All posts in the topic Bike Fun (Short link)
Summary
- There are 34 posts — by 23 authors — in this topic.
- Latest post made by Forum Manager (David Brauer) at May 16 01:40 UTC
I observed afairly rare occurrence this evening while taking some squirrels
down to the river. A bike rider in full regalia actually stopped and waited for
the light to change. I was tempted to stop and congratulate him for being a
responsible rider who took serious his use of an alternative vehicular mode of
transportation.
By the way all you folks interested in bike riding and obeying laws will get a
kick out of the FOX ( news tonight. Apparently they have been reading the Mpls.
Issues List. From the promo it seems they are going to feature some of the bike
riders doing just what Wizard and I have complained about.
It should be an interesting show, I look forward to Issue comments on it
tomorrow.
Jim Graham,
Ventura Village
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
It's not just the channel surfing...most of the news casts look the same. I missed it, but here's the video link. http://kstp.com/article/stories/S428329.shtml?cat=1 best wishes, cheryl luger nokomis east I never wonder to see men wicked, but I often wonder to see them not ashamed. --- Jonathan Swift
now if only someone could find a way to get
car drivers (i am one) to stop at stop signs!~!
peace
leigh combs
Powderhorn
plant trees not statues and stadiums
So, I just got done watching the KSTP bit on law breaking bicyclists. http://kstp.com/article/stories/S428329.shtml?cat=1 It doesn't change the legality, but the intersection they chose to focus on in the video was interesting - except for the idiot turning left in front of the car - the only way a bike riding through that stop sign would get in a car's way is if the car went across the T on a vector to jump the curb. Its a stop sign that would be run by many bicyclists who would stop at 4 ways or stop lights. It was also interesting to watch the guy who "changed his ways" get passed by a car rolling the stop sign. In any case, one one of the bicycle forums I read, someone brought up Idaho's law regarding stop signs and stop lights. They're a lot more rational as far as I can tell. They're also what a number of bicyclists on this list were more or less describing during the last round of this discussion. As far as I'm concerned, anyone violating Minnesota laws but following Idaho's version of the laws is riding (currently) illegally but safely. Anyone violating the Idaho laws is probably putting themselves and others at risk. So, the question I have is, in the interest of bringing laws and rationality closer together, is there any way that the city of Minneapolis can adopt these rules or does it have to be done at the state level?: 49-720. STOPPING -- TURN AND STOP SIGNALS. (1) A person operating a bicycle or human-powered vehicle approaching a stop sign shall slow down and, if required for safety, stop before entering the intersection. After slowing to a reasonable speed or stopping, the person shall yield the right-of-way to any vehicle in the intersection or approaching on another highway so closely as to constitute an immediate hazard during the time the person is moving across or within the intersection or junction of highways, except that a person after slowing to a reasonable speed and yielding the right-of-way if required, may cautiously make a turn or proceed through the intersection without stopping. (2) A person operating a bicycle or human-powered vehicle approaching a steady red traffic control light shall stop before entering the intersection and shall yield to all other traffic. Once the person has yielded, he may proceed through the steady red light with caution. Provided however, that a person after slowing to a reasonable speed and yielding the right-of-way if required, may cautiously make a right-hand turn. A left-hand turn onto a one-way highway may be made on a red light after stopping and yielding to other traffic. http://www3.state.id.us/cgi-bin/newidst?sctid=490070020.K If our law was similar, I think we'd have a lot more bicyclists working harder to advocate legal riding. Btw, congratulations to Donald Pflaum for doing a good job of addressing the valid points of the story (some bicyclists do ride unsafely and learn lessons the hard way) without supporting the sensationalistically presented premise the story seemed to be pushing that car drivers are all well behaved and innocent towards those of us on two wheels. We really are lucky to have him - he works hard and I suspect gets a lot hassle from bicyclists for not being able to move mountains with one hand. When it comes down to it, it is a great city to be a bicyclist in and from what I can tell, he's done a lot to make that happen. Oh, since the last time we went over all of this, I've been in another accident with a car. I didn't have my armored jacket that day so I was not only riding completely legally, I was also riding slower than normal which probably helped save me from being hurt as much upon my first experience with being doored. I haven't gotten the wheel onto a truing stand to see how it fared yet. Good fun. The driver was lucky I wasn't moving faster or operating a heavier vehicle. - phaedrus (jason.goray), 3-6, minneapolis, minnesota, usa, earth.
The Idaho laws make much more sense, I agree. Another change in MN law that would help would be to more clearly state that in certain circumstances a bicyclist has the right to control the entire lane and motorists need to change lanes if they wish to pass. I was recently buzzed (passed with less than 3 feet of clearance which is MN law) by an SUV on a four lane road in Golden Valley. The gentleman who was doing close to 50 mph on this city street probably didn't realize that he most likely would have killed me had he misjudged the girth of his hydrocarbon powered metal box and struck me. I suppose that KSTP would have blamed the cyclist in that hypothetical. In contrast to KSTP's waste of air space with this "report", Fox 9 News (surprisingly) produced a wonderful news story on the benefits of bicycling to work (annual savings currently at $8,400 compared to motoring) and highlighting the Midtown Bike Center which will be opening soon at Midtown Exchange. Congratulations to Tim Springer, Kevin Ishaug, Hennepin County, the City of Minneapolis and all others involved in making this project happen. I can't wait to use the facility and to see it help make Minneapolis streets more populated with human powered travelers. Fox 9 video link: http://tinyurl.com/6gmcuq Matty Lang, Midtown Phillips
I agree with Jason and Matty's comments on the Idaho laws. They effectively capture the rules that one should follow to safely and conscientiously operate a bicycle on the street. We should absolutely adopt them here. Unfortunately, I believe this would be a case where any potential Minneapolis ordinance would be preempted by State law. It sounds like there is some interest in this issue on the State level, however, so stay tuned. I also second Jason's appreciation of the City's inestimable Don Pflaum. He's a pleasure to work with. Now on to the KSTP "news" story. Among the most frustrating aspects of this shoddy piece of reporting (and there were many) is that they didn't get the basic facts right. The most important factual inaccuracy in the piece is the assertion credited to “police in both St. Paul and Minneapolis” that “about half the time,” accidents between bicyclists and drivers are caused by bicyclists failure to yield. This is just not the case. I've looked through the 2006 bike/car crash data collected by the City of Minneapolis, and found that 120 of the 200 crashes (or 60%) for which fault can be determined were caused by drivers, while only 80 (or 40%) were caused by cyclists. This is far from “about half.” Rather, it is a clear indication that driver error and violation of law is a significantly greater threat to bicyclist safety than bicyclist error and violation of law. I've written more on this topic on the Second Ward blog: http://secondward.blogspot.com. Robin Garwood Policy Aide to Council Member Cam Gordon Cooper
While I probably also agree about the "Idaho model" I find that the KSTP story
to be very accurate. I see the same thing almost daily, so I believe if
anything they were conservative in their treatment of bad bikers. The only
reason more are not hurt is the consideration of Minneapolis drivers and the
fear of prosecution for bumping them, even when it is there fault.
An example of which happened day before yesterday. I came to a stop before
turning left attheintersection at 33 Street and 22nd Avenue. Coming directly
towards me was a bike with a short, 30 to 40 year old, slightly pudgy, slightly
balding rider. That rider proceeded to run the stop sign then call me a f___ing
idiot because I was turning, had right of way and had to slam on the brakes to
keep from hitting him. He acted like he automatically had right of way by
privilege and did not need to bother with traffic laws. I off course jumped out
and yelled to come back you chicken s---t AH (slang for an anus). He of course
kept on riding. This was not even the 50th time such had happened over the last
few years.
Do car driversbreak traffic law, do they regularly roll stop signs, do they
sometimes inadequately yield for pedestrians in crosswalks? Of course they do!
Put per-capita not nearly as often as bike riders. There just seems to be some
kind of self righteous feeling of entitlement that some bike riders feel. And
that is the part that many people resent and that is what really creates
antipathy towards bike riders, almost all of who do NOT deserve it. Such goofs
are bad for bike riders as much as they are for anyone.
Also, that cowardly thing of yelling obscenities at people from a bike and then
riding away onthat bike is just plain stupid. Bike riders are almost totally
defenseless against a car, and creating the motivation for someoneto chase them
down in a car is simply stupid. Forty years ago it was car drivers being
downright stupid about bike riders, today the pendulum has swung the other way.
So I am in favor of that change in law both for bike riders as well asfor car
drivers. We do not need to waste petro-chemicals, or pollute the air, with cars
and trucks stopping when it is unnecessary. After all, the stop signs are to
control traffic in order to enhance traffic flow safely, so it makes sense to
have some little logic to it.
And 40% sounds close to half to me. Especially given the realative danger to
bike rider versus car driver in accidents.
Jim Graham,
Ventura Village- “Without conflict communication and novel synthesis of
information cannot take place. Conflict is the fertile soil in which creativity
grows.” - Toe
Be a better friend, newshound, and
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
And...then there are those of us on the low end of the car/bike food
chain...pedestrians.
Happened yesterday at business intersection of 34th ave so. and east 50th
street. There isn't any pedestrian 'visibility' at the build-to-the- sidewalk
commercial building. Normally not a problem.
I'm walking west, she's biking rapidly north. Almost a collision as she
slammed on her brakes and almost fell off. My reaction time is slow on a cane
and couldn't get out of the way. In her mid-to-late 50's, with padding and
helmet. She crossed the intersection and resumed her ride on the sidewalk. With
the 'unofficial' increased traffic speed on 34th Ave so...can't blame riders
for prefering the sidewalk.
Most riders are very polite over here...giving you warning if they're passing
you on the sidewalk, teaching bike 'etiquette' to their kids and stopping to
allow pedestrians to pass. But there is always the one exception you remember.
Guess pedestrians will need to outfit with helmet, etc.
A few years back I heard it is legal to ride on the sidewalk unless
prohlibited by a certain class of business district. True?
best wishes,
cheryl luger
nokomis east
I never wonder to see men wicked, but I often wonder
to see them not ashamed.
--- Jonathan Swift
On Fri, 2 May 2008 15:24:21 -0700 (PDT), Cheryl Luger wrote:
> A few years back I heard it is legal to ride on the sidewalk unless
prohlibited by a certain class of business district. True?
In general, it's permitted unless prohibited, *except* in business
districts, where it's prohibited unless permitted.
Minn. Stat. §169.222 Subd. 4(d)
A person operating a bicycle upon a sidewalk, or across a roadway or
shoulder on a crosswalk, shall yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian
and shall give an audible signal when necessary before overtaking and
passing any pedestrian. No person shall ride a bicycle upon a sidewalk
within a business district unless permitted by local authorities. Local
authorities may prohibit the operation of bicycles on any sidewalk or
crosswalk under their jurisdiction.
Dave Garland wrote:
> On Fri, 2 May 2008 15:24:21 -0700 (PDT), Cheryl Luger wrote:
>
>> A few years back I heard it is legal to ride on the sidewalk
>> unless prohlibited by a certain class of business district. True?
>
> In general, it's permitted unless prohibited, *except* in business
> districts, where it's prohibited unless permitted. ...
Riding bicycles is also prohibited on sidewalks at the University
of Minnesota[1]
No person shall operate a bicycle on sidewalks, crosswalks
or pedestrian areas located on property owned, leased or
occupied by the University of Minnesota except:
(a) in compliance with all posted signs governing or
directing the operation or parking of bicycles,
where applicable; and
(b) where bicycle lanes are designated by lane markings
and signs or pavement markings.
<http://www1.umn.edu/regents/trafficordinance.html>
-tjs
1. OpMPLS: The University of Minnesota is a self-proclaimed
sovereign entity that has large land holdings within the
City of Minneapolis.
There are a lot of times during my commute, especially in the morning, when
there is no cross-traffic and it would be nice to not sit and wait at a red
light, so I also like the Idaho law. That said, I try to follow the laws we
have and not the ones I wish we had. When I come upon a red light in my car and
there is no cross-traffic, I wait for the green before I go. I do the same on
my bike.
Jim Graham said:
"Do car driversbreak traffic law, do they regularly roll stop signs, do they
sometimes inadequately yield for pedestrians in crosswalks? Of course they do!
Put per-capita not nearly as often as bike riders."
You're kidding, right? There are far, far more drivers on the road, so by that
alone this argument is easily proven false. I won't even get into all of the
completely insane things I have seen drivers do, even in just the past week. An
unearned sense of entitlement was not distributed in larger proportions to
operators of ANY vehicle on the road as far as I can tell; we may as well say
40% of everyone on the road acts like a d**k. I had a guy scream at me and buzz
me once because I had the nerve--the nerve!--to use the edge of the car lane as
we all started moving through an intersection. And I didn't jump in front of
him unexpectedly; I positioned myself while waiting at the red light to make my
intentions very clear. Riding through a bike lane full of shattered glass was
not on my agenda that day...and for that I apparently needed to be taught my
place on the road!
That said, as a bike commuter I have been especially frustrated this spring
with bikers who appear to have no idea what the law is, or who have no desire
to follow it. For example, you all know that the bike lanes are oriented to
move with traffic and are not usually two-way, right? Park and Portland are my
routes to and from work, and frankly I'm getting so tired of dodging people who
are going the wrong way that I want to kick them over as I roll by. That goes
double for the guy who gave me a sarcastic "OKAAAAAY" when I told him he was
going the wrong way (AFTER putting myself in danger by quickly taking part of a
car lane when he refused to yield). But what can I do?
It is correct that riding bicycles on sidewalks is generally permitted except
in "business districts" and except on U of M property.
That being said, does anyone know exactly what constitutes a "business
district" and where they are in the City? I can't find anything on the City
website, I called 311 a few months ago and, after waiting about 20 minutes
while the operator looked everywhere she could think of, was told that, "since
this involved interpretation of a City ordinance" (???????), I would have to
call the City Attorneys' office. Not wanting to waste the time of the City
Attorneys' office and not wanting to get laughed off the phone, I let it go.
But someone, somewhere, must have a record of Minneapolis' "business
districts." I get that 7th and Nicollet is probably a business district. But
what about NE Hennepin? What about Lyndale and Franklin? Any help out there?
Barry Clegg
Nicollet Island Business District
At 12:42 AM +1200 5/4/08, Barry Clegg wrote:
>It is correct that riding bicycles on sidewalks is generally
>permitted except in "business districts" and except on U of M
>property.
>
>That being said, does anyone know exactly what constitutes a
>"business district" and where they are in the City? I get that 7th
>and Nicollet is probably a business district. But what about NE
>Hennepin? What about Lyndale and Franklin? Any help out there?
>
>Barry Clegg
>Nicollet Island Business District
>
East Hennepin Avenue (which is only "NE" on the north, or west, side
of the street) has a lot of retail businesses from the river up to
about 5th or 6th St. They're right on the sidewalk; no setbacks. That
includes businesses on University Ave., 4th St., 5th St., and First
Ave. NE--the business district there, approximately.
A bicyclist would not be wanted on the sidewalks there, because
customers are going in doors and coming out of doors. They would be
hit by bikes on the sidewalk in too many cases to count.
I don't think we need yet another layer of district designations for
this. We need common sense. And if a bike rider hit a pedestrian in
front of my store, I'd make sure that bike rider was prosecuted to
the full extent.
I think I recall that the federal money Transit for Livable
Communities got last year was to be directed to bike lanes on East
Hennepin Ave. near the river, among other projects across the city.
Connie
Como, in Southeast Mpls
> While I probably also agree about the "Idaho model" I find that the KSTP
story to be very accurate.
As far as the KSTP story goes, it was irresponsible and
sensationalistic journalism. At least anecdotally, the number of
incidents of bicyclists being harrassed, threatened or worse by car
drivers seems to have jumped significantly since that report - even
when the bicyclists are riding legally. Reading the comment thread on
the report, it doesn't take long to realize that at least half of the
people who are posting with outrage don't care whether we're riding
legally or not - they just want us off the road and KSTP's reporter
just gave them a reason to waive their guilt when they yell at us,
throw shit at us, or worse. It should also be noted that the reporter
broke the law several times during the report which makes his
indignant statements of "THE LAW IS THE LAW" in his followup report a
bit ironic.
That said, for those who have noted a large number of bicyclists
riding stupidly lately, you're right, the numbers do seem to be up.
While I have supported and continue to support downgrading traffic
controls if one is certain that they're not in violation of anyone's
right of way, I would welcome increased traffic enforcement.
I would be THRILLED to receive a ticket for running a stop sign or red
light and would be happy to pay it without complaint if it means
consistent enforcement against all illegal operation of vehicles.
If every time a police officer sees any user of the road - bicyclist
or car - break the law, they ticket it, it would be wonderful.
Whether its speeding (even 5 mph over on city streets is a
significantly increased danger to bicyclists), running/rolling a red
light or stop sign, fail to yield, passing with less than three feet
of clearance, dooring, tailgating, not using or misusing signals,
stopping in the crosswalk forcing people crossing the street to go out
into traffic to get around their nose, etc, the roads would be much
safer!
And by all means, ticket the bicyclists who are going the wrong way on
one ways, bombing through pedestrians in a business district, riding
at night with no lights, diving multiple lanes with no signal, etc.
And, if you're doing all that, please feel free to ticket me when I
run a stop sign when no one's coming. I'll probably even change my
ways to ride within the laws because a big part of the reason I break
them is to avoid being unnecessarily close to cars, especially at
intersections where I am most at risk.
However, all that said, I'll still lobby for the Idaho style laws
because there ARE differences between bikes and cars that should be
recognized. When I come up to a sensor controlled light on my
motorcycle, Minnesota law gives me the right to run it if the light
doesn't recognize the bike being there. That just makes sense. If
there are legal adjustments that can be made to make things work more
smoothly for bicyclists, it will result in more efficient travel. As
an added bonus, it will actually allow cars to be less impacted by
bicyclists on the road - if you've ever had to stop behind a bicyclist
at an intersection, you've probably noticed that unless we're feeling
full of testosterone, we accelerate a bit more slowly than cars do.
Last week, I rode up Hennepin with my s/o on her commute and couldn't
help but note that because of the way the lights are timed, moderately
paced bicyclists pretty much get stopped at every single light. On my
own commute, when crossing Hennepin followed by Central on 5th Street,
its almost impossible for a non-athletic bicyclist stopped at the
light to make it across when it turns green without it going yellow or
red before they clear Central. The rules are are made to take car's
speed and mass into account and they just don't work quite right for
bicyclists.
But, getting the laws changed aside, in the mean time, please feel
free to ticket us - just please also ticket every car that breaks the
law. Doing both will ultimately make all of us happier and safer and
save a lot of money in accidents and emergency services.
Also, please educate the police in the laws. Numerous bicyclists will
tell you of riding through business districts and have police yell at
them through the speaker to "get on the sidewalk" even though that's
illegal.
One of the best I've heard was a friend of mine riding in the
dinkytown area who got yelled at by an officer to get on the sidewalk.
Later that day, on the return trip, he saw a police car and got on
the sidewalk in the same area and was yelled at to get off the
sidewalk. Experiences like these don't exactly enhance one's respect
for the law or those who enforce it.
- phaedrus (jason.goray), 3-6, minneapolis, minnesota, usa, earth
phaedrus (jason.goray) wrote: >Also, please educate the police in the laws. ML: My favorite was a conversation I had with a Minneapolis Police Officer on the 2200 block of Lyndale Avenue South last spring. My partner and I were cycling northbound past the Parisian Flats apartments construction dumpster and its debris when an officer drove up on our rear wheels and instructed us over his loudspeaker to get single file and over to the right as far as possible. I calmly turned to him and pointed out the obstacles we were avoiding and reminded him that state law requires cyclists to ride no more than two abreast. The officer's reply was, "not on a road like this." The officer then asked me if I wanted to continue the conversation. I politely declined and we went on our ways. Needless to say we cannot assume that all of our officers are properly trained. Here's a pretty good (although a bit corny) 10 minute training video produced by the San Fransisco Police Department and the San Fransisco Bicycle Coalition: The video covers dooring, motorist intimidation and how officers should deal with bicycle/automobile collisions among other topics. It would be swell to see the MPD put some resources into officer training regarding bicycles and traffic law enforcement. Perhaps the Minneapolis Bicycle Ambassador program will have a police force education aspect to it. Minneapolis, by the way, was just awarded Silver status as a Bicycle Friendly Community by the League of American Bicyclists. This is a very difficult designation to earn. Congratulations to the City of Minneapolis! Let's work to join Davis, CA and Portland, OR at the Platinum level. http://www.bikeleague.org/programs/communities/bfc_minneapolis.php Matty Lang, Midtown Phillips
State law seems a little ambiguous.
Sec. 169.222, subd.4(a) says: "Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway
shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the
roadway ..."
169.222, subd.4(c) says: "Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway or shoulder
shall not ride more than two abreast and shall not impede the normal and
reasonable movement of traffic ..."
So, does the statement that bicyclists shall not ride "more than two abreast"
give them the right to ride two abreast at all times given the other language
about "every person" riding as close as practicable to the curb and not
impeding traffic? It's not clear to me.
RE: San Francisco film clip about "dooring"
Bus drivers are constantly dodging car doors as they try to pull into bus stops
because car drivers seldom check their mirrors before they open the door on the
driver's side. Dumb, but habitual.
Sometime just prior to 1980, a bus driver who had been on the line for some 40
years was retiring after he got off the line that day. He drove Hennepin Av.,
notorious for dooring. On that afternoon, deciding the MTC (at that time) could
do nothing to him, like punish him with a day off or put a paper in his file,
he was wont to get even with the car driving public to a minor extent.
On the afternoon of his last day, each time a parked car doored him, he hit the
door, ripping it off its hinges. (Entirely a dangerous behavior since the
driver could have lost an arm or leg.)
He removed 4 doors from cars that afternoon.
At 02:30 PM 5/5/2008, Matty Lang wrote:
>phaedrus (jason.goray) wrote:
>
> >Also, please educate the police in the laws.
I once had a Minneapolis cop loudly yell at me on Hennepin Ave that
"You can't ride there!" I was very perplexed and asked, "You mean
in the bike lanes?" It was night and, looking puzzled, she shined
her flashlight on the ground and left me alone. Still, it was an odd
experience.
Jim McGuire
Como
> Sec. 169.222, subd.4(a) says: "Every person operating a bicycle upon a
roadway
> shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the
roadway ..."
>
> 169.222, subd.4(c) says: "Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway or shoulder
shall
> not ride more than two abreast and shall not impede the normal and reasonable
> movement of traffic ..."
>
> So, does the statement that bicyclists shall not ride "more than two
abreast" give them
> the right to ride two abreast at all times given the other language about
"every person"
> riding as close as practicable to the curb and not impeding traffic? It's not
clear to me.
That's a good question. I read it that I have the right to ride two
abreast but need to stay in the right lane and if riding alone should
be no further left than the center of the right lane unless planning
to turn left ahead. I am very interested in hearing some sort of
official answer.
I will almost never ride further right than the right hand tire track
on the road as the area between that and the gutter tends to be filled
with debris and other obstacles and riding that far over makes it
harder for drivers to notice you. Its far better to be in the right
tire track and be seen than to be further in the shoulder encouraging
cars to pass you in your lane and then get stuck and possibly struck
when having to swerve back into the lane to avoid something.
For both visibility and sociability, I do generally prefer to ride two
abreast when I'm riding with another person. However, in the
interest of civility, I generally tend to pull into single file to
give drivers approaching from behind more room to pass me although I
often wait until they're close enough that I'm certain they're aware
we're there.
I am curious on whether or not bicyclists riding double file are
required to change to single file if being approached from behind.
Does anyone know? I guess the root of the question comes down to what
is considered "impeding the normal and reasonable movement of traffic"
versus being traffic. We've certainly got the right to be there and
we definitely aren't permitted to legally ride more than two abreast
but I'm not sure how much lane we are permitted to claim.
When I'm on busier roads with four lanes (generally for very short
stretches as that's not where I like to ride), I often prefer to keep
two abreast as it does make us more visible and tends to make traffic
pass us with a wider margin and a bit less speed. Additionally, I
tend to ride a large and well lit bike and wear a fair bit of armor so
I generally take the outer-rear position as I'm quite visible and have
got a chance of faring better if clipped than some of the people I
ride with.
Even so, if going single file, it is prudent to ride 3 - 4' from
parked cars to avoid being doored and I believe that passing cars are
required to give you 3' of passing space which means that a bicyclist
requires 8' to 9' of lane which is pretty much the whole lane in some
areas of town.
- phaedrus (jason.goray), 3-6, minneapolis, minnesota, usa, earth.
I raised Barry's question with the City's Non-Motorized Transportation Coordinator (and Ward 2 resident and all-around good guy) Shaun Murphy, and here's what I heard back: "'Business District' means the territory contiguous to and including a highway when 50 percent or more of the frontage thereon for a distance of 300 feet or more is occupied by buildings in use for business. We’ve got this referenced on the City’s website: http://www.ci.minneapolis.mn.us/bicycles/UnderstandingtheLaw.asp It doesn’t make all situations clear, but it helps. We haven’t got a map to illustrate this yet." All that said, even when it's not illegal to ride a bike on a sidewalk, it is generally a bad idea. Partly for the pedestrian and building-door concerns that Connie raises, but as importantly because cyclists that are operating on sidewalks are significantly less visible to drivers, who are much more likely to hit them while executing turns. This does not excuse drivers' failure to yield, but it's safe to say that sidewalk riding is not safe, defensive riding (KSTP's irresponsible assertion to the contrary notwithstanding). I agree with many of the responses to Jim's comments. He says: "Do car drivers break traffic law, do they regularly roll stop signs, do they sometimes inadequately yield for pedestrians in crosswalks? Of course they do! Put per-capita not nearly as often as bike riders." I invite Jim to come out to the intersection of 24th and E Franklin in Seward, or basically any other place in town without a stoplight or four-way stop, and step off the curb into the crosswalk to see how many drivers come to the legally-required stop. In my experience, compliance with this particular law hovers at around 2%. Per capita, that means that approximately 98% of drivers regularly break that particular law. Jim goes on to state: "So I am in favor of that change in law both for bike riders as well as for car drivers." Jim has missed the point. There are reasons that Idaho has changed the meaning of certain traffic control devices for cyclists and *not* for drivers, including: a) due to their substantially lesser mass, the space required for cyclists to stop suddenly is significantly shorter than for autos, even autos going more slowly; b) a driver's eyes are typically at least five feet from the front of their vehicle, whereas a cyclist's eyes are typically about a foot and a half from the leading edge of their front tire. Put simply, due to the realities of their vehicles, drivers treating all stop signs as yield signs would be dangerous. Due to the different realities of their vehicles, bicyclists doing the same would not. Lastly, Jim says that "40% sounds close to half." I guess we just live in different universes. Where I live, 60% is closer to two thirds than half, and a 60/40 split in an election is generally referred to as a 'landslide.' Jason, Jim, and Matty make some good points - we definitely need to do more to educate drivers, cyclists and officers about traffic laws. My hope is that the Ambassador program can help with this, but it's certainly not going to be a silver bullet. If anyone has ideas (that haven't already been stated) for increasing awareness of traffic laws, please contact me off-list. Robin Garwood Cooper Aide to Council Member Cam Gordon
Robin Garwood wrote:
> ... I agree with many of the responses to Jim's comments.
> He says: "Do car drivers break traffic law, do they regularly
> roll stop signs, do they sometimes inadequately yield for
> pedestrians in crosswalks? Of course they do! Put
> per-capita not nearly as often as bike riders."
As a daily pedestrian in Dinkytown and on the University of
Minnesota campus, I find bicyclists to be, far and away,
much ruder than motorists. No amount of sophistry will
convince me that, except in some narrowly defined universe
or by some obscure measure, bicyclists are not significantly
worse than motorists in terms of their respect for the rules
of the road, or their respect for anything else that happens to
be on the road or on the sidewalk. I find arguments of the
form: "Failing to make a complete stop at a stop sign is
just as bad as failing to slow down even the slightest,
therefore..." rather unconvincing.
> I invite Jim to come out to the intersection of 24th and
> E Franklin in Seward, or basically any other place in town
> without a stoplight or four-way stop, and step off the curb
> into the crosswalk to see how many drivers come to the
> legally-required stop. In my experience, compliance with
> this particular law hovers at around 2%. Per capita, that
> means that approximately 98% of drivers regularly break that
> particular law.
Did I mention obscure measures?
Robin, I invite you to come to the University of Minnesota
campus -- the Minneapolis campus is completely within
your Ward. Note that neither cars nor bicycles are
permitted on the sidewalks (except bicycles are permitted
in marked bike lanes). Let us know how many cars you see
driving on the sidewalk; how many bicycles you see riding
on the sidewalk. Then try stepping into one of the
crosswalks at traffic circle at Pleasant Ave SE and Pillsbury
Drive SE. Try it at, say, noon and 5:00pm. In my experience,
and it is considerable in this matter, 99.9% (or more)
of the cars will stop, and 99.9% of the bicycles won't
even slow down. Rather, the bicyclists simply head for
the pedestrians (usually without even slowing down)
apparently assuming that an opening will be available by
the time they get there. Of course, not all bicyclists
operate this way. I see a bicyclist stopping for
pedestrians at least a couple times a year (well, OK,
at least once a year).
Regarding Sidewalk Riding.
Riding a bicycle on a sidewalk is illegal in some places and unwise or
to be done with caution in most places.
When it does make sense for a bicyclist to ride on a sidewalk, they
really do need to moderate their pace and be aware that the
pedestrians do have the right of way and often act unpredictably. If
there is any sort of potential for pedestrian cross traffic, they need
to be that much more careful.
Most areas where it is illegal to ride on the sidewalk are marked as
such. It should be noted that in these areas, bike parking is
sometimes on the sidewalk mid block so it is sometimes necessary to
take the bike the partial block from the nearest curb cut. Strictly
speaking, one should probably get off the bike and walk it, but I
suspect that many responsible bicyclists do ride it at low speed and
with proper caution.
Tim,
You raise valid points about the dangers of being a pedestrian in and around
the University, but I think that your experiences with these cyclists are not
representative of commuter cyclists as a whole. Most of the cyclists around the
U are students, and they'll bike wherever they want to, whether it's legal or
not. The U is definitely it's own microcosm, and that goes for cyclist
behavior, too.
Some great points have been made on this message board; the KSTP spot really
angered me, as well. So much was taken out of context, and the spot really
represents the worst in ambulance-chasing journalism.
I bike commute regularly, and obey the laws (most of the time). But like
someone else said earlier, if I do run a red light, and go through a stop sign
(WITH NO TRAFFIC VISIBLE), it's usually because I'm in an exposed area, and
would like to get away from the cars.
Anyway, thanks everyone for your insightful posts. I'm honestly shocked that
Minneapolis achieved such a high ranking from the League; I think this city has
a long way to go before cycling is improved. I'm pleased with the grant money
we got, but I think it could be put to better use than it is. Hire a few more
bicycle planners, and stop putting bike lanes in between car and bus lanes
downtown.
That's my two cents!
I have to weigh in on this conversation about bicyclists. Myself being one as
well.
My "issue" is the greenway cyclists. While I recognize that it's for everyone,
commuters, families, pedestrians, avid cyclists, and even homeless who need to
chill on the down low it's for EVERYONE. When I say that, I am addressing the
speed demon cyclists who use the greenway as their practice space. While this
is fine, some of those folks in their team spandex need to make room for the
rest of us who aren't willing to go so fast. Several times I have witnessed
cyclists racing along nearly missing a kid on their tricycle. Please, be
respectful It's not the Tour-de-France.
Thanks,
Allison Herrera
Program Manager, Community and Public Programs
Walker Art Center
1750 Hennepin Avenue
Minneapolis, MN 55403
F: 612-375-5802
With a wide paved area, long runs with few or no grade crossings and
distractions, the greenway must be the least worst place in the city limits to
ride fast; far safer than city streets, parkways and regular park bike trails.
I guess you could shut down the interstate completely and let them ride there.
Mike Jensvold
East Isles
(not a racer)
-------------- Original message ----------------------
From: "Herrera, Allison" <allison.herrera@walkerart.org>
> I have to weigh in on this conversation about bicyclists. Myself being one as
> well.
>
> My "issue" is the greenway cyclists. While I recognize that it's for
everyone,
> commuters, families, pedestrians, avid cyclists, and even homeless who need
to
> With a wide paved area, long runs with few or no grade crossings and
> distractions, the greenway must be the least worst place in the city limits
to
> ride fast; far safer than city streets, parkways and regular park bike
trails.
>
> I guess you could shut down the interstate completely and let them ride
there.
Unfortunately, the folks who decided to ride the interstate when it
was shut down got ticketed for it so that's no good. Looked like a
hoot in the pictures I saw though - probably worth the ticket.
The mistake in your statement is "no ... distractions". On the
greenway you've got pedestrians, children, people running with pets,
etc. They simply can't be counted on to not veer unexpectedly which
makes traveling at over about 16 to 20mph dangerous to both the
cyclist and the people/pets they might hit. Of course, when there
aren't any potential obstacles in front of you and you've got the wind
channeling at your back you really can fly. I'm not sure though,
isn't the greenway saddled with the 10mph speed limit like the bike
highways and the bike paths?
For this area, the best place I can think of for going fast (other
than the velodrome) would be the River Roads.
25 mph speed limit, pretty much no cross traffic and pretty much no
places for cars to turn out of on the river side of the roads, paths
along side the road for <=10mph cyclists, children, pedestrians and
pets. Pretty much perfect. Just look out for KSTP reporters.
Even if you do intend to stop at all the stop signs, they're fairly
widely spaced apart meaning you should be able to get pretty good
length runs at speed.
Of course, athletes can go 30 to 40 miles per hour and sprint even
faster so they'll need to find someplace else. I've heard old Hwy 8
is pretty good. Not a lot of traffic, pretty long stretches with no
cross roads, really wide shoulders and fairly wide lanes. A bit
boring though.
Not that I have to worry about any of this (except the bike path speed
limits) - for a variety of reasons, its hard for me to sustain more
than 18mph on my normal rig.
- phaedrus (jason.goray), 3-6, minneapolis, minnesota, usa, earth.
The Midtown Greenway does not have posted speed limits, and I believe there is
no maximum bicycle speed on most sections of that structure.
The reason from my recall is based on MNDot overseeing the design with a
line-of-site speed requirement of (again as I recall) circa 45 mph for many
sections of the corridor. The Midtown Greenway is built to highway standards
for human, non motorized mobility/access, able bodied or handicapped.
Certainly for safety and civil peace of mind, if there is more people traffic
and activity, then the higher speeds are not always suitable. Likewise for
other road structures for cars, when there is increasing traffic, it becomes
necessary for the cars and trucks to slow down.
In my experience on the MT Greenway during peak daytime hours, I have driven
and walked in some fairly heavy bike and people traffic. During off hours it is
easier and safer to reach and maintain higher speeds. There is additional
safety and ease without the mix with auto traffic.
One question I have if anyone can reply, is where can I can locate the specific
state and other laws related to the right to take up the entire lane width when
there is not enough room in the lane for both a bicycle and a car. Matty linked
to the San Francisco You Tube that displayed California State Law, and Charlie
Swope referenced MN state law.
I live in Saint Paul, and my current copy of the Midway in Motion Map states
under the "Biking Rules of the road" section: "#7 Cyclists have the right to
take the full travel lane." In addition, a comment in an email from the Saint
Paul City engineer advised us that a bicyclist could take up the entire travel
lane on a thru street (I think Marshall Ave) in the winter if the snow and ice
buildup precluded utilizing the space or bike lane between the parked cars and
the travel lane.
On the whole I personally am very inclined toward safety of myself and others,
and obeying and following the laws, etc. That aside there are a couple of stop
lights over here is SP that will not change to green if there is just me on a
bicycle and it is late at night.
All The Best
Paul Nelson
Saint Paul
Ward One - D7
Hyde Park
From 169.222
Subd. 4. Riding on roadway or shoulder. (a) Every person operating a
bicycle upon a
roadway shall ride as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of
the roadway except
under any of the following situations:
(1) when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same
direction;
(2) when preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or
driveway;
(3) when reasonably necessary to avoid conditions, including fixed or moving
objects,
vehicles, pedestrians, animals, surface hazards, or narrow width lanes, that
make it unsafe to
continue along the right-hand curb or edge.
(b) If a bicycle is traveling on a shoulder of a roadway, the bicycle shall
travel in the same
direction as adjacent vehicular traffic.
(c) Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway or shoulder shall not ride more than
two abreast
and shall not impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic and, on a
laned roadway,
shall ride within a single lane.
>>> <email obscured> 5/12/2008 5:06 PM >>>
The Midtown Greenway does not have posted speed limits, and I believe there is
no maximum bicycle speed on most sections of that structure.
The reason from my recall is based on MNDot overseeing the design with a
line-of-site speed requirement of (again as I recall) circa 45 mph for many
sections of the corridor. The Midtown Greenway is built to highway standards
for human, non motorized mobility/access, able bodied or handicapped.
Certainly for safety and civil peace of mind, if there is more people traffic
and activity, then the higher speeds are not always suitable. Likewise for
other road structures for cars, when there is increasing traffic, it becomes
necessary for the cars and trucks to slow down.
In my experience on the MT Greenway during peak daytime hours, I have driven
and walked in some fairly heavy bike and people traffic. During off hours it is
easier and safer to reach and maintain higher speeds. There is additional
safety and ease without the mix with auto traffic.
One question I have if anyone can reply, is where can I can locate the specific
state and other laws related to the right to take up the entire lane width when
there is not enough room in the lane for both a bicycle and a car. Matty linked
to the San Francisco You Tube that displayed California State Law, and Charlie
Swope referenced MN state law.
I live in Saint Paul, and my current copy of the Midway in Motion Map states
under the "Biking Rules of the road" section: "#7 Cyclists have the right to
take the full travel lane." In addition, a comment in an email from the Saint
Paul City engineer advised us that a bicyclist could take up the entire travel
lane on a thru street (I think Marshall Ave) in the winter if the snow and ice
buildup precluded utilizing the space or bike lane between the parked cars and
the travel lane.
On the whole I personally am very inclined toward safety of myself and others,
and obeying and following the laws, etc. That aside there are a couple of stop
lights over here is SP that will not change to green if there is just me on a
bicycle and it is late at night.
All The Best
Paul Nelson
Saint Paul
Ward One - D7
Hyde Park
Paul Nelson
District 7 Ward 1 Hyde Park, Saint Paul
Info about Paul Nelson: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/paulnelson
This topic's messages may be viewed at:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/cr9C4pa4CDEAio4g30PYZ
MIKE JENSVOLD: "I guess you could shut down the interstate completely and let
them ride there."
This actually happens in Israel on Yom Kipur, when the country shuts down for a
day and cars are prohibited on the roads. The highways fill with bicylists
that can travel at fast speeds. Pure rapture for us cyclists, enabling us to
imagine, "If only..." Once it becomes clear that we must cease burning fossil
fuels if we want our planet and species to survive, perhaps all highways will
become bicycle ways.
On speeds on the Greenway: I concur that this is the safest trail in the city
for faster speeds, given the line of sight and wide lane for pedestrians. Can
we conclude for certain that there is no official speed limit for cyclists on
the Greenway?
I have however seen bicyclists riding dangerously fast around the lakes, such
as Lake Calhoun, where there is a good chance of running over an ambling
toddler. Though an avid cyclist, I would be in favor of enforcing speed limits
on these park paths with ticketing. Anybody know if the park police have ever
enforced these 10mph speed limits?
Unfortunately, a good number of motorists believe that if there is a park
bicycle path, that bicyclists should be on the path and not in the road. On
multiple occasions I have seen aggressive motorists buzz bicyclists and shout
out the window that they should be on the park bicycle path. We need to
educate motorists on the dangers to pedestrians should high-speed cyclists take
park paths, and that by law, they should be on the road where they belong with
other vehicles.
Michael Mackey,
Uptown
I agree that motorists do need to be educated about cyclist's rights on the
roadway. And you're right, just because there is a bike path doesn't mean that
we bike riders are confined to it.
That said, I believe there SHOULD be a speed limit on the greenway because of
the number of pedestrians, kids, and families. What it really comes down to for
me is the disrespect some bike riders show at having to accommodate others on
the shared path. I have seen it on numerous occasions. It's there for everyone.
Allison Herrera
Program Manager, Community and Public Programs
Walker Art Center
1750 Hennepin Avenue
Minneapolis, MN 55403
F: 612-375-5802
Not having kept up with this entire thread, I thought I would share a
quick story that is in alignment with the thread's title.
In celebration of bike to work week, and with tomorrow being bike to
work day, our school bus stop is riding to school by bike. This am,
we had 10 of the 20 kids at the bus stop ride to school. Even a
couple kindergartners with training wheels on their bikes made it.
Tomorrow, we're going for all 20. Everyone had a blast and the kids
are learning the rules of the road in the process. Learning the hand
signals proved to be a little confusing to some of the kids, but we'll
get there.
Tom Madden
Lowry Hill
Tom - thank you for sharing your story! As a mom and one who REALLY ENJOYED
getting on her bike this week, I choked up when I heard the fun, learning
experience you guys put together for the kids (making sure kindergarteners got
in on it too!)
So precious, special and healthy! Good job.
Hey Rachel -
Can you add neighborhood to your e-democracy user profile? List rule for
signatures.
Thx,
David
PS Sorry I didn't make the house party - exhausted