Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I guess I have no problem with people being licensed for bicycle commuting. However, I really wish that there was some sort of requirement that you re-take drivers tests every 10 years or something like that.
There are way too many terrible drivers out there who have horrible and dangerous driving habits, without any check on it (police forces are spread too thin to really provide an incentive for change in driving behavior).
I do think drivers should have extra care when driving in crowded urban areas with lots of pedestrians. It isn't the responsibility of the driver to look out for jay-walkers, but they should be aware of legally crossing pedestrians (especially when making a left turn without an arrow).
25 in residential, 30 on feeders and 45 on major streets seems okay to me. In my part of Los Angeles you rarely have enough space to get up to 45 anyways.
When I lived in Illinois, they would pull people out of the driver's license renewal line randomly to take the rules of the road test. I once was "chosen". I passed.
Are you saying drivers, at least most of them, DON'T take extra care when driving in crowded urban areas with lots of pedestrians?
With rare exceptions (usually school zones and only enforced during certain hours of the day) nearly every street is signed 30MPH or more. Some are signed at an alarmingly high and incredibly dangerous 45mph - nearly highway speeds. These are streets through residential and busy commercial areas. Reaction times at speeds above 25mph rapidly diminish to the point where only the most vigilant drivers solely focused on driving can be considered remotely safe. And the vast majority in this country are distracted drivers - with cell phones and texting, checking emails in one hand and a big mac in the other. Probably a large percentage are sleep deprived and the others driving around with traces of ambien and xanax in their systems.
No wonder pedestrians and bicyclists feel assaulted and few people opt for more sensible modes of transportation.
The health crisis in this country from sedentary lives is in epidemic status costing untold billions in medical expenses and public policy should be aligned to get people moving as much as possible.
20MPH is plenty for residential streets. It's a speed at which motorists can safely share the road with pedestrians and cyclists. It's a speed where even the most distracted drivers can do little harm in the event they actually are in an accident. It gives plenty of time for people to react to each other and feel comfortable in sharing space.
It also increases the capacity of most roads to carry individuals. You can move a lot more vehicles from point A to point B when you slow down traffic and when you add in the number of individuals who bike and walk on the same shared road the capacity goes way way up.
All residential streets through neighborhoods should be signed 20MPH. Commercial streets should maybe go to 25MPH in the city. Leave the dangerous speeds of 30MPH and above to the roads and highways where they are less likely to cause an accident and where few cyclists and pedestrians would go anyway.
Not everyone wants or needs to use the roads on a motorized vehicle, nor should have to. If you can't manage to deal with cyclists on the road, you shouldn't be driving.
Granted. But by the same token, cyclists who do not follow the rules of the road shouldn't be biking neither. This includes idiots who think it's OK to ride on the sidewalk and dimwits who don't understand they are supposed to walk their bike across a busy street with pedestrians rather than foolishly riding into the left-hand turn lane with all the cars and trucks on the road.
Ah maybe I am old fashioned but pedestrians should be on the side walk and if I had my way I would seriously think about abolishing bikes on public streets. Less because bikes are practical and more because bikers in my area tend to ignore the rules of the road and love to ride across intersections where there is no traffic but a red light(dangerous cause if the biker didn’t see the car that had the green or overestimated how fast he could clear the intersection…pow). I love bike paths because they can take said bikers off the street.
20-25MPH is way too slow for any large street without traffic and if you think getting hit with a car at 25 miles an hour can do little damage you are underestimating the mass of said car. I wouldn’t want to get hit with anything that masses 500 pounds or more at any speed.
People don’t bike or walk because compared to the care these methods of transport have limited range, slower speeds, limited cargo caring capacity and limited passenger carrying capacity not to mention the comforts ofhaving your own seat, in a car with air conditioning and heat that you control as well as a radio.
That's because no one enforces cycling rules. Think if you could just plow through intersections running over pedestrians, ride the wrong way whenever you felt like it, etc in your car because no one ever enforced the rules. It'd be pandemonium. That's beginning to shift, San Francisco prosecuted the first vehicular manslaughter case against a cyclist in the country.
Granted. But by the same token, cyclists who do not follow the rules of the road shouldn't be biking neither. This includes idiots who think it's OK to ride on the sidewalk and dimwits who don't understand they are supposed to walk their bike across a busy street with pedestrians rather than foolishly riding into the left-hand turn lane with all the cars and trucks on the road.
Umm, no. In most instances, a cyclist should make a left turn with the left turn lane. Wait light and the road to be clear and go. Not hard. It's often a nice setup for cyclists as they can sit and wait in a spot without moving traffic. There are some nasty ones where walking your bike might make more sense, but usually following the left turn markers flows naturally.
That's because no one enforces cycling rules. Think if you could just plow through intersections running over pedestrians, ride the wrong way whenever you felt like it, etc in your car because no one ever enforced the rules. It'd be pandemonium. That's beginning to shift, San Francisco prosecuted the first vehicular manslaughter case against a cyclist in the country.
Although there are plenty of reports that cars aren't held responsible if they hit and injure/kill a pedestrian or cyclist.
Sure, it's streetsblog, but it does seem like they're a lot. Police departments classify them as a majority of them as the pedestrian's fault. Maybe, but first it's the driver hitting the pedestrian, and I supsect there may be a windshield bias.
Actually, the reading comprehension skills seem about as good as the spelling.
Frankly, I'm fine with 25 in residential neighborhoods and downtown as my city does it. Feeder streets are 30mph, and arterials are 35-40. It works for me.
Agreed. That is what the different road classifications are for. It would be inconceivable for every road between limited access highways to be posted at 20 mph. Some people choose to live on a busy street and the value of their home is often less due to the noise, speed, and volume of traffic. Many residential streets are 25 mph and if there are many curves or sight-line impairments that speed limit is often less. The fact that many people drive a considerably higher speeds than the posted limit in these areas is an enforcement (or lack of it) problem.
The majority of bicyclists I see are exercising for recreation, and they seem to have a better understanding of what the rules of biking on the road are. The commuters I see biking have some of the worse judgement I've ever seen. If the light is red and you're in the street, then you should stop. Just because you think no one is coming doesn't mean you get to zip through the intersection. If a car did it, the person would get a ticket for running a red light. If a pedestrian did it, the person would get a ticket for jaywalking. Bikes need to held to the same standard, and perhaps they are, but several bicyclists decide to endanger everyone on the road with their decisions.
If a pedestrian did it, the person would get a ticket for jaywalking. Bikes need to held to the same standard, and perhaps they are, but several bicyclists decide to endanger everyone on the road with their decisions.
They would? After seeing pedestrians cross against the light while I'm waiting on a bicycle, it becomes very tempting to go too (no, I don't mean blast through the light).
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
