Dr. Gridlock: Sidewalk Riding and the GW Parkway

This week, Dr. Gridlock continued to discuss bike issues (more than over the winter). Mostly it's drivers and pedestrians who wish cyclists would ride elsewhere. First, a pedestrian

Alexandria, Va.: I do not know how thoroughly you checked with local governments before recommending that bicyclists should use both streets and sidewalks, but you should know that in both Alexandria and Arlington it is illegal to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk.

Robert Thomson: I don't recall recommending that cyclists favor either streets or sidewalks. Recently, we had a discussion about the DC rules in which I noted that there's a downtown zone where cyclists are barred from riding on sidewalks (though many cyclists don't obey that law). In other areas, where it's legal to ride on sidewalks, cyclists can use either the street or the sidewalk, but they have to follow the applicable rules.

Pentagon City, Va.: I'm looking at the Arlington County bike map (available here -- http://www.bikearlington.com/bikemaps.cfm), which has a quick summary of bike laws. "In Arlington, bicycling is permitted on sidewalks except where posted."

I can't speak to Alexandria, and I would rarely recommend that a cyclist choose a sidewalk over the road, though.

Robert Thomson: Without speaking to any one specific area with it's own issues, I'd also say that the sidewalk is rarely a good choice for cyclists. Sets up too many conflicts with pedestrians who are not expecting them.

Silver Spring, Md.: Bicycles on sidewalks:

Montgomery Co. is yes.

Check http://www.waba.org/areabiking/bikelaws.php

for a complete summary.

Robert Thomson: Thanks, Silver Spring. The Washington Area Bicyclist Association Web site has lots of very helpful information for riders all across the region. It has a guide to some of the local laws, and great safety tips.

Then, someone asked an identical question to the one from last week.

Alexandria, Va.: Are cyclists allowed to ride on the GW Parkway? I seem to be noticing this more south of Alexandria, and it seems selfish and dangerous considering there is a perfectly good bike path right next to it. There is little to no shoulder, so cars are forced to veer over to the left to get around these people, and holds up traffic if there is no room to do so, because people in the right lane have to slow down until they can pass.

Robert Thomson: This has been an issue for a while. I believe the park police maintain their ban on cycling anywhere on the GW Parkway, though some of the serious cyclists would much prefer to use the parkway rather than the trail in that southern area.

Cycling on the GW: I'm one of those cyclist that ride on the southern part of the GW on the weekends. The trail on that side is not really conducive to serious cycling, the traffic is nothing like that on the northern half (which I'd never, ever, ride), the runners appreciate it, and there is absolutely no signage forbidding it.

Robert Thomson: It's been a while now, but I did check with Park Police, who told me that cycling is banned along the entire parkway. I have also heard from cyclists who say, as you do, that the trail is problematic in that area.

Biking on the GW Parkway appears to be illegal. Biking on the southern part shouldn't be. But the trail is not "a perfectly good" option. [Everyone seems to use that set of words "there's a perfectly good bike trail right there..."  - this person, the one last week, Chris Core etc... Is that taught in Cyclist Bashing 101?] I like how the cyclist "forces" the driver to veer over - certainly there was no other option. And what's with the "these people" line?

Comments

[Catherine]

when is this dr. gridlock chat? or, rather, how can i email him? it's kind of insane, all of this.

and finally, seriously when has there ever been traffic so heavy that a motorist was delayed more than 20 seconds by a cyclist "holding up traffic"? it's not hard. turn on left turn signal, check mirrors, yield to oncoming traffic, turn wheel. presto.

now, if there's a bunch of jerks in the left lane speeding or driving aggressively or otherwise not allowing the motorist to merge into that lane, just HOW is that the cyclist's fault? he has no control over the actions of any motorist.

if their answer is simply "he shouldn't be there in the first place" (which on the GW parkway that may be the case, but this is an issue on every road), they may seriously want to reconsider their priorities. cyclist's legal presence on road vs. road raging speed demon showing no courtesy toward or care for the safety of others. hrm. tough.

[Washcycle]

Dr. Gridlock's chats are on Mondays at Noon. I do like that Dr. G usually tries to explain why cyclists, pedestrians and drivers do what do. Even when it is against the law, he tries to create some empathy - instead of fueling the fire.

[Jonathan Krall]

"Robert Thomson: I'd also say that the sidewalk is rarely a good choice for cyclists. Sets up too many conflicts with pedestrians who are not expecting them. "

At an intersection with a road, a cyclist on a sidewalk is likely to enter the road at too high a speed and get killed. Unless the cyclist is an unusually disciplined rider who slows to walking speed at every intersection, this is very dangerous.

In other words, the reason "that the sidewalk is rarely a good choice for cyclists" isn't that it creates "too many conflicts with pedestrians who are not expecting them." It is instead that the sensible cyclist doesn't want to get killed.

Once again, Dr. "I got my Ph.D. on sale at Wallmart!" Gridlock simply doesn't get it.

[SJE]

I like pointing out that cyclists subsidize motorists because (a) the gas tax doesnt cover the costs of road use, and therefore must come out of general revenue such as income tax, which cyclists pay, and (b) cyclists impose almost no cost on roads, unlike cars. If motorists want to feel all high and mightly, they might like to pay European-type gas prices, which do cover road costs.

[Washcycle]

To be fair, the cyclists who ride on the GW Parkway are breaking the law. A bad law, and one I'd like to see changed, but the drivers at least have a point. I might rephrase it (if I were such a driver) as "I see cyclists riding on the GW Parkway; since this is illegal I worry that it places cyclists - and possibly even drivers - at risk because drivers will not be looking for them" instead of saying how much it inconveniences me. Still, they do - unfortunately - have a legitimate gripe.

[Froggie]

Part of the problem with bicycling along the GW Pkwy is the lane widths. Those lanes are very narrow...either 9 or 10ft, when the "standard" is 12ft. This requires virtually every car to shift into the left lane to pass bicycles on the Parkway...no matter how close to the right edge the bicyclist is. Not a big deal in light traffic, but a VERY BIG (and unsafe) deal when you have platoons of traffic coming down from the signals in Old Town.

I would be against lifting the prohibition on biking on the GW Parkway unless something's done to at least improve the right lane width on that segment. Given that this is NPS we're talking about, I don't see it happening.

Perhaps, as an alternative, the "serious cyclists" could use Fort Hunt Rd instead. It parallels the GW Pkwy and has wider lane widths, and even shoulders in some locations. It may not be the flatter, signal-free shot those serious folks are looking for, but it's a safer situation than exists along the Pkwy.

[Washcycle]

I get that it inconveniences drivers. I don't get the safety argument.

[Froggie]

My argument has nothing to do with "inconveniencing drivers".

Let me put it a different way. GW Pkwy has no shoulder, narrow lane widths, and a 45 MPH speed limit.

Fort Hunt Rd has a paved shoulder along much of it, wider lane widths, and a 35 MPH speed limit.

It's a no-brainer...

[Geof Gee]

Mind you, I don't travel there much, but I recall that Ft. Hunt Road has a lot more intersections and cross-traffic in general. Intersections present the greatest risk to cyclists not motorists from the rear. If you take the lane, you minimize risk during passes (IMO) such that you could very well be much better off on GW Parkway.

Regarding intersections and why one should avoid sidewalks ...

http://tinyurl.com/y4p2d7

[Washcycle]

That's a great study. One thing that I try to point out about it is this. It's not riding on the sidewalk that's dangerous. It's riding on the sidewalk against traffic that's dangerous (so riding with traffic on your right instead of your left - normally). The risk for riding with traffic in the roadway is 0.8 and with traffic on the sidewalk is 0.7. Against traffic it goes up to 1.5 and 3.0 respectively.

[MB]

Well, to be even fairer, pretty much everyone using the GW Parkway is breaking the law.

And I don't know what Froggie is talking about with the narrow lanes. GW Parkway south of Belle Haven (which is where cyclists want to ride, and do) has *plenty* of room for two cars and a bike.