Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes, you are. You're describing "cyclists" as if they're one group with interests and habits in common.
I guess I'm not understanding how creating subsets of riders changes our basic expectation that all bikers follow the rules of the road. The reasons one chooses to ride and/or break said rules seem irrelevant to me, but I may be missing your point.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nei
New York State, riding two next to each other is legal
may ride two abreast on roadways, but they must ride single file when being overtaken by other vehicles. Bicyclists may not travel more than two abreast on a shoulder, bicycle lane or shared-use pathway intended for bicycle use even if there is sufficient space. However, they must be in single files when passing vehicles, pedestrians or other bicyclists[/i]
If all cyclists followed these rules we probably wouldn't be having this discussion. Here in Colorado it's not uncommon to come up on a group of 8-12 riders consuming an entire lane. Which I have no problem with when it's a 30mph road with no bike lane, but when it's on a 50-60mph highway it can be a real hazard trying to pass them.
In all fairness I know what it's like to draft in a big group. For me it's almost zen-like and I become very focused, so much so that you don't always notice when you're holding up traffic.
Last edited by Good Red Road; 08-12-2016 at 03:32 PM..
You'd have a hard time finding someone who hadn't sped, failed to fully stop at a stop sign, crept across a limit line, blasted through a yellow, failed to yield to pedestrians, failed to give 3' to cyclists, or broken some law at some time. Just because it's not noticed or caught doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
My previous posts were referring to a blatant and deliberate disregard for road rules commonly made by cyclists, not the unintentional forced errors that we all make everyday. Sorry if I my writing wasn't clear, but I thought that was intuitively obvious.
I guess I'm not understanding how creating subsets of riders changes our basic expectation that all bikers follow the rules of the road. The reasons one chooses to ride and/or break said rules seem irrelevant to me, but I may be missing your point.
Umm, it doesn't; I never said that. My point was that you were grouping cyclists as one type as if they have the same riding styles or interests.
Cyclists who advocate bike lanes tend to be those who cycle for transportation or the more causal recreation cyclists; not the bike club "roadies".
Umm, it doesn't; I never said that. My point was that you were grouping cyclists as one type as if they have the same riding styles or interests.
Cyclists who advocate bike lanes tend to be those who cycle for transportation or the more causal recreation cyclists; not the bike club "roadies".
Fair enough.
But whether it's a commuter biker ignoring a designated bike lane, or a bike club collectively being road hogs, it all creates a negative perception with the general public. My view is simply to discourage bad riding habits if we want to further the cause of attaining more bike lanes and/or safer wider shoulders.
Ignoring how hyperbolic that hypothetical is, no, I mean like how, when I'm riding legally and respectfully of the situation, I have to move in to a 12' or 14' traffic lane because the 3' bike lane, assuming it exists at all, isn't wide enough for me to pass another rider.
First of all, the situation I've described is not hypothetical. It's what I live with almost daily. I would have no issue if they were just using the car lane for passing. That's reasonable. But that's not what going on near me. What's going on is groups of cyclist decked out like the Tour de France CONSISTANTLY riding 2-3 abreast (frequently in a large herd where you have 2-3 bikes times 6 rows) and stopping the flow of traffic in the process. They're not passing anything. They just prefer to ride side by side instead of single file in the bike lane designated for their use. Why does it seem to be so hard for you to grasp why that causes a problem?
I just happen to live off a road that is part of a large loop where all the roads have dedicated bike lanes. Large groups of cyclists ride this loop for training or whatever purpose for hours each day, especially on the weekends. There aren't many other of these loops where I live so you get a large concentration of cyclists on 2 lane roads with no intention of following the rules. Nothing good is going to come of this and already there have been situations where cyclists and motorists are flinging insults at each other.
My previous posts were referring to a blatant and deliberate disregard for road rules commonly made by cyclists, not the unintentional forced errors that we all make everyday. Sorry if I my writing wasn't clear, but I thought that was intuitively obvious.
You were painting a broad brush about cyclists following all the rules of the road. In that case, all road users should be held to that standard. Unintentional or not, rules are rules. If cyclists shouldn't run stops, drivers shouldn't run red lights. If cyclists shouldn't go too slow, drivers shouldn't speed. If I don't get a pass as a cyclist, I shouldn't get a pass as a driver.
First of all, the situation I've described is not hypothetical. It's what I live with almost daily. I would have no issue if they were just using the car lane for passing. That's reasonable. But that's not what going on near me. What's going on is groups of cyclist decked out like the Tour de France CONSISTANTLY riding 2-3 abreast (frequently in a large herd where you have 2-3 bikes times 6 rows) and stopping the flow of traffic in the process. They're not passing anything. They just prefer to ride side by side instead of single file in the bike lane designated for their use. Why does it seem to be so hard for you to grasp why that causes a problem?
As to the habits of those particular cyclists, depending on the location, it may or may not be illegal.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UNC4Me
I just happen to live off a road that is part of a large loop where all the roads have dedicated bike lanes. Large groups of cyclists ride this loop for training or whatever purpose for hours each day, especially on the weekends. There aren't many other of these loops where I live so you get a large concentration of cyclists on 2 lane roads with no intention of following the rules. Nothing good is going to come of this and already there have been situations where cyclists and motorists are flinging insults at each other.
This suggests the problem is road design and insufficient capacity.
As to the habits of those particular cyclists, depending on the location, it may or may not be illegal.
Where I live cyclists are permitted to use vehicle lanes provided them doing so doesn't impede the flow of traffic. Clearly their behavior is prohibited. .
Quote:
Originally Posted by dark economist
This suggests the problem is road design and insufficient capacity.
Given that the road was recently redone specifically to add bike lanes, sides walks, turn lanes into neighborhoods and flattened to create better lines of sight, I'm not sure your assumption has much value. The purpose of the project was to create a safer road that provides for all modes of transportation for the neighborhoods off the road. Since it runs through a purely residential area, I'm sure the city was mindful of not encouraging cut through traffic or turning the road into a major thoroughfare and kept it as a 2 lane road. Who could have predicted the cycling groups would appropriate it as their private training loop?
Clearly we're never going to agree. I think people should follow the rules and be mindful of how their behavior effects others. You believe cyclists should be excused for any and all rule breaking.
Where I live cyclists are permitted to use vehicle lanes provided them doing so doesn't impede the flow of traffic. Clearly their behavior is prohibited. .
Given that the road was recently redone specifically to add bike lanes, sides walks, turn lanes into neighborhoods and flattened to create better lines of sight, I'm not sure your assumption has much value. The purpose of the project was to create a safer road that provides for all modes of transportation for the neighborhoods off the road. Since it runs through a purely residential area, I'm sure the city was mindful of not encouraging cut through traffic or turning the road into a major thoroughfare and kept it as a 2 lane road. Who could have predicted the cycling groups would appropriate it as their private training loop?
Clearly we're never going to agree. I think people should follow the rules and be mindful of how their behavior effects others. You believe cyclists should be excused for any and all rule breaking.
Well, of course we're not going to agree if you misrepresent my positions.
If we're going to say that cyclists should be law-abiding at all times, it is only fair that all road users be held to that standard. If drivers should be given leniency--which, as an aside, I think would dangerous given we command multi-ton missiles--then all road users should be treated with the same leniency.
Anyway, my point about the road was that it is, from your posts, very popular with team cyclists. The available infrastructure, then, is insufficient for the demand. It seems like a standard bike lane offers inadequate space. I don't see what's controversial about pointing that out.
Well, of course we're not going to agree if you misrepresent my positions.
If we're going to say that cyclists should be law-abiding at all times, it is only fair that all road users be held to that standard. If drivers should be given leniency--which, as an aside, I think would dangerous given we command multi-ton missiles--then all road users should be treated with the same leniency.
Anyway, my point about the road was that it is, from your posts, very popular with team cyclists. The available infrastructure, then, is insufficient for the demand. It seems like a standard bike lane offers inadequate space. I don't see what's controversial about pointing that out.
Given that the road was unknown to and unused by team cyclists until the bike lanes were added, I don't suppose the city was aware an insufficiency would result or that they should have designed it to accommodate a daily peloton.
And nowhere did I say cyclists should be law abiding at all times or held to some impossible standard. None of us are perfect and make mistakes. But, there's a difference in imperfection and out and out disregard for the law. They impede traffic every time they use the road. That's not an oops that's an "I don't give a sh*t".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I guess I'm not understanding how creating subsets of riders changes our basic expectation that all bikers follow the rules of the road. The reasons one chooses to ride and/or break said rules seem irrelevant to me, but I may be missing your point. 
