Hacker News Reader

Comment by avree | Hacker News Reader

Yes, it's been proven that un-protected bike lanes such as those are very dangerous. There are more and more separators coming out (https://peopleforbikes.org/blog/a-new-generation-of-bike-lan...) to allow for protected bike lanes.

However, I do need to mention that when you choose to bike on the sidewalk, you're creating the same type of problem that cars that ignore traffic rules create for bikes. There's a reason why biking on the sidewalk is illegal in most places, and why bike lanes/roads exist.

View on HN

Yes, but the reason why biking on the sidewalk is illegal in most places is mostly unrelated to safety.

The only bicycle riders willing to get organized and lobby the legislators are the very most serious ones. These are the people who want to race along at 50 MPH.

The resulting laws force pitifully slow riders to be out in the street. Even if you can only manage 5 MPH, you have to be in the street.

Lots of us are too arthritic, too fat, too weak, too inflexible, too limited by lung capacity, too limited by heart capacity, and too limited by cheap steel mountain bikes from Walmart.

So our choices are:

a. break the law

b. annoy drivers and risk death

c. don't ride a bicycle

>you're creating the same type of problem that cars that ignore traffic rules create for bikes

Which are what? Such a broad statement doesn't seem accurate and the sidewalk shown in the map looks low traffic with excellent sight lines, as long as you're not cycling head down at high speed the danger to pedestrians doesn't seem comparable to danger posed by car driver's ignoring traffic rules.

The problem is that something is somewhere and/or does something unexpected. The bicyclist doesn't expect the car to drive in the bike lane. The car driver turning across the sidewalk doesn't expect the bicyclist to be riding across the driveway on a bicycle. If you're not expecting it you're not going to look for it.

Riding a bicycle on the sidewalk isn't illegal most places because it's dangerous for the pedestrians, it's illegal because it's dangerous for the bicyclist.

I understand and personally am very cautious around driveways especially if they don't have perfectly clear sight lines.

I just find it odd when cyclists out of principal decry riding on the sidewalk when the danger of riding with traffic is well known and America has an abundance of long empty sidewalks in suburbia and around office parks.

Riding on the sidewalk is dangerous despite the sidewalks being usually empty. There's another factor: when sidewalks become intersections. Very few drivers check for cyclists on the sidewalk before going through an intersection. From what I understand this is shown quite clearly in the crash statistics.

Many dedicated cycletracks have similar problems. Here in Austin there are several that I refuse to use because drivers far too frequently turn into my path without looking. I ride in the lane so that I can be seen. It's counterintuitive to most drivers, but visibility is often the deciding factor in bike safety. This would be more obvious to drivers if they spent more time cycling. If a cyclist is stuck using a path with poor visibility, I find paying attention to the cars and using light touches of an air horn when approaching an intersection to help. But I still prefer being visible to that.

More generally, intersections are relatively more dangerous (crashes per person mile or something like that) than straight segments of road for any mode of transportation using the road.

It's not a matter of principal, it's a matter of statistics. Even empty sidewalks are more dangerous to ride on than riding with traffic.

The problem is that pedestrians on a sidewalk do not follow traffic rules. They don't signal turns or stopping in advance. They choose random sides of the sidewalk to walk on. They don't have mirrors to see approaching cyclists behind them.

Vehicles, on the other hand, do follow traffic rules with regards to lane usage, signaling, and checking what's behind them. Even if they don't, they're still more predictable compared to pedestrians.

> you're creating the same type of problem that cars that ignore traffic rules create for bikes

Agree. I'd do it anyways because sidewalks are 99.999% empty where I live. I could ride for 20 miles and not see a person on the sidewalk. So biking on sidewalks is safe as long as you pay attention to what's ahead. No idea if that's the case in this AZ location.

You still have to cross at intersections and driveways. I've been hit multiple times (at low speed) by motor vehicles crossing the sidewalk at a driveway. I don't ride on sidewalks anymore.

This sounds like a speed issue. If you’re doing 20 mph on the sidewalk then yes you weren’t in view when the driver started backing out of their driveway.

I don’t fully think I’m a bike I get right of way. If I see a car reversing ahead I move into the street then prepare to full stop but proceed with caution and watch the cars acceleration to see if they see me. If I get the hint they don’t. I stop. It’s scratch on the bumper for them and life for me I am more than glad to yield.

Cyclists here (in Seattle) have a healthy habit of calling out "to your left" when approaching from behind. Things like this need to become more widespread.

I do that regularly on my commute on a mixed-use trail. Half the time the pedestrian looks to their left and their feet follow. The other half have headphones on so they don't hear me anyway.

I might be exaggerating a bit.

Personally as a I cyclist, I don't intend just yet to give up cycling on roads (which are for multi-transport users). After getting munged on a separator, I also don't think they are the be and end all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com