Phoenix, Az. Bicycle on Sidewalk Laws-NEED HELP!

Discussion in 'rec.bicycles.soc archive' started by Progunner, Mar 13, 2004.

  1. Progunner

    Progunner Guest

    OK, I'm not sure if I have the correct ng for this topic, or
    if this is even on topic, so I cross posted to another ng.
    hoping to get a response. (So, please forgive me if I am ot)
    ----------
    I need clarification about bicycle riders riding bicycles on
    sidewalks in Phoenix, Arizona.

    Is this covered by state, county or city statutes???
    ------------
    The scenario goes something like this:

    A driver of an automobile is in a supermarket parking lot
    driving towards an exit.

    Usually, there is a sidewalk crossing the exit path of the
    vehicles leaving the parking lot. Sometimes there is a stop
    sign, usually there is not.

    A quick check to the right by the driver of the automobile
    shows that there are no pedestrians on the sidewalk, so
    the driver is concentrating on the traffic to his/her
    left, looking for an opening in the traffic to turn onto
    the roadway.

    Out of nowhere, a bicyclist [approaching the vehicle on
    the passenger side, (right to left) and moving much faster
    than a walking or jogging pedestrian] almost rams the
    passenger side of the vehicle, and starts swearing at the
    driver of the vehicle for not yielding to the bicyclist on
    the sidewalk.

    Apparently the bicyclist believes (passionately) that he is
    in the right, and that the driver of the automobile is
    supposed to yield to the bicyclist crossing the exit path of
    the automobile.

    If anyone is aware of the laws the Phoenix area, would you
    please help? Possibly a url or ???

    Many thanks in advance for your help.

    James
     
    Tags:


  2. Joel

    Joel Guest

    just the bike specific stuff- http://azbikeclub.r.m6.net/bikelaw.html

    check it with the actual law-
    http://www.azleg.state.az.us/ars/28/title28.htm

    It's my understanding that in arizona bicycling on the
    sidewalk is not against the law, as a bicycle is not
    considered a vehicle in that state. although, operating at a
    speed faster than the normal users of a sidewalk could be
    considered reckless driving on the part of the cyclist.

    hope this makes things somewhat blurry...

    progunner wrote:
    > OK, I'm not sure if I have the correct ng for this
    > topic, or if this is even on topic, so I cross posted to
    > another ng. hoping to get a response. (So, please
    > forgive me if I am ot)
    > ----------
    > I need clarification about bicycle riders riding bicycles
    > on sidewalks in Phoenix, Arizona.
    >
    > Is this covered by state, county or city statutes???
    > ------------
    > The scenario goes something like this:
    >
    > A driver of an automobile is in a supermarket parking lot
    > driving towards an exit.
    >
    > Usually, there is a sidewalk crossing the exit path of the
    > vehicles leaving the parking lot. Sometimes there is a
    > stop sign, usually there is not.
    >
    > A quick check to the right by the driver of the automobile
    > shows that there are no pedestrians on the sidewalk, so
    > the driver is concentrating on the traffic to his/her
    > left, looking for an opening in the traffic to turn onto
    > the roadway.
    >
    > Out of nowhere, a bicyclist [approaching the vehicle on
    > the passenger side, (right to left) and moving much faster
    > than a walking or jogging pedestrian] almost rams the
    > passenger side of the vehicle, and starts swearing at the
    > driver of the vehicle for not yielding to the bicyclist on
    > the sidewalk.
    >
    > Apparently the bicyclist believes (passionately) that he
    > is in the right, and that the driver of the automobile is
    > supposed to yield to the bicyclist crossing the exit path
    > of the automobile.
    >
    > If anyone is aware of the laws the Phoenix area, would you
    > please help? Possibly a url or ???
    >
    > Many thanks in advance for your help.
    >
    > James
     
  3. So it looks like you were driving and got into a heated
    discussion with that sidewalk cyclist.

    For whatever it's worth, I learned rights-of-way and yields
    with a simple rule of thumb: traffic on the smaller road
    always yields to traffic on a larger road, except where
    signs or signals say otherwise.

    When riding a bicycle on a path or sidewalk, I always
    consider the path or sidewalk the smaller road, and
    therefore am compelled to yield to traffic on regular roads
    and highways as well as wider paths that intersect the path
    that I'm on (such as driveways and the supermarket entrance
    that you describe).

    Since the sidewalk or parallel cycle path is *always* the
    narrower road for the purposes of determing right-of-way,
    you can see why it's such a pain to ride on the sidewalk. At
    speeds faster than your average walker or runner (easily
    attainable by a cyclist, whatever his condition!), it places
    the cyclist in a very awkward legal situation: does he stop
    at every intersection and driveway, or does he ignore cross-
    traffic and ride blithely on? The former is very sound, so
    far as the law goes, and quite safe--but inconvenient. You
    might as well walk. The latter is convenient but, as you
    saw, hazardous, as it sets a cyclist up for all sorts of
    inevitable confrontations.

    This is why I ride in the roadway. If traffic won't yield to
    me, it will definitely yield to the car behind me, or the
    truck behind him, or the bus behind that.

    The cyclist riding wrong-way and on the sidewalk was
    therefore probably in the wrong, and operating under the
    fatal misapprehension that all traffic should yield to him
    in whatever circumstance. Had he collided with your car
    and done actual damage, you'd probably have a good case on
    your hands.

    Get on your bike and try it sometime in a quiet
    neighborhood. You'd be surprised.

    -Luigi
     
  4. Bill Z.

    Bill Z. Guest

    [email protected] (progunner) writes:

    > Out of nowhere, a bicyclist [approaching the vehicle on
    > the passenger side, (right to left) and moving much faster
    > than a walking or jogging pedestrian] almost rams the
    > passenger side of the vehicle, and starts swearing at the
    > driver of the vehicle for not yielding to the bicyclist on
    > the sidewalk.
    >
    > Apparently the bicyclist believes (passionately) that he
    > is in the right, and that the driver of the automobile is
    > supposed to yield to the bicyclist crossing the exit path
    > of the automobile.
    >
    > If anyone is aware of the laws the Phoenix area, would you
    > please help? Possibly a url or ???

    Laws regarding use of bicycles on sidewalk vary from state
    to state, with some states allowing local jurisdictions to
    regulate the use of a sidewalk by bicycles. Regardless of
    the laws regarding that, however, there is a general
    obligation to operate a vehicle at a safe speed, and laws in
    every state reflect that.

    From your description, the bicyclist would have been riding
    at a speed unsafe for the conditions (I presume the car was
    moving very slowly towards the road as the driver tried to
    get a better view of traffic.) I've seen bicyclists (usually
    teenagers too young to drive) go very fast on a sidewalk and
    shoot out into an intersection, with buildings or other
    obstructions blocking the view for a driver on a cross
    street. With the bicyclist riding against the flow of
    traffic, the driver can have well under a second to react,
    which is far too short to have any chance of avoiding a
    collision.

    BTW, riding against the flow of traffic on a sidewalk has
    been shown to be about 4 times more dangerous than riding
    on the road in the same direction as traffic, even with
    most bicyclists riding at what would seem to be a
    reasonable speed.

    --
    My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
     
  5. Just Zis Guy

    Just Zis Guy Guest

    On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 19:21:09 GMT, [email protected] (Bill Z.)
    wrote in message <[email protected]>:

    >Laws regarding use of bicycles on sidewalk vary from state
    >to state, with some states allowing local jurisdictions to
    >regulate the use of a sidewalk by bicycles.

    Or maybe the guy is trying to blame the cyclist for a
    SMIDSY...

    --
    Guy
    ===
    May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
    http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

    88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University
     
  6. Hi, You should contact the Arizona State Department of
    Transportation. They would be able to give you an accurate
    answer to your question about bikes on sidewalks. Also,
    contact the City of Pheonix about any local ordinances
    governing bikes.

    In my state, Florida, riding on sidewalks is allowed but you
    must give way to pedestrians. But, in the city I live in
    there is a local ordinance prohibiting riding (you can walk
    them) bicycles on sidewalks in the downtown district.

    As for accident, if that same scenario happened here I would
    say the cyclist is at fault for hitting the stationary
    vehicle. Here's a couple links to get you in the right
    direction. Take care - www.dot.state.az.us
    www.ci.phoenix.az.us

    progunner <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > OK, I'm not sure if I have the correct ng for this
    > topic, or if this is even on topic, so I cross posted to
    > another ng. hoping to get a response. (So, please
    > forgive me if I am ot)
    > ----------
    > I need clarification about bicycle riders riding bicycles
    > on sidewalks in Phoenix, Arizona.
    >
    > Is this covered by state, county or city statutes???
    > ------------
    > The scenario goes something like this:
    >
    > A driver of an automobile is in a supermarket parking lot
    > driving towards an exit.
    >
    > Usually, there is a sidewalk crossing the exit path of the
    > vehicles leaving the parking lot. Sometimes there is a
    > stop sign, usually there is not.
    >
    > A quick check to the right by the driver of the automobile
    > shows that there are no pedestrians on the sidewalk, so
    > the driver is concentrating on the traffic to his/her
    > left, looking for an opening in the traffic to turn onto
    > the roadway.
    >
    > Out of nowhere, a bicyclist [approaching the vehicle on
    > the passenger side, (right to left) and moving much faster
    > than a walking or jogging pedestrian] almost rams the
    > passenger side of the vehicle, and starts swearing at the
    > driver of the vehicle for not yielding to the bicyclist on
    > the sidewalk.
    >
    > Apparently the bicyclist believes (passionately) that he
    > is in the right, and that the driver of the automobile is
    > supposed to yield to the bicyclist crossing the exit path
    > of the automobile.
    >
    > If anyone is aware of the laws the Phoenix area, would you
    > please help? Possibly a url or ???
    >
    > Many thanks in advance for your help.
    >
    > James
     
  7. Mike Kruger

    Mike Kruger Guest

    "Luigi de Guzman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    >
    > For whatever it's worth, I learned rights-of-way and
    > yields with a simple rule of thumb: traffic on the smaller
    > road always yields to traffic on a larger road, except
    > where signs or signals say otherwise.
    >
    > When riding a bicycle on a path or sidewalk, I always
    > consider the path or sidewalk the smaller road, and
    > therefore am compelled to yield to traffic on regular
    > roads and highways as well as wider paths that intersect
    > the path that I'm on (such as driveways and the
    > supermarket entrance that you describe).
    >
    That's might be a good rule for survival, but as law it's
    all wet. Let's suppose we have a through street with a
    sidewalk, and several side streets with stop signs. Let's
    suppose we have a pedestrian walking straight, using the
    sidewalk on the through street. A pedestrian on the sidewalk
    has the right of way over vehicles on the side streets. They
    have to stop for him. That same pedestrian also has the
    right of way over traffic turning off the through street
    across his path. The traffic has to wait until he has
    crossed the street.

    What's true for the pedestrian is true for any legal user of
    the sidewalk (jogger, baby carriage, wheelchair, Segway, in-
    line skater, bicyclist, marching jazz band).

    What the original poster was talking about is a legitimate
    problem from both sides. The vehicle driver often can't see
    whether traffic is coming without pulling far enough forward
    to block the sidewalk. However, this blocks the sidewalk
    from other users who, in fact, have the right of way. This
    is particularly irritating when there's no way for the
    pedestrian to walk behind the vehicle safely.

    Courtesy is the best rule in these circumstances, but
    shouldn't obscure the basic principle that it is not legal
    for a vehicle to block a sidewalk.
     
  8. On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 19:40:16 +0000, "Just zis Guy, you know?"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 19:21:09 GMT, [email protected]
    >(Bill Z.) wrote in message
    ><[email protected]>:
    >
    >>Laws regarding use of bicycles on sidewalk vary from state
    >>to state, with some states allowing local jurisdictions to
    >>regulate the use of a sidewalk by bicycles.
    >
    >Or maybe the guy is trying to blame the cyclist for a
    >SMIDSY...

    OK, I'll bite.

    SMIDSY?

    "sorry, mate I didn't see you?"

    In any event, Guy, the cyclist was counterflow and moving
    fast on the footpath. Nobody looks for anything there. A
    few of these SMIDSY incidents and I was a confirmed
    vehicular cyclist.

    -Luigi
     
  9. Mike Kruger

    Mike Kruger Guest

    The whole Phoenix code, in searchable form, is here:livepublish.municode.com/2/lpext.dll?f=templates&fn=altmain-
    nf-hitlist.htm&2.0 (this specific link is the result of a
    search on "sidewalk")

    Oh, and my previous post may have been a bit snippy.

    I certainly agree with those who point out that, legal or
    not, it is imprudent for a bicyclist to ride on the sidewalk
    in the "wrong" direction at a high rate of speed.

    In my pedestrian mode, I'm really tired of people blocking
    the sidewalks.
     
  10. On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 22:08:49 GMT, "Mike Kruger"
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >The whole Phoenix code, in searchable form, is here:ivepublish.municode.com/2/lpext.dll?f=templates&fn=altmain-
    >nf-hitlist.htm&2.0 (this specific link is the result of a
    >search on "sidewalk")
    >
    >Oh, and my previous post may have been a bit snippy.
    >
    >I certainly agree with those who point out that, legal or
    >not, it is imprudent for a bicyclist to ride on the
    >sidewalk in the "wrong" direction at a high rate of speed.
    >
    >In my pedestrian mode, I'm really tired of people blocking
    >the sidewalks.

    Agreed. But now what I want to know is whether or not there
    is a difference between a cyclist and a pedestrian on the
    sidewalk, legally-speaking. If a cyclist on the sidewalk is
    considered a pedestrian moving really really fast, that's
    one thing. If the cyclist is considered a vehicle operator
    who is incidentally permitted to operate on the sidewalk
    (where other vehicles are not permitted), then that's qutie
    another, isn't it?

    -Luigi
     
  11. >But now what I want to know is whether or not there is a
    >difference between a cyclist and a pedestrian on the
    >sidewalk, legally-speaking.

    Mostly if you are riding a bicycle you are required to yield
    to sll pedestrian traffic regardless of situation.

    That may not be applicable in Montana but it applies in DC.

    --

    _______________________ALL AMIGA IN MY
    MIND_______________________ ------------------"Buddy Holly,
    the Texas Elvis"------------------ __________306.350.357.38-
    >>[email protected]__________
     
  12. rec.bicycles.soc is the closest newsgroup

    As I recall, case law is weighing in against cyclists
    claiming to be pedestrians but going 3 - 6 times faster,
    even on crosswalks. I doubt you could hold a driver liable
    if someone entered the street any faster than jogging speed,
    regardless of mode of conveyance.

    Given cyclists are considered vehicle operators, they would
    be given the least leeway.

    Some people are just jerks and think they have the right to
    tell the whole world to get out of their way.

    "progunner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > OK, I'm not sure if I have the correct ng for this
    > topic, or if this is even on topic, so I cross posted to
    > another ng. hoping to get a response. (So, please
    > forgive me if I am ot)
    > ----------
    > I need clarification about bicycle riders riding bicycles
    > on sidewalks in Phoenix, Arizona.
    >
    > Is this covered by state, county or city statutes???
    > ------------
    > The scenario goes something like this:
    >
    > A driver of an automobile is in a supermarket parking lot
    > driving towards an exit.
    >
    > Usually, there is a sidewalk crossing the exit path of the
    > vehicles leaving the parking lot. Sometimes there is a
    > stop sign, usually there is not.
    >
    > A quick check to the right by the driver of the automobile
    > shows that there are no pedestrians on the sidewalk, so
    > the driver is concentrating on the traffic to his/her
    > left, looking for an opening in the traffic to turn onto
    > the roadway.
    >
    > Out of nowhere, a bicyclist [approaching the vehicle on
    > the passenger side, (right to left) and moving much faster
    > than a walking or jogging pedestrian] almost rams the
    > passenger side of the vehicle, and starts swearing at the
    > driver of the vehicle for not yielding to the bicyclist on
    > the sidewalk.
    >
    > Apparently the bicyclist believes (passionately) that he
    > is in the right, and that the driver of the automobile is
    > supposed to yield to the bicyclist crossing the exit path
    > of the automobile.
    >
    > If anyone is aware of the laws the Phoenix area, would you
    > please help? Possibly a url or ???
    >
    > Many thanks in advance for your help.
    >
    > James
     
  13. In article <[email protected]>,
    progunner says...
    > If anyone is aware of the laws the Phoenix area, would you
    > please help? Possibly a url or ???

    Don't know the exact laws there, but, no matter if he is
    allowed to be there, if you hit a bicycle with your car,
    it's gonna be your fault. Also, if a bike rams you, it's his
    fault. Then everything else.

    --
    "There's a fine line between an attitude problem and
    thinking clearly."
    d.B. ICQ: 138579247
     
  14. On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 18:00:09 -0500, "Eric S. Sande" <[email protected]>
    wrote:

    >>But now what I want to know is whether or not there is a
    >>difference between a cyclist and a pedestrian on the
    >>sidewalk, legally-speaking.
    >
    >Mostly if you are riding a bicycle you are required to
    >yield to sll pedestrian traffic regardless of situation.

    But is a cyclist on the sidewalk a *pedestrian* that must be
    yielded to?

    I'm honestly quite confused on the issue.

    >
    >That may not be applicable in Montana but it applies in DC.

    Especially in the designated "central business district"
    where bicycles are positively prohibited from using the
    sidewalks.

    -Luigi
     
  15. Matt O'Toole

    Matt O'Toole Guest

    progunner wrote:

    > OK, I'm not sure if I have the correct ng for this
    > topic, or if this is even on topic, so I cross posted to
    > another ng. hoping to get a response. (So, please
    > forgive me if I am ot)
    > ----------
    > I need clarification about bicycle riders riding bicycles
    > on sidewalks in Phoenix, Arizona.
    >
    > Is this covered by state, county or city statutes???
    > ------------
    > The scenario goes something like this:
    >
    > A driver of an automobile is in a supermarket parking lot
    > driving towards an exit.
    >
    > Usually, there is a sidewalk crossing the exit path of the
    > vehicles leaving the parking lot. Sometimes there is a
    > stop sign, usually there is not.
    >
    > A quick check to the right by the driver of the automobile
    > shows that there are no pedestrians on the sidewalk, so
    > the driver is concentrating on the traffic to his/her
    > left, looking for an opening in the traffic to turn onto
    > the roadway.
    >
    > Out of nowhere, a bicyclist [approaching the vehicle on
    > the passenger side, (right to left) and moving much faster
    > than a walking or jogging pedestrian] almost rams the
    > passenger side of the vehicle, and starts swearing at the
    > driver of the vehicle for not yielding to the bicyclist on
    > the sidewalk.
    >
    > Apparently the bicyclist believes (passionately) that he
    > is in the right, and that the driver of the automobile is
    > supposed to yield to the bicyclist crossing the exit path
    > of the automobile.
    >
    > If anyone is aware of the laws the Phoenix area, would you
    > please help? Possibly a url or ???

    I don't know how the law sees this in AZ, but riding like
    this -- against the flow of traffic, and on the sidewalk --
    is almost begging to be hit.

    Matt O.
     
  16. Bill Z.

    Bill Z. Guest

    Luigi de Guzman <[email protected]> writes:

    > >In my pedestrian mode, I'm really tired of people
    > >blocking the sidewalks.
    >
    > Agreed. But now what I want to know is whether or not
    > there is a difference between a cyclist and a pedestrian
    > on the sidewalk, legally-speaking. If a cyclist on the
    > sidewalk is considered a pedestrian moving really really
    > fast, that's one thing. If the cyclist is considered a
    > vehicle operator who is incidentally permitted to operate
    > on the sidewalk (where other vehicles are not permitted),
    > then that's qutie another, isn't it?

    The rules in Calfornia are that pedestrians have the right
    of way on sidewalks and at uncontrolled intersections
    (otherwise they have to obey traffic lights.) But, there is
    also a law that says that pedestrians cannot leave the
    sidewalk unless it is reasonably safe to do that. I.e., you
    can't just jump out from behind a bush in front of a car and
    expect the driver to stop with nearly no warning. The driver
    must, however stop to let you go if he can do that without
    slamming on the brakes.

    Also, bicycles in California have all the rights and
    resonsibilities as vehicles. Aside from some special cases
    (registration, etc.), a bicycle is in fact treated as a
    vehicle (but not a motor vehicle.)

    Most states do something similar.

    --
    My real name backwards: nemuaZ lliB
     
  17. > Out of nowhere, a bicyclist [approaching the vehicle on
    > the passenger side, (right to left) and moving much faster
    > than a walking or jogging pedestrian] almost rams the
    > passenger side of the vehicle, and starts swearing at the
    > driver of the vehicle for not yielding to the bicyclist on
    > the sidewalk.
    >
    > Apparently the bicyclist believes (passionately) that he
    > is in the right, and that the driver of the automobile is
    > supposed to yield to the bicyclist crossing the exit path
    > of the automobile.

    Regardless of the actual rule of law, the bicyclist was
    operating his "vehicle" in an extremely unsafe manner for
    one reason- lack of predictable behaviour. It is not the
    norm to expect a cyclist coming towards you at high speed
    from the "wrong" direction on a sidewalk. Darwin comes into
    play here; any cyclist that thinks doing so is a good idea
    is likely to come upon many potential collisions.

    In general (but not always the case), the rule of law
    supports and encourages predictable behaviour, and for very
    good reason. The more random our roadways, the more
    dangerous they are.

    So, to me, even if the cyclist was acting legally, he's
    still an idiot waiting to be killed. I wouldn't give him
    much thought, except to recognize that there might be others
    out there like him, and that you've now got one more thing
    that you should be paying attention to a bit more closely
    than before.

    --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReaction.com

    "progunner" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > OK, I'm not sure if I have the correct ng for this
    > topic, or if this is even on topic, so I cross posted to
    > another ng. hoping to get a response. (So, please
    > forgive me if I am ot)
    > ----------
    > I need clarification about bicycle riders riding bicycles
    > on sidewalks in Phoenix, Arizona.
    >
    > Is this covered by state, county or city statutes???
    > ------------
    > The scenario goes something like this:
    >
    > A driver of an automobile is in a supermarket parking lot
    > driving towards an exit.
    >
    > Usually, there is a sidewalk crossing the exit path of the
    > vehicles leaving the parking lot. Sometimes there is a
    > stop sign, usually there is not.
    >
    > A quick check to the right by the driver of the automobile
    > shows that there are no pedestrians on the sidewalk, so
    > the driver is concentrating on the traffic to his/her
    > left, looking for an opening in the traffic to turn onto
    > the roadway.
    >
    > Out of nowhere, a bicyclist [approaching the vehicle on
    > the passenger side, (right to left) and moving much faster
    > than a walking or jogging pedestrian] almost rams the
    > passenger side of the vehicle, and starts swearing at the
    > driver of the vehicle for not yielding to the bicyclist on
    > the sidewalk.
    >
    > Apparently the bicyclist believes (passionately) that he
    > is in the right, and that the driver of the automobile is
    > supposed to yield to the bicyclist crossing the exit path
    > of the automobile.
    >
    > If anyone is aware of the laws the Phoenix area, would you
    > please help? Possibly a url or ???
    >
    > Many thanks in advance for your help.
    >
    > James
     
  18. "Mike Jacoubowsky/Chain Reaction Bicycles" <[email protected]> wrote
    in message news:JZM4c.38005$%[email protected]...

    > So, to me, even if the cyclist was acting legally, he's
    > still an idiot waiting to be killed.

    I agree with Mike. It is inherently unsafe to be riding the
    wrong way on the sidewalk. This behavior is only excusable
    for children using their bikes as toys under adult
    supervision; or cyclists at extremely low rate of speeds,
    i.e., at a walking pace, or perhaps "Fred Flintstoning"
    along. When I come out of the transit station downtown,
    I scootle in this fashion for a half block to get to the
    street, for example.

    Then again, I've spent some time recently in Phoenix, my
    impression is that the city seems to suffer from an
    extremely car-centric design and behavior, and totally
    clueless cyclists. You just want to knock everyone's heads
    together and put some sense in their brains.

    --
    Warm Regards,

    Claire Petersky
    Please replace earthlink for mouse-potato and .net for .com

    Home of the meditative cyclist:
    http://home.earthlink.net/~cpetersky/Welcome.htm
    Email me re: the new Tiferet CD (http://www.tiferet.net)
     
  19. >But is a cyclist on the sidewalk a *pedestrian* that must
    >be yielded to?

    A good hair splitting queston. In my opinion, no.

    The cyclist wouldn't have been on the sidewalk in the first
    place, it was illegal.

    --

    _______________________ALL AMIGA IN MY
    MIND_______________________ ------------------"Buddy Holly,
    the Texas Elvis"------------------ __________306.350.357.38-
    >>[email protected]__________
     
  20. Rick Onanian

    Rick Onanian Guest

    On Sat, 13 Mar 2004 23:40:25 GMT, "Mike Jacoubowsky/Chain Reaction
    Bicycles" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >Regardless of the actual rule of law, the bicyclist was
    >operating his "vehicle" in an extremely unsafe manner for
    >one reason- lack of predictable behaviour. It is not the
    >norm to expect a cyclist coming towards you at high speed
    >from the "wrong" direction on a sidewalk. Darwin comes into
    >play here; any cyclist that thinks doing so is a good idea
    >is likely to come upon many potential collisions.

    Additionally, this is all at a blind corner (that's the
    impression that I got, anyway).
    --
    Rick Onanian
     
Loading...
Loading...