More rights for bicyclists? Not without a fight (MN)

[goodhue]

This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by azurnoir (a host of the Latest Breaking News forum).

Source: Star Tribune

More rights for bicyclists? Not without a fight

Article by: PAT DOYLE , Star Tribune Updated: April 27, 2013 - 7:18 AM

State proposals call for safer bike lanes, parking restrictions for motorists.

As bicyclists saddle up after a long winter, Minnesota legislators are preparing to grant them greater rights to ride on the road.

But not without a fight.

Measures advancing in the House and Senate would make it harder for motorists to use bike lanes and easier for cyclists to use both them and the shoulders of roads. The proposals picked up support Friday from U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, who said in an interview that Minnesota is “way ahead of the curve” in promoting bike safety.

Some Republican legislators would prefer biking advocates to slow down.

“I bet most people in the state don’t even realize what a bike lane is,” said Sen. David Hann, R-Eden Prairie, during a recent legislative session. He called a proposal to ban motor vehicle parking in bike lanes “ridiculous” and “a way to collect fines.”

* * *

Read more: http://www.startribune.com/politics/statelocal/204957031.html

[freedom fighter jh]

1. What's the point of a bike lane if cars can be parked in it?

They did this in New York decades ago. In theory cars were not allowed to park in the bike lane, but there were usually several cars there on every block. It was worse than not having a bike lane, because a cyclist was forced into traffic over and over.

[Travis_0004]

2. I think people need to get smarter about building bike lanes

A lot of bike lanes are either in spots cars choose to park, or in the zone where you are in the doors stike zone.

A lot of people don't look for bikes when opening doors, which can be a danger to cyclist. On existing roads, it might be too expensive to move the bike lane further away, but its something to consider when building new roads, or expanding roads.

[Major Nikon]

5. Some bike lanes are more dangerous than riding in the traffic lane

They put cyclists in a position where they are in danger of opening car doors, and/or they put cyclists in a position where they are less likely to be seen going through an intersection.

[Travis_0004]

8. I agree

I've been on roads where there was an unsafe bike lane, and I refused to ride in it because it wasn't safe. Then I have motorist who are mad at me, because all they see is a bike lane that I'm not using.

I think a lot of city planners don't ride bikes, and they have a great plan such as adding 100 miles of bike lanes, but they need to concentrate on making a few less miles of quality bike lanes, than just pumping out tons of miles of shitty bike lanes.

I'll admit where I live, there are not a ton of bike lanes, but there are plenty of roads where the speed limit is only 25, we do have a really nice 70 mile long bike trail that is completely separated from traffic, with the exception of a few street crossings, so I do think I have it pretty good.

[Major Nikon]

9. I have problems with bike trails as well

Bike trails aren't really bike trails, they are multi-use trails. This means that you're going to eventually come around a blind spot and find someone with a dog leash stretched across the trail, or a 5 yr old on a Big Wheel in the wrong lane. They also tend to frequently cross traffic lanes, often at intersections where few people are looking for bikes. They also rarely go where you need to go, which often makes them useless for commuters.

So basically trails aren't well suited for exercise or commuting, which puts cyclist back in the traffic lanes where they often face angry drivers who are mad because you aren't on the trail they are paying for with tax dollars.

[Travis_0004]

13. At least where I live, the major trail doesn't have that problem.

The trail by me is almost dead straight for 20 miles. It was build on an old railroad right of way, and since the trains were there before most of the city, they just build the tracks pretty much dead straight except where they were winding close to a river. There are a few gentile turns, but not much. Its also big enough that people are spread out. The biggest starting point for most people is in Loveland Ohio, and its a bit busy for the 4 miles or so close to loveland, but once you get past that, people are more spread out. Now that is a small Multi Use path that is a 2 mile loop somewhere else by me, and I'll admit thats a nightmare for bikes. People walking on the wrong side of the trail, dog leashes 10 feet long, kids not paying attention etc. On that path, I can't hit more than 10 miles an hour for safety reasons (so I don't use it, the the roads are much safer). On the major bike path, I would feel safe going 25 miles an hour in most sections, although I'm still fat and out of shape, so 13-14 is my average speed.

[happyslug]

39. This is NOT a Rail to trail but a bik "Path" on an existing road

Forester and other bicycle writers are advocates of Rails to Trail bicycle routes, but oppose bike lanes.

http://www.johnforester.com/Articles/facilities.htm

http://www.johnforester.com/index.html

[wordpix]

7. in DC the streets downtown were built for trolley cars but now there's lots of traffic + bike lanes

right up against the parking lanes. Very dangerous situation. I've seen lots of cyclists down after accidents. No good answer in a crowded city with narrow streets except to ban parking and give parking lane over to bikes.

[happyslug]

40. Most older cities have such wide streets

Parking (for wagons) was set at six feet, streetcars only needed five feet (The rails kept them within those five feet), and a travel lane of eight feet, Total 19 to 20 feet (38 to 40 feet if you include both directions). Six feet is still the minimun needed for parking, thus 12 feet of the 40 feet are taking up by parking, you thus have 26-28 feet of travel lanes. 13-14 feet of travel lanes (Given that the Streetcars were removed in the 1950s). That is not enough for 4 eight foot travel lanes, thus you end up with four 7 foot or smaller lanes (to small even in the 1800s) or two 13 feet wide lanes.

Just such lanes are more the result of accident then any real design.

[chelsea0011]

51. On a two lane road it is illegal to take a right turn

onto a street from the left lane for obvious reasons. But they put bike lanes on the right side of the road so vehicles turning right go right through the bike lane. It makes no sense to have a safety rule for vehicles and ignore it for bicycles. I was stuck in traffic one day at night. To exit the traffic, I would take the next right turn. A bicyclist came flying down the bike lane and I and the bicyclist were lucky I was turning at a very slow pace. It is nearly impossible to pick up that bicyclist from my vantage point, traffic behind me and a speeding bike with no lights.

[BlueJazz]

3. “I bet most people in the state don’t even realize what a bike lane is,” Ah..No, Sen. David Hann.

Most people in Minnesota are much smarter than a box of rocks...unlike you, Sir.

[jwirr]

4. He is an idiot. I do not use these trails but anyone who is not aware of them is not looking. They

are all over the state.

[Bigmack]

6. When we bike on roads in WA...

... we can always tell what political party a driver is by how much room they give us.

Time after time, cars that refuse to yield us any room... shoulder or not... have a Repub bumpersticker or some other tell-tale on their vehicle.

Cars that go wide...? Prius', Obama bumpersticker, etc.

[Fumesucker]

38. I live in a red area of a red state and the great majority of cars give me plenty of room

I think it's got to do with the fact that I ride an unusual looking semi recumbent bike, this point has been discussed at length on a forum I'm on and practically everyone who rides a bent says the same thing, you get more respect on a bike that's not a traditional diamond frame road bike.

It's hard to figure out what's going on in people's heads sometimes.

[Revanchist]

10. Feel lucky you don't live in the Hampton Roads area of Virginia

Your lucky to find a sidewalk in many areas, let alone a bike lane.

[FightingIrish]

11. In Oregon it's Illegal to drive or park a motor vehicle in a bike lane

On my daily commute I encounter vehicles whose drivers will not use the parking lot in the city park I must pass on my route. I started taking photos and tweeting them to the city. Friday there were no cars. The cars that used this particular bike lane were also encroaching on the traffic lane.

[Posteritatis]

15. Given the hostility towards bikes, I wouldn't be surprised if some are parking there on purpose. nt

[Gregorian]

18. I'll never understand why the hostility toward cyclists. It has always boggled my mind.

I guess we've got a planet to kill as fast as we can, and cyclists are getting in the way of that. Or something.

No road riding for me, as much as I would dearly love to go grocery shopping with a trailer. Fuck em. I want to die naturally.

[SoapBox]

26. I don't know if I'll call it hostility...

but in my area, there are TONS of bikers. There are, in many parts bike lanes (and no, no body dares to park in them)....

BUT what makes me so fuck'n mad is that, these bikers will ride next to each other, staggered (so the group is either 2 or 3 wide), right dead
center ON the left line of the bike lane, with those on the car lane side being IN the car lane.

Get the fuck over into the bike lane! And at intersections, while I'm at a stop, to go forward or turn right, they will
very commonly come up the right side of my car and then sit at the front right corner of my car OR even just pull right in front of me.

Bikers (some bikers) stop DARING a car to hit you...I'm tired of the arrogance and attitude of many bikers.

[Cronus Protagonist]

42. Yeah!

Your post does display your hostility quite well. I would call it hostility for sure.

[Earth_First]

12. I will get behind cyclists when they begin adhering to current traffic laws.

when they can start following the existing traffic laws and law enforcement enforces violations.

I drive for a living. I see it all day long. Spare me the sob story that YOU and YOUR cycling club follow the traffic laws.

The only way to increased cyclist compliance is to pass legislation that requires licensing and registration fees and increased enforcement of traffic laws by law enforcement agencies.

I'll play when they play.

[Travis_0004]

14. Whats the point in lisensing cyclist?

Most cyclist own cars, so they have a drivers license, pay fees, buy gas etc. And I'll admit some cyclist do stupid things, but I think most are pretty safe. When you are on a bike that weighs 20 lbs, and somebody is in a vehicle weight 3000, you should follow safety rules.

[Major Nikon]

17. Good point

As we all know, drivers adhere to all traffic laws and never manage to kill 50,000 people or so per year when they don't.

[Gregorian]

19. You just betrayed your username.

[Earth_First]

20. I didn't do shit.

I pointed out a clearly visible hole in a situation in which one group is playing the victim card.

[Gormy Cuss]

22. Yes, and it's tiresome when drivers play the victim card like that.

Lemme guess, pedestrians are also a bunch of scofflaws especially those who move slowly when crossing the street.

[AngryOldDem]

46. How so?

By pointing out that cyclists often ignore basic traffic rules? You see it every day. If they're on the streets, then traffic laws also apply to them. Pretty simple concept. And that doesn't translate into cyclist hate.

[LanternWaste]

49. What's the ratio between cyclists who ignore laws

What's the ratio between cyclists who ignore laws and those who drive vehicles who do the same?

"And that doesn't translate into cyclist hate..."
While focusing on the benign and the statistical aberrations certainly doesn't translate into hate... it does however, translates into petulance. (Another simply concept one may safely presume)

[frylock]

21. here we go....

[freshwest]

23. In my cycling days in a large city, there were no bike lanes but there were trails, along rivers and

well protected from traffic. Nice paved little roads, to ride in wooded areas or in sight of the water. Great long day trips, to cross the miles without any traffic lights or cars to look out for. So much more pleasurable than driving in competition with cars.

But all bikes were licensed by the city. Although head or tail lights or turn light signals were not required, rear reflectors and a city license sticker were. The cost was nominal, but it was also supposed to prove a person wasn't driving a stolen bike, and help get stolen bikes returned to the rightful owners.

That made them street legal, and bicyclists had to follow all of the rules of the road and act just like cars. I had to make hand signals when going left or right, and I drove in the center of the lanes of traffic, not between lanes of cars, as the law and the drivers license manual required me to do. I had to wait for the light to go through an intersection or make a left turn, just like vehicle. I prefer this kind of setup and I didn't mind, when driving my car, waiting for whatever they were doing, until time when there might be room to pass in another lane.

Some people were hostile where I used to live, but they were legally in the wrong. The majority had no problem, any more than they'd be irritated at a slow moving vehicle such road equipment. Drivers knew bicycle laws and their rights, since they were in the driver license tests. Common sense had to prevail as far as the freeways were concerned, but you could ride on the shoulder at your own risk.

I don't understand why anyone would want to drive a car in a designated bike land. They are not wide enough. That's poor trip planning or rushing.

That being said, I've seen bad riding by some bicyclists in the area where I now live, despite bike lanes. They don't want to have to stop (I do sympathize) and will jump from road to sidewalks and back. I've seen some bicyclists speeding on the sidewalks and scaring pedestrians when the bike lane was open. Red lights at the corner mean nothing to some bicyclists. I'm guessing it's because they don't see themselves as operating a 'street vehicle.'

There are no saints in either side of the debate, everyone must give way to anyone who is less vulnerable than a vehicle the right of way. No one wants to injure anyone by insisting on their 'right of way.' That includes bicyclists scaring pedestrians off sidewalks. But most people are good drivers and riders. Some aren't.

JMHO.

[CreekDog]

24. Change the screen name

It doesnt fit.

[SoapBox]

28. "12. I will get behind cyclists when they begin adhering to current traffic laws."

+ 100!

[Fumesucker]

36. If you drive for a living then you see far more cars violating the laws

But they just don't register with you because it's so common.

I'll also point out that the vast majority of the cyclists you are complaining about are licensed drivers, particularly if they are well off enough to belong to a cycling club. Poor people who use a bike for transportation rather than sport don't belong to clubs and don't ride in packs.

[AngryOldDem]

45. +10,000

Can't agree more.

They are using the road just like drivers are. All laws should apply to them as well.

I'm sick of seeing them running red lights, weaving in and out of traffic, and otherwise making themselves traffic hazards.

I don't have problem with cyclists -- I DO have a problem with SOME cyclists' arrogance and sense of entitlement when it comes to traffic laws.

[onehandle]

16. 'I bet most Republicans in the state don’t even realize what a book is, much less a bar of soap.' nt

[Sunlei]

25. Cars are very expensive to own. It's probably a good idea for cities to plan for more bicyclists.

Around here there is no public transportation. Lot of people can't afford a car. See them all the time bike, walk to the closest corner store for groceries.

Some of them use their powered wheel chairs, struggle with a walker or a cane to store.

one guy has a go cart, he zips past to store early in the am sunday so to avoid the police ticket

[Nika]

27. Minnesota is not the most bicycle friendly state in that part of the country

but hopefully they do wind up improving things for bicycleist safety as this is sorely needed.

[bvar22]

30. I lived in the Twin Cities for 7 years,

....and found it to be one of the most bike friendly major cities I've ever had the pleasure to ride a bicycle in, with a large and healthy bicycle community.
It is difficult finding a free spot in the public bicycle racks downtown.





It is possible to ride from south of St Paul to well north of Minneapolis on dedicated Bike paths and Commuter Bike Ways without having to share the road with an automobile.



On and Off Ramps for merging traffic in crowded areas


The Twin Cities has several hundred miles of dedicated, well maintained BikeWays,
much of it cleared during the Winter.

Emergency Call Boxes!


Some divided sections for One WEay traffic.

With the addition of studded tires, I rode through several Minnesota Winters.


The studs were my personal preference because I like to get off the beaten path,
and even ride out onto the frozen lakes.
Some bike commuters ride through the Minnesota Winters on regular street tires,
but they stick to the cleared paths.

I encourage everyone who likes to ride to visit the Twin Cities,
and Bring Your Bike.
You don't want to miss this.

[Nika]

31. Great post, thanks

I live in Eugene, Oregon which is ultra bicycle friendly. I worked as a mechanic many years and used to race and still tour on bicycles.

Great pictures, thanks.

[hibbing]

32. Nice

Hi,
Those trails look amazing. I biked all winter here in the middle of the country except on days where there was snow and ice, I have to take some residentials to get to the path to work. I haven't tried the studded tires yet. And to the other posters, there are idiot bikers, just like there are idiot drivers.

Peace

[bvar22]

34. The studs are fun on glazed ice,

but you pay a price on pavement.
They have a lot of rolling resistance.
You will think you have a brake dragging,
but, for me, the security when hitting a patch of glazed ice was worth it,
and riding out on a frozen lake is sublime.
Just be sure to remember that there are no studs on your shoes,
or you could wind up on Dumbest Stuff on Wheels.

I have since moved to rural Central Arkansas,
and bought a Mountain Bike,
but its not the same.
There are too many Bad Dogs on these rural dirt roads.
They make the ride unpleasant,
so I don't do it much anymore.

[SummerSnow]

29. This is huge...

Did you know there is a anti cyclist website.

www.anticyclist.com


Interesting.

[tarheelsunc]

33. Cyclists want their bike to be considered a "vehicle" when it is convenient...

but otherwise, they expect special treatment.

I have no problem with cyclists on the road, IF they actually obey the rules of the road. I couldn't even begin to count the number of times I have seen them crossing streets without stopping and looking, pull up along side cars at a red light so they don't have to wait to make their right turn, and riding at night without lights or reflectors. I see so many novices riding bikes who swerve back and forth due to their inexperience and endanger themselves and everyone else. I see so many cyclists going from road to sidewalk and back to the road, just trying to find the fastest way for them even though bikes are forbidden from sidewalks in most places.

If states and cities want to build more bike lanes, that's great. Hopefully it will keep bikes in a place where cyclists, drivers, passengers, and pedestrians are all safe. But allowing bikes on the shoulders of roads sounds dangerous and most bike safety sites advise against that.

[Fumesucker]

35. The great majority of the people you are complaining about are also licensed drivers

It's interesting how people's attention is so selective, I can see people in cars breaking the rules of the road every time I drive or ride but people are so used to seeing cars do those things that the violations just don't register. It's the much more rare cyclist who gets the attention because the cyclist and their violation is much less "normal".

[telclaven]

47. I'm pretty sure I'd comment on a car hoping on the sidewalk to dodge traffic

Generally only see that in movies with Jackie Chan.

I like biking to work, but I also like driving without the utter fear of killing someone. I remember slamming the brakes and having my gf smack into the dash, having to stop in the middle of an intersection because a cyclist blew through his stop sign.

Makes it real hard to want to stop after the 4th or 5th time.

[Fumesucker]

48. I see cars run stop signs on a regular basis

I'm not even on the road that much any more and I can go five miles and see a bunch of cars violating the rules of the road, speeding for instance is ubiquitous, practically everyone does it at least a little.

Where I live there are virtually no pedestrians and not many bikes for the most part, most of the small number of bikes ride on what few sidewalks we have because drivers simply aren't used to seeing bikes and riding in the major roads (the only ones that have sidewalks) is just too hazardous.

What it boils down to is the more bikes there are on the road the safer bicycling becomes because drivers are more used to looking out for bikes.

I feel the same way about inattentive drivers talking or texting on cell phones as you do about bikes, it makes it real hard to want to avoid them after the 40th or 50th time.

[JCMach1]

37. One thing Florida is doing right is building hundreds of miles of dedicated

rail trails...

However, they don't help the cyclists stuck in the bike lanes on highways...

[happyslug]

41. Some long time cyclist OPPOSE bikes lanes

http://www.johnforester.com/Articles/facilities.htm

http://www.johnforester.com/index.html

John Forester, M.S., P.E.
Cycling Transportation Engineer
Consulting Engineer, Expert Witness & Educator in
Effective Cycling, Bicycles, Highways & Bikeways, Traffic Laws
7585 Church St., Lemon Grove, CA 91945-2306
619-644-5481, forester @ johnforester.com

Fight for Your Right to Cycle Properly!

The right of cyclists to cycle properly and safely is disappearing. If you don't fight to preserve it, it will disappear.

Since 1944, American society has disapproved of lawful, competent cycling. It was then that bicycles were removed from the class of vehicles and became "devices" whose riders became subject to three discriminatory laws prohibiting cyclists from exercising the full rights of drivers of vehicles. These laws prohibited cycling away from the edge of the roadway, from riding outside of bike lanes, or for using the roadway at all if a path usable by bicycles was nearby. The bikeway system was devised by motorists to provide the physical enforcement of these laws that, motorists think, make bicycling safe by keeping "their" roads clear of bicycles. The environmentalists were suckered into this bogus safety argument and now demand bikeways to make bicycle transportation safe and popular. With the government spending more and more money on bikeway programs, lawful and competent cyclists are being more and more limited to operating on bikeways that are unsuitable for lawful and competent cycling. As long as bikeways are tied to the three discriminatory laws, bikeway promotion is carrying out the motorists' intent of discriminating against cyclists for their own convenience.

Most of the rest of this website explains the advantages of lawful, competent cycling and the engineering and safety defects inherent in doing anything else. That is all support for what must be done now, fighting for repeal of the three discriminatory anti-cyclist traffic laws. Vehicular cyclists and bikeway cyclists must join forces to reform the national policy for bicycle transportation so that it serves cyclists rather than serving the convenience of motorists.

The policy statement for this effort is linked here.
Distribute this statement.
Endorse this policy.
Vote for politicians who legislate for good cycling.
Vote against politicians who use bikeways to serve motorist convenience.

Repealing the Anti-Cyclist Restrictive Laws

The rights and duties of drivers of vehicles enable traffic to flow safely and efficiently. But motorists, for their own convenience, denied cyclists important rights, thus making cyclists second-class road users, trespassers subject to discrimination by police and harassment by motorists, and unable to take advantage of the safety and efficiency of obeying the standard traffic rules. Repealing the restrictive laws that deny cyclists the full rights of drivers of vehicles is the most important task for those cyclists who recognize the value of obeying the rules of the road for drivers of vehicles. Because these rules violate both traffic-engineering and legal principles there are reasonable arguments for repealing them. Repeal discussion



Effective Cycling is Safer, Faster, and More Fun!

When you do it right, cycling is enjoyable. The enjoyment of cycling is the most important reason for doing it. For some people, it is economical transportation, or a way to exercise for health, or competitive racing, or provides the means of entering areas from which motor traffic is excluded, or transportation that doesn't use petroleum, but, in today's U.S.A., if you don't enjoy cycling you won't long continue doing it. Like any other activity, if you do it wrong you will find it unpleasant and unsatisfactory. The important thing is to cycle properly so that you do enjoy it.

How many ways are there to enjoy cycling? Well, there is motoring out into the country to find a deserted road or a rail-trail, so you can cycle without, so you think, any worries at all. That seems to be the most prevalent hope about cycling. If you stay in town, most people hope for a bikeway to keep you away from traffic, to make cycling safe, again so you can cycle with few worries. The supposed lack of safe places to ride is the most frequent reason people give for not cycling, and, therefore, for not getting the enjoyment that cycling would give them. Does that make sense? To tell the truth, it does not make sense, not when you know the facts and feel the enjoyment of cycling properly. When you cycle properly in traffic, you find the traffic no more annoying than if you were motoring; indeed, if congestion is bad, you are less delayed when cycling than when motoring.

There are many skills associated with cycling, some having to do with the bicycle itself, others with the match between you and your bicycle, others explaining how to ride with least fatigue, others with how to handle the environmental conditions of heat and cold, rain, darkness, winds, and hills. Several books provide instruction in these skills, although I think that the most comprehensive is my Effective Cycling (The MIT Press).

However, most people are most concerned about what they consider to be the dangers of motor traffic. Staying away from traffic is how they describe safe cycling, and if you cannot stay away from it you have to fight it, which makes cycling worrisome and dangerous, so they say. Fighting with cars would be utterly foolish, but that's not what you do. Instead of fighting with cars, you cooperate with other drivers, so that you all get home safely. Participating in, cooperating with the traffic system, obeying the same rules of the road as other drivers, acknowledging their rights while claiming your own, that's the key to safe and confident cycling in traffic. Vehicular cycling, so named because you are acting as the driver of a vehicle, just as the traffic laws require, is faster and more enjoyable, so that the plain joy of cycling overrides the annoyance of even heavy traffic.

Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles.

That is the guiding principle that cyclists should recognize and government and society should obey. But government does its best to prevent cyclists from recognizing this principle. Motorists fear that competent cyclists would delay them.

[Skittles]

43. I live in a very pro-bicycle town

there are bike route symbols on the street signs

[Franker65]

44. Society is built for the autmobile

Parking in a cycling lane defeats its purpose. Cycling can only be a good thing for cities - takes cars off the road, eliminates pollution and makes for good exercise for people. In Europe, there is a huge contrast - look at Dublin - cycle lanes are shared with buses. In Holland, its perfect though. Paradise. And life is much better as a result.

[yellowcanine]

50. 'He called a proposal to ban motor vehicle parking in bike lanes “ridiculous”'

This isn't banned already in Minnesota? Parking on traffic lanes is banned. Why would bike lanes be different?

[azurnoir]

52. sorry locking

not LBN and local story