PatrickGSR94

hmm yeah, tell that to all the pedestrian fatalities. They were in control of their own safety, huh? A sidewalk/curb never stopped a car from hopping it. Don't ASSume that just because you're on the sidewalk that you have some sort of invisible barrier from auto traffic.

Also, no, not 50%, nowhere near it. That 40% rear-end crash statistic from the LAB that you're referring to is rubbish, based on very poor and incomplete crash reporting.

I ride on a sidewalk in very rare and specific instances, mainly where there are little to no side street or driveway interruptions and few or no pedestrians, or if I need to turn left out of a side street and immediately back left into a parking lot. Sidewalk makes sense in that case.

kickstart

One can use good judgement or bad judgment in any situation, those with bad judgment who lack self control don't define what's appropriate for everyone everywhere. There are sidewalks I wouldn't walk my bike on, there are sidewalks I ride at full speed, it all depends on conditions.

AdvXtrm

Well said!

RubeRad

+1. Whenever I ride on the sidewalk, I try to be very self-conscious about the fact that pedestrians (if any) have the right of way, and that if I'm on the wrong side of the street, cars coming out of driveways will NOT look to their right and see me coming.

allan6344

On one of our MUP's due to a discontinuity, the easiest way southbound is ride sidewalk against the traffic for about 1/8th mile. It's the most dangerous part of the commute. The turning drivers do not perceive the side walk as place to yield to pedestrians much less a bicycle.

You can't assume sidewalks are a "safe" place to ride but rather they "may sometimes be" a safer place to ride but it's still no guarantee. A few years ago a popular bike store employee riding home on the sidewalk on another road was taken out by a pickup truck jumping the curb after crossing six lanes from the opposite direction.

AlmostTrick

I see several "Better safe than sorry" justifications posted here for choosing sidewalks over roads. As if the odds for remaining safe there are better.

Hmmmm, I wonder about that, since 99.99% of my riding is done on roads, vs. probably .01% on sidewalks/side paths. Yet that's were I was the only time I was hit by a car! I was sorry the side path cross walk turned out not to be so safe.

mcours2006

Chock it up to bad luck.

All things being equal, riding on the sidewalk is inherently safer because 1) you're likely going slower; 2) you're further away from fast-moving cars, and as I said the only reason I was on it was because of fast moving cars in darkness.

I agree that doing so in a busy downtown/urban area is not such a great idea and the bylaws are there to protect pedestrians. However, in a suburban setting, especially in the middle of winter when right lane width is reduced due to snow banks as well as the absence of pedestrians, makes it a viable, and sometimes the only, option in certain instances.

HardyWeinberg

On their way to school I have my kids ride on the sidewalk for a couple hundred yards rather than illegally cross a 4 lane road (no left turns allowed where they leave the neighborhood) and then cross it again a couple hundred yards later. When they're coming home they take the bike lane going in their direction rather than the sidewalk. I am forever after them to keep an eye out for cars backing out of driveways not expecting kids on the sidewalk.

Sidewalk riding is only illegal in the downtown area but they are among the few street cyclists going to their schools.

When I'm going that way without them I make the illegal left, although if I am just going to the convenience store where the kids turn left at the bottom right of the picture I might stay on the sidewalk.

wolfchild

I am more concerned about protecting myself then about internet discussions...Here in the suburbs we don't have as much pedestrian traffic as in the cities and it's legal to ride on the sidewalks. I do it all the time. My commute is a mixture of roads, sidewalks and mups. You just need to pay extra attention when crossing roads and driveways, other then that it's perfectly safe to ride on sidewalks. Traffic in the suburbs is a lot faster then in the cities and sometimes it's just a lot safer to by-pass dangerous roads by using sidewalks.

AlmostTrick

Ok, but bad luck could happen anywhere, no? Why aren't the examples given of cyclists hit in the road not chocked up to bad luck? Instead, they're viewed as a reason to bail to the "safer" sidewalk.

I'll admit that there may be situations where taking a sidewalk may be safer, or more convenient, and I suppose that's what this thread is about. But I don't believe a solid case can be made for "All things being equal, riding on the sidewalk is inherently safer."

Maybe there are some statistics that can backup this statement?

PatrickGSR94

I don't believe that for a second. Riding near the beach in Destin, FL, I would say it's inherently safer to ride on the road than on the adjacent sidewalk-like MUP, because that path is chock-full of pedestrians, and it has around 100 driveway and street crossings in its 5 mile length. I've ridden both many times and the sidewalk/MUP is ALWAYS more dangerous on a bike than riding in the road.

Relative distance from vehicles moving generally faster than you does not automatically mean you're safer. Many people die from very slow moving turning vehicles.

mcours2006

Not that I'm advocating riding on a busy sidewalk with pedestrians, strollers, old ladies with walkers, skateboarders, but if one were to ride on such a sidewalk, one would be going so excruciatingly slow that any risk of serious injury from a fall or crash would be all but eliminated.

There are instances, and numerous posts have alluded to this, where it's better (read: safer) to be on the sidewalk. E.g. suburban areas where there are very few or no pedestrian, side roads, driveways or parking lots. Traffic in areas like there are likely much faster than the posted speed limit. This is nothing like the situation you describe.

No, not always, but usually. Collision at 40 km/h relative speed results in 40% fatality. Collision at 60 km/h relative speed results in 90% fatality. I can't cite the reference, but I recall it from a news report regarding a recent spike in pedestrian fatalities.

alan s 

It's almost impossible to ride on the sidewalk in the city with peds present. I'll walk my bike on the sidewalk in that situation, if necessary to be off the road. Otherwise, riding on the sidewalk is OK by me. However, it's not always the safest option. In general, I'll do what is safest for a given situation. Where is all the talk about hate coming from? Haven't really heard much.

e0richt

As long as you understand what the dangers are on riding on the sidewalk, it can be a good way to go depending on the circumstances

kickstart

I think it's reasonable to say it's safer to ride on the sidewalk....... unless it isn't.

No matter where one chooses to ride, it's all about situational awareness, and judgment. That never changes.

CrankyOne

The statistics behind your statement are?


You are basing this on what?

CrankyOne

Not a blanket statement. If you are maintaining 25-30 MPH on a road bike, and particularly with several others, then the road may be better (there is a big difference in 98 and 30A though). If you are riding 11 MPH on an upright with your husband and children then the sidewalk/MUP is likely much safer as well as more enjoyable and comfortable.

As @kickstart stated above, it all depends on the situation and how you treat it. 25 MPH on a sidewalk without being cautious at driveway crossings would likely be rather dangerous. More dangerous than doing the same on the road? OTOH, 11 MPH and riding cautiously would likely be much safer on a typical MUP or sidewalk than on most roads.

Your statistics to back this up?

Both motor vehicle absolute speed and their speed relative to you make a difference but the primary predictor of death or permanent injury is the actual speed of the vehicle. Put simply:



However, your proximity to their intended line of travel and presence of real or perceived barriers between the drivers and bicycle rider has the biggest influence on a crash happening or not. Nearly all of the hit from behind fatalities that made up the 40% number in the LAB report were the result of brief inattention by the driver. Drivers pay much more attention to avoid hitting a curb than to crossing a line of paint (or not in the case of someone taking the lane). This is why countries like The Netherlands, Sweden, Germany, Denmark, Finland, and others rarely design painted bike lanes anymore but nearly always curb protected bikeways.

This is similar to narrower EU roads being safer than wider U.S. roads. Drivers in Europe pay much closer attention because even slight inattention could result in their hitting a curb and damaging an expensive rim and tyre. On much wider U.S. roads that often also have wide shoulders or curb reaction distances, drivers do not feel a need to pay close attention because they've got a lot of room for error before incurring any damage to their car or ego.

AdvXtrm

That's great info there, thanks.

I was hit and run over by a vehicle traveling at over 50 Mph last year. But thankfully, I was not out walking or on my bicycle, but rather I was on my motorcycle. Which meant I was wearing high level and full protective gear from head to toe; something you just can't do on a bicycle, which saved my life. Of course if I was on my bicycle, I would have died, or worse, been left brain-dead, quadriplegic, and the sort.

CrankyOne

That's something that's not discussed as much as it should be. Permanent injuries can in many ways be worse than death. Fatalities make for a clean statistic though — someone is either dead or not.

PatrickGSR94

By the fact that it happens, and has happened, smart guy. I don't have time to troll the internet to find every such person killed by a slow turning truck. Go find it yourself if you're so inclined.

PatrickGSR94

Not sure if you're thinking I'm a woman or gay or what, but I have ridden with my WIFE and child on the MUP along Scenic 98, and yes I was concerned for their safety and having to keep a sharp watch out for traffic pulling out, especially when going east, against the flow of traffic closest to us. I can't maintain 25-30 mph, but I still felt safer going 14-15 mph on the road, by myself, than I did going 5-8 MPH on the path with my family.

I average 11-13 MPH on most of my 31 mile round trip commutes, all ridden on the road. No sidewalks, no MUP's, and until recently no bike lanes (now only for about 1 mile of the afternoon commute, and that one sucks). I get along just fine, thanks.

PatrickGSR94

Joining the Chorus of Ignorance - i am traffic

Among other issues, the LAB's study was based on stats from a number of different media sources (TV, newspaper, internet), and ZERO official crash reports. Also, "The 40% overtaking was arrived at by ignoring 41% of the crashes." Some sound statistical math right there.

So yeah, I don't believe that 40% number for a second.

mcours2006

Interesting read. Thanks for the link.

Daniel4

I had to read it twice to make sure. I believe the 40% is that of all cyclist fatalities by motorists, 40% are from overtaking from behind. 60% would be from the rest (right hooks, left hooks, cutting off, head on, T-bone, etc).