The _Observer_ on "deadly" bike lanes

in message , David Arditti
') wrote:

The people who might not like it, in some places, might be a few
cyclists who like to cycle very fast (20+ mph) in towns. But should
they be allowed to do this anyway - consider the poor pedestrians?

Two points: first, one group of people who typically cycle fast are
utility cyclists: they're getting to their jobs and getting about their
business and they don't want to waste time. If their journeys are
slowed, then the economics of choosing a cycle are reduced.

But if we are encouraging cycling either to reduce congestion or to
reduce pollution then utility cyclists are _the_ class we want to
encourage. A person who drives to work, drives home, and then goes for
a cycle in the evening reduces neither.

Second, a cyclist moving at the same speed as the rest of the traffic is
_much_ safer than one travelling slower than the traffic, particularly
when changing lanes.

There is a very widespread call for motor speeds to be limited to 20
in towns. We need to be consistent. We shouldn't make roads policy for
speeding drivers, and we shouldn't make cycling policy for fast
cyclists.

I disagree most strongly, for the reasons stated above.

--
(Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

The trouble with Simon is that he only opens his mouth to change feet.
;; of me, by a 'friend'