If anyone saw anything please report it

[CptnRn]

Originally Posted by atxcio

I always thought it was common knowledge that riding on the sidewalk was more dangerous than riding in the street... ? At least, that was what I was always told. Cars aren't expecting you crossing driveways, business entrances/exits, etc. And how many people stop to check for moving vehicles 8 feet from the end of their driveway? Cause that is about where the sidewalk is...

It's similar to how many of those cyclists died on 360: It doesn't happen at intersections, but at the road access/exit points. Some studies say it you are up to twice as likely to get into an accident riding on the sidewalk:

Bicycle Safety: How to Not Get Hit by Cars

Certainly you are many,many times more likely to get into a pedestrian-cyclist accident on a sidewalk. Auto-cyclist accidents, maybe twice as likely? It's difficult to say. Sidewalk riding is probably OK for the kids in a quiet, low-traffic neighborhood street.. but elsewhere, you may be putting yourself at greater risk than you realize.

I did not see anything on his website substantiating the statement "Some studies say it you are up to twice as likely to get into an accident riding on the sidewalk". I have never heard of a bicyclist being killed by a car while on the sidewalk. Crossing the street maybe, but that is a result of not looking both ways before proceeding and happens in the street.

Ok I agree he has repeats some good advice that I have seen on other bicycle safety websites. But I have a hard time accepting his recommendations that you ignore what the law requires. I also recognize that he says he is recommending what he feels is safe regardless of the law, just keep in mind that it may also be illegal. I agree with you also that there is nothing good about road rage, but bicyclists absolutely have to recognize that certain practices like failing to obey the laws results in road rage and disrespect for bicyclists. If we want other motorists to respect us in the roadway we need to obey the same laws everyone else does.

Please note that every collision situation he describes is a result of riding in the street. All can be avoided by riding on the sidewalk and pausing to make sure it is safe to cross at each intersection before before doing so, if there are any automobiles in the vicinity.

No one disagrees that the safest situation for bicycles is to be on a route that is separated from the roadway. A separate bike and pedestrian path is always safer. Where none of those exist, riding on a sidewalk is the next best alternative. It is always recommended that children ride on the sidewalk rather then in the street. Why? Because it is safer!

[love roses]

Originally Posted by twange

The issue here is a hit and run. Period. It's wrong and the driver of that cab should be prosecuted. Blaming the victim's choices (riding a bike in the street at night) is like blaming a rape victim for dressing sexy and acting flirtatious. It's tacky.

I live close to the city and enjoy late night rides. I like to ride my bike instead of driving 2 miles and finding a parking spot. That's kind of the point to living close to a city, don't you think? And since most of the busses stop running after midnight, that rules out public transportation. I wear lights and follow traffic laws. I have a right to enjoy Austin any time I want without being run over and left to die unattended.

I understand many people's frustration with rogue bikers. It frustrates me when they ride with a moral superiority and ignore traffic laws. That's why Austin needs(and is hopefully getting) better, safer bike infrastructure in the CBD and surrounding areas. It will encourage more people to use bikes as transportation which will improve the collaboration between autos and bikes. It's just a great way to get around.

I agree. My bike and I were never better friends than when I lived in Denver. I never found the bike lanes to be a nuisance when I was in my car and because of the great lanes, never had a problem riding on the street. I can't wait until Austin gets on that bandwagon, especially since there are so many bike riders around there. Also, I've seen numerous riders out this direction so i think it would also be fantastic for the surrounding communities to adopt bike lanes as well. Rural roads would probably be unnecessary to do, but even out on those I see lots of riders.

[woodinvilleguy]

Originally Posted by CptnRn

No one disagrees that the safest situation for bicycles is to be on a route that is separated from the roadway. A separate bike and pedestrian path is always safer. Where none of those exist, riding on a sidewalk is the next best alternative. It is always recommended that children ride on the sidewalk rather then in the street. Why? Because it is safer!

And your facts are? I have seen many people actually disagree with seperated paths. Clearly you are not going to listen to anyone else about riding on the sidewalk.

As far as I see it:
CptnRn suggests you ride on the sidewalk.

ACA Streetsmarts suggest otherwise.

IMHO; I will side with ACA. Everyone else can make up their own mind after doing some basic research. Can we end the constant fighting now?

[twange]

Originally Posted by love roses

I agree. My bike and I were never better friends than when I lived in Denver. I never found the bike lanes to be a nuisance when I was in my car and because of the great lanes, never had a problem riding on the street. I can't wait until Austin gets on that bandwagon, especially since there are so many bike riders around there. Also, I've seen numerous riders out this direction so i think it would also be fantastic for the surrounding communities to adopt bike lanes as well. Rural roads would probably be unnecessary to do, but even out on those I see lots of riders.

You know, I'm in Ohio right now (Cleveland suburbs) attending to some family matters and I'm astounded by the amount of new bike lanes that have been added since I left in 2007. Now I won't sit here and declare the Cleveland area a bike commuters paradise, but the suburbs here seem to be very on-the-ball about this. In fact, there are many miles of new separated, paved bike paths (sort of like that new little strip by Town Lake -the Lance Armstrong bike path). It kinda surprises me that a struggling, depressed area like Cleveland seems to be ahead of Austin in this way. At least as far as suburbs go...the cities are not comparable at this point.

[love roses]

Originally Posted by woodinvilleguy

And your facts are? I have seen many people actually disagree with seperated paths. Clearly you are not going to listen to anyone else about riding on the sidewalk.

As far as I see it:
CptnRn suggests you ride on the sidewalk.

ACA Streetsmarts suggest otherwise.

IMHO; I will side with ACA. Everyone else can make up their own mind after doing some basic research. Can we end the constant fighting now?

I'm going to refer back to Denver, since it's my only point of reference for an excellent biking city, but the trails in Denver were extra wide for pedestrians, rollerbladers and bikers. Cherry Creek portion of the trail is paved like a sidewalk and is anything but dangerous. The rule of thumb there when you are riding the extra wide paths, paved or not, when you come up behind someone you say "On your left" or "on your right" so that they know someone is coming up behind them and which way they should move over if they are in the center of the path. If you forget to say this, every once in a while someone will surely tell you "Hey, you're supposed to say On your right or left". I had it said to me a number of times until I learned better

[love roses]

Hutto may be backwoods to some people but I think they are actually listening to us citizens and working on improving our existing paths. I'm also glad that Round Rock, Cedar Park and Taylor are on board with a large connecting series of trails. This is very like the ones in the Denver/Boulder area and one reason that I think these suburbs are light years ahead of Austin. Now, if they would just improve the sidewalks we'll be set.

[TexasHorseLady]

One of the things that occurred to me today as I was going about my day, after reading this discussion. For those bikers who prefer to ride on the sidewalk, given the size of most sidewalks which are not designed to be hike and bike paths, who do you, the biker, think should have the right of way on standard urban sidewalks, if you're going to ride on them? Clearly, on vehicular roads, you object to the arrogance of those in cars who feel they have the right of way over the smaller, more vulnerable bicycle. Do you carry this over to sidewalks and grant right of way to pedestrians?

And, going way back to the original post, the real issue is, indeed, hit and run, and there's no excuse for that at all, no matter who was driving or riding what.

[love roses]

On standard sidewalks, I make way for walkers. Maybe I'll go into the road for just a miinute and then back on, or if there is enough land off of the sidewalk, I'll go there too.

[twange]

Originally Posted by TexasHorseLady

One of the things that occurred to me today as I was going about my day, after reading this discussion. For those bikers who prefer to ride on the sidewalk, given the size of most sidewalks which are not designed to be hike and bike paths, who do you, the biker, think should have the right of way on standard urban sidewalks, if you're going to ride on them? Clearly, on vehicular roads, you object to the arrogance of those in cars who feel they have the right of way over the smaller, more vulnerable bicycle. Do you carry this over to sidewalks and grant right of way to pedestrians?.

Pedestrians for sure. Whatever is the slowest form of transportation gets right of way. The only time I vary from that is when I'm hiking and I encounter horses - then horses get right of way!