Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Wednesday, 9 October 2019 14:10:31 UTC-4, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On 10/9/2019 12:21 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:

I was riding along a side street in a city near to me and came to a
cross street that had a sign ONE WAY Bicycles Excepted. No to me
that's a pretty stupid thing to do since any automobile entering that
one way street would NOT be expecting a bicyclist to turn up that
street going what the automobile driver would think is the wrong way.
It's a brilliant setup for an accident waiting to happen.

Actually, that can work quite well. A contraflow bicycle lane is one
place that I approve of striping special lanes for bikes. Such lanes
can save considerable travel distance for cyclists, and if done
properly can be adequately safe. See
http://www.bikexprt.com/research/con...ngerichtet.htm for
example.

But the details have to be done right.
http://www.bikexprt.com/massfacil/ca...q/litlconc.htm

Warmies... they never think of a snow cover.

That one way road where bicycles are allowed to ride counter to traffic
flow is a narrow side street WITH NO bike lane. Just imagine it. You're
driving down this street and approaching the intersection when suddenly a
bicyclists turns left from that other street and is now on your right
side. You're not expecting a bicyclist to do that. It'd be bad enough in
daylight but it'd be a LOT WORSE at night especially if the bicyclist did
not have adequate lighting if they had any lighting at all. Like I said,
it's an accident waiting to happen.

FUD. Read Frank's first link. In "narrow side streets with no bike lane
markings," the accident tsunami expected by motorists and conservative
politics has not happened. Though admittedly, it might have something to do
with the European transportational cyclists' higher accident-avoidance
competence levels than in the second link (US university affiliated);-)