bicycle courtesy and the new bike hiway

[tulsarufflebutt]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

The problem with the "go to the streets" concept is that Riverside is a very busy, very fast, and winding commuter road.  There is not room for bikers on the side of the road, and traffic is too heavy to allow a 20mph biker to shut down a lane during much of the day.  It would be (is not) safe for the biker and causes traffic problems (which is not safe for the drivers).

Sic him, C-Dog!

[ARGUS]

Welcome new member Dax.
the "trail" is for all. Simple signage in re: to simple trail etiquette may not be a bad idea. Perhaps some "road markings" on the surface of the trail; thus minimizing sign poles.
Any city park,and one as popular as The River Parks is where several different "types" of citizens are exposed to each other and "rules of the Trail" are possibly not known to infrequent users.
I think it would be easy to conclude that some just leave their common sense (and courtesy) at home and regard the whole park as owned by them alone; which we all know is not the case.
All in all River Parks is a great asset to Tulsa.
Its not what has Tulsa done for you; but what have you done for Tulsa?
Go be nice to your fellow park goer and enjoy the asset.

[Gaspar]

quote:Originally posted by waterboy

Ed, could you remind your fellow bikers that runners are at risk versus bikers since we have no way of knowing you're coming up from behind unless you speak, ring a chime or grunt?  These new wide asphalt mini freeways were originally called "running paths" and the signs for "yield to pedestrians" still are in place.

I'm not talking about the pink balloon tired bikes that generally move slowly and are driven by people we know are unaware of rules of the road. I'm talking the helmeted, sunglassed, spandex dressed speedsters that know better but are too focussed to let me know they're approaching. Several times this week I've been about to move to one side or the other to avoid a dog, a child or just exit and been startled by a 20mph tough guy who can't think 5 feet in front of himself. My count is about 2 riders out of 10 announce themselves.

And Mr. K if you're reading this...please leave the west side paths alone. Please. Unless you add a crushed rock side path to them. They are comforting in their small town feel.

When I was a kid, riding your bike on a sidewalk or running path was illegal.  When I was a little older they made the trail on riverside paved for bikes and gravel for runners.  Now they have to share the space.  

That's kind of like cars and bikes sharing the road.  The slower or smaller vehicle is always at danger.  

My solution. . . since it's not possible for runners to move at the same speed as cyclists, they should simply increase their mass to make up for the difference.  

Bikers will slow down and become more cautious if the road is filled with a bunch of huge joggers.

Or if exercise is the goal for these runners, they could simply twirl nunchucks or a baton while running.  This too will slow the careless cyclist.

Just some thoughts.

[nathanm]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder


The entire problem can be solved by using common trail courtesy.  "On the left" is standard language and is required on many organized events.  Walker/runners also need to stay to the right and be alert - they have the right of way but SHARE the path.  Dog walkers need to realize the harm a dog can cause to all others and restrain the animal accordingly (generally I make my dog SIT when a group of runners/bikers passes by.  It puts them at ease, keeps my dog safe, and reinforces my authoritay' over my animal).

If we can't share a 10' wide trail, there is little hope.

What CF said. Walkers/runners seem to have a much harder time sharing the trail than bikers. Bikers usually keep right and usually respond to "on your left."

Walkers like to take up 3/4ths of the trail and often act put out if they have to allow some space for someone to pass. Worse, though, are the people who treat the path like their living room, and just wander all over it whereever they like. Or the fellow who was walking left the other day. Almost everybody grasps the concept of keeping to the right side of the trail, so other than the one idiot, it's a problem of hogging the trail, not anything else.

I pretty regularly find that I have to hit the grass if I want to get by a couple of people walking beside each other, even after a good loud "on your left." I should be better about it, though. If it's just one or two folks walking or running along the right side of the trail who aren't wandering all over the thing, I'll often forgo the announcement of my presence.

[PonderInc]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

I never see anyone in Tulsa ever carry anything with them while they bike.

I used my bike for transportation instead of a car for about 10 years in Tulsa.  My co-workers used to greet me with: "Saw you on your bike today." Or: "Sorry I almost ran over you this morning....I didn't know it was you!"  (As if they wouldn't want to kill a cyclist they actually knew!)

For six months I was in between cars, and just didn't bother buying a new car b/c I could bike everywhere.  (Lived close to downtown, work, the gym, the river, restaurants on Cherry St and Brookside, and the grocery store, etc.)

I had a road bike without panniers or a basket, so I used a backpack to carry my stuff.  On occasion, I'd buy more groceries than would fit in my backpack.  Somewhere there's a  picture of me with plastic grocery sacks tied to the outside of my backpack, and cereal boxes and other items stuffed down my jacket!  If I'd crashed, there would have been salsa all over the road!

[Ed W]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

The problem with the "go to the streets" concept is that Riverside is a very busy, very fast, and winding commuter road.  There is not room for bikers on the side of the road, and traffic is too heavy to allow a 20mph biker to shut down a lane during much of the day.  It would be (is not) safe for the biker and causes traffic problems (which is not safe for the drivers).

I think we've had this discussion before, but I'm well into middle age and I tend to repeat myself.  This causes my children to roll their eyes a lot.  I kinda enjoy that.

Pick any arterial street in Tulsa, and you'll find that the lanes are seldom more than 12 feet wide.  The minimum width necessary to safely share side-by-side with a motor vehicle is 14 feet.  Very few lanes are that wide.  So it would be possible to say that any arterial is too narrow for a bicyclist in heavy traffic.

Of course, I'd never say that.

I know, I know, it's a difficult concept to embrace but when a cyclist takes the lane by riding assertively, he enhances his safety.  Assertively, in this case, means riding in the right hand tire track with 1/3 of the lane to his right and 2/3 to the left.  Overtaking traffic will slow and go around him when it's safe to do so.  

But what about the 'considerate' cyclist who rides all the way over on the right, hugging the fog line in order to let motorists pass more easily?  Overtaking traffic hardly slows down and often passes within inches of his elbow.  He's convinced that all motorists are out to kill him.

Heavy traffic offers a perverse benefit to an assertive cyclist.  By taking the lane he gains some control of the traffic as it flows around him.  His lane position forces motorists to wait until it's safe to pass, and heavy traffic causes them to slow more readily.  When there are fewer motor vehicles on the road, speeds remain higher and that is a greater danger to a cyclist.

Don't misunderstand me.  There's a lot of give and take on the roads and an experienced cyclist knows this.  But safety always trumps convenience for any of us regardless of our mode of travel.  

Brian and I will probably have something on trail etiquette over on the TAOBIKE blog before long, and I may do something on CycleDog also.  I've been kicking around an idea - Things Motorists Should Know About Cyclists: Or why the hell to they do that? - because there are so many misconceptions and misunderstandings about safe bicycling operation.  It's a long list.

[PonderInc]

In some cities where there are wide pedestrian/bike paths, they just paint a line down the middle and designate one side for bikes only.  Perhaps the paint contractor will do this after the whole trail is finished?

Now, if there were just a way to keep those dogs on the "expanding" leashes reined in...

[dax]

Argus appears to have wisdom.  He clearly uses the trail a lot and therefore can wax elaborate on the scenario there.  It would serve his audience well if he could translate his musings in a way that we plebeians can understand what in the daylights he is trying to convey.  []

[cannon_fodder]

Ed, I understand what you are saying.  IF one were to ride in traffic on Riverside (or any arterial road) taking up a lane would be the only way to do it.  Just like heavy equipment in Tulsa - any truck larger than a standard carriage has to drive down the center or some idiot will try to pass in the 5' left free.  I understand that.

And I respect cyclists who understand the rules.  While I (clearly and redundantly) prefer bikes to find alternative routes (side streets, bike paths, sidewalks - which are usually otherwise unused) cyclists that are out for transportation and haul-donkey are OK.  There are several around midtown, though the 3 that I know use Pittsburgh to go North South and not arterial roads to go E/W most of the time.

One thing I will say on the road users, you have the right to be treated like a car.  You can occupy a lane and I will yield to your right.  BUT, then you have to follow other traffic laws.  A UTulsa Law Librarian has been riding his bike down Harvard lately and elects bike/car status as he sees fit.  Yesterday he stopped in the center of a lane at a red light, when traffic cleared - he just went through the red.  Yet when traffic approached he held fast in the middle of his lane - ONE OR THE OTHER!  Argh.

Oh, and on a side note. When Paul is riding his bike on the road he consistently makes uturns, lane changes without signally, etc.  I'd love to see him get a ticket like a car.

/circular discussion, sorry

[tulsarufflebutt]

quote:Originally posted by cannon_fodder

Oh, and on a side note. When Paul is riding his bike on the road he consistently makes uturns, lane changes without signally, etc.  I'd love to see him get a ticket like a car.

He has.  Check with Tulsa Municipal.

[patric]

The bicycle enthusiasts among us are probably familiar with the "Critical Mass" ride to promote alternatives to automobile-choked streets, with celebrations from California to New York.

The one in New York was marred when police claimed that one bicyclist was alleged to have deliberately driven his bicycle into a police officer.  The man was subsequently charged with  blocking traffic, resisting arrest, disorderly conduct, and assault.  Case closed.

Funny thing about public celebrations is that there are lots of people taking pictures, and this video was recently posted to YouTube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUkiyBVytRQ
http://news.cnet.com/8301-1023_3-10001149-93.html

[guido911]

I have an etiquette question. If I am driving my car on a two-lane road marked at 45 mph and I come up behind a cyclist riding their bike swerving side to center line in my lane (making no effort to get to one side and I cannot pass given on-coming traffic) riding at 10 mph, what am I supposed to do after the cyclist flips me off?

[Ed W]

quote:Originally posted by guido911

I have an etiquette question. If I am driving my car on a two-lane road marked at 45 mph and I come up behind a cyclist riding their bike swerving side to center line in my lane (making no effort to get to one side and I cannot pass given on-coming traffic) riding at 10 mph, what am I supposed to do after the cyclist flips me off?

Take the Slawson Cut-Off.

[Hoss]

quote:Originally posted by Ed W

quote:Originally posted by guido911

I have an etiquette question. If I am driving my car on a two-lane road marked at 45 mph and I come up behind a cyclist riding their bike swerving side to center line in my lane (making no effort to get to one side and I cannot pass given on-coming traffic) riding at 10 mph, what am I supposed to do after the cyclist flips me off?

Take the Slawson Cut-Off.

But don't cut off your Slawson....Hiiii-yo!

[Ed W]

OK, here's a serious answer to Guido's question.  The law says a cyclist must ride as far to the right as is safe.  That is left to the cyclist's judgment, not the motorist following him.  Sometimes we move to the left or swerve around patches of glass, cracks, or other road imperfections that motorists simply cannot see.  It's sensible for a cyclist to check for overtaking traffic before moving laterally in the lane, but it's not a requirement.

It is a requirement to overtake safely, regardless of the types of vehicles involved.  Motorists are required to pass with a minimum clearance of 3 feet when overtaking a cyclist.  BTW, don't sound your horn.  Cars are plenty noisy (except for those pesky hybrids!) and sometimes we can even smell them coming.  No joke.

Finally, if a cyclist is weaving uncontrollably, he may be intoxicated or under the influence of a controlled substance.  Cyclists are subject to the same drunk driving laws as motorists.  Use your cell phone to call 911.  I can tell you from a long ago experience that large quantities of vodka do not mix well with cycling, what with the bladder-compressing saddle position and the tendency of my stomach to expel aforementioned vodka.  At least I wasn't on the road.  But it's an experience I will not repeat.