Current Events > In the absence of dedicated bike lanes, bicycles should be allowed on sidewalks.

(+) Yeah! (+)

In the absence of lanes AND sidewalks, well, I don't have a solution for that except have em build sidewalks.

What about the people walking on the sidewalks? Where they supposed to go to avoid being run over by people on bikes?

So instead of the cyclist being at risk being hit by car, the risk should be put on the pedestrian? There's a huge fucking problem where I live with bikes and more insidious, mopeds, on the sidewalk.

PeteyParker posted...

What about the people walking on the sidewalks? Where they supposed to go to avoid being run over by people on bikes?

Perhaps two steps to the side?

deny.

you're going to cause a lot of pedestrian injuries because so many cyclists are entitled and think they are at the top of the transpo food chain.

ride on the road like you are supposed to. If you get nervous, well, now you know how pedestrians feel when some lance-wannabe is tearing down the sidewalk.

In my city, people just assume the bike lane exists for cars anyway. Cyclists can't get a win.

The only time bicycles should be allowed on sidewalks is when the person using it is actually walking. Same thing with mopeds.

RetuenOfDevsman posted...

In the absence of lanes AND sidewalks, well, I don't have a solution for that except have em build sidewalks.

As a frequent walker, I'm fine w/ bikes on sidewalks, but... guess what? Just like on the road a car is supposed to yield to you, on the sidewalk, you have to yield to us! You're the dangerous ones in our domain. You have to work around us, not the other way around.
I've crossed paths with plenty of cyclists on sidewalks over the years and the majority are nice. But a significant minority of like 20% act like fucking entitled bastards, like I'm intruding on their lane.

Nope. Bicycles are vehicles. Get off the sidewalk if you're an adult cyclist.

I think the misunderstanding here is that some of us are picturing NYC, where there is no solution to transportation regardless.

In plenty of places, there are sidewalks but there might be one pedestrian per mile. That's more what I had in mind.

Eh most sidewalks are barely wide enough for two people to walk next to each other to begin with. Add in bikes and the ones riding the bikes will have to slow down so much, its just like walking anyways.

as a frequent cyclist I can't even imagine biking on the sidewalk for any more than like, pulling up onto the sidewalk to stop at a store or maybe trying to get over to the traffic light button or something. it's a fairly narrow space with a bunch of people going way slower than you and often blocking the sidewalk entirely, it's not a good riding environment at all

Y'all have trouble sidestepping bikes or something? Hell of a lot easier for a person to dodge a bike than it is for a bike to dodge a car. I know a ton of people who bike regularly and them almost getting hit by drivers is a stupidly common occurrence, and getting full on hit isn't THAT far behind, but I don't know anyone who's been hit by a bike period.

I'm ok with this for children under 12 or something only.

In Michigan you can bike on the sidewalks but pedestrians have the right-of-way and you have to let them know if you're coming up behind them.

KajeI posted...

I know a ton of people who bike regularly and them almost getting hit by drivers is a stupidly common occurrence, and getting full on hit isn't THAT far behind,

Just to play Devil's Advocate, how many of these stories are because the cyclist is riding too far into the middle of the lane for a car to get around them safely?

KajeI posted...

Y'all have trouble sidestepping bikes or something? Hell of a lot easier for a person to dodge a bike than it is for a bike to dodge a car. I know a ton of people who bike regularly and them almost getting hit by drivers is a stupidly common occurrence, and getting full on hit isn't THAT far behind, but I don't know anyone who's been hit by a bike period.

There's also the thing where a cyclist is naturally disincentivized from hitting a pedestrian by the fact that they'll die too. Unlike a motorist, who just paints another skull on the side of their car.

GranQroppoop posted...

In Michigan you can bike on the sidewalks but pedestrians have the right-of-way and you have to let them know if you're coming up behind them.

Perfectly reasonable.

KajeI posted...

Y'all have trouble sidestepping bikes or something? Hell of a lot easier for a person to dodge a bike than it is for a bike to dodge a car. I know a ton of people who bike regularly and them almost getting hit by drivers is a stupidly common occurrence, and getting full on hit isn't THAT far behind, but I don't know anyone who's been hit by a bike period.

Why do we have to "dodge" the bicycle? On the road a car might have to be stuck behind a cyclist for a while before he can safely pass them, why can't the cyclist slow down and/or dismount to safely pass a pedestrian on the sidewalk?
This shit is the entitlement a few of us have mentioned. It's ok for them to inconvenience drivers, but god forbid the cyclist be inconvenienced by pedestrians.

streamofthesky posted...

Why do we have to "dodge" the bicycle? On the road a car might have to be stuck behind a cyclist for a while before he can safely pass them, why can't the cyclist slow down and/or dismount to safely pass a pedestrian on the sidewalk?
This shit is the entitlement a few of us have mentioned. It's ok for them to inconvenience drivers, but god forbid the cyclist be inconvenienced by pedestrians.

Where the hell do some of you people live that this isn't literal common sense?

GranQroppoop posted...

In Michigan you can bike on the sidewalks but pedestrians have the right-of-way and you have to let them know if you're coming up behind them.

Fairly the same here as well.

TMOG posted...

Just to play Devil's Advocate, how many of these stories are because the cyclist is riding too far into the middle of the lane for a car to get around them safely?

None. Every biker and walker in this city knows that drivers don't give a fuck around here. Hell, the drivers from inside and outside the city know that too.

Unless of course you count "being on the road at all without scraping your skin off on the parked cars" as being too far into the middle of the lane. But that'd just be crazy.

Nope. Sidewalks for pedestrians, roads for vehicles. I will say that bike lines should be for bikes only, e-bikes and fat bikes go on the road.

KajeI posted...

None. Every biker and walker in this city knows that drivers don't give a fuck around here. Hell, the drivers from inside and outside the city know that too.

Unless of course you count "being on the road at all without scraping your skin off on the parked cars" as being too far into the middle of the lane. But that'd just be crazy.

Fair enough. The drivers in my city are unfair to cyclists as well (as I stated above, they use bike lanes as car lanes), but the cyclists are just as bad. I've had a few of them turn their head to see me approaching behind them, and then actually swerve INTO the lane so they're more directly in front of me and I have to either slow down or actually drive in the opposite lane to get past.

It's why I've been driving with a dash cam for about 5-6 years now, so if I do end up hitting one I can show that it wasn't my fault.

Nah

streamofthesky posted...

Why do we have to "dodge" the bicycle? On the road a car might have to be stuck behind a cyclist for a while before he can safely pass them, why can't the cyclist slow down and/or dismount to safely pass a pedestrian on the sidewalk?
This shit is the entitlement a few of us have mentioned. It's ok for them to inconvenience drivers, but god forbid the cyclist be inconvenienced by pedestrians.

Because presumably you'll want to avoid collision with a dumbass biker. There's nothing stopping them from being reasonable and going around you or slowing down or getting off or whatever, but you could use the same argument for drivers+bikers and obviously it's not quite that simple.

It makes way more sense for bikers to be allowed on sidewalks than on car roads because the maneuverability of the pairs differs so much. Cars can't strafe. Bikes can't strafe. People CAN strafe. Cars are far more dangerous to bikers than bikers are to pedestrians. People are also far less likely to be distracted from looking at what's in front of them compared to drivers, and when it does occur there's far more time for them to correct before something bad happens due to the differences in speed/mass/etc.

If you have a functioning set of eyes and legs, as long as you're not near a corner you have 0 reason to ever be hit by a biker, which is why it barely ever happens, especially in comparisons to bikers getting hit by drivers.

Like I was almost hit by a car while getting my groceries a month or so ago. I literally can't remember a time in my life where I've ever had a collision with anyone on a bike because it's trivially easy to avoid with even the slightest amount of situational awareness.

TMOG posted...

Fair enough. The drivers in my city are unfair to cyclists as well (as I stated above, they use bike lanes as car lanes), but the cyclists are just as bad. I've had a few of them turn their head to see me approaching behind them, and then actually swerve INTO the lane so they're more directly in front of me and I have to either slow down or actually drive in the opposite lane to get past.

It's why I've been driving with a dash cam for about 5-6 years now, so if I do end up hitting one I can show that it wasn't my fault.

Around here I'd have a dash cam all the time period if I actually had anywhere I wanted to go that wasn't within walking distance. Too many goddamn morons.

TMOG posted...

and then actually swerve INTO the lane so they're more directly in front of me and I have to either slow down or actually drive in the opposite lane to get past.

swerving into the middle of the lane (as long as there's a reasonable amount of space for you to react) is like some sort of defensive cycling. basically they don't trust people to pass them safely so they go so far out into the road that you can no longer pass at all. either that or they're trying to move over for an upcoming left turn.

for what it's worth, most bike/car collisions aren't related to this sort of lane squeezing anyway. They're mostly caused by drivers being used to only looking for cars, and then bumping cyclists without even noticing they're there at all, like rear-ending when stopped at a light or sideswiping a cyclist when making a right turn

I think this is reasonable but I don't think ebikes or escooters should be allowed on sidewalks

Thats a problem in the city but out in the suburbs riding a bike is like being a fast walker. When you occasionally encounter a pedestrian you just carefully go around them and go on your way. Being out on the road is more if youre like a pro biker with the wind suit and all that going full speed.

HudGard posted...

Thats a problem in the city but out in the suburbs riding a bike is like being a fast walker. When you occasionally encounter a pedestrian you just carefully go around them and go on your way. Being out on the road is more if youre like a pro biker with the wind suit and all that going full speed.

Even in the suburbs I use gear 7 >_>

No