On Friday, January 4, 2019 at 3:00:34 PM UTC-5, wrote:
Snipped

Snipped. I think building trails into scenic remote areas is a better use of funds and effort. Be happy you are getting people on bikes and enjoying the exercise. Don't think you can solve commuting and congestion and parking problems with bikes. Be happy with half a loaf of bread, don't think you can get the whole loaf.

I don't think that Canada or the U.S.A. will EVER get a lot of people commuting on bicycle lanes in big cities, or even small cities, where the existing infrastructure is old. That's because there simply is no where to put a bicycle lane that isn't in the door zone. On top of that just painting a bike lane between the parked cars and the traffic lane just narrows that traffic lane.

The city that I often ride through going south or coming back is talking about adding a bike lane to its main north south road that comes in from the west side of the city. The problem is that they can NOT widen the road to put in that bike lane. This means that the bike lane will be yet another door zone bike lane and as such bicyclists will not use it nor will it increase the number of bicyclists and that's because those bicyclist know that riding in the door zone of parked cars is dangerous.

So, if roads are too narrow for a safe bicycle lane and the sidewalks are already too narrow, how would a city put in safe and usable bike lanes into their business/downtown areas? That's the problem as I see it.

I wonder if a bicyclist riding in a door zone bicycle lane gets doored and injured if they could sue the city or whatever for building an unsafe route.. After all if a road does not meet Provincial standards the city can be sued by any motorist who has an accident on it.

Cheers