Bike lanes - Who has the rights to use them?

[quadzilla]

Even though cycling season has ended for most people, there are still many people riding around here.

Yesterday I came the closest to getting a door prize in my years of commuting through downtown. Riding down Spadina from Adelaide to Lakeshore in the bike lane of fear which is a white line painted on the road about half the width of a regular bike lane.

As I was passing a car I saw the door open out of the corner of my eye and heard a noise as it grazed my pannier. I jam on the brakes and start off with many obscenities followed by more yelling and obscenities (all which were me). The person said nothing and I left as no harm (physical) was done. Hopefully I said something constructive and they got the message.

Every day I yell at drivers that find the need to drive in this bike lane when the traffic is moving at a snail's pace. I even had one guy yell back that the reason he was driving in it was because traffic was backed up. Remember, old people with walkers are going faster than the traffic is.

But I've been thinking about this for a while. Since this bike lane is part of the road, who has the right to use it?

When a car is turning right, should they pull into the bike lane first?
Can cars park here?
Are people allowed to walk/run in it?

I don't deny I'm bias as I'm a cyclist and we have very few lanes but logically, if its part of the road, does it really belong to only bikes?

[safristi]

..Let me and the boys POOP on the lanes........makes a nice squishy SLALOM....and my **** don't stink..................... maybe a rollaaah skataaah  or a BOAR'ed teenager............

[sparky]

When a car is turning right, should they pull into the bike lane first?
Can cars park here?
Are people allowed to walk/run in it?

I don't deny I'm bias as I'm a cyclist and we have very few lanes but logically, if its part of the road, does it really belong to only bikes?

These are good questions.
Around here, the solid white line marking the bike lane changes to a broken line just before the corner, which suggest cars can use the lane for right turns, as long as they don't pick off any cyclists on the way.
On my street, people park in the bike lane all the time, although it seems it should be illegal.

Can anyone help us on this?

[rrocket]

As I was passing a car I saw the door open out of the corner of my eye and heard a noise as it grazed my pannier. I jam on the brakes and start off with many obscenities followed by more yelling and obscenities (all which were me). The person said nothing and I left as no harm (physical) was done. Hopefully I said something constructive and they got the message.

Awesome.  I'm sure the message they got was "another out of control, foul mouthed cyclist".  And yes, I know the car was at fault.  But when you respond the way you did....ummm...nothing good can come from it.

[vdk]

I've seen people being ticketed on St. George for crossing the line for the bike lane.

[quadzilla]

I've seen people being ticketed on St. George for crossing the line for the bike lane.

Is that pedestrians, cars or bikes? I'm thinking you meant cars so that is interesting. I wonder if that lane actually has a bike symbol in it?

Awesome.  I'm sure the message they got was "another out of control, foul mouthed cyclist".  And yes, I know the car was at fault.  But when you respond the way you did....ummm...nothing good can come from it.

Yep, that is right. Some days I explain things clearly and almost polite to fucktards that almost hit me and other days (like that one) I fly of the handle because of how stupid they are. No excuse but when you get cut off every day for just riding at the side of the road, the fuse is shorter some days.

Just yesterday I had a car honk at me because he couldn't pass me as I was in the middle of the road coasting downhill 40kph in a 40kph zone approaching a stop sign while the sidewalks were filled with kids going to school. Now why would that person need to get by me? They got the WTF look from me.

[toolatecrew]

I agree cars should not park in bike lanes. Cars should not drive in bike lanes as a rule (the dotted line before a corner example might be an exception I guess.

Cyclists should NEVER EVER complain about pedestrians, wheelchairs, skatboards or any other non motorized mode of transportaion in bike lanes..unless they want to stop riding on the sidewalk or across crosswalks.

[tortoise]

That's a myopic viewpoint toolatecrew.   Had you said "Cyclists who ride on sidewalks should NEVER EVER complain" then you might have a point.  Quad has said many many times that he follows the rules of the road so why should he pay a pennace for the dumbasses that don't?

Drivers should never never complain about cyclists riding on sidewalks or running red lights.... unless they want to stop speeding, running stop lights or merging/turning without signalling.

[toolatecrew]

That's a myopic viewpoint toolatecrew.   Had you said "Cyclists who ride on sidewalks should NEVER EVER complain" then you might have a point.  Quad has said many many times that he follows the rules of the road so why should he pay a pennace for the dumbasses that don't?

Drivers should never never complain about cyclists riding on sidewalks or running red lights.... unless they want to stop speeding, running stop lights or merging/turning without signalling.

I said drivers should not drive in bike lanes. That inculdes drivers who obey the rules and those who do not. Bike lanes are not for cars (as I said unless they are specifically marked to alow a car to go there for saftey reasons like a corner).

Sidewalks are for pedestrians. If cyclists want to have a special lane just for them then they should not drive on the sidewal or the road when there is a bike lane. Cyclists need to self police too. If a cyclists sees another one riding on the sidewalk they shpould be cussing him out for making all cyclists look bad.

Cars don't drive on sidewalks. Cars don't use crosswalks to cross the street.

No one is saying drivers of cars don't do things that are wrong. But drivers of cars don't as a rule "act like pedestrians". All cars are subject to the same rules and regs and expectations. No they don't always adhere to them.

Cyclists have every right to complain about a vehcile using their "lane" that doesn't belong there. Just as everyone else has a right to complain when cyclists use a "lane" (sidewalk) that doesn't belong to them.

Lets not even discuss signalling. From my observations 99% of cyclists don't signal.

[quadzilla]

Cars don't drive on sidewalks.

You should come to my neighborhood then. Although they don't drive on the sidewalk per say but we sure do have lots of people that find it necessary to park on them. Starbucks locations are the worse.

As to pedestrians and sidewalks. Why do some find it necessary to walk on the road when there is a perfectly good sidewalk there? Why do they cross in the middle of the road when there is a crosswalk/corner a short distance away?

This could go on and on forever.

[vdk]

I've seen people being ticketed on St. George for crossing the line for the bike lane.

Is that pedestrians, cars or bikes? I'm thinking you meant cars so that is interesting. I wonder if that lane actually has a bike symbol in it?

Cars of course, and yes the bike lane has a bike symbol on it.

[toolatecrew]

Cars don't drive on sidewalks.

You should come to my neighborhood then. Although they don't drive on the sidewalk per say but we sure do have lots of people that find it necessary to park on them. Starbucks locations are the worse.

As to pedestrians and sidewalks. Why do some find it necessary to walk on the road when there is a perfectly good sidewalk there? Why do they cross in the middle of the road when there is a crosswalk/corner a short distance away?

This could go on and on forever.

Don't get me started on people who won't walk their lazy AZZ 10 feet to go to the crosswalk. That trumps bikes on sidewalks not signalling etc etc in my pet peeve book.

If there is a crosswalk withon visual range and someone isn't using it but looks like they want to cross I will not stop (as long as its safe for me to do so). I try extra hard to stop at crosswalks even if it LOOKS like the person is appraoching it. I've had too many close calls (with my kids with me) of stepping out onto a crosswalk and a car blowing right through. If you go to the corsswalk you have the right of way no ifs ands or buts. If you are too lazy too bad.

[X-Traction]

Cyclists need to self police too. If a cyclists sees another one riding on the sidewalk they shpould be cussing him out for making all cyclists look bad.

Lets not even discuss signalling. From my observations 99% of cyclists don't signal.

I don't want to be snarky, but I couldn't resist...

Motorists need to self police too. If a motorist sees another one speeding or not stopping for a stop sign or running amber lights, they shpould be cussing him out for making all motorists look bad.

Pedestrians need to self police too. If a pedestrian sees another one walking on the bike lane or jaywalking, they shpould be cussing her out for making all pedestrians look bad.

Lets not even discuss signalling. From my observations 80% of motorists don't signal properly.

Lets not even discuss speeding. From my observations 95% of motorists speed.

Lets not even discuss stopping for stop signs. From my observations 90% of motorists don't stop, or stop where they should.

Then we can factor in who is the much greater danger to others, pedestrians, cyclists, or motorists.  I'll remind you of the recent accident of someone doing an estimated 200kph smashing apart a minivan and killing two occupants of the van.  Cyclists do no such things, riding legally or not.

And why do motorists sometimes shout at cyclists to get off the road, or specifically mention the sidewalk as the preferred alternative?  Why are cyclists often REQUIRED to use sidewalks, such as on bridges.  Militant motorists are just not worth listening to.

[toolatecrew]

Cyclists need to self police too. If a cyclists sees another one riding on the sidewalk they shpould be cussing him out for making all cyclists look bad.

Lets not even discuss signalling. From my observations 99% of cyclists don't signal.

I don't want to be snarky, but I couldn't resist...

Motorists need to self police too. If a motorist sees another one speeding or not stopping for a stop sign or running amber lights, they shpould be cussing him out for making all motorists look bad.

Pedestrians need to self police too. If a pedestrian sees another one walking on the bike lane or jaywalking, they shpould be cussing her out for making all pedestrians look bad.

Lets not even discuss signalling. From my observations 80% of motorists don't signal properly.

Lets not even discuss speeding. From my observations 95% of motorists speed.

Lets not even discuss stopping for stop signs. From my observations 90% of motorists don't stop, or stop where they should.

Then we can factor in who is the much greater danger to others, pedestrians, cyclists, or motorists.  I'll remind you of the recent accident of someone doing an estimated 200kph smashing apart a minivan and killing two occupants of the van.  Cyclists do no such things, riding legally or not.

And why do motorists sometimes shout at cyclists to get off the road, or specifically mention the sidewalk as the preferred alternative?  Why are cyclists often REQUIRED to use sidewalks, such as on bridges.  Militant motorists are just not worth listening to.

So you are in favor of road rage then? Instersting. Since motorists are isolated inside there cars and usually moving at a high rate of speed is it or is it not much harder for a motorist to speak to anither motorist? thought so.

Everryone is different but I don't find people signaling in cars all that bad. Is it 100%? Of couse not but its far higher than 80% in my expereince. I'll go weeks at a time without seeing a cyclist signal. They just don't do it (I admit I don't do it myself very often) but for a motorist cyclists who don't signal makes them very unpredicatable.

I am not against cyclists. not by a long shot. Most are pleasent and just want to get where they are going. There are many more cars than cycles and therefore many more bad motorsists.

Cyclists and pedesitrians do not cause nearly as much damage as a car. But you'd think that cyclists and pedestirans would do everything they can to keep themselves safe. I want them to be safe but many of them really don't help me do that.

I'm in a 3000 lb car surrounded by airbags. If a cyclist does something stupid who's getting hurt? Not me.

People don't have to liek it. they just have to accept it. Cyclists bear a much higher responisbility for doing the right things to keep themselves safe. They have less margin for error.

[X-Traction]

As for signalling, I said "signal properly".  Your observation is that most motorists "signal".  I agree that while most motorists signal, very many don't signal at the right time.  What are your estimates of the percentages of motorists who obey the speed limits and stop properly for stop signs?

When I cycle, I signal.  But putting on my driver or pedestrian hats, I have to say I can't think of a cyclist's failure to signal causing me a problem.  Maybe because I don't car commute.  In the rare circumstance where it might matter, I can wait to see what the cyclist wants to do.

I do think my point was missed.

When cyclists misbehave or swear at a motorist, motorists usually say the former gives all cyclists a bad image, and they say the swearing is counterproductive.  They also sometimes say cyclists should educate each other, on the road.  (How this dovetails with motorists' other wish that cyclists pay attention to what they're doing, remains a mystery.)

I find it odd that motorists never seem to post that one motorist misbehaving gives all motorists a bad image.  Perhaps because this is preposterous.  Yet they see no problem applying this thinking to cyclists.

Same for cyclists cursing at motorists.  I have been cursed at by a few motorists, while cycling.  They roll down their windows to do this, and power windows has made it more easy and common.  I have never heard anyone, motorists or otherwise, describe this as a case of the motorist being counterproductive.  Yet motorists say cyclists are conterproductive when they curse motorists.

If you can see that these are examples of a fundamentally different way of thinking about motorists as compared to thinking about cyclists, then you can grasp the point I hoped to make.  And anyone who makes that hurdle has no choice but to conclude that there's something unbalanced going on here.

Along the way, I question the position that motorists cannot communicate with other road users.  If that were the case, road rage would not happen.  Thanks to clogged traffic and multi-lane roads, and power windows, horns etc., motorists and cyclists communicate with each other quite commonly. 

Red lights are wonderful for neutralizing the capability for motorists to speed away from their misbehaviour, and I would speculate that many motorists avoid conflicting with cyclists because they know the exchange may continue at the next light.  I know I've had many an educational opportunity with motorists and recorded many a license number for reporting to the police, at red lights.

Anyway, as a cyclist I find both wayward pedestrians and careless or aggressive motorists to be the greatest threats.  Although as a cyclist, I've had a head-on collision with a cyclist riding at night with no lights, I rarely feel any danger from other cyclists.  As a pedestrian, I'd rank motorists more threatening than cyclists, and cyclists more threatening than other pedestrians.  And as a motorist, I definitely find other motorists to be the predominant threat to the point where threats from cyclists and pedestrians are irrelevant.

If society really weren't full of hot air when it comes to dangers from cyclists, people would boycott bicycle courier services and they would put in place compulsory education, licensing and insurance for adult cyclists.  And also direct the police to exercise their duty to protect the rights and safety of cyclists.  These things are not there because cyclists don't want them.  They aren't there because society prefers to marginalize cyclists.  Until I see those things, I have to regard all this carping about dangerous cyclists as being a bunch of crap.

[toolatecrew]

I think you missed my entire point. I carp about cyclists making it harder for ME as a motorist to keep them safe. Cyclist are a different group than motorists or even pedestirans. There are millions of motrists millions of pedestrians. They number of cyclists. They are probaly the kost vunerable group out there. They are unprotected as are pedestrians but they share the road with vehicles pedestirans for the most part do not.

Cycilists who don't signal are a huge probalm (not for prevening damage to motorists but to prevent cyclists themselves from ebing hurt). The number one thing anypone can do (be it cyclist, motorist or pedestrian) to keep themselves safe is BE PREDICTABLE. If a pedestrian goes to a crosswalk I as a motorist expect they might cross and will stop. I'm not surprised when they walk out onto the road. If a person jumps out into the middle of the road randomly I'll be surprised and am likley to hit them. If a cyclist makes a sudden turn with no warning they are likley to get hit and hurt becuase I can't predict when they are likley to do this.

Saying lots of motorists don't signal properly is a copout. The amout of ANY signaling by cyclists I observe is tiny. Its not about being "right". Of course motorists should signal. The consequences of not signaliong are simply less. Its simple physics.

Cyclists aren't marginalized they are the miority. Why do they get so defenive when what I want is to help keep THEM safe? I say signal so I won't hit you and kill you. The response? Well motorists speed or don't signal etec etc. How does that help keep YOU safe? You can't control what millions of motorists do. YElling at them won't change the behaviour. Cyclists are a inority. The only thing YOU can control is what YOU do to make yourself safer.

If you get into an accident but you are "right" it doesn't make you any less dead. Persoanlly I think that if Cyclists want more they should be held to the same standards of motor vehicles (which are not necsissarily high enough). Cyclists have the PRIVILAGE (not right) to use the same roads. They don't need any kind of liscence. They don't even need to prove they know the rules of road. They don't need insurance. People complain about the morons in cars and I agree but at least we know that they had to show some minimum of skill and kowledge to be able to drive on the road.

I'm not one of the AHOLE drivers I try my best to keep cyclists safe. All I ask is that they help me do so. Many don't.

[X-Traction]

I fully understand your point.

But the context has to include the fact that, despite the rampant lawlessness you keenly observe on the part of cyclists, most accidents between adult cyclists and motorists are the fault of the motorists.  Put another way, these accidents are happening mainly because the motorists are not obeying the traffic laws.

And I will repeat my objection that whatever the relative compliance to the rules between motorists and cyclists, the onus MUST be on the motorists to behave due to the far greater potential for harm to result from their errors.

That is why, in Europe, many countries assume the motorist is at fault in most, if not all, accidents between cyclists and motorists.  It's up to the motorist to prove they were not to blame; except in the case of children or old people on bicycles, in which case the motorist is always held at fault.

And again, if you want licensing, education and insurance for cyclists, tell your government. Not me.  I have done such lobbying, and gotten nowhere.  It's not the fault of cyclists that these aren't available, let alone required. 

Bicycle education (Canbike, Effective Cycling) IS available for those sufficiently interested and motivated.  I have taken such courses, and recommend all cyclists take them.  Statistics show that such courses greatly increase cyclists' chances of surviving in traffic.

[safristi]

Europeans  have accepted bikes since tulips were DIM BULBS..............here not so MUCH.........so I protect MY ARSE when i ride.............signal..STOP @ STOPS and keep my arse well away from BUSY ROADS..................and i don't ride at night any more despite having done so in Scotland with LIGHTS (front and back) WOT A CONCEPT eh!!!!!!!!!


  pedalphiles the lotta U..................

[X-Traction]

I fully understand your point.

And I will repeat my objection that whatever the relative compliance to the rules between motorists and cyclists, the onus MUST be on the motorists to behave due to the far greater potential for harm to result from their errors.

But on reflection, I can see why you'd conclude I'm being thick-headed.  Trying it again...

Cyclists certainly have a strong interest in avoiding being hurt by obeying the traffic laws.  As I've said, motorists should obey the traffic laws to minimize their greater potential to do harm.  In fact, if motorists completely obeyed traffic laws, presumably they would never hurt anyone else.

The difference is that the misbehaving cyclist is most likely to hurt him/herself, while the misbehaving motorist is very likely to hurt someone else.  I think that is the important distinction.  I think we have more responsibility to avoid hurting others, than to avoid hurting ourselves.

[safristi]

..BUT ...PUTTING YOURSELF in a WELL DOCUMENTED risk situation.......e.g SKY DIVING....comes with expensive baggage.......and i don't mean the PARACHUTE....but the INSURANCE..maybe that's the answer INSURE (Mandatorilly) the bikers and adjust the PRICE like CARS for WHERE and WHY u BIKE ...........simple eh!!! then we can come to BURY Caesar and his insurance PAYS................