Advocacy & Safety - Potential 8 mph speed limit

http://denver.cbslocal.com/2011/11/13/boulder-may-put-brakes-on-speeding-cyclists/


Bicycle “friendly” Boulder CO will consider an 8 mph speed limit for cyclist in crosswalks.

I suppose that would include cyclist on bike paths anytime they cross a road.

And on sidewalks or MUPs, I would be able to outrun and pass the cyclist in a crossing.

They are just trying to protect vulnerable users...

While there may be negative legal ramifications of the law (as noted in the article), it's generally a good idea to slow down when riding in crosswalks. If there's traffic coming that will cross the crosswalk, I'll slow to walking speed (or below).

Seems like the law is designed for urban areas where some people ride bikes on sidewalks and crosswalks and thus have to interact with slow moving pedestrians. If so, then just ride on the roads if you want to ride faster.

Seems fair to me. If you're riding in the crosswalk, you should probably slow down anyways.

I doubt that they will differentiate between bikepath crossings and sidewalk crossings.

How about a law requiring a motorist come to a complete stop at a red light or stop sign, carefully look and yield to pedestrians and cross traffic, then safely proceed with their right turn when clear?

Seems fair to me. If you're riding in the crosswalk, you should probably slow down anyways.Seems 3 mph would be better then.

It's funny to watch "vehicular cyclists" whine about speed limits. But it's true that entirely different laws should apply to bikes vs cars.

How about a law requiring a motorist come to a complete stop at a red light or stop sign, carefully look and yield to pedestrians and cross traffic, then safely proceed with their right turn when clear?

I believe that law already exists for both stop lights and stop signs...

Seems 3 mph would be better then.
Sure, why not?

Denver has a 6 mph limit on sidewalk riding. Is that too low for you?

I doubt that they will differentiate between bikepath crossings and sidewalk crossings.

How about a law requiring a motorist come to a complete stop at a red light or stop sign, carefully look and yield to pedestrians and cross traffic, then safely proceed with their right turn when clear?

Oh wow, what a concept... what the heck, next you"re going to suggest that motorists drive only 25 MPH in residential areas... even though they too want to go much faster.

Sure, why not?

Denver has a 6 mph limit on sidewalk riding. Is that too low for you?YES, I really hate getting slowed down by cyclist when I go for a run!

I believe that law already exists for both stop lights and stop signs...I don't believe you, based on my experience as a pedestrian. Maybe they should consider a 1 mph pedestrian speed limit when in a crosswalk.

I don't believe you, based on my experience as a pedestrian. Maybe they should consider a 1 mph pedestrian speed limit when in a crosswalk.

You can believe what you like, but the law already does require what you suggested. Now, that isn't to say that motorists obey those laws than cyclists or pedestrians...

They are just trying to protect vulnerable users...

Excuse me? When did cyclists' no longer get defined as a 'vulnerable user?:injured:

Yes, Pedestrians and those with physical mobility problems fit the term. But when did cyclists' as a whole, no longer fit the term?:notamused:

Excuse me? When did cyclists' no longer get defined as a 'vulnerable user?:injured:

Yes, Pedestrians and those with physical mobility problems fit the term. But when did cyclists' as a whole, no longer fit the term?:notamused:
Where'd you get the idea that he wasn't referring to cyclists?

YES, I really hate getting slowed down by cyclist when I go for a run!
Isn't that what they make jogging paths for?

Sure, why not?

Denver has a 6 mph limit on sidewalk riding. Is that too low for you?

You can ride on the sidewalk in Denver? Neat but sounds dicey to me..

Ummm am I misunderstanding this, but if I were to go road riding which I do I would have to slow to 8 or under at interesections with crosswalks etc.. and the cars don't have to?

You can ride on the sidewalk in Denver? Neat but sounds dicey to me..
The law is actually quite specific. Something like you can ride on the sidewalk at a rate of 6mph or less as long as you don't cross any driveways or intersections.

The purpose of the law is supposed to allow you to ride far enough to stop at a bicycle rack.

The law is actually quite specific. Something like you can ride on the sidewalk at a rate of 6mph or less as long as you don't cross any driveways or intersections.

The purpose of the law is supposed to allow you to ride far enough to stop at a bicycle rack.
Very cool, it's acceptable here but not legal or exactly safe for the most part. Edit I am a big dummy head and can not read so gud, and now have a new question... if this only applies to sidewalk riders, where the hell is the big deal?

I doubt that they will differentiate between bikepath crossings and sidewalk crossings.

How about a law requiring a motorist come to a complete stop at a red light or stop sign, carefully look and yield to pedestrians and cross traffic, then safely proceed with their right turn when clear?They do have that law, and I hope the cops are not anal retentive about it, or the new one.

I think it's a good thing, but since bicycles don't have speedometers it's really anyone's guess exactly how fast anyone rides. Just me, but I'm on record as that it depends upon the traffic involved. If there are pedestrians in that crosswalk, they get first priority for safety, a cyclist comes second and motorists should have to slow & yield to everyone that is going the same direction. If another is crossing against the light, the rules change, because then the pedestrian or cyclist is now a jay walker crossing against the light for a car if that is the way the light is and then common sense comes into play. Only an idiot would step off or pedal in front of a moving car and in that case whatever happens the pedestrian or cyclist would almost deserve. I don't care if you're the bmx punk that like to jump/hop the bike onto curbs, walls or whatever or the cyclist that's training for a triathlon or road race. The most vulnerable should get priority and be protected from injury barring their own stupidity.

Cross walks and sidewalks are for pedestrians and bicylists going a pedestrian speeds.

I almost hit a kid today in a crosswalk. Both of us were contributors....I was making a right following behind a big rig and putting more attenting on what the heck lane the big rig was going to end up in than the crosswalk. Kid was barrelling across at 15 to 20 mph....and I didn't see him unitl my son yelled look out.

Part of the danger of cycing in cross walks is that drivers are simplely not attuned to looking for something moving and speeds above that of a pedestrian..........and the mind plays tricks on you.

so speed limit of cross walks is good.

I see this as a harbinger of what will happen after boatloads of those infernal parking-protected "cycletracks" are put in. Anyone riding at a speed faster than a pedestrian will be considered the cause of the intersection mayhem these things may well create and intersection speed limits for cyclists will be set. Ugh.

You can believe what you like, but the law already does require what you suggested. Now, that isn't to say that motorists obey those laws than cyclists or pedestrians...ZZZing----- obvious satire.









But I guess not so obvious for some. Must be the PE types.

ZZZing----- obvious satire.

But I guess not so obvious for some. Must be the PE types.

Sorry, but experience has led me to never underestimate the ability of folks to be as ignorant as they claim to be...

I see this as a harbinger of what will happen after boatloads of those infernal parking-protected "cycletracks" are put in. Anyone riding at a speed faster than a pedestrian will be considered the cause of the intersection mayhem these things may well create and intersection speed limits for cyclists will be set. Ugh.+1

In 1970-90, we use to have bike paths that had no speed limits.
Then in 1990-2000, bike paths were renamed MUPs and 15 mph signs went up.
Then in 2008-2010, pedestrians complained about 15 mph on what use to be "bike" paths and the speed limit was dropped to 10 mph.
Finally in 2015, everyone began calling what use to be "bike" paths by the name they had actually become 'off road sidewalks'.

Sorry, but experience has led me to never underestimate the ability of folks to be as ignorant as they claim to be...Must be the PE types.

So cops will time you with radar gun at 8 mph?

So cops will time you with radar gun at 8 mph?There was a post some time ago with pictures of park police using radar guns to catch cyclist on a park path going over 10 mph.

What I want to know is how come cyclist do not get the same 9 mph over grace that motorist get before being given a ticket.

There was a post some time ago with pictures of park police using radar guns to catch cyclist on a park path going over 10 mph.

What I want to know is how come cyclist do not get the same 9 mph over grace that motorist get before being given a ticket. Any 9 mph over the limit is out in the middle of nowhere & on an interstate. Two blocks over from me in the neighborhood and they have speed traps that are strictly adhered to posted speed limits in those zones. Every AM I drive by a speed indicating device in a 45 mph zone. My speedometer is consistently indicating 4 mph fast. My speedometer indicates 49/50, I'm going 45/46 according to the speed indicator device local police have installed. That one is some 30+ miles away from my neighborhood, but when they put up the same type of device in the 30 mph zone, my speedometer is just as inaccurate. I prefer to use the gps I have, time to distance when on the highway and away from the paved parking lot known as South Florida.

egads.

why is it an imperative bicyclists get to cross roads in crosswalks and MUP crossings at high rates of speed?

I like to clear the intersection before proceeding. anyone riding on a sidewalk SHOULD be travelling slow. it is rare there is an MUP crossing that has superior right of way over the roadway.

Sure, its a nanny law and is going to slow CBHI down in fits of misery next time he's in Boulder.

The city council should be looking at other places to enhance public roadway safety. it may be in response to violations of crosswalk use laws that affected public safety already.

but i'm not for this type of law, preferring speed limits and other restrictions to be levied on much more hazardous vehicles rather than human powered devices. However, people can do 20-25mph on a road bike on a MUP if they're clipping along.

What I want to know is how come cyclist do not get the same 9 mph over grace that motorist get before being given a ticket.
I'd imagine (at least I would hope) they wouldn't be sitting with radar guns, and would only enforce the law if they see a cyclist clearly in violation, i.e. cycling 15-20mph or more.

Boulder's sidewalks are split into pedestrian walkways and cycling paths. As the two interact and every intersection, it probably is a good idea to get cyclists to slow down.

I'd imagine (at least I would hope) they wouldn't be sitting with radar guns, and would only enforce the law if they see a cyclist clearly in violation, i.e. cycling 15-20mph or more.

I wouldn't expect reason to work well when discussing with CB, given his persecution complex and anger issues.

Ride in the road in a responsible manner like big boys and girls. Problem averted.

It just amazes me how many rules and laws would be dictator B'crats can come up with. The thing here is cyclist should just use common sense at what speed they can ride in crosswalks or any where else.

What is really stupid is ----8-----miles an hour. Think of it 8 not 7 or 9 or 10. Who the hell can tell if a cyclist is riding 8 MPH or less. It would just be another stupid law that would be damned near unenforceable. Therefore illogical and a total waste of time and paper.

Boulder's sidewalks are split into pedestrian walkways and cycling paths. As the two interact and every intersection, it probably is a good idea to get cyclists to slow down.

A very few of them are split as such. An example is the path that parallels Broadway.

+1

In 1970-90, we use to have bike paths that had no speed limits.
Then in 1990-2000, bike paths were renamed MUPs and 15 mph signs went up.
Then in 2008-2010, pedestrians complained about 15 mph on what use to be "bike" paths and the speed limit was dropped to 10 mph.
Finally in 2015, everyone began calling what use to be "bike" paths by the name they had actually become 'off road sidewalks'.

So the real question is "where are the proper sidewalks?"

It just amazes me how many rules and laws would be dictator B'crats can come up with. The thing here is cyclist should just use common sense at what speed they can ride in crosswalks or any where else.

So do you feel the same way about speed limits, traffic signals, and other such laws that apply to motor vehicles, or is it only those laws that affect you and your common sense that you want left alone?

myrridin

Think about it. Assume a street has a 25mph speed limit. As I read it if a cyclist was riding on this street, every block he or she would have to slow down to 8 mph when crossing the crosswalk. Doesnt really make sense for the cyclist to slow down when the cars dont have to. As to your question, logical laws are necessary for society. Also while I am a cyclist, I have driven over 1 million miles in a car.

So, as I understand this, it applies to cyclists riding in the crosswalk (which is the extension of the sidewalk that crosses a street or road). It does not apply to a cyclist riding on the road that happens to cross a cross a crosswalk at an intersection, right?

If the first is correct, I don't see a problem. Cyclists that want to be pedestrians on wheels need to be nice to their fellow crosswalkers.

On the other hand, if the second is what they are planning, they are nuts. Why should a cyclist riding with traffic, with legal authority (green light) to proceed through the intersection, have to go slower than cars? It cyclists hitting pedestrians in crosswalks is an issue, then they need to control the reason why this happens (and the reason is that either the cyclist or pedestrian did something wrong, and it probably was not related to speed).


-G

ryda/gmt I first interpreted it as ryda did and then re-read it and figured out it does indeed only apply to riders, riding on the sidewalk and then onto crosswalks... I was annoyed at first with my first interpretation but it's a good law I think in it's real form.

How about a law requiring a motorist come to a complete stop at a red light or stop sign, carefully look and yield to pedestrians and cross traffic, then safely proceed with their right turn when clear?

Bike "advocates" wearing their ignorance on their sleeve like this and showing everybody how shockingly ignorant they are, is one of the reasons people don't take cycling seriously. Are you smoking crack, or do you really have no idea?

Bike "advocates" wearing their ignorance on their sleeve like this and showing everybody how shockingly ignorant they are, is one of the reasons people don't take cycling seriously. Are you smoking crack, or do you really have no idea?

ermm I was pretty sure CB was being sarcastic... considering how many motorists do indeed do blow stop signs/lights...

ermm I was pretty sure CB was being sarcastic... considering how many motorists do indeed do blow stop signs/lights...

I fully agree... That was how I too read it. Certainly many motorists do act as if there is no such law.

Corrected this to be more accurate...

Certainly many motorists/cyclists do act as if there is no such law.

It is just crosswalks. I understand the intent and on the surface is no issue for me, after all when crossing the road using the crosswalk it is good for cyclists to be slower on the order of pedestrian speed, so motorists have time to see and yield to them (if making right/left turns over the crosswalk)

However, the issue I see that except for perhaps some initial crackdowns (which I have issue with also), this law will not be proactively enforced, but instead used as a tool to remove responsibility for motorists not having yielded to a cyclist in a crosswalk, claiming the cyclist was traveling over 8mph. Should be easy to find witnesses who say the cyclist was traveling faster.

(Also in AZ tolerance for traveling over PSL is 11mph, except in school zones which have zero tolerance. Of course police can still cite someone for unsafe speed even if they are traveling below the PSL and conditions do not support that speed)

What is really stupid is ----8-----miles an hour. Think of it 8 not 7 or 9 or 10. Who the hell can tell if a cyclist is riding 8 MPH or less.

Probably not most cyclists.

There should be a law requiring working speedometers on bikes. Really, that would make this proposed law more enforceable.

I wouldn't expect reason to work well when discussing with CB, given his persecution complex and anger issues.Again with attacking posters rather than engaging in rational debate. Is it that you just cannot handle a couple of jokes? Any debate on the article rather than attacks myrridin?

Do try and prove your made up accusations of persecution complex and anger issues.

You have admitted trolling BFs to try and learn how to debate cyclist that reject your poor traffic planning.