🚀 go-pugleaf

Crossposting moved to bc.cycling rather than bc.general, as it's not
really a general BC issue.

>>>>> "TT" == Trikky T <gdaymate@iceonline.com> writes:

TT> Certainly people will criticise the bike lane project.  These people
TT> are those who drive their SOVs.

Actually, you'll find some cyclists who will criticize the project as
well, and curiously, they tend to be some of the more informed people
around on the subject.  I support the city in efforts to promote lower
impact transportation, even to the point of inconviencing the higher
impact variety (i.e. SOVs).  I am concerned however, that the PR fallout
from this particular project could set back real cycling advocacy to a
considerable degree.

I was talking to a coworker today who is a diehard driver, and he was
astonished to learn that cyclists have not previously been allowed on
the bridge deck, but had to dodge and weave with the pedestrians on the
sidewalk.  His original misapprehension was that the changes had been
made for cyclists, rather than pedestrians, with cyclists being the
convenient target to absorb motorist ire.

My personal take on the Burrard Bridge is simple: let me ride on the
bridge deck.  Put up signs if you wish ("yield to cyclists in right
lane" would actually be good), let slower cyclists continue to use the
sidewalk if they wish, but don't spend thousands of dollars on cycling
"improvements" that don't really help, and worse may generate ill-will
from the driving public.

-- 
 o         Brian Edmonds <edmonds@cs.ubc.ca> (occasional MSc student)
 \\_/\_,   Applications Analyst, University of British Columbia, Canada
(*)   (*)  See http://www.cs.ubc.ca/spider/edmonds for me and my hobbies