Are there roads we just shouldn't be on??

[malcolm]

The other thread about hating being call a cyclist prompted me to post this question.

We have lots of roads in my state with zero shoulder, typical two lane black top and no shoulder. One in particular leading to my house is fairly popular with cyclists, lots of dips and rises and curves, no shoulder, 30mph speed limit. I do not ride on it, but I see bikes on it every day including groups. At 5:30 pm I was the third car back behind a guy on a bike and just a glance in the mirror counted 8 other cars and that wasn't the end of the line. In the grand scheme of things it only cost me a few minutes and I got home fine.

I get we have the right to be there, but with human nature being what it is dead is still dead no matter if you had the right or not.

When is it just good common sense not to ride there?
Is courtesy ever an issue? Is it ok on a road with heavy traffic and poor visibility to just hold up traffic endlessly or until some knucklehead tries to thread the needle and either runs you off the road or hits you?

I don't really have a dog in the hunt but was just curious especially seeing how polar some of the responses were in the other thread. I simply ride where I'm comfortable and stay away where I'm not. I do think having the right to be there makes some make poor choices.

[rugbysecondrow]

I will pick my roads based on time of day. For instance, 430-630 PM, I will stay of any road that doesn't have a substantive should or traffic is low enough to accommodate me.

So yes, I will pick and choose my routes based on traffic. I see cyclists on these roads at very high traffic times, and I try to be fair regarding their use, but it is hard not to be judgmental. A few minutes might not be a big deal, but I get charged $15 for being 1 min late at the daycare. In the morning, one minute is the difference between making or not making the train. It just seems very self-centered for the cyclist to think these motorists should accept and delay their travel so they can get their fitness in. It is often the equivalent of being stuck behind the school bus in the morning, but at least the school bus is doing something for the greater good.

Roads with plenty of space and ability to share are fair game.

Originally Posted by malcolm

The other thread about hating being call a cyclist prompted me to post this question.

We have lots of roads in my state with zero shoulder, typical two lane black top and no shoulder. One in particular leading to my house is fairly popular with cyclists, lots of dips and rises and curves, no shoulder, 30mph speed limit. I do not ride on it, but I see bikes on it every day including groups. At 5:30 pm I was the third car back behind a guy on a bike and just a glance in the mirror counted 8 other cars and that wasn't the end of the line. In the grand scheme of things it only cost me a few minutes and I got home fine.

I get we have the right to be there, but with human nature being what it is dead is still dead no matter if you had the right or not.

When is it just good common sense not to ride there?
Is courtesy ever an issue? Is it ok on a road with heavy traffic and poor visibility to just hold up traffic endlessly or until some knucklehead tries to thread the needle and either runs you off the road or hits you?

I don't really have a dog in the hunt but was just curious especially seeing how polar some of the responses were in the other thread. I simply ride where I'm comfortable and stay away where I'm not. I do think having the right to be there makes some make poor choices.

[azrider]

ABSOLUTELY

The road in front of our subdivision is 3 lanes with speed of 45. No shoulder. There is no reason why someone should be on this road on a bike, ESPECIALLY sans helmet.

I consider myself cyclist and this dude pissed me off.

[fiamme red]

Originally Posted by rugbysecondrow

I will pick my roads based on time of day. For instance, 430-630 PM, I will stay of any road that doesn't have a substantive should or traffic is low enough to accommodate me.

So yes, I will pick and choose my routes based on traffic. I see cyclists on these roads at very high traffic times, and I try to be fair regarding their use, but it is hard not to be judgmental. A few minutes might not be a big deal, but I get charged $15 for being 1 min late at the daycare. In the morning, one minute is the difference between making or not making the train. It just seems very self-centered for the cyclist to think these motorists should accept and delay their travel so they can get their fitness in. It is often the equivalent of being stuck behind the school bus in the morning, but at least the school bus is doing something for the greater good.

What if the cyclist is not riding for fitness but commuting to work, and there are no other roads to get to the job?

[biker72]

Originally Posted by malcolm

When is it just good common sense not to ride there?
Is courtesy ever an issue? Is it ok on a road with heavy traffic and poor visibility to just hold up traffic endlessly or until some knucklehead tries to thread the needle and either runs you off the road or hits you?

Malcolm there are riders that feel it's their right to be on the heavy traffic and poor visibility roads. I'm not one of them. A little common sense goes a long way.

[zachateseveryth]

Originally Posted by azrider

ABSOLUTELY

The road in front of our subdivision is 3 lanes with speed of 45. No shoulder. There is no reason why someone should be on this road on a bike, ESPECIALLY sans helmet.

I consider myself cyclist and this dude pissed me off.

I'll say. He should be 2-3 feet further to the left.

[rugbysecondrow]

Originally Posted by fiamme red

What if the cyclist is not riding for fitness but commuting to work, and there are no other roads to get to the job?

That might happen occasionally, but that is not normally the case where I live. We have lots of cyclists, not a lot of commuters. I think commuters should plan their routes based on traffic conditions as well though. Is this perfect? Nope, but will it help decrease the strain, yep. Lets face it, bikes are outliers on the road and people have problems dealing with them.

Most roads where I live are compatible for both motorists and cyclists. There are a few specific roads with high traffic, but also a popular triathlon training routes. This means that you get all sorts of experienced and inexperienced cyclists mixing with heavy traffic. This causes obvious problems.

[Saint Vitus]

Originally Posted by azrider

ABSOLUTELY

The road in front of our subdivision is 3 lanes with speed of 45. No shoulder. There is no reason why someone should be on this road on a bike, ESPECIALLY sans helmet.

I consider myself cyclist and this dude pissed me off.

Tough crowd.

[joosttx]

Cycling is about pleasure for me. I cannot imagine riding on a busy road pleasurable. It seems down right stressful. Last four places I have lived, Fresno, Portland, Philadelphia and San Francisco I have been able to leave from my door and riding relative traffic free rides. Right now, my favorite rides I on a road about 20-30% of the ride.

It takes time to figure out the routes, maybe a little contrarian, and you dont go exactly what you want to go but I think the pleasure and peace of mind out weighs any constrainment one might have avoiding busy roads.

[Zoodles]

In Regards to a cyclist holding up traffic or making someone late for the train/daycare...

there are so many things on our roads to delay your travel ranging from poor parking, ups trucks double parking, accidents, senior drivers and groups of Harley's (want to make sure I offend all groups equally). It seems silly to pick on Cyclist, particularly when most wouldn't choose to ride on a crowded two lane if there was a feasible option.

[flyhippy]

Yea, I don't really think its about a RIGHT to be there or not. Reminds me of when my cousin and her boyfriend visited south Florida. They were in Miami, and it happened to be the night of like the Hip Hop awards or something there. A police officer came up to them, and told them it might be best if they weren't in the area on that particular night. So they got in a car and drove up to visit me in Ft. Lauderdale. Did they have a right to be in Miami, of course. Was it in their best interest to be there, no.

I avoid well travelled roadways, simply because people are idiots. I would rather divert and have a pleasant, albeit slightly longer, ride, than get hit by a texter or morning commuter that is trying to multi-task on the way to work.

[MattTuck]

2 things.

1. Lots of times there are cars that could pass but choose not to (either out of being too timid, abundance of caution, etc.) and thus cause an 8 car back up that takes a long time to clear. In those cases, I'll just pull over for 10 seconds and let everyone get by. It is hard to pin blame on anyone in this situation, the cyclist is riding safely and staying to the right, and the driver doesn't want to pass because they deem it unsafe.

2. I use the pick 2 philosophy. good shoulder / average speed over 45 / low volume of traffic.

[malcolm]

Originally Posted by Zoodles

In Regards to a cyclist holding up traffic or making someone late for the train/daycare...

there are so many things on our roads to delay your travel ranging from poor parking, ups trucks double parking, accidents, senior drivers and groups of Harley's (want to make sure I offend all groups equally). It seems silly to pick on Cyclist, particularly when most wouldn't choose to ride on a crowded two lane if there was a feasible option.

I think the difference is most cyclists are out for enjoyment/exercise. The others impediments are work/life related except maybe the Harleys. I appreciate the right to be there but I see folks riding in areas I wouldn't ride on a bet. I just don't see how being in front of a line of 20 angry motorists can be pleasurable.

Someone mentioned riding to work as in the only means of transportation available. It's interesting I see a young woman that works at a car wash a couple miles away and has her bike on the road I mentioned in the original example and she walks in the grass and pushes her bike until she can cut through the lesser traveled neighborhood streets to her job.

[rugbysecondrow]

Originally Posted by Zoodles

In Regards to a cyclist holding up traffic or making someone late for the train/daycare...

there are so many things on our roads to delay your travel ranging from poor parking, ups trucks double parking, accidents, senior drivers and groups of Harley's (want to make sure I offend all groups equally). It seems silly to pick on Cyclist, particularly when most wouldn't choose to ride on a crowded two lane if there was a feasible option.

Stuff happens, and I know if I am late it is my fault and not the cyclists fault, I should have left sooner. With that said, I find the statements that cyclists make " are you in that big a hurry that you can't be delayed a few minutes" a BS response. Somehow, all motorists who come into contact with this cyclist are now the dicks for not wanting to be delayed rather than the one person who is actually causing the delay...that makes no sense.

We can be reasonable, I don't think a moratorium on riding certain roads is necessary, I just think there are times and places when it is most appropriate. Sure, if you can't help it, then you have not choice but to traverse that route. That is seldom the case. Folks often choose these routes because they are convenient for them, but they ignore or discount the inconvenience to others.

I view this like I view taking young children out to restaurants. If I go at 5:00-6:00 PM, then that is a family hour and folks should expect kids to be there and that is more appropriate. The inverse is true that I won't take them at 8:PM because that is a more adult time. It isn't a rule, but a courtesy, a compromise. There are certain restaurants which are kid friendly. If you don't like kids and you go to Red Robin, then you are SOL. That is a big fail on your end. It s about courtesy and appropriateness. Even the best behaved young children are louder than no children, so we make this compromise. I view cycling the same way sometimes.

This is often the case where I live, which will likely vary from other folks and their environment.

[flyhippy]

Originally Posted by rugbysecondrow

I view this like I view taking young children out to restaurants. If I go at 5:00-6:00 PM, then that is a family hour and folks should expect kids to be there and that is more appropriate. The inverse is true that I won't take them at 8:PM because that is a more adult time. It isn't a rule, but a courtesy, a compromise. There are certain restaurants which are kid friendly. If you don't like kids and you go to Red Robin, then you are SOL. That is a big fail on your end. It s about courtesy and appropriateness. Even the best behaved young children are louder than no children, so we make this compromise. I view cycling the same way sometimes.

I think this is the perfect analogy. Don't get pissed because the folks celebrating their anniversary at the next table are giving you dirty looks, you took your toddler to a fancy restaurant at 8 pm on a friday night.

As always, there are exceptions to everything. One prominent image in my mind is when I attended Lewis & Clark law school in portland and HAD to cross the Sellwood bridge every day. They are tight lanes, without enough room to be safely overtaken. If you hug the shoulder, people will make the unsafe pass. If you take the lane, people in the oncoming lanes will ... LITERALLY... swerve at you and honk their horns. Yes, the people whom you are not impeding at all, actually carry so much hostility towards cyclists, IN PORTLAND, that they can't take it and have to lash out at someone travelling the opposite direction.

thankfully, that bridge is being redone now...