6 ms·

Almost every time I encounter cyclists in traffic, they context switch between vehicle and pedestrian at their convenience. If you want to be treated as a vehi

• gamegoblin 11y ago
  I cycle around Seattle quite a bit and my preference is always to ride on the sidewalk. As far as I know, this is legal as long as I yield to pedestrians. I can ride nearly the same speed as on the road, and stop or slow down at my leisure. It's much more enjoyable. I never find pedestrians to be an issue. It's always far faster than walking and less stressful than riding in the street.
  • peterfirefly 11y ago
    Maybe they find you to be an issue? If you really do yield to pedestrians than I suppose they don't but most bicyclists are -- like smokers -- not nearly as considerate as they think they are.
    • gamegoblin 11y ago
      My basic strategy is to wait until at least half of the sidewalk is open before passing any pedestrians. I have no problem coasting at pedestrian speed until I have a passing opportunity. It still beats walking.
      • kelnos 11y ago
        You are one of the few considerate ones. I see cyclists on the sidewalk often, and most will force pedestrians out of the way to pass.
• yitchelle 11y ago
  > They seem far more compatible to ride sidewalks and co-travel with pedestrians. Pedestrians and bike riders are not compatible either. I am a bike commuter as well. I live in West Germany at the moment, but I have also bike commuted to work in Australia. In general, commuting in Germany is a much safer proposition than in Australia. The German drivers seem to be more aware and tolerance to the bike commuters. The bike riding paths are also very well configured and designed, minimising the risk of accidents.
  • thaumasiotes 11y ago
    > Pedestrians and bike riders are not compatible either Maybe you could explain what you're thinking of when you say this? My experience says that pedestrians and bikes are fully compatible; they commonly share sidewalks.
    • mcantelon 11y ago
      Bikes can go much faster than pedestrians. People can get seriously hurt when bikes run into them. Bike lanes are what's needed (and exist in many places).
    • danielwarna 11y ago
      I'd claim that cyclists tend behave a lot more like other motorists than like pedestrians The speed difference between a cyclists and a pedestrian is usually bigger than that between a car and a cyclists, at least in urban traffic. Pedestrians can be very unpredictable and they don't tend to signal very clearly what they are about to do, not to mention that a pedestrian can stop or turn around pretty much instantly. The optimal solution is of course to build dedicated bike lanes, but if that's not a option I'd rather ride my bike on the road with other cars, than on a shared path with pedestrians. It's also a matter of attitude, roads are built to allow cars to travel between point A and point B as fast as possible. If cycling is to be seen as a form of transportation they also need to have access to proper infrastructure.
      • thaumasiotes 11y ago
• _pmf_ 11y ago
  > They seem far more compatible to ride sidewalks and co-travel with pedestrians. I agree. Bikes as road vehicles is a dangerous anachronism. Overtaking bikes is the most unpleasant exercise for me as a driver. Although, given the state of roads vs. the state of sidewalks, I understand why they choose the road.
  • stephendedalus 11y ago
    The other reason cyclists choose the road is because sidewalks are frequently filled with turn-ins and turn-outs. So riding on a sidewalk, even if there were no pedestrians, would be an act of putting yourself in exactly the place motorists rush to get to/from most frequently.
• deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
• micheljansen 11y ago
  The thing is, they are neither, really. Bicycles are not comparable to motor vehicles, as they are much slower (50 km/h vs ~15-20 km/h). Bicycles are also not comparable to pedestrians, as they are much faster (5 km/h vs ~15-20 km/h). I think it's a mistake to mix traffic that differs in speed by a factor of 3. As someone who moved from the Netherlands to London, it has taken me years to adjust to absence of real bicycle lanes. They really do seem like the best answer to me.
  • crocowhile 11y ago
    I agree with you in principle but let me make a cheeky comment: Average speed of a motor vehicle in London is 8.98 mph ( http://www.itv.com/news/london/update/2012-11-19/tfl-average-traffic-speeds-are-less-than-20-mph-in-london/ http://www.itv.com/news/london/update/2012-11-19/tfl-average... ) so way lower than average bike commuter speed (~12-15mph)
    • micheljansen 11y ago
      Haha, I'm sure that's true (in fact, it's one of the reasons many prefer cycling), but I'd argue that the average speed matters a lot less than the top speed. Stop and go traffic, where one minute cycles whizz past cars and the next it's the other way around, is probably the worst of both worlds.
  • stephendedalus 11y ago
    I agree. When would you like to exchange your car for a bicycle when the roads are turned back over to pedestrians and cyclists? Road bike or mountain bike?
  • joncrocks 11y ago
    Does that mean we can get 'fast walker' and 'slow walker' lanes as well? :-)
    • micheljansen 11y ago
      Do you walk 3 times as fast as a normal pedestrian? :P
• brandonmenc 11y ago
  > They seem far more compatible to ride sidewalks and co-travel with pedestrians. I live in Tempe, AZ near ASU - one of the "most bike friendly" cities in the US, and I can't tell you how many times I've been nearly killed by a bike at full speed weaving in and out of pedestrian traffic on the sidewalk - where it's actually illegal for them to ride. Bikes do not belong on the sidewalk unless they're moving as slow as a pedestrian, which they never are. They're a hazard. Many years ago I biked daily on 40 mph city streets, so I'd like to think I know what I'm talking about.
  • pascalo 11y ago
    While I totally understand that it must've felt menacing to nearly have been hit by a bicycle, do you _really_ think it would've killed you? I also think that cyclists shouldn't ride at speed on the sidewalk, but even if, cyclists causing pedestrian fatalities is extremely rare. It has happened, but it's statistically insignificant when compared to cars killing pedestrians. There is a big difference between getting hit by 90kg at 30km/h vs 1900kg at 45km/h.
    • brandonmenc 11y ago
      > do you _really_ think it would've killed you? I've almost been knocked into a busy 50 mph street by sidewalk cyclists, so yeah.
    • gknoy 11y ago
      I think it could indeed kill you. It's rare, but certainly can happen: """ From 1996 to 2005, 11 pedestrians across New York City died after being struck by bicyclists.... 2006 to 2013, there were just four pedestrian deaths, according to the city’s Department of Transportation. """ [0] 0: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-09-23/pedestrian-cyclist-crash-deaths-rare-as-collision-suits http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-09-23/pedestrian...
      • pascalo 11y ago
        Very sad. However, you kind of made my point. That amounts to 0.8 pedestrian fatalities a year caused by cyclists, with a population of 8.4 million people.
• buro9 11y ago
  In London this is being answered through speed restrictions. A gradual move to 20mph on all roads is being introduced: http://www.islington.gov.uk/services/parking-roads/street_improvements/Pages/20mph_limit.aspx http://www.islington.gov.uk/services/parking-roads/street_im... Some boroughs have already completed the move (i.e. the link above) and others are following. Traffic in London rarely gets above 20mph anyway, so it barely impacts. As a driver it makes driving more relaxing and hasn't impacted travel times. As a cyclist, it's a joy to not have vehicles racing to overtake in appropriate places.
• hvidgaard 11y ago
  One of the main problems is that the road have not been designed for cyclists at all. In Denmark there is dedicated bike lanes, and cyclists like you describe is for the most part not a problem at all.
• kelnos 11y ago
  They seem far more compatible to ride sidewalks and co-travel with pedestrians. Please, no. The biggest nuisance I experience as a pedestrian are cyclists riding on the sidewalk.
  • tuxdev 11y ago
    I agree they're the biggest nuisance, but.. they're just a nuisance. I'm not fearing for my life from bikes like I do from cars all the time at almost every intersection.
• cheshire137 11y ago
  Yes! I have so much dislike for cyclists because they run red lights, they drive between cars, and they flit about. I can't ever predict what they're going to do because they don't seem bound by the same rules I am bound by in my car.
• jrock08 11y ago
  Taking a lane while riding a bike is the safest thing to do when the road is too narrow because it prevents drivers from trying to "squeeze" by. It's also how people claim they want bikes to act, just act more like a car, unless it slightly annoys me. In which case, move over, ride on the shoulder while people blow by you without slowing down from going 15 over in a 30 mph zone. Lane splitting/filtering at stop lights puts bikers in a safer and more visible position, in front of, instead of between vehicles. When I attempt to queue at lights, the car behind me will often inch up until I'm uncomfortable. If there is a car coming, I often wonder whether they "see" me, or whether I'm about to get caught between two cars having a fender bender, and end up leaving with two broken legs. Sidewalks are not meant for bikes. The offset from the road, and expectation that traffic on them will move slowly leads to drivers pulling into them without actually checking for traffic. On many occasions while jogging I've almost ended up on someones hood, add a bike, and I'd have been across the hood and on the left side of the car before the driver even looked to his right for traffic.