Sidewalk bicycling?

[Gooserider]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>I don't understand why all cycling websites blast sidewalk cycling as
> the 'most unsafe' way to cycle? I have started to commute 12 miles to
> work and do a mix of roads, trails and some sidewalk. I don't see how
> a long stretch of empty sidewalk parralel to a busy road would
> considered 'unsafe'? As you long as you treat yourself as invisible
> at each intersection, the sidewalk should be safer, no? I also like
> sidewalk since I don't have to keep checking my mirrors to see if
> cars are passing me correctly. It is more relaxing. Am I missing
> something? I realize it is not as fast as road cycling, but if I
> cared abuot time, I would be driving...

There is one section of my route on which I use the sidewalk. I take a
divided 4 lane some of my route, and Florida will build roads with paved
shoulders OR sidewalks and curbs, but not both. Rather than share the lane
with high speed traffic for a mile, I take the sidewalk.

 

[It's Chris]

It's less safe for pedestrians, who now have to contend with a much
faster and less manuverable (relative to another pedestrian) bicycle on
a narrow path since sidewalks are made for foot traffic, not vehicles.

This makes riding on the sidewalk illegal in most states anyway. You
can, of course WALK your bike on the sidewalk

That's my 2¢...

- -
Compliments of:
"Your Friendly Neighborhood Wheelman"

If you want to E-mail me use:
ChrisZCorner "at" webtv "dot" net

My website:
http://geocities.com/czcorner

 

[smn]

I really think this is what you are looking for.

"Effective cycling". John Forrester. He is the pioneer of this thing.
Don't want anyone here to beat you over the head with it though. : )

http://www.johnforester.com/

http://www.ihpva.org/pipermail/hpv/2000-May/005176.html Comments

 

[smn]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] wrote:
>> Overall, the safety record of sidewalk cycling is dismal. This has
>> been studied a few times by different researchers. IIRC, they've
>> found riding on sidewalks to be anywhere from about 2.5 to 13 times as
>> dangerous as riding on roads.
>
> Here are a few problems I have with these studies:
>
> 1) There are a lot more sidewalk cyclist than road cyclists so
> naturally
> accidents will be higher for them
>
> 2) Sidewalk cyclists are mostly kids while road cyclists are far more
> mature and aware of their surroundings
>
> 3) Nearly all sidewalk accidents you can walk up from, but a road
> accident has much more serious consequences. So I would take 13 wipe
> outs on the sidewalk to being hit just once on the road !
>
> What are some good websites that explain how to commute safely on the
> road, perhaps I am doing something wrong that makes me perceive it as
> unsafe in CERTAIN situations?
>

 

[smn]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] wrote:
>> Overall, the safety record of sidewalk cycling is dismal. This has
>> been studied a few times by different researchers. IIRC, they've
>> found riding on sidewalks to be anywhere from about 2.5 to 13 times as
>> dangerous as riding on roads.
>
> Here are a few problems I have with these studies:
>
> 1) There are a lot more sidewalk cyclist than road cyclists so
> naturally
> accidents will be higher for them
>
> 2) Sidewalk cyclists are mostly kids while road cyclists are far more
> mature and aware of their surroundings
>
> 3) Nearly all sidewalk accidents you can walk up from, but a road
> accident has much more serious consequences. So I would take 13 wipe
> outs on the sidewalk to being hit just once on the road !
>
> What are some good websites that explain how to commute safely on the
> road, perhaps I am doing something wrong that makes me perceive it as
> unsafe in CERTAIN situations?


This article is real helpful for a beginner also. Covers beginning
maintenance, kinds of bikes, passing safely in traffic, and some such.
Jobst Brandt contributed pics.

http://www.mit.edu/~cforest/hobbies_cycling/Bike IAP Seminar Jan 05.pdf

 

[smn]

You're able to come from a long way out, if you're traveling at faster
than ped speeds. It's even worse than it seems, what with stopping
distances increasing with an exponent greater than 1. Or some such. I'm
a bit bizarre at maths, so the key is that doubling one's speed more
than doubles the stopping distance. Which means you not only show up
when you're least expected, you have less chance (than a ped) of coming
up short.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

As long as she knows she is the last person to cross the intersection or
driveway and sometimes miss the light all together. Being in an unsafe
place all the time makes you the soul person responsible for letting them
act like you are invisible. And since she does not care about the time
spent going from A-B as she already stated it would be fine. Most people
here would think that is too much compromising and I do not know how you can
keep up 15mph. That is my average street speed up and down hill and just
stopping for intersections. Your running time is probably closer to 1-10mph
like another poster suggested.
I would think you are also making drivers a little frustrated with
bikers.
They might signal for you to go first and then there is that delay of should
you take the opportunity or let him rightfully go first.

Just my two cents
thanks for listening

 

[SS]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I don't understand why all cycling websites blast sidewalk cycling as
> the 'most unsafe' way to cycle? I have started to commute 12 miles to
> work and do a mix of roads, trails and some sidewalk. I don't see how
> a long stretch of empty sidewalk parralel to a busy road would
> considered 'unsafe'? As you long as you treat yourself as invisible
> at each intersection, the sidewalk should be safer, no? I also like
> sidewalk since I don't have to keep checking my mirrors to see if
> cars are passing me correctly. It is more relaxing. Am I missing
> something? I realize it is not as fast as road cycling, but if I
> cared abuot time, I would be driving...
>

Americans don't walk anywhere anyway do they? All done by car, so pavements
will be empty mainly.

 

[Dane Buson]

David L. Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:
> [email protected] wrote:
>
>> Makes sense in downtowns of big cities, but 99% of sidewalks hardly
>> have anyone walking/biking on them in the USA. ( Ok I just pulled
>> that number from the air, but I would not be surprised if it is
>> correct ).
>
> Just the occasional little kid, who will not expect you to come
> barreling down the sidewalk. Don't you get it?

It doesn't have to be a little kid. I nearly took out a teenage girl
when she *sprinted* out of her driveway [1]. I was on a wider sidewalk
which of part of the MUT I take to work. I wasn't going full speed
thankfully, so I could avoid her.

[1] Which had an extensive hedgeline, so I couldn't see her until she
was just about on the MUT.

--
Dane Buson - [email protected]
"I am convinced that the manufacturers of carpet odor removing powder
have included encapsulated time released cat urine in their products.
This technology must be what prevented its distribution during my mom's
reign. My carpet smells like ****, and I don't have a cat. Better go
buy some more." -- [email protected]

 

[Anthony DeLorenzo]

On Sep 14, 9:29 am, [email protected] wrote:

> Makes sense in downtowns of big cities, but 99% of sidewalks hardly
> have anyone walking/biking on them in the USA. ( Ok I just pulled
> that number from the air, but I would not be surprised if it is
> correct ).

So, since there are few users that makes it OK to break the law? Does
that mean it is OK for cars to break the law with regards to cyclists,
since there are far fewer bikes vs. cars on many roads?

I think that if cyclists knowingly act illegally and/or dangerously,
they have no grounds to complain when other vehicles -- eg. cars -- do
the same. You're holding other road users to a standard that you won't
uphold. The only way mixed-mode transportation systems can work is if
all users play by the rules.

Regards,
Anthony

 

[[email protected]]

On Sep 17, 11:30 am, Anthony DeLorenzo <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On Sep 14, 9:29 am, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > Makes sense in downtowns of big cities, but 99% of sidewalks hardly
> > have anyone walking/biking on them in the USA. ( Ok I just pulled
> > that number from the air, but I would not be surprised if it is
> > correct ).
>
> So, since there are few users that makes it OK to break the law? Does
> that mean it is OK for cars to break the law with regards to cyclists,
> since there are far fewer bikes vs. cars on many roads?
>
> I think that if cyclists knowingly act illegally and/or dangerously,
> they have no grounds to complain when other vehicles -- eg. cars -- do
> the same. You're holding other road users to a standard that you won't
> uphold. The only way mixed-mode transportation systems can work is if
> all users play by the rules.
>
> Regards,
> Anthony

What if it's legal to ride the sidewalk, as in downtown Seattle or
Madison?

 

[Matt O'Toole]

On Fri, 14 Sep 2007 23:05:12 -0400, David L. Johnson wrote:

> [email protected] wrote:
>> rdclark wrote:
>>> 1) Driveways. Cars entering or leaving them aren't looking for fast
>>> movers on the sidewalk. Sidewalk riding is dangerous because a bike is
>>> so different from the expected traffic. The safest way to ride is to
>>> always be predictable.
>>
>> All you have to do is watch out for the cars backing out of the
>> driveway and you are fine. If a cyclist is not capable of this minimal
>> situal awareness, how are they safer on the road?
>
> No, that's not it. You also have to worry about drivers driving into
> driveways, without looking for you on the sidewalk. This is especially
> stupid if there are trees or parked cars blocking the driver's view of
> you -- but the plain fact is that he/she would not be looking for you on
> the sidewalk, because you belong on the road.
>
>
>>> 2) Pedestrians. Sidewalks are for them. They have a right to assume
>>> there won't be any vehicles using a sidewalk (unless it's actually a
>>> multi-use path). And they often make sudden unpredictable moves.
>>
>> I bought a little horn for my bike and so far it works great.
>
> I could do that with a car, or a motorcycle, as well, both of which come
> with horns. That does not make it safe, nor legal.
>
>> Makes sense in downtowns of big cities, but 99% of sidewalks hardly
>> have anyone walking/biking on them in the USA. ( Ok I just pulled that
>> number from the air, but I would not be surprised if it is correct ).
>
> Just the occasional little kid, who will not expect you to come
> barreling down the sidewalk. Don't you get it?
>
>
>>> Bicyclists are not pedestrians. They're vehicles. The rules of the
>>> road apply.
>>
>> If we can share the road with cars, why can't we share sidewalks with
>> pedestrians? My point is it is fine to bike on the sidewalk as long as
>> you ride as if you are invisible. Do we agree there?
>
> Nope.

It seems to work fine as long as you ride as if you're a rolling
pedestrian -- ie, slowly.

It works for millions of Japanese.

This summer I spent a couple of weeks in my hometown in southern CA, where
cycling is trendy again among teenagers and young adults. Most people
ride beach cruisers at low speeds on both sidewalks and streets, whatever
suits them at the moment. If traffic is light they ride in the street.
If not they ride on the sidewalk, in crosswalks, through parking lots and
plazas, on the street against traffic, etc. Almost no one wears a helmet,
or uses lights or reflectors at night. They use cell phones and iPods
while riding, and carry cups of coffee. Thousands of people do this, and
it seems to work fine.

Heresy, I know. But it's sure great to see so many people on bikes again,
especially kids!

Matt O.

 

[David L. Johnson]

Matt O'Toole wrote:

> It seems to work fine as long as you ride as if you're a rolling
> pedestrian -- ie, slowly.

So, if you want to walk, walk.

--

David L. Johnson

"What am I on? I'm on my bike, six hours a day, busting my ass.
What are you on?"
--Lance Armstrong

 

[Tom Keats]

In article <[email protected]>,
"David L. Johnson" <[email protected]> writes:
> Matt O'Toole wrote:
>
>> It seems to work fine as long as you ride as if you're a rolling
>> pedestrian -- ie, slowly.
>
> So, if you want to walk, walk.

That's what I generally do, myself. In some exceptional
circumstances I'll ride up onto, or across a sidewalk.
But I'd prefer not to have to.

But the bike-riding style to which Matt refers, is rampant
here in Vancouver. A pedestrian becomes used to encountering
sidewalk riders. It can be startling when they whiz by ya
from behind, but the incident is over by the time you realize
what happened. The rider is on his/her merry way, and you're
on yours. And there are certain local routes on which I'll
be more ... "understanding" of sidewalk riding. Particularly
along Marine Drive, between Cambie St and points eastward.
SE Marine Drive is a cyclists' deathtrap. Not because the
traffic is fast, but because it's so all-over-the-place.
Fast, linear traffic is trivial to deal with. But all-over-
the-place urban traffic is an horse of a different feather.

There have been local incidents of purse-snatchings
inflicted on Little Old Ladies, by desperate drogaddictos
crackhead sidewalk riders. Sometimes with dire results.
So sidewalk riding evokes fear & resentment in some folks.
That is most certainly /not/ what I want to do to my
fellow citizens.


cheers,
Tom

--
Nothing is safe from me.
I'm really at:
tkeats curlicue vcn dot bc dot ca

 

[Claire Petersky]

<[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> What if it's legal to ride the sidewalk, as in downtown Seattle or
> Madison?


I ride the sidewalk in limited circumstances in downtown Seattle. For
example, if I am riding to the bus stop on 5th at Jackson, and there are
buses picking up passengers on Jackson, rather than do some sort of
complicated run around the buses, I will go up on the sidewalk. I announce,
"on the sidewalk!" and then take my speed 'way down, sometimes scootling
with my feet to the stop.

Another instance of riding on the sidewalk: due to odd one-way streets, if
I'm heading overall north from my workplace, I'll go one block the wrong way
on the sidewalk to get going the right direction. Since the hill is pretty
steep, sometimes I just walk the bike up - my speed either way is pretty
slow. Those who think I should only behave vehicularly can go the several
steep blocks out of their way to do that. For me, a half block up Madison at
3.6 mph isn't that troubling.

--
Warm Regards,

Claire Petersky
http://www.bicyclemeditations.org/
See the books I've set free at: http://bookcrossing.com/referral/Cpetersky

 

[Leo Lichtman]

"Tom Keats" wrote: (clip) horse of a different feather. (clip)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

 

[Camilo]

On Sep 14, 6:27 pm, Ryan Cousineau <[email protected]> wrote:
....
> The basic problem with sidewalk riding is that it works fine, AS LONG AS
> YOU TRAVEL AT PEDESTRIAN SPEEDS.
>
> That's about 0-10 km/h. Maybe 15 km/h if you're really careful. Hint: if
> you were that careful, you probably wouldn't ride on the sidewalk.

+1. They are called sideWALKS for a reason. They are designed for
walkers, not riders.

Sidewalks are used by bicyclists who have an unrealistic view of the
danger of riding on the road vs. sideWALK, and /or are very slow and
timid riders. You cannot make good time safely on a sideWALK -
whether that be commuting speeds (slow, but much faster than walking
or running) or for fitness riding.

 

[Camilo]

On Sep 14, 6:44 am, [email protected] wrote:....I also like
> sidewalk since I don't have to keep checking my mirrors to see if
> cars are passing me correctly. It is more relaxing. Am I missing
> something? I realize it is not as fast as road cycling, but if I
> cared abuot time, I would be driving...

You care about the speed you travel whether you're commuting or riding
for fitness. Sidewalks are made for walking (maybe jogging) speed.
Neither relaxed commuting nor vigorous riding are that slow.

I don't understand this mirror business. I've been riding streets for
30 years including a lot of city street cycling in Chicago and other
large cities. I've never used a mirror and can't imagine how they'd
improve safety.

Do you actually react to cars coming up behind you? I personally know
two people who have gotten hit from behind. Neither could have
prevented it with a mirror.

 

[Justa Lurker]

Camilo wrote:

>
> I don't understand this mirror business. I've been riding streets for
> 30 years including a lot of city street cycling in Chicago and other
> large cities. I've never used a mirror and can't imagine how they'd
> improve safety.
>
> Do you actually react to cars coming up behind you? I personally know
> two people who have gotten hit from behind. Neither could have
> prevented it with a mirror.
>

Personally, I don't use mirrors. However, I wonder if some people do
find them helpful in checking for traffic coming upon them from behind,
in their blind spot, etc. before changing lanes, turning, or otherwise
pulling out into traffic. I would just turn my head quickly to check.
That seems to work fine (at least so far !) But this is the only reason
I could think of......

 

[Steve Gravrock]

On 2007-09-19, Camilo <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sep 14, 6:44 am, [email protected] wrote:....I also like
>> sidewalk since I don't have to keep checking my mirrors to see if
>> cars are passing me correctly. It is more relaxing. Am I missing
>> something? I realize it is not as fast as road cycling, but if I
>> cared abuot time, I would be driving...

[..]

> I don't understand this mirror business. I've been riding streets for
> 30 years including a lot of city street cycling in Chicago and other
> large cities. I've never used a mirror and can't imagine how they'd
> improve safety.

I use a mirror because my ride home involves a left turn in heavy 35 MPH
traffic and sometimes, depending on my route, a left lane change in the
same conditions. The mirror isn't necessary but it saves me an awful lot
of head checks because I can watch the mirror for something that looks
like a gap in traffic before I look over my shoulder.

I have it set up so that I mostly see the next lane over while I'm
looking straight ahead. I can see directly behind me if I turn my head
slightly but I can't monitor that area constantly. I suspect I'd get
overly paranoid about overtaking traffic after a while if I could see
directly behind me at all times

I do think that mirrors improve safety in winter riding conditions,
again because they make for fewer head checks. When I'm riding on snow,
slush, and ice I don't want to take my eyes off the road and twist my
head around any more than necessary.

 

[[email protected]]

Camilo wrote:
> I don't understand this mirror business. I've been riding streets
> for 30 years including a lot of city street cycling in Chicago and

I am not the type to place my life in inferior people's hands. Today
driver is multi-tasking , i,e juggling cell phone, cigarettes, kids,
radio station all with one hand. Why should I place my life in such
foolish people's hands? With the mirror I can check to see cars do
see me and are passing me with enough space.

You may have been lucky to survive 30 years without incident but I
would take a closer look at what today's drivers are doing before
blindly trusting your life to them.