Bikes on sidewalks?
May. 8th, 2006 09:27 pmWith the weather turning nicer I have been doing more running. Most of my normal running routes take me through Davis Square. I feel like there are a lot more bikes on the sidewalks in Davis Square than there were last year (my only other year in Somerville to compare it to).
Just a reminder:
According to Somerville Traffic Regulations,
In addition, Pedestrians shall have the right-of-way over bicycles on all sidewalks and in all crosswalks. The operator of a bicycle shall yield to pedestrians in all traffic situations. (all of this is on page 53 of that .pdf)
That means that if you are riding on your bike, I am coming in the opposite direction, and there are a few people walking between us, I get to go around them without having to yield to you and your bike. I have almost been run into several times, and only avoided it because *I* backed down.
Just a reminder:
According to Somerville Traffic Regulations,
Non-motorized transportation conveyances are prohibited from operating on sidewalks and in parks in certain districts as hereinafter defined. Persons operating non-motorized transportation conveyances must dismount said conveyances and walk within these districts.
(a) Davis Square – On Holland Street, from Irving Street to College Avenue; On Elm Street, from College Avenue to Windom Street; on Highland Avenue, from Cutter Avenue to College Avenue; and on College Avenue from Highland Avenue to Morrison Avenue; and on all intersecting ways within those limits a distance of fifty feet from the above named streets.
In addition, Pedestrians shall have the right-of-way over bicycles on all sidewalks and in all crosswalks. The operator of a bicycle shall yield to pedestrians in all traffic situations. (all of this is on page 53 of that .pdf)
That means that if you are riding on your bike, I am coming in the opposite direction, and there are a few people walking between us, I get to go around them without having to yield to you and your bike. I have almost been run into several times, and only avoided it because *I* backed down.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-09 06:23 am (UTC)Say a bicycle rider is riding the wrong way up Orchard, approaching the Dover St. intersection. There's a driver, stopped at the stop sign on Dover, getting ready to turn left on Orchard. The driver looks to the right to see if they have the ability to turn left onto Orchard. The driver makes the left turn after seeing that no car is coming down Orchard (the correct direction) from their right. If the cyclist tries to proceed across Dover, this could be a problem.
This driver is operating lawfully and predictably, but the cyclist is not. Right of way belongs to the driver unless the cyclist dismounts that bike and crosses Dover St. on foot.
Here's a blurb on wrong-way cycling in general (not just on a one-way street) from a document on the Massachusetts Bicycle Coalition website: http://massbike.org/info1/stats.htm
"Wrong-Way Cycling Cycling against traffic is one of the most dangerous cycling behaviors. The obvious danger of a head-on collision with a lawful cyclist or motorist is only one of several types of crashes caused by wrong-way cycling. A motorist pulling out from a stop sign, commercial driveway, or turning right at a stop sign or traffic signal (including right turn on red) looks in the direction of traffic, not in the direction of the wrong-way cyclist, and then often has no time to avoid a collision. Cyclists riding against traffic accounted for nearly 1/3 of car-bike collisions in the Hunter et al. 1996 study and ¼ in the Boston area study (Plotkin and Komornick 1984)."
Just don't risk it.
no subject
Date: 2006-05-09 02:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-09 05:07 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-05-09 05:28 pm (UTC)Either way, unless it's changed it is still against the law. I would be absolutely devastated if I hit someone on a bike with my car, regardless of whose fault it was. If everyone (cars & bikes both) actually obeyed traffic laws, there would be a heck of a lot less chance of this.