Re: Daytime running light popularity

On 11/6/2024 6:03 AM, Roger Merriman wrote:

Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@gXXmail.com> wrote:

>
At the location I described, in front of the library, it's two wide lanes.

 As it approaches the bridge yes but doesn’t seem to be any narrower than
when it’s 3 lanes, ie it’s still a wide car centric road.

Of course it's a "car centric road." 99.999% of roads in the U.S. are "car centric," and will always be so. The history and geography of the U.S. guarantee that.
Which is why building bike lanes to get people out of their cars is a delusion. Spending fortunes to build "good" bike lanes (as if that's really possible) is also a fantasy. The most that happens, with extremely rare exceptions is what you've called "box ticking exercises."
Even the rail-trail linear parks often have problems, as Andrew and others have mentioned. But in my mind, those are a separate issue. They really are recreational parks. Very few of them have any transportation function.
  > Mind you did see a video of locally some car in a “must get past” overtook

a cyclists doing 20mph past a speed camera, which triggered the camera! Car
not bike which would have being doing fair bit more than 20mph to overtake.
 Mind you it’s shocking how folks didn’t understand how average speed camera
work when they first started to be rolled out some 10 or so years ago.

As more evidence of "car centric," any proposal for speed cameras in the U.S. gets militant opposition. Motorists absolutely hate the inconvenience of having to obey speed limits.
--
- Frank Krygowski