Sharing the road, or, can’t we all just get along?
Posted on October 23rd, 2006 – 6:05 AMBy Roadguy
In the lot in front of Roadguy headquarters, I frequently find myself parked next to one of the largest pickup trucks on earth. Its windshield wipers could flick away my humble vehicle like a bug, and it’s helped me understand what the numbers on Ford’s F-series trucks mean: An F-350 appears to be exactly 350 times heavier and more powerful than my car. Curious as to what might be hauled in the bed of such a behemoth (tools? boulders? enough lumber to build a house?), one day I decided to peek over the edge for a look:
It was a pretty cool-looking collection, really, and it would have made a great sculpture for a high-ceilinged loft. But then I had a darker thought: Maybe these wheels were all that was left of the truck’s victims – trophies to be hung on the wall like so many antlers. I felt a bit of a chill. Are relations between bicyclists and non-bicyclists that bad? (Doug Grow’s latest column — a tale of a plane, a train, a bicycle and a dismemberment — indicates that things might indeed be at a low point.) Roadguy readers, unprompted, have been weighing in, their frequent CAPITAL LETTERS illustrating the high emotions surrounding the topic.
An e-mail last month from Lisa had the subject line “To the Blonde driving a green subaru, 5:00ish, yesterday at Larpenteur,” and went on thusly:
“I have a rant as someone who wants to survive riding my bike to work. A woman gave me the head-shaking and finger-scolding for crossing the street on my bike when she was trying to turn east onto Larpenteur. She did have a green light, and that I guess means go, no matter what. I had the white hand to go, and thus the conflict.”
Lisa was crossing Larpenteur by the U campus, where the walk signal “lasts about 5 seconds. That gives you enough time to get to about the middle of the first of four lanes before it becomes the blinking red hand. Well, [the blonde] was bound and determined to make her left from the side street onto Larpenteur, and then the scolding began… I pointed to the light I was facing, and pedaled as fast as I could, to get OUT OF HER WAY. I later regretted not dismounting in the middle of the street to explain the meaning of traffic signals to her.”
I wish you had, Lisa, because it sounds like you were in the right. But not all bikers are on their best behavior. A.G., who says she tries her darnedest to respect bicyclists and not endanger them, posted this comment:
“My most burning question is this: Why do cyclists ride in the parkway with car traffic when there is a bike path that runs right along the road? …The road has no shoulder and there is no room to pass. It’s most frustrating for me since the bike path is right there! Isn’t it safer for EVERYONE if the bikers took the bike path? Is there an ordinance that requires them to use the path? Is there a reason for these cyclists’ need to lead a parade of parkway drivers at 10 miles an hour, or are they just too cool for the bike path?”
Roadguy is no saint on his bicycle — I tend to view a lot of signage as optional, for example — but I also prefer to be offroad when possible, and I try to make sure I’m not hindering anyone else’s travel regardless of what I’m doing. And when I’m in my car, I try to give the required 3-foot berth to bikes alongside me, and to watch for them in my rearview mirror when opening my car door.
But there must be more Roadguy can do to spread harmony among the many species of wheeled conveyances. Thoughts? Rants? Post ‘em below.
16 Responses to "Sharing the road, or, can’t we all just get along?"
I can offer three reasons why many cyclists take the street instead of the parallel bike path, at least in Minneapolis:
1) Most of the hard-core bikers can bike faster than 10 MPH, which by the book is the speed limit on the Minneapolis paths. Though during my growing-up years (or on my trip home last month) I never saw any speed enforcement, that doesn’t mean it can’t exist…
2) Those annoying curb-cuts, which used to be really bad along Minnehaha Pkwy.
3) In the case of 3 of the Minneapolis lakes (Harriet, Calhoun, Isles), the bike path is one-way.
Despite my signature, it’s not my truck.
In fact the photo reminds me of a friend’s recent misfortune. His Saturn, with his 20-year-old bike inside, got stolen. The car was found several blocks away, but the bike was gone.
As for the bikes-in-the-road phenomenon, I’ll reiterate an earlier response:
The reason bikers are in the street is because the designated bike paths are crowded with joggers, dog walkers and other aliens. I’m betting this gripe came during the final weeks of training for the Twin Cities Marathon, when runners showed a particularly egregious sense of entitlement on the bike paths. . . .Part of the problem, rooted at Lake of the Isles, is that the Park Board has retreated from its long-standing (and sensible, and expensive) commitment to separate paths, due to an on-and-ongoing shoreline restoration project. Even so, on the east side, where there are three (3) paths, walkers somehow seem to prefer the one that’s stenciled with the image of a bicycle and speed limit. This is only a small portion of the Chain of Lakes, but it gives the impression that the paths are paths of lazy disorder, an idea that is spreading like milfoil. I don’t want to be a Path Nazi but separate paths are safer paths. One-ways even moreso. The Park Board needs to be more assertive in marking them. Meanwhile, if you’re not on wheels, get off the bike path.
I can see why speed limits might be an excuse for not taking the bike paths, but it’s not like many bicyclists are paragons of virtue when they ignore the stopsigns, ride on sidewalks for part of a block, then onto streets for the rest of the block. Trust me, it happens. I myself do it when I ride, and get annoyed by it when I drive!
Probably the most egregious bike-behavior I’ve ever seen was driving westbound on west river parkway past the mill district a couple month ago. I pulled up to the 4-way stop by the stone arch bridge parking lot, came to the complete stop required by law, looked both ways and saw a bicyclist pulling a trailer proceeding northbound toward the river. Assuming (wrongly) that the bicyclist might obey the stop sign, I proceeded straight westward through the intersection. I made it about halfway when all of the sudden the bicyclist makes a left turn and comes careening within a foot of my front left bumper and cuts across into the parking lot for the stone arch bridge. He didn’t even look at me. I tapped the horn (not laid on it), the guy turned around, dropped an f-bomb, and then flipped me off and continued across the stone arch bridge.
When I ride on the street instead of the bike path, it is always because the bike path is in horrible shape. The prime example is the bike path along St. Anthony Parkway in NE Minneapolis. It’s a mess. I won’t ride on it. It is supposed to be fixed soon I hear, so that should change things, but until then it is safer for me to be on a smooth road than a bumpy and pothole-filled bike path.
And no, there is no ordinance that requires bikers to be on a path. A bike has just as much of a right to be on a road as a car. Drivers that can’t deal with that should not drive. At the same time, bikers who do not act like vehicles and obey stop signs, traffic lights, etc. should all be run over by cars so they learn to obey the law.
As a mostly-motorist, occasional biker (and decidedly NOT in the hard-core sense), I can think of another reason to ride on the road in Minneapolis. Some major streets have a separate bike lane (usually situated in between parking and auto traffic lanes), though not a completely separate bike path. I try to stick to these, except when I have to make a left turn (if the lane is to the right of traffic, as it usually is). In those cases, I begin to merge with auto traffic as far as a block earlier, looking for an opening for my own safety. I end up slowing down traffic for half a block, but at least I don’t get smooshed.
I agree with Doctor Gonzo, though I don’t want anybody to get run over.
I’m an occasional bicycle commuter, and while there is no shortage of bad driving from Twin Cities’ motorists, I never cease to be amazed by how few cyclists obey traffic laws. I can’t count the number of times I’ve stopped my bike at a red light and watched a fellow cyclist ride right by me through the intersection. Or how many times I’ve watched cyclists blow through stop signs, ride on sidewalks, veer across lanes of traffic without signaling, and commit all manner of moving violations.
When I’m driving, I automatically assume that all cyclists will behave like reckless idiots, and I’m right almost all the time.
This kind disregard for basic traffic laws hurts ALL cyclists.
If bicyclists want respect and courtesy from drivers, they should follow the same rules that drivers are supposed to.
“If bicyclists want respect and courtesy from drivers, they should follow the same rules that drivers are supposed to.”
Sure they should. I agree 100%, but I also don’t follow traffic laws 100%. If I can see no traffic coming, I’ll run a red light or a stop sign. I’d never do that in a motor vehicle, but its second nature on a bicycle. If there is vehicular traffic around, I follow the rules on a bicycle.
I choose to disobey certain laws because they were written with vehicular traffic in mind. For instance, on a bicycle, I’ll never trigger a left turn arrow - or sometimes any signal change at all - at certain intersections. At certain intersections I’ll split lanes to move to the front of the line and share a left arrow with cars in the turn lane. I bet some drivers get pissed off when I do that.
Bicycles span the gap between pedestrians and vehicular traffic. Pedestrians get mad when bicyclists try to share their space (and vice-versa, as evidenced above); likewise car & truck drivers get mad when cyclists share their space - despite the law saying bicycles are legal vehiclular traffic.
There’s not a simple answer and self-righteous claims that all bicyclists should obey all traffic laws at all times are a bit naive and unrealistic. Likewise is the expectation that all motorized traffic will properly share the road with bicyclists.
The rant you posted seems a bit misplaced. Bikers are not pedestrians. Lisa has to follow the traffic signals, not the pedestrian signals.
As a former bicycle commuter, I sympathize with the plight of bicyclists. I was hit by cars in downtown Minneapolis an average of once a month. Most of the time, they would just turn across the bike lane without even a glance.
But now that I spend most of my time walking from one bus stop to another, I get extremely frustrated by bikers careening down the sidewalks. The solution to aggressive drivers isn’t to run over pedestrians.
I mostly bike for enjoyment, but the few times I have had somewhere to be, and chose to bike instead of drive, I found that even biking down a main road towards Minneapolis was extremely inconvenient and unsafe. There is such a lack of designated biking paths that bikers have no choice but to join drivers at their expense, or use alternative means (i.e. sidewalks). I think this city would do well to update and add bike paths on main streets - particularly those that have room to do so. I would absolutely bike to and from work each day, if it was much safer than sharing the right lane and parking shoulder…
Becky, one of the solutions is to rethink bike routes. In a car, taking the main road is usuallly the fastest route. That is not necessarily true when on a bicycle. In my commute from the East Nokomis neighborhood to Edina (494 & France) I’m only about 15 minutes slower on my bicycle - that’s on a 10 mile commute - and I only take low traffic roads or bike paths.
bsimon, I have researched some alternatives bike paths for my destinations… although I can’t help but think how much faster it would be if the main roads had bike lanes - then there’d be no stop signs to deal with and I could zip to work in no time. Sigh… 
The notion that bikes can’t use the bike paths because of walkers and joggers is a lame one at best, because in my 42 years I have never seen a bike path along a road, most of which are 12 feet wide, so crowded with pedestrians as to make it unbikeable.
The path along Pioneer Trail through Eden Prairie is a good example. Huge bike path/sidewalk, yet these stupid looking spandex wearing Lemond wannabes have to ride on the road, which has no room for such endeavors. The fact that they are a public safety threat by hindering traffic and creating an unnecessary road hazard aside, what amazes me is their faith in their fellow humanity in this age of putting on makeup, newspaper reading, laptop using, text messaging drivers to actually be watching out for them. They have a deathwish by taking this unnecessary risk because it is their “right”. Not that they’re any dumber than the imbeciles who multitask while driving, but they are incredibly stupid nonetheless. Shouldn’t the fact they have to attach bright strobe lights to themselves and wear neon green clothes to be seen be their first clue that maybe this isn’t the greatest idea?
Regarding A.G.’s message and Morg’s comment: “Why do cyclists ride in the parkway with car traffic when there is a bike path that runs right along the road?”
Minnesota statute 169.222 clearly states “Every person operating a bicycle shall have all of the rights and duties applicable to the driver of any other vehicle by this chapter”.
If you don’t like bikes on such roads, if you think they are “public safety threat” — contact your legislator to have the law changed.
Relations between motorists and bikes (and pedestrians) are not bad, they are horrible. Sharing the road is possible. Amsterdam is a perfect example, the roads there are much narrower than any here in Minneapolis. There are many countries that put us to shame on this issue.
After reading the entire list of comments, I have to say, “Amen” to Dan’s. To A.G. and every other motorist who doesn’t know this statute (or won’t accept this), bicycles have a right to the road, the entire lane in fact to avoid hazards, as any other vehicle, if there is no separate bike lane designated with stripping. Also, bikes are not required to squeeze over to the shoulder or ride in the gutter with all of the tire popping glass, and other debris. Out of courtesy, bikers are encouraged to stay as close to the right in an actual lane as is practical and reasonably safe, so that cars may pass them when it is safe to do so. The Neon outfits and strobe lights are not clues Morg, they are worn to make the bikes visible to other vehicles sharing the road. Some people may choose to wear spandex and others to drive Hummers. We choose how we react to others.
As far as Sam’s comment about Lisa’s supposed confusion, is actually his. If bikes are on pedestrian paths, they follow the rules and expectations of a pedestrian. So, if a bike is in a pedestrian crosswalk, the crosswalk sign would be obeyed. But that is not the issue. The green Subaru was making a turn and needs to yield until the intersection is clear. The motorist doesn’t have a right to turn -regardless. I agree that bicyclists should not be mowing over walkers, but respectfully move among them, yield to them, warn when passing, and even walk the bike if the sidewalk is crowded.
It seems that their is such a lack of education between motorists and bicyclists. There isn’t any driver’s ed for bicyclists and motorists are not informed about bicycle rights to the road when they learn to drive. Since bicycling is becoming more and more popular, maybe an education campaign would be useful. We need to change.
Of course bikes have every right to ride on the road. That is common sense and I don’t think anyone disputes that. Our point is, we spend millions of dollars to provide bike trails for cyclists to ride safely out of traffic’s way. We are world-reknowned for our bike paths. If bikes were meant to be on the road in these circumstances there would be a shoulder for them. Instead, the money was spent to provide them their own path, leaving the road for vehicles. That’s why they’re called “BIKE PATHS”.
I think many bikes ride on the road out of defiance, because it’s their “right”. I say they’re imbeciles, because they are imposing an unnecessary risk on themselves, literally putting their lives in someone else’s hands. I drive alot, and from the driving behavior I see I would never take such a risk.
Well, I shouldn’t say never. On the Big Rivers Regional trail in Lilydale, from the trailhead near the St. Paul Yacht Club to points east, there is no off-road trail for about a mile. While this is a regional park, and the speed limit is low, many cars find this route through the park a nice shortcut from downtown St. Paul to 35E, and the slow speeds through the park are neither enforced nor obeyed. On the rare occasion I ride this stretch of “trail” (Yes, I’m a biker, too)I pedal like my life depends on it–because it does.
As for Dob’s comment about strobes and neon clothes being worn to make bikers visible, that was exactly my point: if you have to go to such great lengths to make yourself seen, then you know you are placing yourself in a dangerous position. Again, knowing how terrible our driving habits are, and knowing motorists don’t watch out for cyclists–motorized and non–why would you take such a risk when there are safe alternatives, just because it’s your right?
Let me ask you this: You’re driving a vehicle in your lane at the speed limit and you come over the crest of a hill. Unbeknownst to you, just ahead over the hill crest there is a bike riding in the road rather than the trail. You have no time to react and you hit and kill the biker. Who is at fault, the driver, or the biker who needlessly put himself in harm’s way?
To give you another example, it is my “right” to cross a street as a pedestrian in a crosswalk. Does that mean I just walk out, regardless of oncoming traffic? It all boils down to common sense. Do I cross a busy street because it’s my right, or do I wait until it’s clear or find a safer place to cross. Likewise, do I eschew the bike trail for a busy road with no shoulder because it’s my right, or do I do the sensible thing and stay on the trail? To me it’s a no-brainer. Obviously to others, it’s not. May they rest in peace.
By the way, since we’re throwing out Statute 169.222, it also states that “(c) Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway…shall not impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic…”.
News flash, when you are riding on a road where there is no shoulder and traffic must slow down, swerve, change lanes to avoid you, you are violating this Statute.
