Quote:
Originally Posted by tybuilding
> Highway drivers should have the same rule apply for passing cyclists as they would passing emergency vehicles, move over, slow to 70km/hr. Here is a good ad campaign:
Once again I am lost for words. This is a horrible proposition. I fail to understand the reason for this? Why? Are people being hit left right and center? No.
A horrible proposition? If the road does not have adequate shoulders to provide separation then drivers should slow down, and pass with caution. What is wrong with this logic? Vehicles should have at least 1 m to pass cyclists, more with increasing speed. Thankfully not too many cyclists are hit but it does happen. There have been serious accidents and deaths on the highways where the motorist drove too close. I happens more often than you think:
http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/07/24/t...highway-crash/
“It’s a pretty flat, single highway with traffic going both ways,” said McGuire. “Cyclists only have a narrow, about 18-inch piece of highway to ride on.”
Weather conditions were not a factor at the time, police said.
http://www.surreyleader.com/news/162607776.html
16 ave lacks proper shoulders. So passing vehicles should slow down, and pass with caution.
> For in town we need to keep on emphasizing separated bike facilities. Higher speed roads with bike facilities will need to be separated more
I am all for separated bike infrastructure, when implemented properly. A speed limit of 100 and bikes is fine. If you get to 130 then bikes should not use that roadway unless there are wide shoulders or separation, if this is not in place then bikes should NOT be allowed on that road way / highway.
Only some highways are possible to excludes bikes. The ones with alternative routes. People are rooting for higher speeds on the Coquilhalla. Right now the Trans Canada trail is incomplete and when done will still be no substitute for touring cyclists without surface improvements on the current sections. The current shoulder is about 5' wide on the Hope to the summit section, I should know as I have cycled it. Thus if the speed limit is raised the road will then be even worse for cycling with no alternative. The shoulders should be widened on all highways if speed limits are raised further.
Check out page 18: https://bikehub.ca/sites/default/fil...guidelines.pdf
Highways do not have good separation. I don't know what you consider good separation but an 18" shoulder doesn't count as good separation but we have highways with 100 km/h speed limits with them. Highway 16 between Prince George and Vanderhoof is one of them. As I posted earlier I have noticed many highways with inadequate shoulders especially when there is a passing lane or a barrier the shoulders often disappear. |
A) People die all the time and people will always die, there certainly is a acceptable fatality rate with anything and everything. Of course we should always try to keep it as low as possible, within reason though and certainly not at all costs. Life has a price as well, its certainly not priceless in our world. Sad but true, and I am pretty freakin liberal, in most ways.
B) If it is not safe for bikes on interior highways then bikes should not be allowed on them, period. Get a greyhound bus ticket. Personally though I think they are safe enough for those who those who are adventurous and want to bike a few days through the province. If you feel like its not safe, well then you're obviously not adventurous enough. 100 and 18" on a interior highway seems fine for me as well, have good lighting, don't bike at night, wear a reflective west and helmet, be aware of your surroundings, etc. As for Coquihala, personally I say there should be no bikes allowed there, period, use number 3 or buy a bus ticket, or get a car or get a ride. Its a highway, not a bike touristy route. Coquihala makes no sense to allow bikes on, same with number one all the way to Hope.
C) Lets be efficient and rational.
D) I doubt me and you will ever agree.
my two cents