Originally Posted by
OnyxTiger
In Scottsdale, AZ there's actually no particular rule about sidewalk riding. Aside from that, the sidewalk was a natural pathway from a designated bike route with signage. I can understand the reasoning as to why this oversight can lead to accidents, but now it has me thinking; if I wasn't in violation of traffic code for riding on a sidewalk, could it be safe to also reason that I would have the same rights as a pedestrian? And if so, if she hit me while I was a pedestrian, would this change the dynamic of who was wrong and who was right? Just a thought.
There was no way to get onto a roadside bike lane here... because there wasn't one. I came from a bike route that turned into a sidewalk. In which case this blurs my ability to either act like a vehicle, or act like a pedestrian. I do blame myself for taking that risk of crossing without knowingly having her attention first though. I got hit harder in football practice.
A cursory Google search reveals AZ vehicle code s. 28-904 which states
"A person shall not drive a
vehicle on a sidewalk area except on a permanent or duly authorized temporary driveway." (emphasis added)
This begs the question, is a bicycle a vehicle in this context then? s. 28-201, definitions, states:
32. "Motor vehicle":
(a) Means either:
(i) A self-propelled vehicle. (emphasis added - a bicycle is not self-propelled)
...
56. "Vehicle" means a device in, on or by which a person or property is or may be transported or drawn on a public highway,
excluding devices moved by human power... (emphasis added)
---
So, it appears that, according to verbiage within the state code, the OP was actually in the right, as it is
vehicles which are prohibited from riding on the sidewalk. Bicycles are not considered vehicles by the state of AZ, ergo bicycles are not prohibited from using sidewalks and conceivably crosswalks.
In my current city, the only explicit language about bicycles riding on sidewalks is in reference to a defined downtown district.