Biking Regulations

Hi Lydia -

As one whose primary means of year-round transportation is bicycle (I even sold my car), I would be most interested in hearing about ideas on bikes and peds sharing sidewalks. Although I'm certainly open to new viewpoints, in general I think serious cyclists would consider that a bad idea. There are reasons for this other than high risks of collision on even slightly busy sidewalks. (In many towns it is illegal to bike on sidewalks in business districts, but legal on residential streets). Bicycles always move faster, so there is significantly less time for drivers to see them when passing driveways and crossing side streets (and cyclists are far more visible if they're in the middle of the cross street because of distance and driver expectation) - these are major causes of accidents. This is also a problem if someone suddenly runs out of a store or building. Because of fragility and slower reflexes, older people in particular are frightened by bicycles, even if there's a considerable distance between them. And children, of course, move unpredictably and are liable to be seriously hurt by contact with a moving bike. Accidents with untrained cyclists are five to six times more frequent than accidents with cyclists who have had safety courses. Bicycles belong in the street with traffic. When following traffic laws, signalling intention and being considerate, cyclists are predictable - and drivers are overwhelmingly careful and respectful of cyclists, even if the cyclist temporarily slows traffic by claiming a lane (a cyclist's legal right and often a safety necessity). I ride in the Boston area, famed for its crazy drivers, and while there is always the possibility of someone who's overly impatient and mean-spirited, it's a rare experience for a thoughtful cyclist. And with a basic level of skill, bicycles stop quickly and are highly maneuvarable. Off-sidewalk cycling lanes are a good idea, but placement is everything. In Cambridge the cycling lanes are directly to the left of parked cars and using them is very dangerous because of suddenly opening driver-side doors. In some places in Europe, lanes are between the parking area and the sidewalk, a far safer placement. NYC is trying that out for a half-mile or so on 9th Avenue. For further information on safe cycling, I would highly recommend the $5 book "Bicycling Street Smarts" by John S. Allen, available here: http://www.massbike.org/catalog/index.php?cPath=30_25 Safety training is probably a much better investment than encouraging bikes to use sidewalks (imagine what will happen when lots of people start doing it!). As for bells on bikes, there's no question about it. Cyclists should always announce their presence when they approach anyone - pedestrian or cyclist - who can't see them. For that matter, we should also use our lights at all times - just the way cars are encouraged to use lights on for safety during the day. The more visible you are as early as possible, the safer everyone is.

Best,
Adam

How do you approach or more so from rear with someone who is hearing impaired?

Rob Townsend

Kalamazoo College
Recycle & Resource Recovery Coordinator
Assistant Director LandSea Program 

Hi Robert -

I'm not sure how you'd know they're hearing impaired, but if someone doesn't respond to your bell announce yourself in a loud (but polite) voice. If that doesn't work you approach slowly and give a wide berth. If there's not enough room for that you slow to walking speed or dismount. This is not just an issue with the hearing impaired, it's also an issue for people with stereo headphones played at high volume (common-sense impaired).

Adam

Once upon a time UK regulations for bicycles used on the raods included a rule that every cycle must carry "audible warning of approach". If you have ever had a near miss while on your bike, you will appreciate that the most effective audible warning of approach is your voice; it's a reflex to shout "Watch out!" or some such (polite) phrase, and is much more nearly instantaneous than groping to locate the trigger for the bell somewhere on your handlebars. Of course, in non-emergency situations a bell is distinctive and preferable, though cyclists who activate the thing perpetually while cycling near pedestrians are also very annoying. Many towns and even nations have not yet adequately addressed how to accommodate cyclists and pedestrians in the same small area. Obviously it is best to give each a designated track, as Holland and Scandinavia do, while Germany and Austria formally divide the pavement and mark which side is for cyclists and which for pedestrians. Cities where such dual use was never built into the design and where the pavements are consequently too narrow nevertheless try to designate cycle lanes on them in places, giving cyclists the incorrect impression that they have the right of way on *all* pavements, causing indignation from the pedestrian public and a loathing of cyclists in general. That doesn't help the Cause. If we are to take cycling as a serious alternative to motoring on city streets, this question of safety for all has really got to be addressed properly; it won't just go away if left to smoulder.

Elizabeth Griffin
(Victoria, Canada: "the cycling city")