My parents used to tell me to go play in the traffic...I guess they were ahead of their time. Folks are going to ride where they feel safer. Many times that ends up being the sidewalk.

All of the stories in this discussion are about one subject, the one subject that nobody mentions. They all are illustrations of the American cyclist-inferiority superstition.
This view is overwhelmingly held by American motorists. I don't expect motorists to adopt a different view by themselves, so it's up to us cyclists to change perceptions of our value.

I don't care if we add bike lanes, bike paths, yhaka-yahka, but the root of the problem is our place on the best part of the pie: American roads.

The fact that you merely suggest that I "READ" up on the subject says mountains for me. I actually do the things I am speaking of, rather then academically pontificate about them...

Try again.
Try: John Forester fares best when more people buy books on Effective Cycling.

or Try:

Promoters of Vehicular Cycling training fare better (psychically, if not financially) when more people/government organizations are convinced that cyclists need formal bicycling training.

Try: John Forester fares best when more people buy books on Effective Cycling.

or Try:

Promoters of Vehicular Cycling training fare better (psychically, if not financially) when more people/government organizations are convinced that cyclists need formal bicycling training.

The latter may be true, but I have yet to hear any plan that would encompass teaching these sidewalk utility cyclists that set the examples of "where to ride" for the motorists in the area. As long as more butts on bikes are on the sidewalks, that example speaks far louder than any negativity about bike lanes.

I live in a place where growth has been very slow. For decades hardly anything changed at all. Lately, since one portion of the county recently incorporated, there has been a lot of new growth. These new developments are much different from the older ones, which had been built in the 50s-70s.

These new developments tend to have these really nice, meandering sidewalks that appear very inviting, even to me. They are smooth, they curve, they are surrounded by low bushes, they almost even sort of look like they are supposed to be bike paths. It looks like it would be a lot more fun to ride up there than down here on the street, that's for sure. And indeed, you see a whole lot more people riding on sidewalks around these new developments than in the older ones.

Perhaps the way places are built has something to do with sidewalk cycling. Not only are the streets not too inviting to the average person considering riding their bike, but the sidewalks deal a double-whammy by being extra inviting.

I live in a place where growth has been very slow. For decades hardly anything changed at all. Lately, since one portion of the county recently incorporated, there has been a lot of new growth. These new developments are much different from the older ones, which had been built in the 50s-70s.

These new developments tend to have these really nice, meandering sidewalks that appear very inviting, even to me. They are smooth, they curve, they are surrounded by low bushes, they almost even sort of look like they are supposed to be bike paths. It looks like it would be a lot more fun to ride up there than down here on the street, that's for sure. And indeed, you see a whole lot more people riding on sidewalks around these new developments than in the older ones.

Perhaps the way places are built has something to do with sidewalk cycling. Not only are the streets not too inviting to the average person considering riding their bike, but the sidewalks deal a double-whammy by being extra inviting.

I can dig it. the last part of my route is a wide sidewalk through an office park. they lanscape it all nice with trees, flowers, plants and there's lots of birds... it's my favorite part of my commute! if they made the streets like that, with plants and trees in the median and alongside, and slowed the cars down, I'd be there, too!

So tell us, John. Can you provide some statistics showing how well your methods have gotten cyclists off the sidewalks? Hows the improvement rate in that area since you began your crusade?

I never kept statistics on the proportion of my students who were sidewalk cyclists before the course. I can certainly say that all those who passed were roadway cyclists and not sidewalk cyclists at all. The pass rate was above 95%.

John, I have actually done the same routes by both means... by using the VC method (my primary means of cycling) in the street using either a Saninno road bike or my custom flat bar commuter bike; and by sidewalk cycling on my curved toptube Huffy fat tire bike. I know exactly what it takes to negotiate intersections using either method.

The fact that you merely suggest that I "READ" up on the subject says mountains for me. I actually do the things I am speaking of, rather then academically pontificate about them.

My use of the term "being vigilant" was simply a means to reduce the writing clutter that a complex description would entail, much as your shortcutted "cyclists fare best..." slogan also achieves.

The bottom line is that the sidewalk cyclists feel quite satisfied in the results they achieve... how then can they be convinced that their method is far inferior... especially with such a worthless response as you have provided.

Oh, and above all... the whole reason for my queary here is to get sidewalk riding cyclists to ride in the street... Just like me. So motorists will be more accepting of what I do, rather than verbally insisting that I too should ride on sidewalks. But since sidewalk cyclists are apparenltly quite comfortable with what they do, and they too don't see street cycling as "faring better," I was hoping you had some real answers, vice the typical noise about "superstitions" and merely "reading."

Try again.

In 1994 Alan Wachtel and Diana Lewiston published a study of the car-bike collision rates along those streets in Palo Alto along which were sidewalk bike paths (dating back to 1972 as I recall) but which were not mandatory because state law did not allow mandatory sidepaths. Therefore, cyclists could ride on the sidewalk or on the roadway as they chose, and in the manner that they chose, while facing exactly the same quantity of traffic interactions. Wachtel and Lewiston compared the official car-bike collision statistics against the measured quantity of cyclists using each of the several options. They concluded that for all cyclists, riding on the sidewalk produced an accident rate 1.8 times that on the roadway, while it was 2.5 times for cyclists under 18 years of age, and 2.3 times for cyclists 18 years of age or older, and that wrong-way sidewalk cycling was particularly dangerous. Wachtel, A. and D. Lewiston: Risk Factors for Bicycle-Motor Vehicle Collisions at Intersections: ITE Journal Vol 64 No 9 Sept 1994, pp 30-35.

Did this study examine the fatality rate, or rate the severity of injuries?

A study done in Toronto found more accidents on the sidewalk, but less chance of major injuries.

Did this study examine the fatality rate, or rate the severity of injuries?

A study done in Toronto found more accidents on the sidewalk, but less chance of major injuries.
Forester brand accident studies (and the study referenced by Forester in this thread was conducted by one of his associates) never consider severity of cyclist injuries when inconvenient. This fatal error in gathering and measuring data alone makes the value of Forester brand studies worthless for credible risk analysis.

Tip: Look for the device of comparing "crash rates" with no consideration of the "crash" severities in the conclusion of a typical Forester Brand study.

I never kept statistics on the proportion of my students who were sidewalk cyclists before the course. I can certainly say that all those who passed were roadway cyclists and not sidewalk cyclists at all. The pass rate was above 95%.
You can say anything. You measured nothing.
The pass rate or score on Forester Brand Tests is correlated with no observable/measurable cycling behavior in those students outside of the class. Any changes in the students' cycling behavior after taking a Forester Brand class, no matter what the test "score", or any claim that the students "fare better" is also just as unobserved/unmeasured.

Statistics are an interesting thing... something over 2300 pedestrians die each year in car/ped accidents... using that stat alone, one might suspect that simply walking is far more dangerous then say riding a bike, an activity where some 700 cyclists are killed each year by motorists. People typically walk every day... they may not ride a bike for months.

In 1994 Alan Wachtel and Diana Lewiston published a study of the car-bike collision rates along those streets in Palo Alto along which were sidewalk bike paths (dating back to 1972 as I recall) but which were not mandatory because state law did not allow mandatory sidepaths. Therefore, cyclists could ride on the sidewalk or on the roadway as they chose, and in the manner that they chose, while facing exactly the same quantity of traffic interactions. Wachtel and Lewiston compared the official car-bike collision statistics against the measured quantity of cyclists using each of the several options. They concluded that for all cyclists, riding on the sidewalk produced an accident rate 1.8 times that on the roadway, while it was 2.5 times for cyclists under 18 years of age, and 2.3 times for cyclists 18 years of age or older, and that wrong-way sidewalk cycling was particularly dangerous. Wachtel, A. and D. Lewiston: Risk Factors for Bicycle-Motor Vehicle Collisions at Intersections: ITE Journal Vol 64 No 9 Sept 1994, pp 30-35.


Like I said... statistics are an intersting thing. According to that same report, I am better off being female. Males had a risk factor of .8 and females had a risk factor of .5. Then again over 3X as many males were observed as females.

Looking at the differences between sidewalk and roadway cyclists... the sidewalk riders faced a risk of 1 (gee, they "normalized" the study for sidewalk accidents) while roadway cyclists faced a risk of .4, but then again there were 4.5 times as many roadway cyclists observed.

What happens when the local cycling community has a far greater number using the sidewalks vice the roadway? Could it be that the motorists become accustomed to looking for cyclists on the sidewalks... a situation similar to that which is often mentioned should occur if more cyclists were on the street... motorists would supposedly become accustomed to seeing cyclists there.

Or to read the study a different way (albeit with the same figures): If you are in an area where the majority of cyclists are roadway cyclists... be a roadway cyclist... Now what happens if the majority of cyclists in an area are NOT roadway cyclists?

So a study should be done that compares various accident rates in an area where the majority of cyclists use sidewalks vice streets.

how to get sidewalk riders off the sidewalks?

high quality, on-road bike infrastructure.

So how do I get all the sidewalk riders in my part of town to stop riding on the sidewalks? It sets up the expectation of motorists that I am doing it wrong when I ride vehicularly in the street.
Thus the guys riding "wrong" feel they are doing it right, while I get the honks and yelling...


Maybe we should start with the Bicycle Police.
Yesterday I saw a bicycle mounted police officer riding on the sidewalk at a medium pace going in the opposite direction to the flow of traffic.
I wonder what the training for police officers entails when it comes to VC.
If the bike mounted police officer thinks they should stay on the sidewalk, what does that say to the motorist that see them?

Maybe we should start with the Bicycle Police.
Yesterday I saw a bicycle mounted police officer riding on the sidewalk at a medium pace going in the opposite direction to the flow of traffic.
I wonder what the training for police officers entails when it comes to VC.
If the bike mounted police officer thinks they should stay on the sidewalk, what does that say to the motorist that see them?

Valid point. If the VC crowd can't get the Law Enforcement groups to "do it right," what chance do they have getting utility cyclists to go VC.

Statistics are an interesting thing... something over 2300 pedestrians die each year in car/ped accidents... using that stat alone, one might suspect that simply walking is far more dangerous then say riding a bike, an activity where some 700 cyclists are killed each year by motorists. People typically walk every day... they may not ride a bike for months.
Downtown Honolulu, I have more close calls as a pedestrian than I do cycling and I spend more time downtown cycling than I do walking.

Valid point. If the VC crowd can't get the Law Enforcement groups to "do it right," what chance do they have getting utility cyclists to go VC.
Gee, I guess MADD is pointless too, since Honolulu has had a couple of high profile incidents that involved off-duty cops driving drunk.:rolleyes:

Gee, I guess MADD is pointless too, since Honolulu has had a couple of high profile incidents that involved off-duty cops driving drunk.:rolleyes:

LOL, might just be saying more about cops than we care to know.... :rolleyes:

However you were talking about "off duty" there...

What I was speaking of were cops "on duty" and on bikes.

Ohh pet peeve time Kids/elderlies riding on sidewalks...no issue there. Adults on the sidewalk, 16yrs plus, .... I have an issue with. Same issue as a car in a bike lane. Some old lady walks out of a store and gets creamed by someone toolin' by on the sidewalk. If I'm out walkin' with my kids and along comes some knob rollin' down the sidewalk I'm seriously temped to sidekick his ass into the street and stop endangering everyone on the sidewalk. The physics of say 145lbs of rider rolling, hitting someone walking is bad news. Everything has it's place, and at some point you have no excuse for ridin' your bike on the sidewalk....that's for people walking. Imagine all the peds walking in the door zone as you ride, you'd wanna kill them.

I don't think bike officers have to abide that rule, the 4 wheelers don't have to either. They use sidewalks and even drive across grass. The boardwalk says no motorized vehicles but I see patrols on it all the time.

Well if it's law enforcement, they generally do whatever the hell they want, no?

part of being a vc is knowing when to:

a. ignore the preaching driver, or

b. tell the preaching driver to stfu.

your perceived issue has nothing to do with other riders on the sidewalk and everything to do with you asserting yourself.

So how do I get all the sidewalk riders in my part of town to stop riding on the sidewalks?It's an interesting question. The simple and accurate answer was given by rando in the first response: "you can't"

The question of sidewalk cycling represents a true conundrum for cyclists, especially for vehicular cyclists. It's an issue that all cyclists must come to terms with in one way or another.

I have been trying to reconcile sidewalk cycling with traffic cycling for most of my life. Over the course of decades of transportational cycling, I've given sidewalk cycling more than a little thought.

It sets up the expectation of motorists that I am doing it wrong when I ride vehicularly in the street.Well, yea, maybe. It could argued that the existance of sidewalks represents a greater threat to societal acceptance of bicyclists' right to the road than the existance of bike lanes does. But, then, The Great One himself has decreed, in this very forum, that bicyclists should not oppose the existance of sidewalks, so we must reject any anti-sidewalk argument. :D

__ Even though the original purpose of sidewalks which, if I'm not mistaken, was to separate pedestrians from the mud, muck and horse poop of early roads, no longer exists.

Admittedly, a lot has changed since then. New uses of sidewalks have been found.

When it comes to discouraging sidewalk cycling, just about everything has already been tried-- and failed.

Propaganda has been tried. Vehicular cyclists have been bad-mouthing sidewalk cycling for decades. They have had some success. Despite an almost total lack of credible evidence that sidewalk cycling is inherently dangerous (especailly if accident severity and bicyclist experience are considered), the "sidewalk cycling is dangerous" myth (and I use the word 'myth' advisedly) has become the accepted wisdom in many circles.

And yet sidewalk cycling is alive and well.

"What went wrong?" you might ask.

Well, for one thing, as has been mentioned previously, claiming that sidewalk cycling is inherently dangerous is a sure-fire way to impeach your own credibilty. The claim doesn't pass any reasonable stink test. Even if they havent read accident studies and discovered that the evidence is inconclusive, sidewalk cyclists know intuitively that the 'sidewalk riding is dangerous' assertion in mostly a load of bull. (yes, yes, I know all about cyclist inferiority phobia and other nutcase theories of John Forester-- boy, talk about bull!-- tell me, Foresterites, what exactly are John Forester's credentials as a psychologist or social scientist? :rolleyes: -- Sheesh! don't make me laugh)

Indeed, riding on the sidewalk has it's dangers-- including some dangers that road cyclists don't face-- but the dangers are different, not greater. Yes, riding off the sidewalk into the street is dangerous. Well, duh! The average 5-year old knows that (even though that knowledge may not control the behavior of the average 5-year old). VC-ists list the dangers of sidewalk riding as if they have discovered some great, previously unknown, truth. What a joke! Is the average VC-ist smarter than a 5th grader? :D

Another thing that has gone very wrong for sidewalk cycling opponents is creation of ADA curb cuts, which has made sidewalk cycling much more convenient. There's no doubt that ADA curb cuts have worked against VC-ists' anti-sidewalk cycling efforts. But it's doubtful that the anti-sidewalk riding crowd wants to be in the position of advocating that the handicapped should be either forced out into the street or denied access to desinations served by sidewalks. I can hardly think of a more obvious 'shoot yourself in the foot' position for cycling advocates to take.

Laws against sidewalk cycling have been tried. Such laws have failed spectacularly. They are unenforceable at best. At worst, they are selctively enforced and used as an instrument of racial profiling and harassment. Many police officers are understandably reluctant to stop a cyclist simply for being on a sidewalk. If a cyclist is doing something dangerous, such as riding too fast or endangering a pedestrian, stop them for that; there's no need for laws that make riding carefully, at pedestrian speed, illegal.

As a rules of the road 'vehicular' cyclist for decades, I have a pet peeve: so-called cycling advocates who aren't opposed to anti-sidewalk riding laws -- laws whose primary use (regardless of what their intent is) has historically been selective harassment.

There's no reasonable way to put an end to sidewalk cycling.

There's no cure that wouldn't be worse than the disease.

your perceived issue has nothing to do with other riders on the sidewalk and everything to do with you asserting yourself.You are quite right. Sidewalk cyclists are not the problem at all. They are both a distraction from the real problem and a symptom of it.

LOL, might just be saying more about cops than we care to know.... :rolleyes:

However you were talking about "off duty" there...

What I was speaking of were cops "on duty" and on bikes.
And being "on duty" allows them to legally break some traffic laws, and therefore says nothing about VC. So there is no point to your attempted connection.

what about all the rent-a-bike cops? btw I had a great time riding on the sidewalk today! in the exclusion zone, too. yee haw!

It's a violation of my city's municipal code to ride a bike on the sidewalk in a business or residential district (most of the town) if you're over 12 years of age, and according to the code all violations are misdemeanors (defined as a crime punishable by up to 1 year in jail and/or a fine up to $1000) unless noted otherwise. Private persons can arrest any person they observe committing a misdemeanor in California. By my interpretation of the law I could spend all day arresting every adult I observed operating a bicycle in violation of the municipal code and calling the police to take custody of them, but I have better things to do.

http://www.ci.santa-maria.ca.us/3033-MuniCodeTitle7.pdf See page 29.

Randya, as far as private security officers, they have to obey the same laws as any other private person (in California at least).

And being "on duty" allows them to legally break some traffic laws, and therefore says nothing about VC. So there is no point to your attempted connection.

Vehicular police officers are bound to the rules of the road, unless in pursuit or in route to an emergency.
I think bicycle mounted officers are, or should be bound to these same laws and guide lines.

And being "on duty" allows them to legally break some traffic laws, and therefore says nothing about VC. So there is no point to your attempted connection.

OK you're a VC cyclist... think about it... what "example" do you want the local police setting for other cyclists? Riding in Bike Lanes? Riding on the Sidewalk? Or riding Vehicularly in the street?

And think about what an example those cops and other cyclists set for motorists... who see these "sidewalk cyclists" and then figure every cyclist should be on the sidewalk.

the street cyclist get the adrenaline rush of almost dying at every turn = fared better ;)

w00t! :D

OK you're a VC cyclist... think about it... what "example" do you want the local police setting for other cyclists? Riding in Bike Lanes? Riding on the Sidewalk? Or riding Vehicularly in the street?

And think about what an example those cops and other cyclists set for motorists... who see these "sidewalk cyclists" and then figure every cyclist should be on the sidewalk.

+1 ..... They should not only enforce, but lead by {good} example, especially when on duty.

Does this mean I can't kick 'em off the sidewalk? As for law enforcement I'm not terribly concerned about them leading by example (in terms of riding) because usually the quickest way around isn't the most legal ... ask any messenger.

the real cops and the fake cops can all ride on the sidewalks in PDX, and they frequently do. even the motorcycle cops do it sometimes.

Does this mean I can't kick 'em off the sidewalk? As for law enforcement I'm not terribly concerned about them leading by example (in terms of riding) because usually the quickest way around isn't the most legal ... ask any messenger.

No perhaps not, but the whole thing negates the concept that Vehicular cyclists are teaching others by example... No way, no how... not when the cyclists most often seen are not vehicular, and don't see any advantage in being so... especially when even law enforcement won't do it.

Now if Helmet Head and JF can get Law Enforcement to ride vehicularly... and set examples... maybe, just maybe they might have a chance at the rest of the sidewalk cyclists.

Of course then along comes some firm like like this one:
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=317749
and that really screws the pooch.

The whole point of bicycle police is to interact with the unmounted public. Now how are they going to do that while riding vehicularly the whole time? Do you seriously expect them to ride around at 20mph all day, day after day? That's what they have police crusers and motorcycle cops for.

The whole point of bicycle police is to interact with the unmounted public. Now how are they going to do that while riding vehicularly the whole time? Do you seriously expect them to ride around at 20mph all day, day after day? That's what they have police crusers and motorcycle cops for.

Whoa there cowboy... JF has constantly preached that you don't have to do VC at 20MPH, and that it works perfectly well at any speed. Seems to me the cops can interact just fine with the public at 8MPH while on a 50MPH arterial. :rolleyes:

Whoa there cowboy... JF has constantly preached that you don't have to do VC at 20MPH, and that it works perfectly well at any speed. Seems to me the cops can interact just fine with the public at 8MPH while on a 50MPH arterial. :rolleyes:
Yeah, but that's not the road or the part of town where all the pedestrians are.

In San Diego, for example, it would probably only be logical to use bicycle police in the old town eating and shopping district, and perhaps other local shopping districts, in a non-vehicular manner. using bicycle police on the San Diego high speed arterial grid makes no sense whatsoever.

Yeah, but that's not the road or the part of town where all the pedestrians are.

In San Diego, for example, it would probably only be logical to use bicycle police in the old town eating and shopping district, and perhaps other local shopping districts, in a non-vehicular manner. using bicycle police on the San Diego high speed arterial grid makes no sense whatsoever.

Actually they could work quite well in the downtown area too... where vehicular cycling would work very well... especially considering the density of pedestrians on the sidewalks.

Currently bike cops in San Diego tend to patrol the beach areas... where the "boardwalk" pretty much demands that the cops are going to ride on the "sidewalk."

There'd be little use for bike patrols if bike cops couldn't ride on sidewalks. The advantage of the bicycle is that it can go almost anywhere.

Can You Pass The Bike Cop Test? (http://www.bicycling.com/article/1,6610,s1-4-41-13233-3,00.html)

"Bike cops are most effectively used in downtown business districts, college campuses, airports, crowded inner-city neighborhoods, tourist areas and other pedestrian zones, where it's important to have ballet-like, slow-speed bike-handling skills--and look good doing them."

I wonder how bike cops deal with all the hazards that the anti-sidewalk riding crowd are always talking about. Could it be that the hazards of riding on the sidewalk are manageable -- just as the hazards of riding in traffic are manageable -- with the proper training?

The function of bike cops is not to be rolling advertisments for VC brand of cycling education. Bike cops have their own brand of certified training.

http://www.ipmba.org/index.htm

I wonder if bike cops riding on the sidewalk ever ticket bicyclists for riding on the sidewalk.

There'd be little use for bike patrols if bike cops couldn't ride on sidewalks. The advantage of the bicycle is that it can go almost anywhere.

Can You Pass The Bike Cop Test? (http://www.bicycling.com/article/1,6610,s1-4-41-13233-3,00.html)

"Bike cops are most effectively used in downtown business districts, college campuses, airports, crowded inner-city neighborhoods, tourist areas and other pedestrian zones, where it's important to have ballet-like, slow-speed bike-handling skills--and look good doing them."

I wonder how bike cops deal with all the hazards that the anti-sidewalk riding crowd are always talking about. Could it be that the hazards of riding on the sidewalk are maneageable -- just as the hazards of riding in traffic are maneagable -- with the proper training?

The function of bike cops is not to be rolling advertisments for VC brand of cycling education. Bike cops have their own brand of certified training.

http://www.ipmba.org/index.htm

I wonder if bike cops riding on the sidewalk ever ticket bicyclists for riding on the sidewalk.

Yeah, in my youth I thought midnight ninja cyclists could take on the taggers in my area of town... before I realized that some of those guys might be carrying guns as well as paint. I was so tired of waking up in the morning to find a fence full of scribble... used to drive me quite nuts.

Reading that link you sent and with reference to street cycling and the conversation we were having, I saw this: After a ho-hum morning in the classroom learning how to pronounce "derailleur" and watching the 20-year-old film Effective Cycling (key points: avoid puddles, because you can't tell how deep they are; beware intersections, where 80 percent of bike-car accidents occur; and for general safety, "drive" your bike on the street as if it were a car)...

Overall damn interesting story. Can't say I could pass, but I could probably score a good solid, uh, 78. :D

...the power slide, a rear-brake hook-slide in front of a perp to end a high-speed pursuit.
I dunno, maybe this is something like Serge's power weave...

:roflmao:

I dunno, maybe this is something like Serge's power weave...

:roflmao:

Can you imagine someone doing that in front of a car... :eek: "Stop, I say!"

So how do I get all the sidewalk riders in my part of town to stop riding on the sidewalks?

punch the offending cyclist in the face. If they get punched enough times and told not to ride on the sidewalk, they wont anymore. They will equate riding on the sidewalk with getting punched in the face. :):p:)

punch the offending cyclist in the face. If they get punched enough times and told not to ride on the sidewalk, they wont anymore. They will equate riding on the sidewalk with getting punched in the face. :):p:)

Well that's roughly what drives cyclists to the sidewalk. Getting "punched" by rude motorists that honk, yell and otherwise pressure cyclists to get off of the road.

Well that's roughly what drives cyclists to the sidewalk. Getting "punched" by rude motorists that honk, yell and otherwise pressure cyclists to get off of the road.


No. what drives cyclists to the sidewalk is their sheer laziness to learn how to properly ride a bike in traffic. If the sidewalk monkeys learned to ride properly, they would be scared little sissies who are too afraid to ride normally on the street.

and BTW, i was being sarcastic with my previous post.

If these sidewalk riders arent impeding your forward motion
in anyway, why are you so worried about them ?
I never was a sidewalk rider until I came to FL.
There are 6' wide sidewalks that people do not wlk on.
Miles of them. Im going to ride in traffic on Alt.1 and risk
getting knocked over or at least crowded and beeped at every 15 seconds
or ride a perfect sidewalk that will never see a ped ?? Really......Its a
no brainer.

No. what drives cyclists to the sidewalk is their sheer laziness to learn how to properly ride a bike in traffic. If the sidewalk monkeys learned to ride properly, they would be scared little sissies who are too afraid to ride normally on the street.

and BTW, i was being sarcastic with my previous post.


I ride quite properly on the street in traffic... believe me it is no "walk in the park." Nary a week goes by when someone doesn't inform me of their displeasure. Seems the only offered solution is to simply ignore it.

Many folks have decided that riding on the sidewalk is the proper alternative... easy to see why they might chose to do so, as it seems to be the "information" so often offered.

Now while sidewalk cyclists hardly impede my progress... their very presence on sidewalks seems only to encourage those that would like to see all cyclists "out of the way."

If these sidewalk riders arent impeding your forward motion
in anyway, why are you so worried about them ?
I never was a sidewalk rider until I came to FL.
There are 6' wide sidewalks that people do not wlk on.
Miles of them. Im going to ride in traffic on Alt.1 and risk
getting knocked over or at least crowded and beeped at every 15 seconds
or ride a perfect sidewalk that will never see a ped ?? Really......Its a
no brainer.

sidewalks here are pretty narrow, busy with pedestrians and children. They are no place to be ripping around like some cyclists do. At least once a week a pedestrian gets nailed by a cyclist.

Bikes have no business on the sidewalk, unless you a small kid under 6.

nuff said.

sidewalks here are pretty narrow, busy with pedestrians and children.
nuff said.

Where is "here"?