{"id":233864517,"date":"2012-05-30T18:21:57","date_gmt":"2012-05-30T18:21:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/wp.baltimorespokes.org\/?p=233864517"},"modified":"2012-05-30T18:21:57","modified_gmt":"2012-05-30T18:21:57","slug":"like-car-drivers-and-passengers-cyclists-deserve-to-be-able-to-ride-two-abreast","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/wp.baltimorespokes.org\/?p=233864517","title":{"rendered":"Like car drivers and passengers, cyclists deserve to be able to ride two abreast"},"content":{"rendered":"

[B’ Spokes: I touched on this topic previously: Father and son ride comfortably on Wabash buffered bike lane<\/a>]<\/em><\/p>\n

\n

By: Peter Smith, googlemapsbikethere.org<\/p>\n

Had that thought yet again (and it\u2019s not a new argument) when I was trying to have a conversation with a friend this weekend in SF on my way to Sunday Streets. Every time I or my friend snuck up on the side of each other so we could actually have a discussion \u2014 or just point out something interesting \u2014 we got chased back into the bike lane by zooming motor vehicles. Being forced to single-file it everywhere can make biking a lonely experience \u2014 we deserve better.<\/p>\n

Many of the harmful effects of loneliness<\/a> are well-known, aside from the fact that being lonely just sucks. Depriving people of social contact is just one of the many ways we can effectively<\/a> torture people<\/a>. And we know that poor urban design can increase loneliness<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Being forced to ride single-file, and therefore being disallowed to communicate while we ride, is not torture, but it is a significant deterrent to biking when compared to driving and taking public motorized transit. If we care about putting more people on bikes, we need to advocate for the ability to ride two-abreast. And even if we don\u2019t care about putting more people on bikes, we cyclists still deserve the right to ride two abreast, just like drivers and their passengers.<\/p>\n

If I want to hang with a friend \u2014 all other things being equal \u2014 if I can\u2019t talk to them while we\u2019re moving about, I\u2019m driving. That decision is simple. I want to be able to talk to my friends while we\u2019re riding our bikes around. Cars do not deserve two to three times the asphalt just because they\u2019re wider. If people are really dedicated to getting around by individual private motorized transport, they can go buy a Tango \u2018single-file\u2019 car:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

‘Single-file’ cars — not as space-wasteful<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Drivers and their passengers don\u2019t have to deal with this \u2018single-file\u2019 nonsense, why should we? And look where this single-file biking was being forced to happen<\/a> \u2013 one side of the street even has two lanes for motor vehicles, so two sets of drivers\/passengers can have a decent conversations with each other, while bikers are forced to \u2018get in line\u2019.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

5 (fat) cars lanes, two (skinny) bike lanes<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Shoot \u2014 even pedestrians on the sidewalk have to deal with this all the time \u2013 except most of the time it\u2019s inanimate objects like traffic lights and parking signs and fire hydrants and trees and an assortment of other obstacles which force walkers to \u2018single file it\u2019 on the sidewalk time and again.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Pedestrian slalom course<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

The new Prospect Park West (PPW) street design<\/a> in Brooklyn New York City is going to replace some unused, restricted road space \u2014 currently in line with a \u2018parking row\u2019 \u2014 with some pedestrian islands. The key benefit being touted is \u2018increased pedestrian safety\u2019. The islands probably will do that, if only slightly. If we were really concerned with pedestrian and biker safety, though, we\u2019d two-way the street, and provide more room for people to bike.<\/p>\n

Why would we want to allow cars to travel in the same direction, in separate travel lanes, while allowing bikers only single-file access?<\/p>\n

And why would we want to continue to apportion the street 80\/20 in favor of cars?<\/p>\n

It doesn\u2019t make any sense.<\/p>\n

Maybe it\u2019s not politically feasible at the moment to two-way PPW, but the proposal to fix this street fully and correctly should now be on the table, and that includes giving cyclists the ability to ride two-abreast. It goes without saying that walkers should be afforded this same luxury.<\/p>\n

Here is the current PPW design:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Cyclists not able to ride two-abreast<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Here is the proposed design (not much different):<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Nice trees, but bikers still cannot ride two abreast<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

This is closer to what it should look like \u2014 a two-way PPW:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

Now bikers can ride two abreast<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

And if we proceed apace we can imagine a time in the not-too-distant future when cars will no longer be tolerated. If any type of motorized mode of transport can be substantially shown to be in alignment with the goal of a Vision Zero policy<\/a>, then we can consider allowing them to continue to be used among the population. That could be cars, trucks, trains, buses, NEVs, etc. The burden of proof of safety, of course, remains on those wanting to use these modes of transport.<\/p>\n


\n
\nhttps:\/\/googlemapsbikethere.org\/2012\/04\/17\/like-car-drivers-and-passengers-cyclists-deserve-to-be-able-to-ride-two-abreast\/<\/a>oldId.2012053018215790<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

[B’ Spokes: I touched on this topic previously: Father and son ride comfortably on Wabash buffered bike lane] By: Peter Smith, googlemapsbikethere.org Had that thought yet again (and it\u2019s not a new argument) when I was trying to have a conversation with a friend this weekend in SF on my way to Sunday Streets. Every … <\/p>\n

Continue reading “Like car drivers and passengers, cyclists deserve to be able to ride two abreast”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"1","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[2],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-233864517","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-biking-elsewhere"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/wp.baltimorespokes.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/233864517","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/wp.baltimorespokes.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/wp.baltimorespokes.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wp.baltimorespokes.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wp.baltimorespokes.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=233864517"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/wp.baltimorespokes.org\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/233864517\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/wp.baltimorespokes.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=233864517"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wp.baltimorespokes.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=233864517"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/wp.baltimorespokes.org\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=233864517"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}