Notso_fastLane

It seems to me that if a city/county is going to go through that trouble, it would be more effective to put up signs about how to share the MUP. Some kind of diagram showing peds to stay right, bikes left, or however they want it. My favorite configuration was in Germany, where the bike paths and sidewalks were clearly delineated. Bikes have the right of way in the bike paths, peds have the right of way on the sidewalk part (and note: these aren't actually physically separate paths, just delineated, usually by a different colored row of bricks) and everything worked quite well.

asmac

Will never happen here, it makes way too much sense. Not only that it's very European, kind of like soccer.

While driving to pick up a new chainring today I took a route thru a lane that entered the street past a sidewalk with the view blocked by a brick wall on the right. I was going very slowly and it was a good thing as two young girls ran in front of me just as I was approaching the sidewalk. I hit the brakes, they kept running and all was well.

It was an unsettling experience and made me reflect:

1. That accidents can happen very easily with terrible consequences. I wasn't being reckless but this could have easily gone another way and it would have been all on me.
2. For the purposes of this thread, that cars are treated quite differently than bikes. This location (next to a library, near a school and on a busy street) is an obvious high risk location. There are no signs, no warnings and no markings of any kind. It's a sharp contrast to the over-the-top warnings, injunctions, gates and general state of alarm that apply to bikes on bike paths.

Notso_fastLane

Good observations. We clearly have auto sickness in the US. I might have to move back to Germany (I would in a heartbeat if the job opportunity was there).

Keith99

You would be a fool not to the first time as far to often there are still grates running the wrong way for biking over. I tend to follow such warnings the first time, just in case the danger is real.

Second time of course is an entirely different matter.

jputnam

That actually varies quite a bit by jurisdiction. In summer, when our local MUPs get choked with foot traffic and fast recreational riders, the county's safety patrol is out, too, with quite-enforceable citations for excessive speed, dangerous passing, or blocking the trail.

We get annual outpourings of indignation on local cycling forums from riders ticketed for trail violations, they never get too much sympathy.

A few of the more common citations,

GROUPS ON TRAIL
No group of trail users, including their animal(s), shall occupy more than one half of the trail as measured from the right side, so as to impede the normal and reasonable movement of trail users.

AUDIBLE SIGNAL WHEN PASSING
Every user shall give an audible warning signal before passing another trail user. The signal must be produced in such a manner as to allow adequate time for response. The signal may be given by voice, bell or horn.

OVERTAKING TRAIL USERS ON THE LEFT
Any trail user overtaking another trail user proceeding in the same direction shall pass to the left of such overtaken user at a safe distance, and shall stay to the left until safely clear of the overtaken user.

ENTERING AND CROSSING TRAIL
Trail users entering or crossing the trail at uncontrolled points shall yield to traffic on the trail.

FBinNY 

I should have been clearer that I was referring to pedestrian traffic, as opposed to vehicles (including bicycles. I found the groups restricted to half width rule interesting, but am surprised it gets any enforcement (if it does).

Either IMO MUPs are basically pedestrian paths where cycling is permitted, and are not suited to faster riding except when very uncrowded. Sadly, whenever they pave dedicated bike paths it's only a short time before pedestrians discover them. We may not like sharing the road with autos, but they do a good job keeping pedestrians from getting too unruly.

Schwinnhund

First, I have no idea what an MUP is. But I would imagine the signs were put up because of a perceived threat to pedestrian safety, and in some cases, it may be valid. I mean, how far do you have to walk your bike? 20 yards, 100 yards? It doesn't hurt to have a little cool-down once in a while. Now, if it was 1/2 mile, or farther, then I would start haranging my elected officials, because that would be ridiculous. Pedestrians always have the Right-Of-Way, and I think it should be that way. After all, I can only imagine how I would feel if I creamed some young woman carrying a baby while she was trying to cross a path, or even somebody's mother, or grandmother. I pay close attention when riding, but people on foot do very stupid and unpredictable things sometimes, especially when they think they have the Right-Of-Way, like in the Kroger or Walmart parking lots. I know they don't mean to, but things happen to everybody.

Or perhaps I just don't understand the issue. Either way, you need to obey the laws and statutes, at least until you can get them changed. I consider myself something of a bicycle emissary when I am out riding, and I try hard not to do anything that would reflect badly on bicycles as transportation, as much as is possible. Breaking the law does not help our cause at all.....

dicktill

MUP = multi-use path

Schwinnhund

The only one of those we have around here are streets and highways.

dougmc

I don't know what the law is there, but here intentionally blocking a highway or passageway is a class B misdemeanor and violators don't get tickets -- they get arrested and taken to jail.

I imagine your state has a similar law, so you could bring that up with him next time -- he's upset at you for violating an imaginary law, but his actions violate a real one.

nelson249

Yes my local government spends an inordinate about of time and money posting useless signs usually to appease some local busybody so they can "correct" everyone else's behaviour save their own. Besides it's cheaper than fixing the infrastructure which is usually the problem in the first place.

-=(8)=-

What size backpack does it take to hold that chip?

"We have met the enemy, and he is us"
Pogo logic would apply to most of the posts in A&S

asmac

Woman breaks back in seawall cyclist collision | CTV Vancouver News

Obviously excessive speed and other careless behaviour is a problem. The question is how to deal with it and I don't think knee-jerk-reaction signs (or bike licensing) do much to change behaviour.

spivonious

We have some in my area, and having been a committee member for Parks & Rec, I can say that they are a legal requirement whenever a MUP crosses a road.

But if you're annoying peds by riding through, then just swallow your pride and dismount. It takes an extra 30 seconds and generates more goodwill towards cyclists.

findude

Environmental factors can be very important. DC area riders familiar with the Mount Vernon Trail along the GW Memorial Parkway may remember the camelback bridge by the Navy/Merchant Marine Memorial on the Virginia side. This bridge was widened and flattened a few years ago but used to have a narrow asphalt walkway for bicyclists and pedestrians that wasn't much more than three feet wide. There were "bicyclists must dismount" signs at both ends of the bridge. Southbound riders had to come around a blind, uphill curve to get on the bridge before having a sight line of oncoming traffic.

I witnessed a southbound bicyclist traveling at a high speed come around that blind curve only to come face-to-face with a wheelchair user who was taking up most of the lane. The cyclist veered off the curb into oncoming vehicular traffic; luckily I was only going about 35 mph in my car or he would have become a messy hood ornament. I still remember the expression on his face.

Unless you are very familiar with an area, ignore warning signs at your peril. Chances are they were put up by, or in response to, people who know more about the environmental factors.