not only that, unlike over a hundred years ago when bicycles could safely co-exist with bullock carts, horse-drawn carriages, early automobiles (including electric cars in those days), trishaws, rickshaws, horses, vehicles these days that share the roadways are different beasts - 18 wheelers, double-container rigs, dirt haulers, low loaders, trucks, vans, buses, (faster, more powderful, and more nimble cars), and motorbikes. the gig economy has caused more of the logistics and utility type vehicles to go on the road - rigs, trucks, vans, pickups, suvs, and of course, cars and motorbikes delivering parcels and food to households. and they are zipping in and out trying to make ends meet. road use has evolved, and the rush to meet deliveries pose worse dangers to cyclists. that’s why cities and counties in sillycon valley have decided (from too many accidents involving motorists, cyclists, pedestrians) based on real data to segregate pathways and lanes between 3 main groups of users - motorists, cyclists and pmd users, pedestrians - to at least reduce accident rates year on year. in 6.9 cities we now have dedicated sidewalks for pedestrians only (no bicycles and pmds), dedicated green bike lanes for cyclists and pmd riders, and roadway lanes for vehicles only (cyclists and pmd riders on them will get fined). i’m surprised to see the same dedicated paths being constructed in pleasanton, a small town in the east bay where it isn’t as congested nor busy like sf, oakland, and sj. on rural and suburban roadways, roadies can still share the road as they are not as busy and congested like in a typical city. at least the geography is huge in the bay area, and roadies can find long secluded rural roads free of hikers and pedestrians for their tdf-wannabe races. sg is too small, too dense, and too urbanized. and tdf wannabes eek out whatever slivers of “highways” to do their speed thrills? actually very pitiful and hilarious at the same time. i have a good laugh everytime i hear that darwinian nonsense.