You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
The long answer ...
It's a sub-standard two way bike lane set up in a non-standard configuration.
Ok, so we have established there is a dedicated bike lane for Great Northern cyclists.
The bike lanes are very narrow -- what, 3' across? Considering that a cyclist on his bike is around 2' wide, that doesn't leave much extra. So if cyclists are going both directions in the bike lanes, they're about 1' apart from each other -- not acceptable. Also consider that there's a slight down grade southbound, so the cyclists going south are likely going 20+ mph, and the cyclists going north are going much slower -- and are likely weaving a bit due to their lower speed.
Other riders seem to not have a problem with using that lane. As a matter of fact, I see very very large groups (8-10+) of riders use that lane very efficiently, and doing so with traffic on either side.
So if we go with that kind of logic... Then the vehicle lane is not wide enough because of the bikers. So ill drive in the bike lane? Hrmm...
And the cyclists going north in the bike lane are about 1' away from car traffic going south -- again, not acceptable.
It gives you a birds-eye view of oncoming traffic.
The cyclists have a good reason not to use it, especially when going northbound..
The road really isn't wide enough for a proper bike lane, so the CoA should just restripe it all, removing the south bound bike lane entirely and making the north bound one of a proper width. Or make the road wider and put down proper bike lanes, which is of course much more difficult.
And the 183 flyover to MoPac isn't wide enough. But you don't see me using the shoulder because I think the city should re-stripe the flyover for more than one car.
You may call it "obstructing traffic" but we call it "avoiding a dangerous situation".
Riding on the street with motorist is a dangerous situation. Period. There is nothing safe about riding no the street with other vehicles. Even with several inches of steel protection, people still die in their cars, even in low speed wrecks.
Why should the people that pay taxes for their vehicle to drive on the road have to pay for someone obstructing traffic on a non-taxed vehicle which isn't funded to build and maintain the roads? This is an annual tax that is levied on the owner of the vehicle which in turn gives him the right to use a public road.
Just like any motorist that drives- driving is a privilege, not a right. Same with bikers. Biking with motorist is a privilege, not a right. Can't we respect that on some level and use your designated lane? Regardless of whats inconvenient to your extracurricular activities.
The short answer is that the bike lane is on the wrong side of the street.
It's a two way bike lane. The entire size of the bike lane for traffic in both directions is about the width of your typical car lane.
I live on West Terrace Dr., which is right along Great Northern. For anyone that rides that area knows there is a two way bike lane on the southbound side for about 85-90% of Great Northern.
At times there are cyclist riding in the northbound car lane, completely on the other side of the road from where the bike lane is.
They are not anywhere close to the beginning or end of the bike lane. So its not like a waiting to get over to the bike lane sorta thing...
I have driven the entire distance of Great Northern behind bikers like this.
Could somebody please enlighten me on why someone would completely avoid the designated bike lane, and obstruct traffic intentionally?
I'm just trying to understand this mentality. Hopefully a group of cyclist can shed some light on this.
Best Regards,
Austin
Pages: 1
[ Generated in 0.095 seconds, 9 queries executed - Memory usage: 512.79 KiB (Peak: 513.41 KiB) ]