On 14 May, 16:28, Cynic wrote:
> In some countries it is a rule of the road that pedestrians and
> cyclists must travel on the opposite side of the road to motorised
> traffic so that they will see it coming in time to get out of the way.
In this country there is no law saying that either peds. or cyclists
should "get out of the way" of other traffic. In fact the law is the
opposite: peds. should walk on the right of roads without footways,
but oncoming vehicles should move over out of their way.
What do the countries cited do about equestrians and animal-drawn
vehicles? Where do they go?
Dosn't having peds. and cyclists on the same side of a footwayless
road lead to a higher risk of collisions between these two?
What happens when traffic conditions or law keep motor traffic speeds
down at cycling speeds (e.g. on parts of my commute, 15/20 mph is the
norm)? Combined with a high volume of both types of vehicles, the
'opposite sides' rule would mean four separate vehicle streams,
reqiuring a wide road and meaning peds. crossing would have a very
complex task observing all of the streams.
Jon
|