Commuting - 15 mph Bike Path Speed Limit Lifted

I don’t know who did the lobbying, but our local parks and rec department recently eliminated the unenforceable 15 mph speed limit on all bike paths in town. Now cyclists are merely required to ride at a “safe speed.” This is a nice change, because anytime a cyclist complained about anything (like being bitten by a dog), the response was “you cyclists ride faster than 15 mph.” I guess they wanted the penalty for speeding to be a dog attack.

Our bike path is surprisingly good for commuting. It goes along a river for about fifteen miles and has few intersections with roads. It is almost deserted during morning commuter time, and it is not crowded in the evening. Parks and Rec plans to start cracking down on rule violators, so I'm glad this is no longer a rule.

Edit: I'm NOT arguing that cyclists should treat the path as a race track. We still need to show courtesy to other users by 1) passing only when safe and after ringing a bell, 2) not passing too close, 3) riding at a speed reasonable for the conditions, and 4) understanding that sometimes other people will throw us off our cadence.

15mph speed limit? What a silly idea. I don't use a cycle computer and I certainly wouldn't start using one.

15mph speed limit? What a silly idea. I don't use a cycle computer and I certainly wouldn't start using one.

On a lot of multi-use paths, 15mph is a pretty good speed to ride at. Around my area they use hand held radar to write tickets on the paths. That said, I don't like paths due to other users, and stay on the roads.

On a lot of multi-use paths, 15mph is a pretty good speed to ride at. Around my area they use hand held radar to write tickets on the paths. That said, I don't like paths due to other users, and stay on the roads.

15 mph is OK on parts of the path when they are at their busiest, but this is the Midwest, not the Bay Area. Most of the path is sparsley used during morning commuting hours, so 15 mph would be silly. Even in the evening, 20 mph is almost always fine.

I'm not even sure any speed limit would be legally enforceable, except, perhaps, as a mere violation of park rules. Under state and city law, cyclists are only bound by the traffic code on roads and on paths set aside "for the exclusive use of bicycles." Once they let a pedestrian set foot on the path, the speed limits became unenforceable.

Cyclists need to be courteous, but if pedestrians don't enjoy being around 20-25 mph bicycles, they should stick to the sidewalks. When I ride on country roads, I'm not happy that cars buzz by me at 60 mph, but I don't ask for a statewide 25 mph speed limit.

On a lot of multi-use paths, 15mph is a pretty good speed to ride at. Around my area they use hand held radar to write tickets on the paths. That said, I don't like paths due to other users, and stay on the roads.

Wow, I'm amazed that the police have so little to occupy them that setting speed traps on bike paths is considered a worthwhile use of their time.

I'm not surprised that the safety brigade has set limits though, especially on multi user paths and given the pedestrian rights in California (generally a good thing). The problem is expecting different groups of users to watch out for each other, but this is a subject that has been discussed many times before. The only "bike paths" I have used recently are when visiting LA (my wife spends a lot of time there) and I ride down to the beach. Folks still walk about aimlessly on the bike lane despite it being posted as bike use only - I try not to get upset by this since we are all at the beach to have fun and be "aimless" for a while. In busy areas, new signs appeared recently that directed cyclists to dismount. I'll be watching for speed limits next! I much prefer to be a "proper vehicle" and ride on the road

Good news about the limit being lifted though, that is surprising in this day and age - I'm amazed, when I travel to the USA, at the number of "Dont do that" signs in public places.

Cheers, and happy riding at 15+

Ed

How in the world do you ticket somone for speeding on a bike path????? In a court of law it would never hold up. What if a 7 year old kid is going 18 miles per hour on the bike path???? TIcket them? DO you have to carry an ID to ride on the bike path. What if you don't have a drivers lic. It is unconstitutional to "require" somone to carry and ID. If I were "pulled over on a bike path" I would tell the "officer" that my name was Howdy Doodie and I would be certain to "rush" off and pay my fine. Then I would toss my "ticket" in the nearest trash can. If I got pulled over again..I would say I had never been on the bike trail before in my life and I had no idea what they were talking about and they have mistaken me for someone else named Howdy Doodie. And then I would tell them that my name was mickey mouse and I will gladly rush off and pay my ticket. then I would .....etc. etc. you get the point

How in the world do you ticket somone for speeding on a bike path????? In a court of law it would never hold up. What if a 7 year old kid is going 18 miles per hour on the bike path???? TIcket them? DO you have to carry an ID to ride on the bike path. What if you don't have a drivers lic. It is unconstitutional to "require" somone to carry and ID. If I were "pulled over on a bike path" I would tell the "officer" that my name was Howdy Doodie and I would be certain to "rush" off and pay my fine. Then I would toss my "ticket" in the nearest trash can. If I got pulled over again..I would say I had never been on the bike trail before in my life and I had no idea what they were talking about and they have mistaken me for someone else named Howdy Doodie. And then I would tell them that my name was mickey mouse and I will gladly rush off and pay my ticket. then I would .....etc. etc. you get the point

Lie to a cop at your own peril--you could turn a minor ticket into a crime (just ask Martha Stewart). The cop can also hold you long enough to establish your real identity.

You didn't answer my question about the KID speeding. What if you didn't pay the fine? I think that it is impossible to "legally" fine someone for speeding on a bike trail. It is much different than a car. With a car one is tested to competency of the task AND then they are issued a LIc to show proof of 1) who they are 2) that they have been tested and proven they understand the "rules" of the roadway. Many people in this country fail the drivers licence test and are NOT allowed to drive a car. The ones who do pass the test know the rules and laws and have been informed that violating the rules (laws) are subject to penalties. Now with that in mind....the only way I feel the law can be held up is by testing competency on riding a bike and requiring a bicycle license (LOL). there is a guy in my town who is mentally challenged. He rides his bike everywhere. He has no concept of what a road sign is. If he saw a sign that said speed limit sign that said 15 mph limit he wouldn't be able to distinguish it from a popeye's chicken advertisement sign! This same guy can't drive a car for one of the reason he has no concept of traffic laws. He doesn't know what a stop sign is and this results him stopping at every intersection regardless of right of way or not (which somtimes is annoying but at least he isn't getting killed. One of the reasons there is an age restriction for Mototists is because 13 year old kids (or any other under age) have poor concept of traffic laws. (of course there is other reasons like judgement which comes with obeying traffic laws) I just personally feel that a bike path speed limit is wrong wrong wrong. Perhaps having a nuisance ordinance is much more hmm should I say constitutional. Sure kick a biker off a path for being a nusisance (dangerous speed or whatever but specifying limitations can get dicey.

You didn't answer my question about the KID speeding. What if you didn't pay the fine? I think that it is impossible to "legally" fine someone for speeding on a bike trail. It is much different than a car. With a car one is tested to competency of the task AND then they are issued a LIc to show proof of 1) who they are 2) that they have been tested and proven they understand the "rules" of the roadway. Many people in this country fail the drivers licence test and are NOT allowed to drive a car. The ones who do pass the test know the rules and laws and have been informed that violating the rules (laws) are subject to penalties. Now with that in mind....the only way I feel the law can be held up is by testing competency on riding a bike and requiring a bicycle license (LOL). there is a guy in my town who is mentally challenged. He rides his bike everywhere. He has no concept of what a road sign is. If he saw a sign that said speed limit sign that said 15 mph limit he wouldn't be able to distinguish it from a popeye's chicken advertisement sign! This same guy can't drive a car for one of the reason he has no concept of traffic laws. He doesn't know what a stop sign is and this results him stopping at every intersection regardless of right of way or not (which somtimes is annoying but at least he isn't getting killed. One of the reasons there is an age restriction for Mototists is because 13 year old kids (or any other under age) have poor concept of traffic laws. (of course there is other reasons like judgement which comes with obeying traffic laws) I just personally feel that a bike path speed limit is wrong wrong wrong. Perhaps having a nuisance ordinance is much more hmm should I say constitutional. Sure kick a biker off a path for being a nusisance (dangerous speed or whatever but specifying limitations can get dicey.

Kids can be ticketed, too. Same with the mentally ill (I hope the guy in your town stays safe). I guess you'd just have to hope the cop would some common sense enforcing the limit. I think in Ohio, at least for now, the most you could get cited for on a bike path is a violation of park rules. Traffic laws (like speeding) apply only on paths excusively reserved for bikes.

I agree that the numeric speed limit was stupid. But if the government wanted to pass and enforce a numeric speed limit, it could.

Well with that all said and done I guess I am glad I don't live in the peoples republic of COlumbus. I don't think you are right about ticketing a kid though. What is th e cop gonna do..they can't take em down to city hall and book em! They would have to call juvenile...I can hear it now..judge right after hearing a car theft case..OK billy lets see here you are a menace to society because you went 16 miles per hour in on a bike. Heck I woulld tell my kid to run like he!! if somone tried to apprehend them for somthing like that on a bike trail. I would rather have my attorney get me out of my kid running from a cop for an unenforcable law then be abducted by a person posing as a cop on a bike trail nailing speeders!!! Let me get this right you can get cited for speeding on a bike path????? What is the violation called? Speeding? Does it go on some sort of driving...oops "riding record?" what rights or priveleges do you lose if you refuse to pay your fine? Do you get kicked off the trail? is there some sort of check in at the trailhead? There is no way it could go on any sort of motorist record I know that one for sure. Example is a kid who has no motorist record to fault. It must be some sort of disorderly conduct thing or ordinance. In fact the more I think about this the more I realize that the peoples republic of columbus lifted the "law" because some attourney in town realized that a speeding law on a bike trail really can't be a law or an enfoceable one in court or on the trail. TOo many variables. They would require everyone to have a speedometer (correctly calibrated) on their bike.

Well with that all said and done I guess I am glad I don't live in the peoples republic of COlumbus. . . .

Remember, Columbus LIFTED the numeric speed limit on the bike paths. The parks and rec folks realized a mistake and corrected it. They deserve praise, not condemnation.

In response to another post, I said that, in theory, a government could pass a speed limit and enforce it on kids. But in reality, Columbus is not doing that.

but if pedestrians don't enjoy being around 20-25 mph bicycles, they should stick to the sidewalks.

What part of multi use path didn't you understand? I find it humorous that on one hand we all ***** and complain about motorists, but then thumb or collective noses at regulations which impact us directly.

Bit of the pot calling the kettle black, I think.

What part of multi use path didn't you understand? I find it humorous that on one hand we all ***** and complain about motorists, but then thumb or collective noses at regulations which impact us directly.

Bit of the pot calling the kettle black, I think.

I don't deny pedestrians the right to be there, just like I don't deny my right to ride on country roads. I said only that pedestrians who can't deal with 20-25 mph bikes shouldn't be on bike paths ("multi-use paths" in bureaucratese), just like cyclists who can't deal with 60 mph cars shouldn't be on country roads (which are also, in a sense, "multi-use paths").

The "multi" part of the path means all users get reasonable use. 15 mph is not reasonable for a bike path, especially when most of the path is mostly empty most of the time. As a matter of policy, a 15 mph speed limit for bikes on a "multi-use path" makes as much sense as a 30 mph limit for cars on country "multi-use" roads. Apparently, the Parks and Rec folks agree, because they dropped the numeric limit.

And as for the rules being the rules, under Ohio and Columbus law, I don't see how the Parks department could create an enforceable speed limit on a "multi-use" path. Both codes clearly apply traffic rules only to roads and paths that only bikes may use. You can say that's a bad idea, but if you rely on the law, you'd better be able to show that the law's on your side.

The paths in city parks in Minneapolis are posted at 10 mph; it's a bit silly, but those paths are so rotten it's no surprise. Almost every user goes 12-14 mph but very few go over 15, at least during peak usage. There are far too many corners and pedestrians around for that. See attached photos.

The paths in city parks in Minneapolis are posted at 10 mph; it's a bit silly, but those paths are so rotten it's no surprise. Almost every user goes 12-14 mph but very few go over 15, at least during peak usage. There are far too many corners and pedestrians around for that. See attached photos.

I could see some parks posting low limits, but the city wants cyclists to use ours as a thru-way to work. And there is still a limit, cyclists must stay at a "safe speed." That means if I run into someone, I'm speeding. It also means I can't barrel around a blind curve without keeping an assured clear stopping distance in front of me.

I was surprised to see this post - I'm an occasional user of that path, and it's really not hard to go above 15 when just criusing along. Honestly, I've never obeyed that imposed limit, at least not intentionally. I think most of the riders on (that I've seen) are fairly courteous, heh, and most I've seen are also going well above the previosly posted limit.

As far as ticketing a minor, it happens, for all sorts of things other than just riding a bicycle. I was ticketed when I was younger for "riding a bicycle in the business district". An offense for which there were no posted signs, and to add insult, there were bike lockers at the major parking garage in the downtown area (Toledo). There were extenuating circumstances though, as I (and several others) led the police on a 15 minute escape (looong story) which ended when one of got a flat. I was made the example. So, I agree, if the city really 'wanted' to enforce it, they could.

I'm glad to hear of the lifting of the ban (sorry, I'm a little late in reading this). I try to ride mainly on the streets, and have even started a website to promote street routes for cyclists in Columbus, but when it comes to people on the bike path, it's usually the bike riders I'm least concerned with. I know that a halfway decent cyclist has a much better ability to avoid a collision that a roller blader taking up the entire path or a jogger running with headphones on. I think the name of the game is to be comfortable with the speed you are going, and to just be courteous.

Maybe I'm reading too much between the lines, but by changing the speed limit from a set speed to a "safe for conditions" speed, your city has given police the authority to ticket you whenever they feel like it. It's subjective as to what speed is safe, and it's entirely their call.

Maybe I'm reading too much between the lines, but by changing the speed limit from a set speed to a "safe for conditions" speed, your city has given police the authority to ticket you whenever they feel like it. It's subjective as to what speed is safe, and it's entirely their call.

But they have to be able to back it up in court. In the end, it would be the judge's call. As far as I know, cops never tried to enforce the 15 mph limit, so they probably don't want to waste their time on something more difficult to prove. Also, it's not the same as a traffic ticket. Traffic laws in Ohio only apply to bikes on roads and pure bike paths, so the cops could only cite you for some kind of park rule violation. The rule would probably come into play only if there's an accident.

Yeah, it would ultimately be the judge's call if it went that far, but even then it would be based on the conditions as described in the citation or the cop's testimony. When it's a cop's word vs. your word, who do you think the judge will believe?

Incidentally, at least in California, posted speed "limit" signs don't mean so much. A cop can make the judgment that you're going too fast for conditions (traffic, weather, etc.) even if you're going 10 below the posted limit. He'll give you a ticket, and it will hold up if you fight it.

So what happens to people who don't have a bike computer and can't tell how fast they're going? It's not like bike computers are required like cars are required to have instruments like that.

So what happens to people who don't have a bike computer and can't tell how fast they're going? It's not like bike computers are required like cars are required to have instruments like that.

One is welcome to try this in court while fighting the ticket, but it probably won't help you much. They don't really care whether you knew you were going over the speed limit. The fact is that an officer says you were, and you can't offer any evidence that you weren't.

How do the cops usually get around on the trails? Are they on bikes or motorcycles? If I was flagged down by some cop on say...a mountain bike, and I was decked out for speed on my road bike...I would just hit the hyperdrive...just like Han in the Falcon. Problem is he would probably radio another cop and try to intercept me a couple miles down the trail. I'd have to get off the trail as soon as I could and improvise a route home on back streets.

Maybe its just the cocky 20 year old in me talking, but a cop bike chase would be a huge rush. Maybe I'll wear a skin suit and put some TT bars on my bike just in case...some aero wheels and one of those really streamlined helmets might help too. LOL! Put a couple grand into building a bike specifically designed for outrunning bike trail cops...Howdy Doody pedaling like a madman with Judas Priest's "Breaking the Law" playing in the background.

If it was a motorcycle cop, then thats a different story...LOL!

. . . If I was flagged down by some cop on say...a mountain bike, and I was decked out for speed on my road bike...I would just hit the hyperdrive...just like Han in the Falcon. Problem is he would probably radio another cop and try to intercept me a couple miles down the trail.

I have seen cops on bikes on the path, but they're not concerned about speed. I've rung my bell, shouted "on your left," and passed them. I think they didn't enforce the "limit" because there's no legal force behind the signs in Columbus and because they have better things to do with their time.

As for the chase, you could probably outrun one bike cop, but, as you noted, they have radios and lots and lots of friends. It could be a thrill, but you might just turn a warning into a felony.

You didn't answer my question about the KID speeding. What if you didn't pay the fine? I think that it is impossible to "legally" fine someone for speeding on a bike trail. It is much different than a car. With a car one is tested to competency of the task AND then they are issued a LIc to show proof of 1) who they are 2) that they have been tested and proven they understand the "rules" of the roadway. Many people in this country fail the drivers licence test and are NOT allowed to drive a car. The ones who do pass the test know the rules and laws and have been informed that violating the rules (laws) are subject to penalties. Now with that in mind....the only way I feel the law can be held up is by testing competency on riding a bike and requiring a bicycle license (LOL). there is a guy in my town who is mentally challenged. He rides his bike everywhere. He has no concept of what a road sign is. If he saw a sign that said speed limit sign that said 15 mph limit he wouldn't be able to distinguish it from a popeye's chicken advertisement sign! This same guy can't drive a car for one of the reason he has no concept of traffic laws. He doesn't know what a stop sign is and this results him stopping at every intersection regardless of right of way or not (which somtimes is annoying but at least he isn't getting killed. One of the reasons there is an age restriction for Mototists is because 13 year old kids (or any other under age) have poor concept of traffic laws. (of course there is other reasons like judgement which comes with obeying traffic laws) I just personally feel that a bike path speed limit is wrong wrong wrong. Perhaps having a nuisance ordinance is much more hmm should I say constitutional. Sure kick a biker off a path for being a nusisance (dangerous speed or whatever but specifying limitations can get dicey.

Kids are rountinely ticketed in my town for skateboarding where it is restricted, ticketing them for a bike violation would be no different.

How do the cops usually get around on the trails? Are they on bikes or motorcycles? If I was flagged down by some cop on say...a mountain bike, and I was decked out for speed on my road bike...I would just hit the hyperdrive...just like Han in the Falcon. Problem is he would probably radio another cop and try to intercept me a couple miles down the trail. I'd have to get off the trail as soon as I could and improvise a route home on back streets.

Maybe its just the cocky 20 year old in me talking, but a cop bike chase would be a huge rush. Maybe I'll wear a skin suit and put some TT bars on my bike just in case...some aero wheels and one of those really streamlined helmets might help too. LOL! Put a couple grand into building a bike specifically designed for outrunning bike trail cops...Howdy Doody pedaling like a madman with Judas Priest's "Breaking the Law" playing in the background.

If it was a motorcycle cop, then thats a different story...LOL!

I've often thought the same thing. I've seen a couple cops riding their weighed-down mountain bikes and realized I could smoke them if I wanted to. It would be fun until they put out an all points bulletin on a white Bianchi. I think they're mostly there to keep people from being totally reckless and to check out chicks. Not too bad of a job. I've never had a problem with them, even when I whiz by at 22-23 mph.

The other day I was out cycling with a group of about twenty on a recreational ride. I was riding beside a friend on a bike path, still with plenty of room on the left to pass. A jerk comes barrelling down the trail, yelling at us to get over single file -- he's training. The track and there is one here is for training. The bike path is a public space for recreation. It is not for training. iIthink 15 is a reasonable speed limit for a bike path.

The other day I was out cycling with a group of about twenty on a recreational ride. I was riding beside a friend on a bike path, still with plenty of room on the left to pass. A jerk comes barrelling down the trail, yelling at us to get over single file -- he's training. The track and there is one here is for training. The bike path is a public space for recreation. It is not for training. iIthink 15 is a reasonable speed limit for a bike path.
Do you think 15 mph is a reasonable limit when the path is nearly empty at 7am on a cold weekday morning? In my experience, the 15 mph blanket limit is silly. On a few parts of the path on some days, even 15 mph is unreasonably fast. On most parts of the path most of the time, 25 mph is perfectly safe.

The 15 mph limit at all times on all parts of the path is like setting a 24/7 25 mph limit for cars city-wide just because 25 mph is appropriate in school zones on school days. Such a limit would needlessly slow down all traffic to at least some extent, but it would be difficult to enforce, and people would start to disobey it. Then, where you need the limit to apply the most, people wouldn't follow it. Traffic engineers have discovered that limiting speeds only for school zones and only during school hours causes more people to actually slow down. The same theory applies on the bike paths.

That does NOT mean that anything goes. Cyclists need to keep an assured clear distance and pass only when it's safe (even if that means slowing down and waiting for a gap, just like cars have to do for us sometimes). When we do pass, we should give pedesterians at least one person-width of buffer space. I've also discovered that a bell is probably the most important piece of equipment for trail riding. If you ring your bell and give plenty of space when you pass, many pedestrians will wave or say "thank you," even if you're doing 25 mph.