"Bob Paolino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [snip]
> Perhaps what we really need are bikeways that are shared-use in that the > same "corridor" is available to users on foot and users on human-powered > wheels, just not sharing the exact same pavement. Let's put sidewalks > alongside the bikeways, or make constructive use of some paint to > identify lanes for foot traffic and bicycle traffic. Careful what you wish for. We have that on the George Washington Bridge in New York City. One lane for bikes, the other for pedestrians, divided by paint. The catch is that they didn't put in extra pavement---each lane is about two feet wide. This is sort of like reserving one side of Regent St for cars and bikes traveling in both directions and the other for SUVs and large trucks. The difference is that hardly anyone uses the path over the GW bridge (wonder why?). I agree with Arthur that "everyone on the right" is the best way for pedestrians and cyclists to share a path. If you'd prefer separate paths, fine, but that's more expensive. Making walkers follow different rules doesn't solve anything. For example, if walkers belong on the left, what do you call out as you pass someone who's walking your way---"on your right"? How is that better than "on your left"? --glenn _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://www.danenet.org/mailman/listinfo/bikies
