[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Driving Pet Peeves



In article <3s40jo$t12@rcogate.rco.qc.ca> asouthie@volvox.qc.ca (Alain Southiere) writes:
>
>   Don't get me wrong, I try to co-exist as much as possible with cyclists,
>but many seem to do everything to get hit or simply do everything to
>annoy car drivers. For instance, in some streets here, we have a cyclist
>path just between the road and the sidewalk. But many cyclist still
>ride on the road itself instead of the cycle path. The road is narrower
>than it was because they built a cycle path, so it's more dangerous for
>cyclists, but they still use the road instead of the safer cycle path.
>

It is unfortunate that your community chose to narrow a perfectly good
roadway in order to install a dangerous bicycle sidepath.  It has been
known for more than 20 years that 9 out of 10 bicycle/motor vehicle
accidents are the result of one vehicle turning or crossing the path of
another.  Cyclists using such sidepaths risk collisions with turning motor
vehicles at every driveway, side street, and intersection that the path
crosses.  AASHTO recognizes these dangers, and specifically advises
against the construction of cycle paths parallel to roadways. 
Additionally, such paths make it difficult, if not impossible, for a
cyclist to make a safe and proper left turn. 

I suggest that you contact your city councillor about this dangerous
sidepath.  Tell him that you do not mind sharing the roadway with lawful
cyclists, but that the sidepath narrows the roadway, making it difficult
to pass cyclists who, understandably, do not wish to endanger and
inconvenience themselves by using the sidepath.  Ask that the path be
removed, and the curbside travel lane be widened sufficiently to allow for
easy overtaking of bicyclists (14 feet is considered adequate.)


John Vance



References: