When I rode on side walks, bike lanes were just a fantasy 
If there were bike lanes, I would have used them.
From the link:
Further, TA notes that it is important "to put this in context. Motor vehicles are responsible for over 70,000 injuries every year in New York City, and hundreds of annual deaths.
3 Likes
Yes. Things are going to vary by municipality, population density, etc. I’m not arguing against bike paths. I am arguing against bikes on sidewalks. If people want to change the laws, more data would help.
There might be cultural differences here.
In the UK there are rules for bicycles being on the road
Rule 61
Cycle Routes and Other Facilities.
Use cycle routes, advanced stop lines, cycle boxes and toucan crossings unless at the time it is unsafe to do so. Use of these facilities is not compulsory and will depend on your experience and skills, but they can make your journey safer.
Rule 64
You MUST NOT cycle on a pavement (sidewalk).
1 Like
Rules are very similar in a lot of US states. It is not homogeneous nationally here.
1 Like
So there’s this:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/9542542/
And this:
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0001457599000287?via%3Dihub
Both of which indicate that cyclist appear to be most safe riding on streets, followed by off-street paths (weirdly), followed by sidewalks.
Obviously, your own specific circumstances may be different. Sidewalks around me are legal to ride on, provided the cyclist rides “a normal walking speed”. So, that’s like 2-4mph. Might as well walk at that point.
5 Likes
Not in most of America there aren’t.
1 Like
There are: they’re called roads. Bikes were there before cars.
5 Likes
My own specific circumstances are that I can’t bicycle, and I can’t walk across the street at busy intersections because of all the dangerous safetyweapons.
I’m a hell of a lot more likely to be killed by a car.
I don’t understand the hostility to bikes, given that there are more cars, and infinitely more danger from each car.
1 Like
Enough.
I’m done.
6 Likes
After looking (with varying degrees of specificity) at various aspects of road safety over the last thirty-odd years, I think the most common factor is that it tends towards the counterintuitive.
What’s the point?
I remember reading somewhere that a cycle lane needs to be two metres across to actually be usable.
2 Likes
2 m? That’s a damn wide bicycle lane. You can effectively pass another bicycle while staying within a meter wide lane.
Two metres means you can avoid an obstruction/broken glass/drain, and without going onto the road or pavement.
3 Likes
2 meters would help you avoid door prizes.
4 Likes
I like the separated lanes some areas have for that.
6 Likes
2 meters is wide enough for two cyclists to pass, but I doubt 1 meter is. 1 meter is like two of me (194cm, 85kg) standing shoulder to shoulder.
They kind of suck for parking a car, though.
1 Like
I don’t see how it’s any different than parking on a 2 lane road without a bike lane.
3 Likes
