How do we make cities more cyclist-friendly?

Question

How do we make cities more cyclist-friendly?

1) Devotion and Understanding
The 1st thought is in this question begs the question, how devoted are you to SOLVING THE PROBLEM? There is a clear distinction here. If you would really like to solve the problem as opposed to blaming another group (i.e. commuters or others)? Would you like to make cities more cyclist-friendly? Truly? If so, you may have to make some compromises or pay some fees (yes you) to make it happen. Are you willing to do that?

2) Complex Issue
This issue is much more complex than responders like “oddball” are capable of. If you do not have the mental capacity to solve it or an understanding of the issue please OPT-OUT. This is not about blaming one group or another. If you think it is, you are a part of the problem and not the solution, shove off!

Let’s take a look at a comment on the site. Oddball suggests, "I didn't see the bicycle" defense must be made "null and void." Is he an attorney that ge

2) Complex Issue
This issue is much more complex than responders like “oddball” are capable of. If you do not have the mental capacity to solve it or an understanding of the issue please OPT-OUT. This is not about blaming one group or another. If you think it is, you are a part of the problem and not the solution, shove off!

Let’s take a look at a comment on the site. Oddball suggests, "I didn't see the bicycle" defense must be made "null and void." Is he an attorney that gets paid by litigation? I live in Portland, Oregon, a city touted as cyclist-friendly by the powers that be. Nearly every week, I see a cyclist with no reflectors, wearing dark cloths, not look before riding, violating traffic laws, etc. The concept of recklessly blaming the driver has no place in a society of acceptance. The move of declare “null and void” shows bigotry and a lack of understanding. Solving this problem requires critical thinking and a willing to sacrifice that is uncommon, which is

why the problem exists. Q: Is Oddball as lawyer? A: Dugh!

If any party, cyclist of motorist, has a vendetta they need to step aside and, shove off!

3) Separation
Cyclists do not fit in next to drivers moving at high speeds. It’s not good for either party. For a cyclist to assume that a driver speeding close by them is “an act of evil” is stupid and arrogant; the driver just wants to get by. For a driver to assume that a cyclist is trying to block their path is also stupid and misguided; they just want to go about their business too. A clear solution to being “cyclist-friendly” is to divide the two when high speeds are involved. As a cyclist, I enjoy not worrying about drivers speeding close by. As a driver, I enjoy getting by (without someone who would enjoy holding me up) without bothering anyone else. Cities need to be smart enough to allow a separation between the two – motorists at high speed have no place next to cyclists at low speed. Cities need to separate

separate the two to create a natural habitat for both. Problem solved.

4) Ugly Example – Portland Government
In Portland, Oregon the city is spending taxpayer money on being anti-cyclist, anti-motorist, and anti-taxpayer. No good. For example, they are building concrete barriers that block motorists and cyclists. They are doing this in spite of taxpayer requests to be more cyclist, pedestrian, and motorist friendly. The best way to government success is through failure and they only get more money by wasting it. C'est La Vie! This sort of example is a part of people that are fixing the blame, not fixing the problem and has no place. If your goal is to blame others and sacrifice the problem, we don’t need you, shove off!

5) Ugly Example – Yahoo
Unfortunately, anyone with any “alternative” view was censored by Yahoo. There is no path to allow comment unless there is some event that is not published. It’s too bad.

Answer 1

I'm sorry, somewhere in your political speech is there a question?

I'm going to ignore your multiparagraph speech that appears to be a contentious discourse asking people who do not share your views not to respond. I'm simply going to answer the question:


The burden of safety is on the cyclist. Not every roadway is intended for cyclists, and not every minute of the day on suitable roadways is intended for cyclists. not every cyclist is the same, so each cyclist mucst make up their own mind as to whether enteringh traffic on a roadway is safe or not for them personally.
Any time they leaveteh realatively quiet surafce streets of a residentail area for busier and higher speed roadways, they need to evaluate whether it is safe to do so.

Cyclist should be required to keep up with the flow of traffic, if traffic is going 35-45 mph on a city street, the cyclist should not be doing 15. Pedestrians should consider sharing sidewalks with cyclists in those areas, perhaps oversized sidewalks with a clearly indicated bike path would be more appropriate than cyclists sharing roadways with cars and trucks by driving in the breakdown lane /turning lane modified into a bike path by painting a line...
.
Cyclists should be required to cross all streets where pedestrian crosswalks are available on foot unless they are completely in a traffic lane and maintaining pace with vehicular traffic., and should be required to cross on foot any intersection where there is a dedicated turning lane.
Cyclists should also exercise lane discipline.
Their best choice is (like motorcyclists) to use the CENTER of a traffic lane when no bike path is available not the right 2 feet of a traffic lane where they are harder to see. Otherwise exit that roadway if unable to keep up with the flow of traffic.


Finally cyclists should remember that laws regarding traffic apply equally to them as well. I would like to see cyclists charged with running red lights and charged with impeding traffic when applicable. Cyclists should also be stopped for missing safetyy equipment if on a raodway, such as the light, rear, and front reflectors that are leagally required in such situations.

Finally I would like them to realize that courtesy towards drivers is not cycling on congested and busy high speed roadways at rush hour, nor becoming Irate when vehicles are passing them closely at 65-70 mph. In that case, please exit the roadway Mr.cyclist for a slower street. Not every roadway is intended for use by a cyclist.

Motorist do need to remain vigilant for cyclists, particualrly the ones with no common sense, while cities need to better maintain the outside edges of the road way so that slower cyclists or cyclists who are stopping do not impide traffic, nor are in danger because vehicles must pass within one to two feet of the cyclist due to confined roadways. Perhaps as mentioned above unlicensed cyclists should share sidewalks with pedestrians, unlike the licensed motorcyclists and other vehicle operators. An incident would be very unlikely to result in a fatality, unlike when they share roadways with motor vehicles.

Answer 2

As a person that woke up in a hospital covered in blood from head to toe after riding my bicycle near the side of a road with no helmet,no sidewalk, and no curb I would have to agree that there are problems with roadway sharing in the states. The guy next to me in the hospital, asked me what type of bike I was riding, since he crashed his Harley and only broke his foot, was rather surprised to hear I was riding a Huffy.

Solutions:

Infrastructure
Economics
Propaganda

Infrastructure:
Clearly, roadways are one of the most expensive infrastructure investments that our tax dollars go to. With old philosophies, from the Roosevelt era, still in widespread use there are inherent roadblocks to developing non-traditional solutions to traffic flow.
Adopting a least cost approach to developing new infrastructure will cost more in the long run, and ALWAYS LEADS TO CONGESTION. The solution to congestion is to plan and develop every square foot of property with a design that incorporates every route of transportation, and then if congestion happens the only thing you can do is change the method of transportation, which will promote ingenuity. Why was the automobile invented? Why was the plane invented? See Malthus. Period.

Economics:
Legislation that will make Infrastructure possible, which will infringe on some civil liberties.

Propaganda:
Start with a war, since it is easier to rebuild or start from scratch, and people will never agree to these ideas unless they are facing death. Win or lose: rebuild with sound Infrastructure and Economics. See WWII. Just because we have the entire globe, doesn't mean we have to inhabit the entire thing! Compromise and Consolidate, for Pete's Sake!

These ideas will probably make more sense in 40 years. So, for the many baby boomers who are making the mistakes, I mean decisions, costing us GEN Nexters trillions of dollars and billions of lives, don't worry cause you'll already be gone, which is probably what you're thinking, anyway. As for the rest of you, buy a helmet, ride your bike and start thinking about your kids' future.

Please comment.

Answer 3

the bicyclist should only ride in areas that are safe for themselves,with plenty of room for cars to pass at normal speeds,otherwise they are takeing a risk at their own stupidity.or they should start paying taxes on their bikes ,like the vehicle owners have to.come on they cant have it both ways.and 911 was an inside job,wake up america,you all should be focusing on what your crooked politicians are doing to your country

Answer 4

well the first step is to get nutcase drivers off the roads,

second step is to make bad weather like snow and ice disappear so ppl can even cycle at all

and another problem is alot of ppl arent healthy enough to cycle


good luck

Answer 5

you get rid of the fixed gear kids that like to taunt drivers.