In the reading passage, the writer explains some advantages of constructing bicycle lanes on major commute roads. However, the lecturer disagrees with this suggestion heralding the results of case study.
First of all, the lecturer argues that there were no eco-friendly effects after creating bicycle roads. Less than one persent of people use this roads beacuse they think commuting on bicycles is too damanding. Therefore, no difference was discovered despite of the construction of bicycle roads. This fact refutes the reading passage's assertion that the roads would be beneficial for our environment.
Secondly, according to the lecturer, drivers found them stressful because of the bicycle roads. They complained that the most of new roads which had replaced with the space for cars were empty. In addition, the traffic jam problems were not fully solved by the project. These points contradict the writers' claim that the bicycle roads will reduce traffic jams, which is good for both drivers and cyclists.
On top of that, the lecturer mentions that we can not expect the decrease of accident rates because drivers do not obey the traffic rules. Actually the car accident rate rather increased due to the addition of cyclists' accident caused by drivers. This result is quite different from the writer's expectation.
In conclusion, the lecturer thinks that creating the roads only for bicyclists is no more desirble due to the fact of the low using rate, no effects of reducing traffic congestions and car accidents. |