I would generally be in favour of restrictions that stopped cars driving on cycle lanes.

Until there's a broken-down vehicle blocking the road, and the only way around it involves encroaching on the cycle lane (carefully!) ... but your hi-tech geofenced car forbids that, so you're stuck.

Or you attempt to move out of the way of an oncoming emergency vehicle, as it's barrelling down the centre of the road to reach a dying patient ... but it needs an extra couple of feet of space that you can only give it if you move partly into the cycle lane. And your car refuses.

> Or you attempt to move out of the way of an oncoming emergency vehicle, as it's barrelling down the centre of the road to reach a dying patient ... but it needs an extra couple of feet of space that you can only give it if you move partly into the cycle lane. And your car refuses.

Do you think geofencing cars out of bike lanes would lead to more or fewer deaths overall, when you include all the cases of drivers killing cyclists that would be prevented?

If there's a broken down vehicle blocking the car portion of the road, the road is closed. If the bike lane were protected with a physical barrier, you wouldn't be able to enter it. Why shouldn't it just be off limits?

I'm unhappy about a lot of the things self-driving cars will bring to our cities, but the one good thing that might happen is automatic bike lane enforcement.

At which point, letting the vehicle move at 3Mph on the cycle lane is perfectly solution (as one of these scooters companies does).