T
Tom \Johnny Sunset\ Sherman
Guest
Qui si parla Campagnolo aka Peter Chisholm wrote:
> ...
> The other being 'major roadblocks'. Even here in the republic, which
> is pretty cycling 'heavy', roads do not support cycling all over the
> this little town. The 'Boulder creek path', often touted as the 'way'
> to get around by bicycle, was sold as a multiuse path and multiuse it
> is in spades..so much so that using it as a bike path is
> tough(IMPOSSIBLE whenever the CU football crowd is on it). .
>
> What is needed is a shoulder/bikelane on all city/county streets. THAT
> would encourage people to actually use a bike to get around but even
> with that, the numbers will always be small. AND don't expect the vast
> majority of towns/cities/counties to spend the $.
A qualified agreement with Peter. On rural highways, I have found the
best to be a WIDE paved (and rumble strip free) shoulder that is NOT
marked as a bicycle lane. This allows riding in the relatively dirt and
debris free traffic lane some to most of the time, then being able to
drift over onto the shoulder to allow overtaking motor vehicle traffic
to safely pass without slowing.
Similarly, a wider than normal right lane in urban areas allows for the
lane to be safely shared, while avoiding the ghetto effect of a marked
bicycle lane that complicates left turns and leads motorists to believe
bicycles should be confined to marked "bicycle facilities".
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
A Real Cyclist [TM] keeps at least one bicycle in the bedroom.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
> ...
> The other being 'major roadblocks'. Even here in the republic, which
> is pretty cycling 'heavy', roads do not support cycling all over the
> this little town. The 'Boulder creek path', often touted as the 'way'
> to get around by bicycle, was sold as a multiuse path and multiuse it
> is in spades..so much so that using it as a bike path is
> tough(IMPOSSIBLE whenever the CU football crowd is on it). .
>
> What is needed is a shoulder/bikelane on all city/county streets. THAT
> would encourage people to actually use a bike to get around but even
> with that, the numbers will always be small. AND don't expect the vast
> majority of towns/cities/counties to spend the $.
A qualified agreement with Peter. On rural highways, I have found the
best to be a WIDE paved (and rumble strip free) shoulder that is NOT
marked as a bicycle lane. This allows riding in the relatively dirt and
debris free traffic lane some to most of the time, then being able to
drift over onto the shoulder to allow overtaking motor vehicle traffic
to safely pass without slowing.
Similarly, a wider than normal right lane in urban areas allows for the
lane to be safely shared, while avoiding the ghetto effect of a marked
bicycle lane that complicates left turns and leads motorists to believe
bicycles should be confined to marked "bicycle facilities".
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
A Real Cyclist [TM] keeps at least one bicycle in the bedroom.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
