• @FireRetardant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    324 days ago

    Roads for cars are built almost exclussively for just cars. Its half the reason this community even exists. Roads speced for bikes wouldn’t need to tolerate nearly as much weight nor would they need to be as wide as car lanes. Many intersections would also be served with yields rather than traffic lights as most bike traffic can negotiate intersections easily.

    • That type of logic is why I prefer roads to bike trails.

      Motorcycles need the full width of a road, so do bicycles. When engineers lower the specs for bicycles, they are thinking of a child riding 5 kph on a Sunday rec ride, but we need roads designed for cargo bikes hauling a weeks worth of groceries or rebar and cement down hill at 40 kph.

      When you make the lanes smaller or don’t clean the land of debris or permit sharper turns, you endanger the lives of cyclists. That’s not OK. Cyclists are vehicles and our roads should meet the same specs as all roads.

      • @FireRetardant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        224 days ago

        Technically speaking. Motorcycle do not need the full width. It is not uncommon to see them side by side in a single lane.

        If your bike max speed is 40kph, thats the slower side of car speeds so the roads could still be designed far differently for bikes.

        • @delirious_owl@discuss.online
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          24 days ago

          Legally and saftey wise, motorcycles absolutely need the full width of the lane.

          Some motorcyclists ride dangerously. Who knew?

          But the motorcyclists uses all 3 thirds of the lane for different purposes. Another vehicle should never enter their lane, for their safety. Same with bicyclists.