BIKE: Statesman Editorial: Cyclists: Be Careful

[Thorne]

Daniel may be on the right path here (though my vote is that it is almost
never unreasonable for people to walk side by side, as people have been doing
for 250,000 years):

Clipped from the late Ken Kifer's website [ http://www.kenkifer.com ]:

"The bike path, on the other hand, is going to be taken over by joggers, dog
walkers, roller bladers, and others, so that a practical cycling speed is
impossible; in fact, bike paths have a much higher accident rate for cyclists
than the road."

This is in keeping with my experience riding "cycling facilities" in many US
cities and in several European countries.  Where bikes and peds interact, you
are working in a near-lawless circumstance that increases the dangers to
cyclists for all kinds of reasons.  The hike/bike path is incompatible in most
cases with fast riding (which would include a moderate cycling cadence)--and
with heavy pedestrian use (which I've found even in the case of California
beach-side bike paths plainly marked "Bicycles Only" every few dozen yards)
any pace much greater than a fast walking pace is impractical for your safety
or the pedestian's.  The solution is to slow way down when pedestrian traffic
is nearby and get up to bike speeds only on relatively deserted segments.  If
you are riding to get somewhere or riding to get a workout, the hike/bike
paths generally don't fit your needs.  Most streets do.

It depends on the path, of course.  This summer I did a cyclo-tour of over
1100 km almost exclusively on bicycle/pedestrian pathways.  Average speed was
forced to about 12 mph because of the nature of the paths and traffic and what
even though we were often traveling at over 17-18 mph.  Where pedestrians were
heavily present, about a fast walking speed was best, as little as we enjoyed
those stretches on our bikes.  Other places speeds over 30 kph were practical.
 Rarely was any faster speed possible for any significant time.  It was an
enjoyable tour on generally excellent paths, but for large segments of it, we
would've been faster and safer in the roads as I saw it.

For the cyclist on a bike/ped pathway, if you are frustrated that you can't
move along at your chosen speed because of peds or other hazards, recognize
that you may be biking in the wrong place for your style of riding, and I'm
just talking here about saving your own neck and not at all of rudeness or
giving cyclists a bad name, which I think is where this discussion started.

Jeff

------ Original Message ------
Received: Tue, 05 Oct 2004 12:10:56 PM CDT
From: "Daniel Norton" <Daniel+bicycleaustin>
To: <forum-bicycleaustin.info>
Subject: RE: BIKE: Statesman Editorial: Cyclists: Be Careful

Lane Wimberley wrote:
> If one has a need to avoid slowing, then I think one should find a 
> different location -- one that doesn't pose as many risks for going 
> fast.

I'm not talking fast, I'm talking a moderate cycling cadence.  You're
solution to the hike and bike trail traffic problem seems to be to not use
it for bikes.

> ...I don't even think that it's unreasonable to expect peds to 
> occassionally block the sidewalk by, say, walking side-by-side.

It's not occasional, it's typical.

--
Daniel Norton


_______________________________________________
Get on or off this list here:  http://BicycleAustin.info/list