Comments
Please wait...
Comments are closed.
Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.
is a proud member of the
media network
media network
All contents © Index Newspapers LLC
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
800 Maynard Ave S, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98134
We should paint little white cars on the streets to remind you that cars may use the road.
Market Optical has a special right now, exam and frames only $2,500 with coupon.
When he sees numbers and other letters painted in the road, as in "this is a 25 MPH zone" or "PED XING", what's his (non) thinking then?
I wish your boyfriend was accepting as broad-minded as you are in this matter, Dan.
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_PfgzU7BLxIg/SB…
when he rides over them he says "bing! bing!" and starts biking really fast.
Huh. Only four times more than my exam and glasses. What a steal!
Terry, you're too funny!
And drivers, you should love sharrows too, since they a)don't take away your precious parking b)don't take any of your precious traffic lanes. while c)encouraging more people to ride bikes, thus providing more available parking and less traffic.
Or, they're an excuse to make jokes about attempted murder.
http://spinningmusic.files.wordpress.com…
Also, I agree with @21 -- separate paths are better, by a long shot. But it's a bit tricky to secure the funding to retrofit an entire city with separate bike paths that go all the places people need to go.
What if a straight guy said "All these gays on capitol hill totally desensitize me to beating them up. I mean there are so many out there who cares if a few go missing right? RIGHT?"
DTMFA
The first argument is that sharrows are not effective. Somehow everyone that has not studied how they work at all seems to be able to make blanket claims that they don't work. This is simply not true. Go look up any of the many studies that show they are effective at changing the mindset of drivers and therefor making cyclists safer. This in turn takes more cars off the road as safety is the biggest reason why people don't ride bikes. This leads to LESS CONGESTION for motorists.
The second argument is that even if sharrows are effective cyclists don't deserve them. This comes from general anti-bike sentiment that is counter productive to motorists because it leads to more single person cars on the road.
I prefer having multiple lanes, and driving in the middle of the farthest right one. It can be for cars and bikes, but at least it doesn't mean I'm in the door zone next to a sharrow.
Bike lanes, sharrows, whatever are a double edged sword. Cars often don't bother to give a cyclist room when passing if there's a bike lane. Feeling the heat off a car that's passing, or getting sucked towards a large truck isn't a fun feeling when all you're trying to do is get to work, save money, and get a little exercise all at the same time.
There's a good long discussion of bike lanes at the CTC forums:
http://forum.ctc.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=…
http://forum.ctc.org.uk/viewtopic.php?f=…
I also love the intersection at the northern end, which is actually Green Lake Way, where it splits into E and W, and where there are a total of SEVENTEEN new road signs, defying the comprehension of even the most dedicated rule-follower.
(For the record - I walk everywhere. So I have equal disdain for drivers and cyclists.)
PS Who shit in your cornflakes today, Fnarf, you seem a little tense...
@49, you live in Cincy? I had no idea. As for your dooring idea, that may work where you are, but here they appear to have gone to some trouble to put the sharrows right at the point of maximum door damage.
Couldn't find any photos, but I did notice last month that Seattle's seemed painted closer to the parking lane than ours.
And remember, in America, if you're a grown-up and you can't drive, that's the only reason why. DUIs. Plain and simple.
"I don't know how to drive." Please.
Stay on the wagon, Doorknob Danny.
Beside which, if a person needs these warnings (if they actually serve a useful purpose), they probably shouldn't be driving. But it's easier to add stupid shit to the streetscape than to remove shitty drivers.
There, I think I got that out of my system, :D
I'd like to point out that when bicycles were first introduced to city streets (yes, "cars" came first in the form of horse-drawn carriages) there was fierce hatred and opposition to the new technology. Bicycles and horses didn't mix well. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_tZ-yszpRiPI/R7…
Today, the hatred of cyclists persists. Because of the perception that they don't normally contribute financially to the maintenance of the roads they use, and that they often act in blatantly unlawful ways in traffic, while simultaneously upholding their entitlement to be treated as another vehicle, many motor-vehicle operators dislike cyclists. Only now, the safety of the cyclist is the one in danger, where previously the equestrian was the one being thrown by a spooked horse.
Oh, man... how did I miss this part? Besides scaring the horses, the bicycle sort of threatened the way of life of the horse industry. They ushered in the automobile. But in a particular way: "...they were ridden by "dandies", the precursor of today's metrosexual male, who demanded smoother manmade roads that would make the automobile a more viable option."
in portland the sharrows are smaller and subtler and used mostly in the center of the lane at cross-street intersections, and electronically notify the red light as to the presence of a cyclist - no more leaning way over to punch the pedestrian button. perhaps seattle's funding ran out, and this first round of sharrows helps keep the revenue pipeline open a crack while simultaneously getting drivers sensitized to our presence.
of course it's not at all out of the question that they were deliberately botched as a pretext for CUTTING a bike-friendly revenue stream, no?