Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Advocacy & Safety Cyclists should expect and demand safe accommodation on every public road, just as do all other users. Discuss your bicycle advocacy and safety concerns here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 05-16-13, 09:26 AM   #51
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 23,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post
Now playing devils advocate for a moment... peds walking side by side by side and blocking a well marked bikeway could show courtesy and leave way for cyclists to get by.
Yes, pedestrians could and should show courtesy and leave way for cyclists to get by; but often don't. That is a fact of life on the MUP, cyclists just have to deal with it and not whine and cry about how they could be going faster if only...

Cyclists could and should show courtesy when cycling in traffic; but sometimes are obnoxiously obtuse. That is a fact of life on the street, motorists just have to deal with it and not whine and cry about how they could be going faster if only...
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 09:32 AM   #52
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 23,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by agent pombero View Post
I'm not going vigilante. All I'm saying is that accidents have happened on MUPs where spedestrians were hit by cyclists. A few years ago this happened on the Springwater MUP. The cyclist crashed into a pedestrian, enough to cause some bodily damage. Witnesses said the pedestrian was zigzagging and not paying attention. Nothing happened to the cyclists legally.
That is a lot different circumstance than that suggested by another poster who in essence advocates open season on pedestrians on an MUP if they don't get out of cyclists' way and/or happen to be using a cell phone or are listening to audio devices.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 10:01 AM   #53
alhedges
Senior Member
 
alhedges's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Naptown
Bikes: NWT 24sp DD; Brompton M6R
Posts: 1,133
Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeyBike View Post
I often walk on MUPs with my wife. We walk on the far LEFT edge facing wheeled traffic. Cyclists coming up from behind don't have to do anything but go past right where they are. When a cyclist approaches from up ahead we LOOK over our shoulders and move right if all is clear. If more cyclists are also behind us we just step off the path momentarily and watch all the grateful cyclists go past easily and safely, then resume our walk.

It is all about attentiveness and a desire to be courteous to fast moving traffic same as if we were walking on a state highway populated with motor vehicles.

Most MUP users are oblivious, unaware, and entitled. Those users need to get buzzed IMO. At least they will be alert for a few moments thereafter and perhaps avoid causing an accident.
You are walking in the wrong direction on the MUP. If you can't figure out how to use it, you should stay off.

Pedestrians have the right of way. You, as a cyclist, are required to yield to them under *all circumstances*. Even if you don't like how they are walking, or that they are listening to headphones.

The world was not set up for your convenience.

Quote:
Originally Posted by agent pombero View Post
No. It is a Multi Use Path. Which means there will be cyclists (faster traffic) mixing amongst pedestrians. Reasonable pedestrians stay to the right unless they wanted to get speared at 20 mph.
Again, more entitled BS from a cyclist who believes that *he* has all of the rights of the road, and pedestrians may only participate if they defer to cyclists. That's not how MUPs work. If you are biking on the MUP, you are required to yield to pedestrians. They have right of way, *even if* they are on the left.

If you can't figure out how to use a MUP, please stay off of them. The last thing we need is for a bunch of overentitled jerks to get bikes banned from the MUP.
alhedges is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 10:12 AM   #54
agent pombero
Mmm hm!
 
agent pombero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Portland, Oregon
Bikes:
Posts: 1,164
Is there a chance over entitled jerk pedestrians might be banned from the MUP?
agent pombero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 10:28 AM   #55
Commodus
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Burnaby, BC
Bikes:
Posts: 4,144
Quote:
Originally Posted by agent pombero View Post
Is there a chance over entitled jerk pedestrians might be banned from the MUP?
They're not over-entitled. They're free citizens using public space at their own discretion. This is something like what 'freedom' means. Why is it so unreasonable to slow down, say 'excuse me' or something, and go round? Isn't this pretty close to what we expect cars to do when we're riding on the road? What is it about society that convinces everyone they must be allowed to travel at their chosen speed at all times?

When I rode motorcycles, I was constantly impeded by all other traffic on the road. I had, at that time, the fastest motorcycle ever produced by anyone. At no time did I expect other road users to accommodate my desire to travel at a consistent speed of 250+ km/h. Nor do I expect that at 90 km/h in my car, nor at 35 km/h on my bicycle. We all require accommodation at times from others, and we all must provide the like at other times. Or you can whine and moan about it on bikeforums, I guess.
Commodus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 10:34 AM   #56
Camilo
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Bikes:
Posts: 3,955
Quote:
Originally Posted by agent pombero View Post
No. It is a Multi Use Path. Which means there will be cyclists (faster traffic) mixing amongst pedestrians. Reasonable pedestrians stay to the right unless they wanted to get speared at 20 mph.
I am not saying that pedestrians don't need to consider other users, but I am saying that cyclists need to understand that the annoying behavior they see by pedestrians and other users is normal and should be expected. Any cyclist who is going 20mph in the vicinity of any other user is in the wrong, period. Go 20 on a path dedicated to bikes only? Could be perfectly safe. Do 20 on a path that has nobody else on it and good sight lines? Could be perfectly safe. Go 20 when there's any other user being overtaken? Almost always wrong.

Last edited by Camilo; 05-16-13 at 11:00 AM.
Camilo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 10:36 AM   #57
agent pombero
Mmm hm!
 
agent pombero's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Portland, Oregon
Bikes:
Posts: 1,164
Quote:
Originally Posted by Commodus View Post
They're not over-entitled. They're free citizens using public space at their own discretion. This is something like what 'freedom' means. Why is it so unreasonable to slow down, say 'excuse me' or something, and go round? Isn't this pretty close to what we expect cars to do when we're riding on the road? What is it about society that convinces everyone they must be allowed to travel at their chosen speed at all times?
I, too, am a free citizen using public space at my own discretion...
I'm not asking to be allowed to travel at my chosen speed at all times.
I'm asking for over entitled pedestrian jerks to actually move over when I say "Excuse me" or ding my bell.
I'm asking for over entitled pedestrian jerks to not run/walk on a MUP 5 abreast so that nobody can pass them.
I'm asking for over entitled pedestrian jerks to not use their iPhones while crossing in the middle of the street, between parked cars, without looking.
Etc.
agent pombero is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 10:57 AM   #58
GP 
Senior Member
 
GP's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 7,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by Commodus View Post
They're not over-entitled. They're free citizens using public space at their own discretion.
+1.
GP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 01:38 PM   #59
longbeachgary
Senior Member
 
longbeachgary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Beautiful Long Beach California
Bikes: Eddy Merckx MXL; 2012 CAAD10; 2013 CAAD10 - The Silver and Black; Cannondale CAAD10 DI2 - The Black Dahlia; 2013 Cannondale CAAD10 DI2, The Black Mambo
Posts: 3,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Camilo View Post
Frankly, I wouldn't ride up to anyone on a "bike path" that fast, regardless of calling out or whatever. You should overtake anyone -cyclist or pedestrian - at a safe speed that accounts for any boneheaded move they make. That means very slowly, hands on brakes, ASSUMING they'll be making some sort of unexpected move - not surprised by it.

I'm not saying the turning guy was not an idiot- he was. The overtaking rider, from what I see in the video was careless and more experience riding would teach him that he needs to be more cautious. This sort of thing happens all the time.

Like someone said above (to paraphrase) - you can "wish" all you want that pedestrians on MUPs would walk in a straight line, not listen to head phones, keep their kids and dogs on very short leashes, but SURPRISE!! they simply don't

Get over it. Ride according to what is really happening, not what you wish would happen. Unless it's a restricted bicycle only path, it's a MULTI USE path, and those other users have every right to use it, and the behaviors that are so annoying to some of you are simply NORMAL ways that people enjoy a walk.
Hey why not grab your video camera and show us less experienced cyclists how it's done? I know how easy it is for you to give advice to others from the comfort of your computer chair. If you don't have a camera or cant' afford one, I'll gladly send you one and you can even keep it. Man up and show us how it's done.
longbeachgary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 02:17 PM   #60
kalliergo 
Senior Member
 
kalliergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: SF Bay
Bikes: Trek Valencia+, Dutch cargo bike, Karate Monkey, etc.
Posts: 708
Quote:
Originally Posted by alhedges View Post
Another A&S post that shows that a lot of bikers are bullies just like the cars they are always complaining about. If a car passes too closely, it's whine, whine, whine...but because pedestrians are slower and weaker, they have to put up with whatever the more powerful cyclists want.

It's disgusting. And it's yet another reason why the populace at large doesn't like cyclists much.
Exactly right. If you want to share the road with users who behave like vehicles, use the road. If you want to ride on paths with pedestrians, slow down, yield, stop yelling at them, stop bullying.
__________________
"What if we fail to stop the erosion of cities by automobiles?. . . In that case, we Americans will hardly need to ponder a mystery that has troubled men for millennia: What is the purpose of life? For us, the answer will be clear, established and for all practical purposes indisputable: The purpose of life is to produce and consume automobiles."

~Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities
kalliergo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 02:24 PM   #61
kalliergo 
Senior Member
 
kalliergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: SF Bay
Bikes: Trek Valencia+, Dutch cargo bike, Karate Monkey, etc.
Posts: 708
Quote:
Originally Posted by longbeachgary View Post
Hey why not grab your video camera and show us less experienced cyclists how it's done?
It's done like this: Slow down and yield to peds and other slower users. Stop expecting/demanding that people walking behave like operators of vehicles; they don't and they won't.

Even an inexperienced cyclist shouldn't need video to learn this lesson. If you are having trouble, I have a nearby MUP that will teach you: The baby joggers will call Officer Mike, whose Harley is a lot faster than your bike. Officer Mike will write your citation, you will pay the fine, and then you can decide whether you want another, at the special repeat-offender price.
__________________
"What if we fail to stop the erosion of cities by automobiles?. . . In that case, we Americans will hardly need to ponder a mystery that has troubled men for millennia: What is the purpose of life? For us, the answer will be clear, established and for all practical purposes indisputable: The purpose of life is to produce and consume automobiles."

~Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities
kalliergo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 02:26 PM   #62
kalliergo 
Senior Member
 
kalliergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: SF Bay
Bikes: Trek Valencia+, Dutch cargo bike, Karate Monkey, etc.
Posts: 708
Quote:
Originally Posted by agent pombero View Post
I, too, am a free citizen using public space at my own discretion...
I'm not asking to be allowed to travel at my chosen speed at all times.
I'm asking for over entitled pedestrian jerks to actually move over when I say "Excuse me" or ding my bell.
I'm asking for over entitled pedestrian jerks to not run/walk on a MUP 5 abreast so that nobody can pass them.
I'm asking for over entitled pedestrian jerks to not use their iPhones while crossing in the middle of the street, between parked cars, without looking.
Etc.
You can't always get what you want, and you're not going to get what you're asking for here.
__________________
"What if we fail to stop the erosion of cities by automobiles?. . . In that case, we Americans will hardly need to ponder a mystery that has troubled men for millennia: What is the purpose of life? For us, the answer will be clear, established and for all practical purposes indisputable: The purpose of life is to produce and consume automobiles."

~Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities
kalliergo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 02:28 PM   #63
Keith99
Senior Member
 
Keith99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 5,866
Quote:
Originally Posted by alhedges View Post
You are walking in the wrong direction on the MUP. If you can't figure out how to use it, you should stay off.

Pedestrians have the right of way. You, as a cyclist, are required to yield to them under *all circumstances*. Even if you don't like how they are walking, or that they are listening to headphones.

The world was not set up for your convenience.


Again, more entitled BS from a cyclist who believes that *he* has all of the rights of the road, and pedestrians may only participate if they defer to cyclists. That's not how MUPs work. If you are biking on the MUP, you are required to yield to pedestrians. They have right of way, *even if* they are on the left.

If you can't figure out how to use a MUP, please stay off of them. The last thing we need is for a bunch of overentitled jerks to get bikes banned from the MUP.
Most actual MUPs are primarily for bikes. If it comes to banning it will be pedestrians that get banned.

Near me many paths that pedestrians think are MUPs are in fact bike paths, not MUPs.
Keith99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 02:36 PM   #64
longbeachgary
Senior Member
 
longbeachgary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Beautiful Long Beach California
Bikes: Eddy Merckx MXL; 2012 CAAD10; 2013 CAAD10 - The Silver and Black; Cannondale CAAD10 DI2 - The Black Dahlia; 2013 Cannondale CAAD10 DI2, The Black Mambo
Posts: 3,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by kalliergo View Post
It's done like this: Slow down and yield to peds and other slower users. Stop expecting/demanding that people walking behave like operators of vehicles; they don't and they won't.

Even an inexperienced cyclist shouldn't need video to learn this lesson. If you are having trouble, I have a nearby MUP that will teach you: The baby joggers will call Officer Mike, whose Harley is a lot faster than your bike. Officer Mike will write your citation, you will pay the fine, and then you can decide whether you want another, at the special repeat-offender price.
What are you talking about? You jumped into something that you know nothing about. Try to mind your own business.
longbeachgary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 02:52 PM   #65
kalliergo 
Senior Member
 
kalliergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: SF Bay
Bikes: Trek Valencia+, Dutch cargo bike, Karate Monkey, etc.
Posts: 708
Quote:
Originally Posted by longbeachgary View Post
What are you talking about? You jumped into something that you know nothing about. Try to mind your own business.
I was talking to you, among others, Gary. And I was talking about the subject under discussion. If you think I know "nothing about" it, you have a great deal to learn about me.

And I'll damned well jump into threads whenever and wherever I decide.

Further: You need to learn manners. Your mother should have taught you long ago, but she obviously failed.
__________________
"What if we fail to stop the erosion of cities by automobiles?. . . In that case, we Americans will hardly need to ponder a mystery that has troubled men for millennia: What is the purpose of life? For us, the answer will be clear, established and for all practical purposes indisputable: The purpose of life is to produce and consume automobiles."

~Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities
kalliergo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 02:54 PM   #66
kalliergo 
Senior Member
 
kalliergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: SF Bay
Bikes: Trek Valencia+, Dutch cargo bike, Karate Monkey, etc.
Posts: 708
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith99 View Post
Most actual MUPs are primarily for bikes. If it comes to banning it will be pedestrians that get banned.

Near me many paths that pedestrians think are MUPs are in fact bike paths, not MUPs.
Those assertions would be wildly wrong WRT the vast majority of MUPs in the US. Where do you live?
__________________
"What if we fail to stop the erosion of cities by automobiles?. . . In that case, we Americans will hardly need to ponder a mystery that has troubled men for millennia: What is the purpose of life? For us, the answer will be clear, established and for all practical purposes indisputable: The purpose of life is to produce and consume automobiles."

~Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities
kalliergo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 03:25 PM   #67
longbeachgary
Senior Member
 
longbeachgary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Beautiful Long Beach California
Bikes: Eddy Merckx MXL; 2012 CAAD10; 2013 CAAD10 - The Silver and Black; Cannondale CAAD10 DI2 - The Black Dahlia; 2013 Cannondale CAAD10 DI2, The Black Mambo
Posts: 3,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by kalliergo View Post
I was talking to you, among others, Gary. And I was talking about the subject under discussion. If you think I know "nothing about" it, you have a great deal to learn about me.

And I'll damned well jump into threads whenever and wherever I decide.

Further: You need to learn manners. Your mother should have taught you long ago, but she obviously failed.
Thank you for the laugh!!! I already know everything I ever want to know about you. You may go back to your knitting now.

Last edited by longbeachgary; 05-16-13 at 03:29 PM.
longbeachgary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 03:31 PM   #68
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 23,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith99 View Post
Most actual MUPs are primarily for bikes. If it comes to banning it will be pedestrians that get banned.

Near me many paths that pedestrians think are MUPs are in fact bike paths, not MUPs.
Who sez MUPs are primarily for bikes? You? Anyone else?

Where in the US is there a chance in heck that pedestrians are likely to banned from using an MUP because cyclists claim it as their own playground?
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 03:46 PM   #69
kalliergo 
Senior Member
 
kalliergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: SF Bay
Bikes: Trek Valencia+, Dutch cargo bike, Karate Monkey, etc.
Posts: 708
Quote:
Originally Posted by longbeachgary View Post
Thank you for the laugh!!! I already know everything I ever want to know about you. You may go back to your knitting now.
Quod erat demonstrandum.
__________________
"What if we fail to stop the erosion of cities by automobiles?. . . In that case, we Americans will hardly need to ponder a mystery that has troubled men for millennia: What is the purpose of life? For us, the answer will be clear, established and for all practical purposes indisputable: The purpose of life is to produce and consume automobiles."

~Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities
kalliergo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 03:49 PM   #70
GP 
Senior Member
 
GP's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Bikes:
Posts: 7,575
The MUP near my house is primarily for bikes. It has "bike trail" in its name. I doubt pedestrians or bikes would ever be banned. We don't seem to have any problems on it. It's raised and does not have any trees so lines of sight are excellent.
GP is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 04:28 PM   #71
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,573
Quote:
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike View Post
Who sez MUPs are primarily for bikes? You? Anyone else?

Where in the US is there a chance in heck that pedestrians are likely to banned from using an MUP because cyclists claim it as their own playground?
Depends on the MUP, location and design. One (yes, only one) near me has a parallel walking track... yet oddly peds still walk on the bike path itself. The sad fact is peds will go anywhere their legs will take them... just like cyclists will ride on sidewalks. No point in banning them, best for all to do a reality check and just get along.
genec is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 05:01 PM   #72
kalliergo 
Senior Member
 
kalliergo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: SF Bay
Bikes: Trek Valencia+, Dutch cargo bike, Karate Monkey, etc.
Posts: 708
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post
Depends on the MUP, location and design. One (yes, only one) near me has a parallel walking track... yet oddly peds still walk on the bike path itself. The sad fact is peds will go anywhere their legs will take them... just like cyclists will ride on sidewalks. No point in banning them, best for all to do a reality check and just get along.
In California, per the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, Class I bikeways (bike paths) are intended for bikes and peds.

Comparatively few adjacent pedestrian facilities exist.

Quote:
1003.1 Class I Bikeways (Bike Paths)

Class I bikeways (bike paths) are facilities with exclusive right of way, with cross flows by vehicles minimized.

Class I bikeways, unless adjacent to an adequate pedestrian facility, (see Index 1001.3(n)) are for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians, therefore any facility serving pedestrians must meet accessibility requirements, see DIB 82. However, experience has shown that if regular pedestrian use is anticipated, separate facilities for pedestrians may be beneficial to minimize conflicts.
Edit: The referenced accessibility guidelines are those established pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act.
__________________
"What if we fail to stop the erosion of cities by automobiles?. . . In that case, we Americans will hardly need to ponder a mystery that has troubled men for millennia: What is the purpose of life? For us, the answer will be clear, established and for all practical purposes indisputable: The purpose of life is to produce and consume automobiles."

~Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities
kalliergo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 06:14 PM   #73
genec
genec
 
genec's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Posts: 24,573
Quote:
Originally Posted by kalliergo View Post
In California, per the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, Class I bikeways (bike paths) are intended for bikes and peds.

Comparatively few adjacent pedestrian facilities exist.



Edit: The referenced accessibility guidelines are those established pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act.
This one has a well signed "adjacent pedestrian facility," with a split rail fence between the two. Peds don't care.
genec is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 06:23 PM   #74
longbeachgary
Senior Member
 
longbeachgary's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Beautiful Long Beach California
Bikes: Eddy Merckx MXL; 2012 CAAD10; 2013 CAAD10 - The Silver and Black; Cannondale CAAD10 DI2 - The Black Dahlia; 2013 Cannondale CAAD10 DI2, The Black Mambo
Posts: 3,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnabb100 View Post
It certainly did not sound like you called out very loudly, it sounded almost like a normal speaking voice. That's not loud enough, you gotta really use those pipes.

You complained at him louder than you called.


I'm not saying you're at fault, i'm just saying you could have done more to prevent it.
Thanks for your thoughtful response. Not sure we were watching the same video but I did prevent it. I could tell that he was acting funny when he stopped pedaling but there was no natural place for him to turn - if you notice he turned onto a gravel walkway that parallels the path. The camera that I used was a GoPro camera that fits into a plastic case. That's why it doesn't sound very loud but you have to know that I don't ride up behind people and scream at them. I appreciate your comments but there is just no way to be able to always avoid collissions except to do what a lot of the members here do and that's stay at their computer and not ride.
longbeachgary is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-16-13, 07:19 PM   #75
I-Like-To-Bike
Been Around Awhile
 
I-Like-To-Bike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Posts: 23,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by genec View Post
Depends on the MUP, location and design. One (yes, only one) near me has a parallel walking track... yet oddly peds still walk on the bike path itself. The sad fact is peds will go anywhere their legs will take them... just like cyclists will ride on sidewalks. No point in banning them, best for all to do a reality check and just get along.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kalliergo View Post
In California, per the Caltrans Highway Design Manual, Class I bikeways (bike paths) are intended for bikes and peds.

Comparatively few adjacent pedestrian facilities exist.
Thanks for the clarifications. Your explanations are certainly a lot different than this exaggerated claim:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith99 View Post
Most actual MUPs are primarily for bikes. If it comes to banning it will be pedestrians that get banned.

Near me many paths that pedestrians think are MUPs are in fact bike paths, not MUPs.
I-Like-To-Bike is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:59 PM.