Not that it matters, but that seems to be exactly his complaint. One of the streets he'd like bikes banned from, Embarcadero Road in Palo Alto, has a 25 mph speed limit. I can maintain that on my bicycle if the wind is right. What's more, Embarcadero Road's direction is about 30 degrees off the road grid in the surrounding neighbourhoods so there really are no parallel streets, and the indirect routes through those residential neighbourhoods are a maze of stop signs designed to encourage traffic onto Embarcadero Road.
This means that if you are on your bicycle at one end of Embarcadero and you need to get to the other end, you have a choice. You can take a quick trip in the traffic on Embarcadero, or a slower trip (often twice the time) winding your way through the neighbourhoods with the stop signs. Because of this I understand his argument to be that, on the off chance he might be unable to immediately change lanes to pbutt a cyclist without slowing, and hence might actually need to inconvenience himself by slowing to the speed limit for a while on Embarcadero, the cyclist should instead be forced into the neighbourhoods to deal with the stop signs. That is, if there's any possibility that the presence of a cyclist might delay him a bit the cyclist should be forced to suffer a certain delay instead (because the cyclist's time is of no importance compared to his own?).
I live in a neighbourhood close to Embarcadero Road, and I'm pleased to have the right to pick my routes based on my own needs and preferences. If convenience for cars was the sole consideration I wouldn't be able to take my bicycle out of my garage.
Dennis Ferguson
