[SDCBC] Enforceable speed limits? Re: Using full lane

[Jim Baross]

The presence of bicyclists, pedestrians and other non-motorized uses 
on and along a roadway can serve to "calm" motor vehicle operators 
(yes, there are motor-bullies who will coninue to attempt to 
illegally harass others). When sufficient numbers of bicyclists are 
traveling legally - in the available lane or next to it - on Coast 
Hwy, the 80% of traffic speeds will be reduced and enforceable and 
reasonable speed limits will be enforceable.

I see a sort of "chicken and egg" issue; what comes first? Reduced 
and enforceable 80% motor vehicle speeds due to the presence of more 
bicyclists and (customer) pedestrians or more bicyclists and 
pedestrians due to reduced motor vehicle speeds?.... or both?

Go ride.

At 06:40 AM 2/20/2008, John Eldon wrote:
>That is still what MIGHT work on Coast Highway 101 through Leucadia. 
>IF (I know, 85th percentile speed trap law, etc.) we can enforce a 
>25 or 30mph speed limit, stripe the road for four travel lanes and a 
>center divide, sans bike lanes, and post signs to the effect that 
>"Bicyclists use full outer [or right] lane," we can avoid the 
>alternatives of either a door zone Class II or a two-way 
>semi-contraflow Class I with extremely awkward access for southbound 
>bicyclists.
>
>John E.
>
>Gene Carman <gcarman at san.rr.com> wrote:
>
>And why can't we have such messages broadcast here in San 
>Diego?  Why don't we have "Cyclist may use full lane" signs in San 
>Diego?  Why don't billboards proclaim the following messages for all 
>to see and understand:
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.bikesandiego.org/pipermail/sdcbc/attachments/20080220/8da62c13/attachment.html