SF: Now America's Top Big City for Biking!!



L

Leo Lichtman

Guest
"Rich Clark" wrote: (clip) When I go back and ride in Chicago I am still
struck by how well drivers accommodate cyclists on the streets, and just
how much bikes are an *expected* part of the traffic flow.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
You have raised a very good point. When bicycles are present in numbers,
they increase the awareness of drivers. A lone cyclist may be seen as an
impediment, while a population of cyclists becomes part of the scene.
 
M

Matt O'Toole

Guest
Paul Turner wrote:

> There may be something to that, but It leaves Chicago as a
> counter-example that needs to be explained away. Chicago has few
> topographic restrictions. It's about as flat and regular as a
> chessboard. Even the lakeshore is a big smooth curve, with no cliffs
> or fiords. There's a river, but with almost 200 bridges it doesn't
> create many bottlenecks. Yet Chicago is a very bike-friendly city, in
> my opinion.


Again, it's an older city that took its final form before the age of the
automobile.

Matt O.
 
M

Matt O'Toole

Guest
Leo Lichtman wrote:

> "Rich Clark" wrote: (clip) When I go back and ride in Chicago I am
> still struck by how well drivers accommodate cyclists on the
> streets, and just how much bikes are an *expected* part of the
> traffic flow. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


> You have raised a very good point. When bicycles are present in
> numbers, they increase the awareness of drivers. A lone cyclist may
> be seen as an impediment, while a population of cyclists becomes part
> of the scene.


Well, put, Leo.

Matt O.
 

Similar threads