We're Walkin' Here!- Mtbr.com
Results 1 to 53 of 53
  1. #1
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: mtbxplorer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    7,685

  2. #2
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    173
    Here is my issue with pedestrian in my area. The shared paths, they walk in the middle or walk 3 or more a breast. They have both ears plugged with ear buds so they can't hear when you ring the mandatory bell we're supposed to have. I think sometimes "pedestrian have the right of way" has its own set of issues. I don't want to sound like I'm harping on pedestrians but I see irresponsible acts by them.

    Motorists and cyclists can be ticketed for breaking the rules of the road and fined if they break them. Pedestrians should be ticketed for jaywalking or crossing an intersection too late.

    Bottom line motorists, cyclists and pedestrians need to take more care and respect each other.

  3. #3
    mtbr member
    Reputation: Straz85's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,348
    Quote Originally Posted by snailspace View Post
    Here is my issue with pedestrian in my area. The shared paths, they walk in the middle or walk 3 or more a breast. They have both ears plugged with ear buds so they can't hear when you ring the mandatory bell we're supposed to have. I think sometimes "pedestrian have the right of way" has its own set of issues. I don't want to sound like I'm harping on pedestrians but I see irresponsible acts by them.

    Motorists and cyclists can be ticketed for breaking the rules of the road and fined if they break them. Pedestrians should be ticketed for jaywalking or crossing an intersection too late.

    Bottom line motorists, cyclists and pedestrians need to take more care and respect each other.
    I completely agree. Pedestrians are often very unpredictable. I constantly see them on the wrong side of multi use paths. Not that bikes are always on the correct side, but my point is that pedestrians aren't completely without fault either.

  4. #4
    mtbr member
    Reputation: WiTrailRunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    191
    Quote Originally Posted by Straz85 View Post
    I completely agree. Pedestrians are often very unpredictable. I constantly see them on the wrong side of multi use paths. Not that bikes are always on the correct side, but my point is that pedestrians aren't completely without fault either.
    Yes! Around here there a lot of walkers and runners who walk/run on the MUP as if it was the road (on the left hand side.) It drives me batty. We're ALL traffic on MUP, stay to right and I will go around you just like you're a slow moving vehicle.

  5. #5
    Fat-tired Roadie
    Reputation: AndrwSwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    18,453

    Re: We're Walkin' Here!

    Central Park is a particular problem because it's got a fair-sized road loop that's closed to cars during most of the day. It seems like a place one should be able to open up the throttle, but there are runners, people on roller blades, horse drawn carriages, etc. The sightlines are good, so it's usually still okay, just takes attention. Though the article doesn't say if the accident was on the road loop or the foot paths.

    People have an odd sense of entitlement about riding bikes fast on MUPs and similar situations. I feel like a lot of the time, I'm safer and more relaxed if I just sit up and cruise in those situations. I ride roads or less densely used trails when I want to ride at a training pace.

    That's not to say that I didn't ride like a Bike Path Lance Armstrong when I was coming back to it, incidentally in Manhattan. But letting go of that really hasn't been much of a sacrifice. And I can't control the behavior of every pedestrian and stroller mommy.
    "Don't buy upgrades; ride up grades." -Eddy Merckx

  6. #6
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ghettocruiser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,725
    I avoid riding MUPs as much as possible in the summer, but I have been upping my bike path mileage significantly in the last few weeks. After work is the only time in my schedule I am able to ride, and virtually all roads in Toronto are paralyzed with traffic, so unless I'm mountain biking it's either bike path ride or no ride.

    Alas, with persistent warm weather, the crowds have not completely dispersed yet, so unlike in the winter I do not yet have the paths to myself. I don't have a problem with the idea of "yielding to pedestrians", however I have to draw the line somewhere. For instance:

    1. Off-leash dogs are not pedestrians. And a 25' black retractable string that is never retracted is worse than no leash most of the time.

    2. If they are wearing earphones, they forfeit the auditory warning that I am passing. I don't have a problem with that if they don't.

    3. "Yield to pedestrians" does not mean "yield to the authority of pedestrians". Yes, they try sometimes.

    4. What does "yielding" mean? Well I'm either slowing to a jogging pace to pass, or I'm going way around them on the grass. I will not do both.

    5. I follow the 20kph speed limit on the MUP as rigorously as they follow the 20kph speed limit on the park road when they are driving in with a car full of dogs. That is to say, not rigorously. At least I slow to pass them. They gas it to pass me into a parking lot 50 feet away. But I digress...
    The above statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration

  7. #7
    I'd rather be on my bike
    Reputation: TenSpeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2,749
    The pedals turn, not just the left one, but the right one too.

  8. #8
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    173
    If a motorist can be ticketed for running a red or stop sign a pedestrian should be ticketed for jaywalking. Maybe the police should set up jaywalking traps and ticket another source of the problem for a change. When I used to jog I always did the one ear bud thing so I can hear my surroundings and stuck to the right.

  9. #9
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rogbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,255
    Except jaywalking laws were introduced and lobbied for by the auto-industry to clear roads for motorized traffic.

    Here's a review of the book, "Fighting Traffic: The Dawn of the Motor Age in the American City", from The Atlantic.

    One problem is, many people on bikes act like they do when driving: full speed, all the time; and damn anyone who gets in the way. In otherwords, onanism.

  10. #10
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ghettocruiser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,725
    FWIW, I will also yield to pedestrians who are crossing the road at locations other than marked intersections. I might get irritated when they wait patiently for 50 cars to pass and then step out directly in front of my bike, but I'm still just going to swerve around them, not do the motorist-drama-queen act of blaring the horn and writing letters to the editor.

    Also: IMO, comparing "bike-overtaking-pedestrian" with a "car-overtaking-bike" doesn't reflect really reflect accident physics.

    It's more like "motorbike-overtaking-bicycle". Yes, he's coming up fast, but at least I know if he hits me, there's a decent chance he'll end lying on the pavement too.
    The above statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration

  11. #11
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    635
    I've been a bike commuter in two geographically distinct areas, both have very good bike infrastructure. pedestrians in both these areas have no clue. They're constantly in the middle of the path with headphones on and occasionally walking a dog at the same time. On a couple of occasions I've had to slow to a crawl to pass pedestrians wearing headphones:

    The first was walking her dog (retractable leash) the dog was on the far left of the sidewalk (yes there is a small section where bicyclists are forced onto the sidewalk) the walker was on the right. I slowed to a track stand and repeated "on your left" several times. After quite a while she realized and let me pass. I much have shaken my head or something because she shouted a**hole at me.

    The second woman was wandering down the middle of the path monkeying with her ipod. I repeated "on your left" and when I passed she yelled "On your right!"

    I really don't understand. I am on my way to work, not out for a joy ride. As a result of these interactions I have pretty much stopped warning pedestrians of my presence now.

    In the new town, where the bike infrastructure is extensive and excellent, The paths are all labelled as bike paths, nothing that would indicate that they are multi-use. The number of pedestrians who are surprised by the presence of bike is almost zero here, but there is still clueless behavior.

  12. #12
    Fat-tired Roadie
    Reputation: AndrwSwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    18,453
    Don't say "on your left." Couple reasons: first, the key word asks someone to do the opposite of what you want them to do. Second, a lot of people hear it as a command shouted at them by a stranger. Lame.

    Maybe I'm defeatist, but I see areas with a lot of foot traffic as being very slow, and that's that.
    "Don't buy upgrades; ride up grades." -Eddy Merckx

  13. #13
    I'd rather be on my bike
    Reputation: TenSpeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2,749
    You would think that bike paths labeled as such would be for bikes only. On the campus here which is rather large, they have put these in. You would be shocked at how many people simply ignore the huge circled pedestrian with a cross through it symbol every so often in bright white paint right on the path and the words BIKES ONLY right below it. I have been known to buzz people that are walking with headphones in on these paths. That path isn't for you.
    The pedals turn, not just the left one, but the right one too.

  14. #14
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BrianMc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,373
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrwSwitch View Post
    Don't say "on your left." Couple reasons: first, the key word asks someone to do the opposite of what you want them to do. Second, a lot of people hear it as a command shouted at them by a stranger. Lame.
    Never had any problem with it. The bell works if they don't have ear buds in. I ma ready for them to shift left, and have not seen it. Of course these are mostly neighbors whether I actually know them or not we have seen each other. Still, I'd rather have a warning than a swoosh as a bike I did not know was there went by. Of course if they walked opposing traffic, as they ought, they would see me coming.

    NBWallace: The lady with the a$$hole comment and dog would have had a discussion with me as to just why my desire to get to work and her not sharing a public sidewalk was a problem for her. I hate MUPs that dump onto standard width sidewalks. She likely does too. But if she walks the dog at the same time you ride by this will become a frequent meeting.

  15. #15
    Fat-tired Roadie
    Reputation: AndrwSwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    18,453
    I'm not saying no warning. I just say "pardon me" or "hi" or something.
    "Don't buy upgrades; ride up grades." -Eddy Merckx

  16. #16
    Short-Change-Hero
    Reputation: gregnash's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    6,416
    I have gotten away from doing things like "on your left" and using hand signals specifically for reasons like this. People have lost most of their understanding and perception of the world around them when they are walking or have headphones on.

    But then again I live in a small community that has a great biking group but almost no biking infrastructure, we are attempting to change that, and so I have gotten used to traveling in traffic as fast as I can and taking alternate routes so that I do not slow motorists and avoid highly congested walking/running/jogging areas.

  17. #17
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: mtbxplorer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    7,685
    A multi-use path (or "rec path") is just that, and we can't expect dog walkers not to walk the dog or walkers not to chat and walk side-by-side, frustrating as that may be. I try to pass with the courtesy I would appreciate of a motor vehicle passing me. I was on one Monday (not my usual route) and came upon a gaggle of HS runners, and passed with a good morning, excuse me, have a good day, and was able to speed up again afterwards. Earbudders should definitely stay right and make themselves easy to pass. Today a roadie passed me just before the roundabout, and as he was even with me I hear something, but not sure if it was "ON YOUR LEFT" or "hello", so I expect some instructions to peds are similarly lost in the wind.

  18. #18
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ghettocruiser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,725
    Quote Originally Posted by BrianMc View Post
    NBWallace: The lady with the a$$hole comment and dog would have had a discussion with me as to just why my desire to get to work and her not sharing a public sidewalk was a problem for her.
    For the record, the last time I was addressed in that manner was last month when I rang my bell at a woman who had parked her bike sideways across the path and was standing behind it talking on her phone.

    It's hard to imagine she did not engineer this situation for the purposes of creating a confrontation with the next MUP user that came along, but I suppose anything is possible.

    Plot thickener: Although that incident occurred downtown, the same woman a few years back cursed out me and my toddler because our stroller was obstructing the sidewalk by my house.

    Suffice to say in both cases I carried on without further "discussion" with this person. I like to think that mentally illness is to blame here, but unfortunately, all evidence seems to point to an entitlement complex gone horribly overboard.
    The above statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration

  19. #19
    I'm SUCH a square....
    Reputation: bigpedaler's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    1,952
    nbw, I can relate to the "a$$hole" comment from the woman; once, when commuting through downtown, I approached a woman walking. Called out a couple times, she didn't hear me over nearby traffic (and her own mental issues). I rolled over a set of steel panels in the sidewalk, which CLANKED! loudly, startling her from about fifteen feet behind. Her first reaction, as I passed, was a squeal and an "OH SH!+", followed a couple seconds later with "muthaf**kin' BI+CH!" I almost fell off the bike laughing.

    The IPod "lady" would have gotten, as a reply to "ON YOUR RIGHT!", a loud, "Up your @$$!!"
    A bike is the only drug with no bad side effects....

  20. #20
    jrm
    jrm is offline
    mtbr member
    Reputation: jrm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    11,342
    A lower speed limit that closes the speed gap between users is a good start but people need to understand how to use a MUT facility and NOT rely on the assumption that others behavior is predictable and that other users have their best interest on their minds. Im beginning to see a more disturbing new trend emerging where people arent even looking where there going b/c they have there faces on the device their holding in there hand and headphones on.

  21. #21
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BrianMc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,373
    ^ Oblivious to the fact that they are at the apex of a blind corner with cyclists approaching from both directions. Such a lack of concern for their own safety on their part should negate any expectation of safety being conceded by others as they have opted not to engage with other users. We will do what we can, but if we need their participation to be successful in avoiding a collision, they are going to get hurt, and I can;t feel too sorry for them.

    I met a man with two dogs halfway up a steepish MUP in Cleveland this summer. He was just past such a blind apex. He loudly said (not shouted) "Bike!". This seemed a non-sequitur to me, as of course I knew I was on a bike, then the 20-25 mph cyclist appeared beside him. "Oh! Bike! Gotcha" I think. We both went right and got the cyclist by (barely: what a moron). So if your face is in your phone and your ears have been pre-empted with buds, you are a standing duck. It will be a tough lesson.

  22. #22
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,091
    We have a lot of multi use paths here and some parks have well signed dedicated cycle and footpaths. It makes no difference there are always big groups walking on the cycle paths (usually plugged in techno zombies), cyclists on the footpath's on weekends and holidays etc
    I just go with the flow and take it very steady about 10 to 15Kmph or whatever is safe- if I want to go faster I just use the service road that runs parallel to the park, I do see lance wannabes getting upset with all around them but there is no point. If I want to go training I go somewhere quiet, there is an 8Km stretch of road along the back side of the airport a few km further up from the park that is pretty quiet and much better for training anyway.
    I sometimes commute midweek through the park (although not as much these days since they relocated my favourite bar) and it is generally fine to get up to a reasonable speed, there is still the occasional jogger or something on the cycle path but generally OK with reasonable sight lines.
    I've given up with bells these days, approaching from the rear at a safe speed ringing the bell seems to causes a significant proportion of the walking and novice cycling brigade to s**t themselves and either fall off, hammer on the brakes or make some other arbitrary change of position in the worst possible direction.

  23. #23

  24. #24
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rogbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,255
    Quote Originally Posted by TenSpeed View Post
    You would think that bike paths labeled as such would be for bikes only. On the campus here which is rather large, they have put these in. You would be shocked at how many people simply ignore the huge circled pedestrian with a cross through it symbol every so often in bright white paint right on the path and the words BIKES ONLY right below it. I have been known to buzz people that are walking with headphones in on these paths. That path isn't for you.
    That's the same thinking motorists have towards cyclists: entitled. Have patience, slow down, and smile. You're on a campus, what's the hurry?

  25. #25
    I'd rather be on my bike
    Reputation: TenSpeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2,749
    These are BIKE ONLY paths, not for foot traffic. They are clearly marked. I am not entitled, but when it says no pedestrians, cycles only, and there are pedestrians on it, there is a problem. If the local road said no bikes, and I was riding my bike on it, that would be the same thing. Motorists could get pissed.
    The pedals turn, not just the left one, but the right one too.

  26. #26
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,091
    Quote Originally Posted by TenSpeed View Post
    These are BIKE ONLY paths, not for foot traffic. They are clearly marked. I am not entitled, but when it says no pedestrians, cycles only, and there are pedestrians on it, there is a problem. If the local road said no bikes, and I was riding my bike on it, that would be the same thing. Motorists could get pissed.
    We have the same here in places and they are largely ignored and full of pedestrians - buzzing people will just get you landed with a law suit when you eventually hit someone so there is little point in getting upset. It would need an army of cops to enforce it which would inevitably lead to more hassle, rules and fines. If I want to ride fast I use the road; even if technically dedicated I just treat them as shared use paths and take it steady.

  27. #27
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rogbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,255
    Quote Originally Posted by TenSpeed View Post
    These are BIKE ONLY paths, not for foot traffic. They are clearly marked. I am not entitled, but when it says no pedestrians, cycles only, and there are pedestrians on it, there is a problem. If the local road said no bikes, and I was riding my bike on it, that would be the same thing. Motorists could get pissed.
    I'm not justifying the pedestrians actions, just pointing out your actions are just as wrong. There's a pretty simple rule to follow in life, "Don't be a dick."

  28. #28
    I'd rather be on my bike
    Reputation: TenSpeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2,749
    Bikes only on the path, no pedestrians, clearly marked, and you are walking? Sorry, but you are getting buzzed. There will be no lawsuit. The pedestrian is clearly in the wrong, and the cyclist will not be at fault for riding on a bike only path. I am not being a dick but I am riding on the bike path. If this was a sidewalk or multi use path of course I wouldn't buzz anyone. I give plenty of room on any path where pedestrians are likely to be.
    The pedals turn, not just the left one, but the right one too.

  29. #29
    Fat-tired Roadie
    Reputation: AndrwSwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    18,453

    Re: We're Walkin' Here!

    I ride, of course. I also drive, run, and, when I have to or I'm with my wife, I walk.

    Something I found interesting about driving every now and then when I was primarily commuting by bike is how different my mental maps of the city are. I think as we get used to our usual routes, it's easy to forget how crappy the infrastructure often is. Bike lanes start and stop seemingly at random, paths and MUPs begin and end in very arbitrary places, and the marked alignment of lanes changes constantly.

    When I was in New York, it used to drive me nuts that the MUP along the West Side Highway is as crowded as it is. One of the only multi-mile, relatively uninterrupted strips of relatively smooth, car-free pavement in the city and it's choked with pedestrians? But, they're crowded over too if they want what I want.

    So I think anyone who's pushing for a strict interpretation of the signage should try going for a run on the same route. See how clear it is then. Or try to go for a run or a ride mostly off-street in another city.

    My own suspicion is that the people who plan these things only ever ride a desk and never test them for flow, logic, or legibility.

    It's still nice to be able to get off the street, but I don't expect much.
    "Don't buy upgrades; ride up grades." -Eddy Merckx

  30. #30
    I'd rather be on my bike
    Reputation: TenSpeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2,749
    I think that I need to make something very clear here regarding this bike only path. Within the campus here, there is a huge pedestrian infrastructure as any university would have. As times have changed, there have been incidents with cyclists and pedestrians using the same path. They have created bike only paths which run along or near the pedestrian only paths. A times, they are within a few feet of the other, and at other times are not that close. They do cross each other I believe in a few spots. They were created to separate pedestrians and cyclists and keep everything moving nicely. They have also put in quite a few bike lanes which was a huge welcome.

    This is not an MUP, this is a bike only path. It is not meant for any traffic other than bikes. It is marked as such continually along the path. I will get some pictures to post and show what kind of a set up they have gone with. In theory, it works well, because pedestrians don't have to worry about cyclists and vice versa.

    As far as strict interpretation of the signage, it is not open for discussion. It clearly is marked bikes only, no pedestrians. It does not get any clearer than that, and if someone cannot interpret that correctly, they have some issues.
    The pedals turn, not just the left one, but the right one too.

  31. #31
    Moderator Moderator
    Reputation: mtbxplorer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    7,685
    Quote Originally Posted by AndrwSwitch View Post
    I ride, of course. I also drive, run, and, when I have to or I'm with my wife, I walk.
    ...
    When I was in New York, it used to drive me nuts that the MUP along the West Side Highway is as crowded as it is. One of the only multi-mile, relatively uninterrupted strips of relatively smooth, car-free pavement in the city and it's choked with pedestrians? But, they're crowded over too if they want what I want.
    ^^I got a ticket there on my bike while accompanying a friend marathon training. In that particular spot the MUP split into bikes only/peds only sections, and I mistakenly stayed with her on the empty ped path (it was a cold weekday). I considered it totally gratuitous enforcement, not solving any problem, probably meeting a quota. That said, I would not do it again, so enforcement does work.

  32. #32
    I'd rather be on my bike
    Reputation: TenSpeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2,749
    Quote Originally Posted by mtbxplorer View Post
    ^^I got a ticket there on my bike while accompanying a friend marathon training. In that particular spot the MUP split into bikes only/peds only sections, and I mistakenly stayed with her on the empty ped path (it was a cold weekday). I considered it totally gratuitous enforcement, not solving any problem, probably meeting a quota. That said, I would not do it again, so enforcement does work.
    It helps solve the problem. You were ticketed, and you won't do it again, and you are here telling us about it, so you are spreading the word. Now I know that when I go to NY, stick to the bike section if I am riding. The lack of enforcement is where it hurts this infrastructure. If you know that you will never get in trouble for putting your hand in the cookie jar, you will just continue to do it.

    When I am down by the campus, I see most of the people on their bikes, on the sidewalk. I pass right by them in the bike lane. They are traveling the same direction as me, but are on the sidewalk. I don't know if they are afraid of the bike lane or what but the use is way down. Riding the sidewalk here is pretty dangerous compared to the bike lane. Really hoping that they pass a law that prohibits sidewalk riding and forces riders into the bike lane. More people in the bike lane creates the need for more bike lanes across the city.
    The pedals turn, not just the left one, but the right one too.

  33. #33
    Fat-tired Roadie
    Reputation: AndrwSwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    18,453
    Sounds like nobody on your campus is reading the signs.

    You know the expression "pissing in the wind?" In a sense, it doesn't really matter what the signage is or isn't. What really matters is how people use the infrastructure. The pedestrian/car separation collapses routinely when something is crowded enough. Big events letting out spring to mind, but I was back at school this time two years ago; I remember lectures getting out.

    Food for thought: lanes for cars are striped in third-world cities, but nobody stays between them.

    Further food for thought: the exit I used to live off of in Seattle now stops a lane or two next to the exit lane during rush hour. Made me glad I was almost always going somewhere on surface streets, by bike when I was living there.
    "Don't buy upgrades; ride up grades." -Eddy Merckx

  34. #34
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rogbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,255
    You're stuck on the problem and can't see the solution for it. Contact the campus police and file a complaint. Buzzing anyone, even if they are in the wrong, is a dick move. Common courtesy goes a long way in this world. Just as with motorists impatience with cyclists, your frustration with pedestrians comes from the same place; a sense of entitlement. You have mechanical advantage over pedestrians. It's possible for you to slow down, pass with care and plenty of room, then accelerate to your previous speed. Costing you fractions of seconds in your total commute time. I'll say it again, file a complaint with the campus police and make them enforce the rules. You playing chicken with unsuspecting peds is a juvenile way of fixing the problem.

    For some perspective, the university I attend also has on campus thru-bike lanes. They are constantly used by pedestrians and that is perfectly fine. At night, when no one is on campus the trip across takes about 10 min., going the 15mph speed limit. During the day, with pedestrian congestion, the trip takes ~12 min or ~20% longer. Sometimes when it's really crowded, I dismount and walk my bike: the horror!!! I still shake my head, but then remember patience begets happiness

  35. #35
    I'd rather be on my bike
    Reputation: TenSpeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2,749
    Are these campus thru-bike lanes for bikes only, or is it a shared path? This is what I am getting at. There is no sense of entitlement. I am asking for pedestrians to use common sense, and when they see a sign that says bikes only on the path to please not walk on it. I cannot help that people as a whole just forget to use their brain and often needs some encouragement to use common sense every once in a while. Buzzing isn't a dick move. Walking on a bike only path is a dick move. If pedestrians don't want to get hit by a bike, they should maybe, I dunno, GET OFF THE BIKE ONLY PATH?

    I am extremely courteous on shared paths. I give bladers and runners along with walkers plenty of room and even slow down when necessary. I follow the rules of the road when I am sharing it with vehicles. I stop at the lights and use hand signals. I obey the no right turn on red signs when waiting to turn right. Now, when I am on a bike only path, there should be only bikes. Pedestrians have their own walkway. It is marked as such. This is not a shared path. It is for bikes only, and should only be used by bikes. Walking on this path, or running, or blading, or doing anything other than riding a bike on it is a dick move.
    The pedals turn, not just the left one, but the right one too.

  36. #36
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Posts
    205
    Quote Originally Posted by TenSpeed View Post
    Walking on a bike only path is a dick move. If pedestrians don't want to get hit by a bike, they should maybe, I dunno, GET OFF THE BIKE ONLY PATH?
    Don't be evil, TenSpeed. Though the vast majority of people seem to wildly overestimate how dangerous ped-bike collisions usually are, they can nonetheless in rare occasions be fatal. While I agree that there are plenty of narcissistic idiots who just don't care about proper path use, even consummate d-bags don't deserve to die for jaywalking on your bike lane. Also, many bike lanes don't have marked crossings; if that is the case (and really, even when it's not), then the assumption may well be that peds may cross at any time (they would probably be expected to yield to oncoming traffic, of course).

    Speed ad - Mistakes - YouTube

  37. #37
    mtbr member
    Reputation: ghettocruiser's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    1,725
    Quote Originally Posted by Carton View Post
    Don't be evil, TenSpeed.
    Evil perhaps, but to be clear, this is not in the same league as motorists... who take it up at least three more levels...

    1 - A motorist buzzes a cyclist who is on a road he is not allowed to ride on.

    2 - A motorists buzzes a cyclist who is on a road he is allowed to ride on, but the motorist think he isn't.

    3 - A motorists buzzes a cyclist who is on a road the motorist knows he is allowed to ride on.

    4 - A motorist enters a bike/bus lane in which cars are prohibited for the sole purpose of buzzing a cyclist legally riding there.

    I've had several "level 4" buzzes this month alone.

    But as I've mentioned before, I also yield to pedestrians under all conditions, including those who are purposefully blocking me on a bike path to attempt to create a confrontation.
    The above statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration

  38. #38
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    1,091
    The main reason motorists buzzing cyclists is much more serious than bikes and peds is due to the much higher potential consequences of a crash. Death or major hospital time are likely as opposed to a very much outside chance.

    That said buzzing pedestrians on a bike achieves nothing - if it could be proven that a cyclist hit a pedestrian deliberately or negligently by buzzing them even if it was a dedicated bike track I think that you would be on dodgy ground legally; don't forget for a civil claim it is on balance of probabilities not proven beyond reasonable doubt.
    I reckon that there are plenty of Better Call Saul type parasites out there who would milk the whiplash, chronic spinal damage, life destroying as I am scared to go out scenarios etc for a %. Even if it eventually fails it could still be a major load of hassle that I could do without.

    I get what you are saying Ten and agree it's very irritating but I don't think that buzzing people is a good idea

  39. #39
    I'd rather be on my bike
    Reputation: TenSpeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2,749
    I must sound like an evil SOB on here LOL. I think I buzzed one person on that path. Not sure how we got on this anyway. I will get some pictures of the paths and the markings to show everyone.
    The pedals turn, not just the left one, but the right one too.

  40. #40
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rogbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,255
    Quote Originally Posted by TenSpeed View Post
    I must sound like an evil SOB on here LOL. I think I buzzed one person on that path. Not sure how we got on this anyway. I will get some pictures of the paths and the markings to show everyone.
    No, not evil, just impatient and entitled. You're back tracking now. Take pictures, but show them to the appropriate authorities who can do something about the problem. Trying to justify your inappropriate actions on a web forum is no solution. Accept that you're actions are wrong (even if others' actions are just as wrong) and adjust your behavior accordingly. Again, bring this to the attention of the campus authorities, either campus police or school administration.

    I'll give you an example of what to say:

    "Hello. I'd like to bring a safety issue to your attention. I commute through campus and have noticed a large amount of pedestrians using the "bike only" lane, despite signage saying 'No peds.' I'm concerned a collision could occur. [Showing pictures at this point may help] Is there some sort of plan for educating people about the through bike lanes or enforcing the 'No pedestrian' rule on these lanes?"

    You'll need persistence, no doubt. If you're brushed off at a lower level try to send the message to the top.

    Of course, if you're a student you may have more leverage with the administration, or reach out to the student government. If that fails, reach out to a local bicycle advocacy group for help. They may have useful information for you to use when going to authorities/administration.

    There's two solutions to this problem that don't reflect poorly on you, and by extension all cyclists: 1) Slow down, accept the presence of peds in the bike lane, and carry on or 2) file a formal complaint to bring the issue to the attention of those who can fix it.

  41. #41
    I'd rather be on my bike
    Reputation: TenSpeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2,749
    When I meant posting pictures, it was so everyone here could see what it looks like and how it is marked. I am not entitled. If they are going to give me a bike lane and mark it as a bike lane only with no pedestrians, you can bet your ass I will get pissed when people are walking on it. You mention educating people about the bike lanes. It says bikes only, no peds. What more can you do to educate someone? They are graphics on the path itself. Huge graphics, with bikes, and with pedestrians crossed out. What more can there be to educate someone????

    We can argue about this until each of us are blue in the face. I will not back down or change my stance on this, so you will simply need to either accept it or ignore it.
    The pedals turn, not just the left one, but the right one too.

  42. #42
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rogbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,255
    I don't think there is a question of what the path looks like. You're right, pedestrians should not use a bike only lane. However, what I am calling you out on is your attitude and actions towards those pedestrians. And yes, you have an entitled attitude. You speak of the lane in the possessive and fail to see the issue from a perspective that is not your own.

    What I'm guessing is, the bigger issue is a design and implementation failure. Combine that with low numbers of cyclist using the lane and pedestrians proclivity to take the easiest route and user conflict is inevitable.

    I've listed several solutions you can take to ameliorate the problem. Yet, you have refused to consider them as solutions. Since your current solution is escalating the dangers presented by others' actions you're just as culpable for the problem as they are.

    You won't acknowledge it, but your frustration stems from the same place as all road rage: impatience and lack of courtesy. Besides, all larger, faster moving vehicles should yield (give way, slow down for, etc.) to slower more vulnerable road (trail, path, lane, etc.) users.

  43. #43
    Fat-tired Roadie
    Reputation: AndrwSwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    18,453
    I don't need to see pictures. I believe you.

    What I'm saying is that it doesn't matter. If people's expectations are that the signs don't mean anything, than they don't. Sort of like how if a freeway is signed for 60 mph, I expect to be able to drive 69 mph with impunity. I can't help suspecting there's a crowd thing going on too.

    So the next thing that I think a few of us are saying is that while it's maybe irritating that you can't ride the bike paths on your campus the way you'd like to, there's no direct action you can take that will change things.
    "Don't buy upgrades; ride up grades." -Eddy Merckx

  44. #44
    I'd rather be on my bike
    Reputation: TenSpeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2,749
    Quote Originally Posted by rogbie View Post
    I don't think there is a question of what the path looks like. You're right, pedestrians should not use a bike only lane. However, what I am calling you out on is your attitude and actions towards those pedestrians. And yes, you have an entitled attitude. You speak of the lane in the possessive and fail to see the issue from a perspective that is not your own.
    It is a bike only lane, pedestrians are not allowed. How am I supposed to see it?

    What I'm guessing is, the bigger issue is a design and implementation failure. Combine that with low numbers of cyclist using the lane and pedestrians proclivity to take the easiest route and user conflict is inevitable.
    That is how it is overall here, the cycling infrastructure flat out sucks combined with the people who insist on riding on the sidewalk when there is a perfectly good bike lane, or bike only path. Wait, why would they use that when they can use the sidewalk? People walking on the sidewalk and the bike only path, so what is the difference?

    I've listed several solutions you can take to ameliorate the problem. Yet, you have refused to consider them as solutions. Since your current solution is escalating the dangers presented by others' actions you're just as culpable for the problem as they are.

    You won't acknowledge it, but your frustration stems from the same place as all road rage: impatience and lack of courtesy. Besides, all larger, faster moving vehicles should yield (give way, slow down for, etc.) to slower more vulnerable road (trail, path, lane, etc.) users.
    Frustration, yes. How can anyone not be frustrated with it? Using your logic, it is OK for people to now walk down the road, the highway, wherever. No rules right? We need to be tolerant and forgiving, no sense of entitlement, oh and educate people more. Maybe it is time to weed the stupid ones out a little?
    The pedals turn, not just the left one, but the right one too.

  45. #45
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BrianMc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,373
    ^ Tenspeed, it could be worse. Here they have a 16' road no sidewalks, terrible lighting, no center or fog lines so you have bikes, pedestrians, strollers, BMX, skatebaorders (there is a park with pool, ramps, baseball and a lake at one end for them), and women with strollers on a road marked for 30 where 40 is usual and 50+ is not uncommon. Now *that* is an MUP! They call it a street, though. Lovely at night with pedestrians in dark clothes walking with traffic, so no faces just black.

    https://www.google.com/maps/@39.3292...X1LkCVYSyA!2e0

    Rotate for Park Road.

  46. #46
    I'd rather be on my bike
    Reputation: TenSpeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2,749
    That is insane. Sounds like an accident waiting to happen.
    The pedals turn, not just the left one, but the right one too.

  47. #47
    mtbr member
    Reputation: BrianMc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    4,373
    ^ A ride at 2 PM Sept 23, 2014 a Friday with school in and minimal traffic. Nothing like no other road users to improve a ride! There is an old barely visible center line that shows better on the camera than in person. No strollers, pedestrians, kids on BMXs, tractors with wide equipment, or trucks on this ride. Avoiding the race to or from schools by mini-van moms and teens is a wise move. Rides during "rush" are a lot more "interesting".


  48. #48
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rogbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,255
    Quote Originally Posted by TenSpeed View Post
    It is a bike only lane, pedestrians are not allowed. How am I supposed to see it?
    Have patience, slow down, pass with courtesy. You, alone, can't stop pedestrians from walking where they're not allowed. You can control your reactions to the problem and find the proper avenues of correcting it.

    That is how it is overall here, the cycling infrastructure flat out sucks combined with the people who insist on riding on the sidewalk when there is a perfectly good bike lane, or bike only path. Wait, why would they use that when they can use the sidewalk? People walking on the sidewalk and the bike only path, so what is the difference?
    Join an advocacy group and figure out how to reach people about the proper ways of cycling, i.e. like any other vehicle. Getting upset over others' actions does nothing to solve the problem. Print some flyers with advice on riding and stick them on every bike at every rack on campus. Then make some flyers from a motorists' perspective on how to safely share the road, plaster every car on campus. Is there a cycling group or club team on campus? They can help. If there is not a group, why not start one?

    Frustration, yes. How can anyone not be frustrated with it? Using your logic, it is OK for people to now walk down the road, the highway, wherever. No rules right?
    Before the automobile industry forced all other modes of transport off the road, people of all modes of transport moved on the roadway and the sidewalks. So, yes, I do think it's ok for people to walk in the street. I don't think it's ok that the current attitude is that streets are for high speed motor traffic only. Rules are important, but they're skewed in favor of motor vehicles at the expense of all other modes of transportation.

    We need to be tolerant and forgiving, no sense of entitlement, oh and educate people more. Maybe it is time to weed the stupid ones out a little?
    Yes (non-sarcastically), to your first (sarcastic) question. Maybe it's time you give up your bike and do as Atticus said: walk around in someone else's shoes for a while?

  49. #49
    I'd rather be on my bike
    Reputation: TenSpeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2,749
    If I were to give up my bike, and walk, as you suggest.....it would be on the sidewalk, and not the road or bike path. Plain and simple.
    The pedals turn, not just the left one, but the right one too.

  50. #50
    Fat-tired Roadie
    Reputation: AndrwSwitch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    18,453
    Good - do it.

    Pay attention to how often the flow is inconvenient or arbitrary.
    "Don't buy upgrades; ride up grades." -Eddy Merckx

  51. #51
    I'd rather be on my bike
    Reputation: TenSpeed's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2,749
    I was down on the campus today just to see what exactly it was like. The bike path is actually out of the way most of the time and is not the most direct line of travel. Huge fail on the designers though for running the two side by side in several areas. That does not help keep pedestrians off the bike lane.
    The pedals turn, not just the left one, but the right one too.

  52. #52
    mtbr member
    Reputation:
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,454
    I'm with 10 speed on this one. Be the squeaky wheel. Is this just laziness or more of a campus culture or ignorance? Get an airzound or maybe mount a super soaker to the bars. I tend to ring my bell a lot on the MUP, we don't have just bike paths here in MA.

  53. #53
    mtbr member
    Reputation: rogbie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,255
    So, you're implying the mode that travels faster and carries a greater force has the right of way and it's up to slower moving users to get out of the others' way? That's top-down, entitled thinking, and most vehicle laws recognize this. That is why in most vehicle codes it is written that operators of larger vehicles have the onus to pass slower users safely. Remember, bikes are vehicles and bound to the same rules that govern all vehicles. Intentionally buzzing someone is wrong, even if the person buzzed is walking in the wrong place.

Members who have read this thread: 0

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

THE SITE

ABOUT MTBR

VISIT US AT

© Copyright 2020 VerticalScope Inc. All rights reserved.