On bike and motorcycle bans

with all the traffic congestion and the pollution that my city is experiencing right now, it has really come into mind that I wanted to just ride a bike going to town either for work or doing small grocery shopping. It is a good way of contributing for the good of the environment. However, our city mayor has just issued bike and motorcycle bans along the central business district so there's no more chance of me fulfilling my dream of cycling to town.

I would also like to know if some of you are also experiencing restrictions when it comes to biking in your area. How are you coping so far with these kinds of laws?

 

No, never. What's the reason behind the ban? It only applies to the area along the central business district? Former accidents? An excuse to not build bike lanes?

 

Gee, how I would love to live in your city. Don't get me wrong because I am a bike enthusiast and also a car driver. But I have to admit that I am terribly annoyed by the 2-wheel riders. Particularly during traffic stops, those pesky riders would weave and snake their way in between vehicles. Scratches and dents are common because of those stunts. And they also add to the traffic jams because they always go the front, facing the traffic light. When the light goes green, they are naturally slower than cars.

 

One of the reasons they have given is to ease traffic congestion especially along the central business district. But if only bike lanes would also be built to accommodate cyclists and promote safety on the road, then I think more people would be encouraged to use bikes instead of pollution causing cars and motorcycles. There's just too much pollution around us now that we need to find ways to decrease the usage of smoke emitting vehicles and promote more environmental friendly means of transport.

 

That's terrible, I hope that the cyclists in your town have found alternative routes to get to their destinations. Fortunately, there are no plans to ban cycling where I live. Vehicle traffic can be quite high in the town center/business hub but I think car owners would be up in arms if they were ever to be banned. Cyclists are less predominant and we have far less influence on how the town is run.

 

I agree with what you said @Damien Lee. Cyclists are also considered minorities here in our city. I feel like there's a lack of representation when it comes to bicycle riders that's why nothing much has been done when the city officers decided to implement a bicycle ban.

 

You are right. They should build the bike lanes instead of banning. This should not happen and this is unfair for the cyclist. I really dislike the idea of bike and motorcycle ban. I think they should change the decision and I hope the new lanes will be made soon.

 

You have an incredibly backward and shortsighted mayor. The answer is to find ways to accommodate the bikes, not ban them.

 

I totally agree with what you said. In fact, the use of bikes should be encouraged more than the use of vehicles that emit a lot of pollutants. We are now experiencing a lot of environmental problems and going back to simpler forms of transportation without the pollution should be encouraged to prevent more negative impacts in our environment. Cycling does not only benefit the cyclist but also the people around them who benefits from cleaner air to breath.

 

In 2006 we [Ohio Bicycle Federation] developed a bill, the Better Bicycling Bill, which included a ban on bike bans and a ban on cities passing local laws which are "fundamentally inconsistent" with state traffic laws - i.e., state law says you may ride "no more than two abreast" so cities may not pass laws requiring single file.

Ohio is a bit unique in that the Ohio Constitution contains a "home rule" provision which gives cities significant power in passing their own laws. One city near me here in Cincinnati is supposedly "studying" bike bans or mandatory single file laws. I think those would violate state law, but they may take a shot based on the "home rule" angle... such a law could generate a long, costly legal battle, but I think we are on good ground here....
Steve Magas

 

Yeah, you are right. The earlier modes of transport were definitely cleaner and it emitted less pollution. The use of CNG should be increased and the price should be made reasonable so that the normal and common people will be able to use it.

 

Wow! I really appreciate moves such as yours to ensure that the rights of bicycle riders are also taken in consideration. I'm happy to hear that you are still fighting despite all the odds. I am hoping for your success in your battle for equality among road users, vehicles and bikes alike.

 

Simply banning something doesn't mean that people are going to stop doing it though, and they're certainly not going to like being told what to do. Surely the better way of dealing with a problem is to try and work with the people and try different ways until a solution is found that's satisfactory to everyone.

Anytime the people go up against a new law or rule that's been brought in, it's always a long battle and often a battle you can't win, but that certainly doesn't mean that you should just roll over and accept the rule, because if people didn't at least try and fight something then the authorities would be getting away with anything and everything.

 

You're right @pwarbi. Someone always has to stand up for what he/she thinks is right. Sometimes authorities would just pass bills that sometimes don't really benefit the people they rule upon and these are the kinds of situation where something has to be done by the people to assert their right. I really appreciate the people who have the courage to stand up to authorities when they strongly feel that something is wrong.

 

Banning or limiting what a person can do will only benefit the authority ho has chosen to take this action, and it won't benefit the cyclist at all. If the authority can explain the reasons behind it and they do make sense then I'm sure that people will accept the new law and that would be the end of it.

You can just ban something though and not expect some sort of backlash, and especially if you can't come up with a legitimate reason for doing it, or it impacts on a lot of people as I'm sure in this case it would.

 

Indeed it would. There are quiet a number of bicycle riders here in our city because of the cool climate and the health benefits cycling gives them. Now the new law on banning bicycles inside the city premises has sparked a lot of reactions from the biking community especially since most bikers would usually flock the central business district in the morning after their usual cycling routine. I hope our mayor is now thinking twice about his decision.

 

I'm still not understanding the reasoning behind the ban in the first place though. To claim that the ban is to reduce congestion, surely banning bicycles would only increase the issue as all the people who used to ride a bike are now banned, so would resort to either their cars or public transport so the congestion would increase?

If I lived in your city I'd certainly be challenging that decision as the reasoning behind it simply doesn't make sense.

 

I couldn't agree more. it's really senseless for me too. Instead of banning bicycles, they should all the more encourage their use in our city because we are known to be a "green" city with fresh air and all but I noticed that this term no longer applies to our city because of the increased congestion and pollution through the years. More people have cars now and the air in the central business district is not something I would like to breath in every day. The last thing I heard was the outcry and petition of an organization of city bikers for the mayor to lift the ban. I really hope he would reconsider.