Posts about Sidewalk Cycling

Treat them like they are...say...zombies. Pedestrians move slowly, and you can't make them change direction, but you absolutely don't want to touch them.

On the flip side, drivers need a lot of education too. In the past week, I was honked at or yelled at by two different drivers for engaging in a very legal, appropriate action: riding in the middle of a lane.

The first was on 19th Street NW, northbound between S and T. The road there is pretty narrow, barely wide enough for cars to fit between the parked cars on each side, and I didn't feel it would be safe for me to ride right next to the parked cars so other drivers could squeeze around or where I might get doored. It's a low-speed road with stop signs, and I was moving at a good clip, so I'd slow down a driver by maybe 5-10 seconds max.

However, a guy in a convertible (Maryland plates) pulled up behind and started yelling, "Bike lane! Bike lane!" Now, there's no bike lane, which I turned around and shouted back to him. A few seconds later, we reached T, and he turned.

The second time, I was heading southbound on 17th NW between M and L. This road has multiple lanes all in the same direction, and I was in the rightmost, non-curb lane (since cars were parked in the curb lane), also in the center of the lane, which is the right place to ride.

I was approaching a red traffic light at L, with a few cars waiting in each lane. Before I got there, a driver (Virginia plates) pulled up behind, leaned on his horn for about 10 seconds, then pulled around me, pulled up to the light in my lane, and moved a little farther to the right as well just to make sure it was impossible to ride around him. Unfortunately for him, I was going to the CaBi station at the corner, anyway.

If I hadn't been in his way, he would have saved absolutely no time, since the light was already red.

Mr. Driving Manners says: People on bikes are entitled to ride in the middle of the lane just as if they were a car (§ 18-1200.3). You shouldn't try to yell, honk, or push them out of the way. On a rural road, you might get stuck behind a tractor and have to drive slow for a bit. The same applies here. Anyway, if it's a one-lane road, you're not supposed to be going very fast anyway, and on a multi-lane road, you can switch lanes to go around.

A similar issue came up on Jones Mill Road in Bethesda, where an angry letter writer called bicyclists "arrogant" for riding in one of two lanes instead of on a nearby trail where people were also walking. Michael Jackson from MDOT wrote a thriller of a response, pointing out the mistakes, and the letter writer retracted his argument.

Both rules follow a very simple principle: the slower or smaller mover gets the right of way. The larger or faster one has to yield. This is like the rule for boats: If you're in a motorboat, you have to always yield to sailboats (under sail), period. No yelling at them to get out of your way; it's not "your" way. Drivers, respect the cyclists. Cyclists, respect the pedestrians. Pedestrians, respect the child pedestrians. Giant truck drivers, respect the drivers of small cars. And so on.

Jim Titus wrote:

The fact that many long-time drivers and public officials also do not understand what it means to share the road suggests that there is a serious gap in driver education. What is the point of all these '[bicycle symbol] Share the Road' signs if most people do not even know what they mean?

Most drivers don't have to take any tests after they first get their licenses and psychological research shows people don't really read most signs, so besides talking about it on blogs, what can we do to educate everyone about the bicycle social contract?

Wells said, "If I get a call from Jack around dusk, I know what it's going to be. It is an issue that we have to keep bicycles separated from pedestrians, especially around sidewalks. We do want people walking and jogging. ... In his own way, Jack is a representative for the jogging advisory council, and we do have work to do."

That work might include looking at whether to restrict cycling on sidewalks in some cases. Currently, DC law allows biking on sidewalks except in a central area. Sean Wieland of the Pedestrian Advisory Council testified that in areas like Georgia Avenue in Ward 4, sidewalks are often somewhat narrow and crowded with pedestrians, and cycling there can create problematic conflicts.

TheWashCycle blogger David C. pointed out that the Mayor already has the power to restrict sidewalk cycling in specific areas as desired. He doesn't think DC should ban it outright, as there are times it's the best move, such as climbing up hills when cars drive fast and there are few pedestrians.

People also start and end their rides on sidewalks, or use them for short distances when one-way streets would otherwise force a long detour. If I ride to U Street, my trip home involves a short segment on a one-way street to get to my alley. I ride on the sidewalk for that short stretch, which is by far the most efficient route.

If I ride on the sidewalk, I always make sure to defer to pedestrians. People on bikes must recognize that people on foot have the right of way, and that while the law might allow using sidewalks, anyone riding a bike on one has to be respectful and stay out of the way of people walking. If that means riding no faster than a slow walk, so be it.

Not everyone does this, however. For this reason, Wells expressed interest in considering restrictions on sidewalk cycling in commercial districts. This could make sense when the commercial district has two-way roads, so people can always bike in the street, and the road is not overcrowded. There seems to be little reason to ride on the sidewalk on Barracks Row, for instance, except between one corner and a bicycle rack on that block.

But what about 17th Street in Dupont? BeyondDC often bikes northbound on this street, which is one way north of Massachusetts Avenue. Going to 18th could represent a fairly long detour. 16th is harrowing. 15th is fairly far away.

A lot of people bike the wrong way in the 17th Street bike lane. Generally, they are able to do that without problems, since 17th is a low-traffic road and cars move slowly. That's illegal, however. Riding on the sidewalk is legal, but those sidewalks are very narrow.

It's too bad DDOT and the neighborhood didn't devise a legal and safe way to ride northbound when recently reconstructing the road. There's now a popular Capital Bikeshare station at 17th and Corcoran. If someone wants to ride there from, say, the station at 17th and L, there's no legal, direct way to do so. As we are seeing in practice, many people are not willing to detour to 16th or 18th for this type of trip.

The trouble all starts when you drop bicyclists into the mix. At that point, a whole new set of combinations comes into play, and as a city we haven't worked out how to make them work. In other cities, especially in places like Copenhagen or Utrecht, bicycles are ubiquitous and everybody knows how to behave on and around them. But we're not there yet.

We expect that people on foot stay on the sidewalk most of the time, and cross when there's a walk signal or an unsignalized intersection, as the law says. We also expect that people on foot sometimes cross against the light if no cars are coming. That might not be legal, but it's generally commonplace and pretty safe. People driving might not like it, but they tend not to be too surprised when it happens and don't write angry letters to the editor about it.

Likewise, we expect that people driving will obey traffic signals and stop signs, and not drive up onto the sidewalk. We also expect that people driving may go a little over the speed limit, which can increase the risk of fatal crashes but is generally widespread. Likewise, people driving often don't stop fully at a stop sign, which adds a small amount of danger but not that much, and so it's generally tolerated.

But what do we expect from people biking? What should they do that's legal, and what are they going to do that's not technically legal, like people crossing on foot against the light or driving a bit over the speed limit?

As Felix Salmon noted, we're not in northern Europe where people riding bikes are everywhere. There, there are so many people on bikes that if 99% of them behave a certain way, people walking and driving are used to it and will generally expect it. Those that stray outside those boundaries will face criticism.

Here are a few examples of bicycling behaviors that are fairly common, and my opinion about whether they should be part of the bicycle "social contract" or not:

Okay: The Idaho Stop. Basically, people on bikes ought to treat intersections as people on foot generally do. If it's a stop sign, look carefully, and proceed if it's safe to do so. If there's a light, stop, look even more carefully, but it's still okay to proceed if it's safe and continuing wouldn't interfere with any people driving or walking.

Bad: Blowing through an intersection against the light without slowing down. This should go without saying, but some do it.

Bad: The "C maneuver." I often see people on bikes approach a moderately busy two-way cross street, then turn right onto that street, merging into the right-moving traffic, then make a U-turn merging into the left-moving traffic, and finally turn right to get back onto the original street continuing along. (Can you come up with a better name for this?)

Good: Riding in the middle of the lane. This is legal but most people riding bikes don't do it. If you're traveling on a bike down a street that doesn't have a bike lane, it's best to act like a car. Ride in the very middle of the appropriate car lane, as if you were in a car.

Most people on bikes ride on the right edge of the roadway. But this entices the people driving cars to try to pass them in the same lane. And if that person in the car turns right, they might "right hook" the person on the bike. Being in the center of the lane makes you very visible. If it's a one-lane street, people on any mode probably shouldn't be traveling that fast. If it's a multi-lane street, people in cars can go around.

Bad: Jumping the queue when it's not really necessary. If you're on a bike, and there's one car ahead of you at a stoplight with enough cross traffic that it's not safe to Idaho Stop across, why go around that car only to make the person driving it pass you again? Just wait behind the car, as if you were in a car yourself.

Okay: Jumping the queue when there are a lot of cars waiting. If there's a lot of traffic, cyclists are going to squeeze up to the front of the line. It's not necessarily safest and as an individual on a bike you might be best off waiting at the back of the line, but when there will be a fairly long wait to get going again after the light changes, people riding bikes are generally going to move up. That's not going to be reasonable to stop.

What do you think about these? What other bicycle behaviors should be part of the ideal "social contract" that will allow people on foot, on bikes and in cars to coexist peacefully, knowing what the others are likely to do and not do?

1. Replace contributory negligence with comparative negligence. Maryland, Virginia and DC are three of only five "states" that use contributory negligence to establish damage awards in civil cases. Under this standard, if an injured road user was even 1% at fault for a crash with another road user they would be unable to recover damages unless they could prove that the other road user had the "last clear chance" to avoid the accident. Last clear chance involves proving four separate facts about the crash, all of which must be true, and can be difficult to prove.

   Every other jurisdiction uses some form of comparative negligence, which allows the injured party to recover some of their loses even if they were partially to blame. Contributory negligence is loved by big business and the insurance industry but it punishes victims—who are disproportionally pedestrians and cyclists—twice, and should be changed.

2. Close the negligent driving loophole. In Virginia and Maryland, it can be very difficult to convict a negligent driver with a crime. In both states recently, drivers who were over-driving their vision or not paying attention hit cyclists from behind and killed them. In one case the driver got a $313 ticket in the other the driver wasn't punished at all.

   The problem is that simple negligence is only a misdemeanor in Maryland and not a crime at all in Virginia. DC, on the other hand, has a law against "careless, reckless or negligent" driving that can result in 5 years in prison or a fine of up to $5000. Virginia and Maryland should close the loophole that allows negligent driving to be treated as "just an accident."

3. Ban distracted driving. Distracted driving is quickly emerging as one of the major causes of road casualties. DC, Maryland and Virginia should move swiftly to make distracted driving (and that includes cycling) illegal.

   This means making texting while driving a primary offense in Virginia, where now it is a secondary offense, and increasing the fine from $20. It means banning the use of electronic devices while driving, including phones, computers, pagers and video games. Hands-free phones aren't significantly safer than hand-held phones and drivers should not be allowed to use those either. Finally, drivers should not be allowed to manipulate a GPS device while driving, though they can listen to directions.

4. Treat cycling as transportation. Complete Streets is a doctrine requiring transportation agencies to build roadways that enable safe access for all users. Several states have adopted complete streets legislation or policies.

   Maryland adopted weak Complete Streets legislation in 2000, but it needs to be stronger. Virginia has a policy to accommodate cyclists and pedestrians, but it needs to be expanded. DC has no complete streets policy and should pass legislation to that effect.

   In addition, both DC and Maryland should emulate Virginia's ban on culs-de-sac, as they make for circuitous cycling on traffic sewers. M-NCPPC should end its policy of closing trails at night or when it snows and region-wide, critical trails should be cleared after a heavy snow. People still commute at those times.

5. Leave a safe distance. Maryland and Virginia should follow DC's lead and pass a three feet minimum passing distance law, as well as a law making it illegal to open a car door unless it is safe to do so.

6. Fix equipment requirements. Maryland, Virginia and DC require some equipment that isn't needed, fail to require one piece of valuable equipment and should try to standardize their light rules.

   The three have different laws about what kind of lights are required, but a common set of rules would help DC area cyclists. Combining the three state's laws could create a requirement for, at minimum, a front light visible 500 feet away attached to the bike, a rear light visible at the same distance attached to the bike or the rider and a rear reflector visible 100 feet away.

   While bells are nice, they shouldn't be required. I've never met a cyclist who thought their life, or anyone else's, was saved by a bell. And Maryland and Virginia should match DC's unique law allowing fixed gear bikes without a separate brake.

7. Improve the return of recovered and impounded bikes. All three jurisdictions should create a process that maximizes the number of recovered stolen bikes and impounded bikes returned to owners. They should check all such bikes against the national bike registries. They should place photos of them on a recovered bike web site, as Arlington County does, and make it searchable by serial number.

   The serial number of bikes that are auctioned, donated or scrapped should be recorded in a searchable online database so that owners can recover the money or donation receipt for their bike. All jurisdictions should regularly report recovered bike statistics such as total number, number returned, number disposed, etc... as well as registries used to return them.

8. Let cyclists decide where to ride. The uniform vehicle code, which most states use to define traffic laws, requires cyclists to ride "as closely as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway" and then lists several exceptions. While Denver has rewritten the law to make cyclists the judge of where in the lane a cyclist should ride, a more dramatic change is needed.

   It's not unreasonable to require cyclists to move right to accommodate faster traffic when safe and necessary, but attempting to codify this has led to frequent misinterpretation. A better rule would require riding right only when the lane is wide enough to allow a car to pass a bicycle safely in the same lane (safe), and when there is only one lane in that direction (necessary). Those cases are actually quite rare, so DC, MD and VA could be required to sign those roads as "Ride Right Roads." In addition, Maryland should repeal its law requiring cyclists to use bike lanes and shoulders when present.

9. Let cyclists ride more than two abreast. Most places limit cyclists riding in a group from riding more than two abreast, and only when not being passed. Cyclists riding in an informal group ride often find themselves riding three or even four abreast, and under current law that's illegal. Instead the law should only require cyclists to stay in a single lane, except when legally changing lanes, and to move right to facilitate overtaking vehicles when judged safe and necessary.

10. Improve access and parking. Building rules restricting bike commuters from bringing bikes inside as well as rules restricting bike parking in the public space make it unnecessarily difficult to park a bike. The region should adopt a rule similar to New York City's Bicycle Access to Buildings law which requires buildings to allow bicycles inside under certain circumstances. Cyclists should also be allowed to park their bikes to poles within bus zones or located within 25 feet of an intersection.

11. Decriminalize safe cycling. Laws that were written for cars and drivers shouldn't necessarily be applied to bikes and cyclists. The Idaho stop law allows cyclists to treat stop signs as yield signs and stop lights as stop signs, which is what many cyclists do anyway. Since it's inception in Idaho, cycling has actually gotten safer.

    Another change should allow cyclists waiting at a light to move past the advanced stop line while the light is still red so as to stay in front of and in view of drivers. And finally, Maryland should review its law requiring cyclists to have both hands available for reaching the handlebars. DC and VA don't have such a ban and and this law could make it illegal for a cyclist to do something as simple as grab a water bottle.

12. Allow more sidewalk cycling. Though sidewalk cycling is a critical tool to effective cycling, it's illegal in Prince William County, Alexandria and most of Maryland.

    While it might make sense to ban it in certain areas with heavy pedestrian traffic, such as DC's Central Business District, a county-wide ban is excessive and imprecise. These jurisdictions should make bans the exception and not the rule. Even in areas where its been decided that a ban makes sense, the law should allow riding on the sidewalk for the purpose of parking, as is done in Denver.