with the laws of physics and the selfish nature of human beings... especially when some of those humans feel they "own the road" due to vehicle payments and various taxes and fees.

In places in Europe where cycling is on nearly equal footing as motoring, laws tend to make motorists responsible for harm to other road users... a vastly different approach to the law than that which exists in the US.

I would applaud your dream (and note with great reverence your choice of words on this date) should such road equality ever come true.

joejack951

In my neck of the woods and over several years I have finally gotten to the point where law enforcement no longer bothers me for riding in the middle of the travel lane on a major multi-lane arterial. For those who have been around long enough, I was actually ticketed for doing just that in 2007 after being harassed several times by law enforcement before the ticket and then several more time afterwards. I'm not sure which effort of mine made the most difference but I'm sure it didn't hurt to have a conversation with the state police officer who lives down the street from me about it, a conversation with the officer who originally ticketed me (after he pulled me over again), and multiple talks with the DE Bicycle Council.

Yesterday on my way home for work I pulled up to a light next to a county police officer. My wife happened to be on the same road a few cars back (in her car). We all pulled away uneventfully, with a motorist to my right making a right hand turn from the turn lane that every other cyclists uses to go straight at that point. I even got a smile and wave from my wife as she passed.

CommuteCommando

I second Genec's statement on the laws of physics thing. I like to say that bikes have the same rights and responsibilities as cars, but they are not cars. This means that they can safely do some things cars cannot, and cars can safely do some things that bikes should not.

As for Utopian dreams, a huge budget for PSA's explaining the reasons behind riding with traffic, taking the lane, riding clear of the door zone, stopping at a signal to the left of right turning traffic etc.

Ignorance on the part of motorists, and a lot of cyclists, is a big issue.

joejack951

Fixed that for you.

totalnewbie

if the road is full of young mothers with their toddlers on tandem bikes, i am sure the entire attitude towards cyclists will change.

genec

Which comes first... fixing the attitude so young mothers feel safe or somehow convincing "road fulls" of young mothers that they will change the attitudes of others...

The fact is that where cyclists fill the streets... the "fix" was top down, and included strong government support for cyclists, training of future generations to have the right attitude, making cyclists feel welcome and safe on the streets and making motorists feel less welcome and more responsible for collisions with other road users... it took all that to make cycling what it is in "some" European countries.

totalnewbie

yes, i agree the fix has to be top down. offering free diapers and baby formula to mothers with babies on tandem is one constructive way to do it. spreading propaganda on long-term damage on babies' brains from upholstery dye is another one. building playgrounds in the middle of busy intersections may help too.

totalnewbie

its quite common to find this in japan. i can't help but think whether this leads to better attitude the japanese's more courteous attitude towards cyclist. or like you suggest, the other way around.

daihard 

I'm not sure about that. There are tons of comfort bikes ridden by young mothers with their children in the "back seat" in Japan, but the bicycles are still treated like second-class citizens over there. Maybe those Japanese mothers should stand up more.

DX-MAN

I have a dream that self-important people will get over it.

It's a good thing I don't stay asleep until it happens, even Rip Van Winkle would say, "GEEZ, man, you slept a WHILE!"

Realizing equal rights on the road -- check, I'm on board.
Lack of harassment, intimidation, etc. -- check.
Use of common sense after comprehensive education -- CHECK Check check. I'm ready for it all to happen -- if I could speed the process, I'd be doing it.

In the meantime, I'll keep my head on a swivel, and the personal radar on hi-gain every time I leave my driveway.

I-Like-To-Bike

Nice dream; not likely though.

FBinNY 

It's a nice dream, and no reasonable person can find fault with it. In fact we;re pretty close to that in most states right now. The FTR rules leave cyclists plenty of latitude on lane placement, though I agree that neither cyclists no motorists seem to know.

OTOH, given the militancy of some cyclists, some of whom have a belief in moral superiority of cyclists, and/or misconstrue the issues of rights vs. licensing as applied to motorists, repealing FTR rules may unleash a bunch or arrogant cyclists with no respect for the rights of other road users. Note, I'm not saying it will, nor that most cyclists would be hogs, but it won't take many to force a rethinking of rpeal.

The dream is about sharing the road, and I'm with you 100%, but sharing the road is a two way street.

We don't need new rules, just better education, and a serious effort to change our road use culture.

daihard 

Like Barry Manilow sings, "Dreams never die as long as you try..."

ShoreCyclist

Nothing too far fetched about the possibility of starting a massive PSA campaign... Bicycle commuting makes a lot of sense for a lot of people, a lot of cities, and a lot of bike manufacturers. Getting two out of the three to pony up for at the very least a regional marketing campaign shouldn't be that tough...

DX-MAN

You're quite right, it's why I also wrote:

I can't let go of my inner cynic....

buzzman

I dream that one day I'll be able to do my ride across Massachusetts using a dedicated bike trail. I currently do the 140 mile trip using a circuitous route of back roads and state highways. Some of the route is quite lovely and other sections are horrendous. There are plans to connect a series of rail trails across the state. I'd love it.

Looigi

My dream is that all motorists will admire, respect, and perhaps even envy me while I'm out riding.

Sorry buzzman, but I'm no fan of bike paths except in specific and very limited circumstances. I want to be able to ride on roads and not be restricted to riding on MUPs.

John Forester

The reference to "the laws of physics" is totally irrelevant. The purpose of the rules of the road is to achieve reasonable mobility with reasonable safety, meaning the prevention of collisions. If the purpose of the rule is to prevent collisions, it doesn't matter which party is affected at that moment, the heavier or the lighter.

The idea that motorists risk colliding with bicyclists because the motorist is not likely to be hurt in such a collision is pure fiction, except for a very few psychopaths. No normal motorist wants to go through all the troubles that will pile up on him through colliding with a cyclist, certainly not for the pleasure of hitting the cyclist.

FBinNY 

Trails are a nice amenity for those who prefer them, but are not, and never will be, an adequate substitute for roads. Even in places with an excellent network of bike side paths and trains cyclists still have to start and end their trips on roads.

Morever, if experience is any indicator, trails aren't laid out and maintained as well as roads. Some of the nicest trails we have here cannot be ridden consistently at anything above 15mph and are prone to mud and silt cover every time it rains. They're nicely suited for recreation, but not reliable for transportation.

CommuteCommando

I recently did a charity ride for teh San Diego Bicycle coalition to raise funds for bike paths. I think that many politicians, in the interest of trying to appease everybody, came up with the concept of the MUP. I take them, and sometimes prefer them. They are sometimes faster than cycling on the street. Pedestrians often have alternates, called sidewalks, they can use.



I have a dream of a network of signal bypassing bike paths like this. https://goo.gl/maps/bJh4H

bshanteau

Rail trails may be nice to ride on and may have their purpose in bicycle transportation, but in function they are to bicycles like freeways are to cars. They both serve through traffic but do not provide access to property. Both bicycles and cars rely on streets and highways other than freeways and rail trails to access property. Thus bicyclists will always need to use streets and highways to access property. And bicyclists will always need to be treated as first class users of the street and highway system with the right to use a full lane.

buzzman

As someone who regularly rides 140 miles on roads in one day across the state of Massachusetts I appreciate the negative feedback and "schooling" me on riding on the road- I'll take your comments with a big grain of road salt. Fortunately, I am not alone in this desire and several advocacy groups are working to accomplish exactly what I described.

I have two extensive rides I do with some regularity which include fairly lengthy sections on rail trails. A Mount
Greylock out and back of 80 miles which includes 26 miles on the Ashuwilltocook. And a Cape Cod ride to Provincetown where I make use of the Cape Cod rail trail for about 30 miles. I am able to maintain a good speed on both trails (20+ mph- depending on the time of day) and both trails are relatively direct.

Sorry some of you have such limited imaginations. I thought this thread was a "dream thread". Guess it's a "crush your dream thread".

genec

You are right, no one wants to have a collision...

And the number of psychopaths out there targeting cyclists is incredibly small, even with road rage as a documented factor, however, collisions do occur, for a variety of reasons, and the fact that they do occur is well documented. Cyclists do not have the protection of air bags, crumple zones nor seatbelts, so even a minor "fender bender" can be serious to a cyclist... hence the "laws of physics" comment.

Neither cyclists nor motorists are perfect in their adherence to the rules of the road, so collisions WILL happen. Denying that collisions happen, and that the laws of physics do not play a negative role in the the injuries to cyclists, is a fools game... get over it.