What is the safest way to configure a roadway with bike paths and walkways for people walking?

Answer this question

  • What is the safest way to configure a roadway with bike paths and walkways for people walking?


Answer #1 | 23/07 2014 15:01
Roads with no parking, lanes sufficiently wide, or traffic speeds sufficiently low to permit shared use or common use. Pavements for pedestrians. Simple junctions without ASL. Education for drivers, cyclists and pedestrians. Proper justice for those affected by careless or dangerous driving ~ removing the privilege of being able to operate a motor vehicle on public highways for those unable or unwilling to conform to the safe practices and any posted rules. There is no reason at all why it should be more dangerous to operate vehicles together, both motor-vehicles and cycles have similar requirements for space, distances and other factors. I think that pedestrians and bikes mix less well than cycles and cars, particularly in the more complex urban environments. For longer distance inter-urban routes a sufficiently wide surface is required, and the design should favour cycles (there are relatively few walking users who travel longer distances on this type of route). The cycles should travel on the nearside (as on a road), while pedestrians should walk facing 'traffic', again as they would do if walking on a road without separate paths. The more common design is to require 'all users' to keep to their nearside, which causes cyclists to be passing walkers by approaching from behind. While the cyclist has a duty of care to not collide with or pass dangerously close to pedestrians, the pedestrian in turn has a duty to not inconsiderately block or impede the use of the path. Generally, cycle ways need more attention to maintaining clear ways, with no street furniture placed into lanes, no parked vehicles or door zones encroaching into the lane, wide lanes, with large radii, to permit passage safely at 15+mph even with poor surface conditions (such as water). Grades should be shallow in the vicinity of give way/stop lines to accomodate lower acceleration and braking performances. Often the grades are excessively steep particularly when the route is added to existing infrastructures cheaply. Routes should have high priority. This makes lanes alongside major routes unfavourable, as they tend to either interfere with or to give way to any and all turning traffic onto or off these routes. Better is a priority route on a secondary route that interferes less with turning or crossing traffic, and can have fewer compromises.
Answer #2 | 23/07 2014 14:46
Tear up every road in America & start all over again. Never going to happen. The safest thing that might happen & this is a long shot, is that motorists will learn to cooperate with cyclists. And cyclists will learn to quit blowing through stop signs & stop lights. It will take cooperation on both sides. 99% of the time I have no problems dealing with traffic because I try to blend in with the traffic flow. If I see a long line of cars behind me & a place to move over, I'll gladly slow down & let them all pass. What's the rush?
Answer #3 | 23/07 2014 14:21
have plenty of lane space which most roads do not have barriers between bikes and cars no one does that or just learn to ride with traffic there cannot possibly be bike lanes everywhere you want to go bottom line: the ''safest'' way is the most expensive, so it is hardly ever done, so it doesn;t really matter wle
Answer #4 | 23/07 2014 16:31
Safest? Shared space: 'Separate' pathways are usually impossible, since you'll always get crossings where the different traffic streams are forced to mixed under crowded conditions. You left off the part about leaving motorized vehicles their privileged position....
Answer #5 | 23/07 2014 15:48
A separate path for cyclists and walkers.
Answer #6 | 23/07 2014 15:17
If money and resources were no object, 3 different and distinct pathways should exist.

Possible answer