-=> Quoting Richard Glazer to Ken Peck <=-
 RG> into the bike lane. There seems to be more things to look for while
 RG> being on the lane. Cars merging from intersection seem to look left for
 RG> oncoming vehicles without remebering to look right for oncoming bikes
 RG> which are on the paths. It would be useful to post signs on these side
 RG> roads "LOOK RIGHT FOR ONCOMING BICYCLES". 
Hi Richard...  I'm treating this as number two...
That is part of my desire for standardization, at least continent wide...
The confusion about what is a path and what is a bike lane, and what is
a roadway, and what is whatever...  The US has a guide put out years back
91 I think, from AAHSTO [sic] that laid out a standard approach to bicycle
facilities... at least it left options for development and 'standards' to
guide the construction once the options were selected...
Most areas tend to refer to that guide (even in Canada) for N.Am guidlines.
Montreal area seems to have quite a range of facilities in place for 
icycles.
Many of which were retrofitted into available space, which was reasonable
at the time I guess, but then not maintained or enforced beyond "you have 
o".
levels...Some were reasonable routings, some were jokes...
Some of the park bike paths were GOOD. and actually went to somewhere.
But they were shared facilities with pedestrians etc., which is OK as well
as long as you remember that.  Those routes that were mixes of 
ikelane,bikepa
and other things like back alleys and parking lots were the pits...
OUT HERE the next town over has a similar outlook... they keep pointing to
their bikepath... it is NOT a bikepath... it is firmly attached to the road
asphalt and separated by a white line which bounds the portion driven by
motorvehicles... Likewise it is not a bike lane... this is two way traffic of
several means... on one side of the road... A BIKE LANE would be 
nidirectiona
and one to each side of the road... protected from parking etc... and signed
as such...  What they have done is simply designated the paved shoulder as
a side walk... but called it a bikepath... they also have eliminated the
shoulder on the other side... I CHOOSE to ride on the road... but the law
out in BC makes that vague... since the shoulder is included in the 
efinition
of roadway... and I have to stay to the right side except etc...
They hope to widen the road later on by siphoning provincial bicycle funds to
create another 'bikepath' on the other side... of course the Province is 
roke
What they need is to make the road NORMAL and build a sidewalk...
The real problem is that the only politician that knows bikes can't win his
point... he keeps losing to the pedestrians who want their bikelane so they
can WALK on it, and use it for parking, and above all to avoid having to ride
their bikes properly.  Some of us are working on that...
But they need to get the terminology right... so that all know what we are
talking about...  BTW that busy highway I'm talking about has less traffic
at rush hour than my old Toronto residential street at night...
Doug
 
... "Beam me up Scotty. There's no intelligent life here."
___ Blue Wave/QWK v2.12
--- Renegade v5-11 Exp
---------------