another town wants to ban cyclists

[sw3759]

any members use this road?

http://www.contracostatimes.com/contra-costa-times/ci_23262185/diablo-eyes-banning-outside-cyclists-and-drivers-from


intersting story and not good for local cyclists..sounds like the Blackhawk Co "lets ban cyclist" story from a while back

[eddief]

It is unincorporated with giant estate-like homes both old and new, and a golf course and private roads...they have been letting us use to get to the foot of Mt Diablo.

Mt Diablo is a hugely popular cycling destination and many/most wanting to go in the South Gate would choose this neighborhood rather than risk life and limb on the more public Diablo Rd. Diablo Rd. is sort of narrow, smoothly paved, high traffic with zero shoulder. Danger is what sends us all into the bucolic hood of Diablo subdivision.

The wealth in Diablo is palpable as many of the houses have been named as in Gone With Wind. A lovely spot for those lucky enough to have the bucks.

Sincerely,
Rhett Butler

[93legendti]

"These out-of-town cyclists blow through Diablo's stop signs. They go too fast. And they ride two or three abreast across narrow roads, jeopardizing safety and movement in the small community, residents say.
Fed up, members of Diablo's road and police services board next month will discuss barring these cyclists at the town limits, unless they are visiting someone who lives there."

[eddief]

don't want so smoosh a poodle or crash into a golf cart. By the way, there are no sidewalks in Diablo either.

"These out-of-town cyclists blow through Diablo's stop signs. They go too fast. And they ride two or three abreast across narrow roads, jeopardizing safety and movement in the small community, residents say.
Fed up, members of Diablo's road and police services board next month will discuss barring these cyclists at the town limits, unless they are visiting someone who lives there."

[93legendti]

Are you condoning "cyclists (who) blow through Diablo's stop signs" and riding more than two abreast across narrow private roads?

If the roads are indeed private as you say, the residents have the right to restrict use and the bicyclists were foolish to take the roads for granted.

[eddief]

I agree 100% that it is their property and they ought to be able to have it their way. I also have a feeling that so many cyclists use their roads that even if they were observing all the laws, that some folks would be upset to have droves of outsiders riding through their neighborhood. Something needs to get done and it's too damn bad the public road can't be made safe for cars and bikes.

It will be interesting to see if they try some public relations thing to get cyclists to be more law abiding or they gate it and/or post guards at the entrance to stop the madness in its tracks.

[cmg]

sounds like cyclists need to pettion the local goverment to provide safe access to Mt. Diablo. depending on the mercy of private roads is unrealistic/unreliable. any comprimise between cyclist and homeowners is unpoliceable.

[93legendti]

I agree 100% that it is their property and they ought to be able to have it their way. I also have a feeling that so many cyclists use their roads that even if they were observing all the laws, that some folks would be upset to have droves of outsiders riding through their neighborhood. Something needs to get done and it's too damn bad the public road can't be made safe for cars and bikes.

It will be interesting to see if they try some public relations thing to get cyclists to be more law abiding or they gate it and/or post guards at the entrance to stop the madness in its tracks.

Ok, sorry I misunderstood your post.

[BumbleBeeDave]

. . . including the roads that are paid for and maintained by local residents, not local government, then I would think they are within their rights to do what they wish for access.

This is completely different from Mohawk CO, where the prohibition is on public roads maintained by government.

BBD

[cachagua]

Another town wants to ban cyclists. . .

Someone must have shown them the "Equal Rights for Women" thread.

[Tony T]

This says it all:

"--along private roads--"

[Ahneida Ride]

perhaps if cyclists just behaved themselves ....

cyclists should obey all laws just like motorists.

[Buzz]

I ride this route regularly and live in adjacent Danville. The "town" of Diablo is no more than a large subdivision of 300 or 400 homes. There aren't any businesses in Diablo aside from the country club. The road is private and maintained by the residents.

The problem here as others have noted above is the public road "Diablo Road" that runs adjacent to this subdivision. The county and town of Danville have have long been aware of the issue of Diablo Road. On either side of a 2 mile stretch are modern four lane roads with bike lanes. It then squeezes down into a narrow two lane road with no shoulder, twisty and with a lot of vehicle traffic. The town of Danville has grown quite a bit in the last 25 years and this is really the only road in the entire area that was never improved to meet the increased vehicle traffic. Every other main road in the entire Danville/Alamo/San Ramon area is widened and has nice bike lanes, etc.

Cyclists for years have been using a cut through Diablo to get onto the southgate road of Mt. Diablo in order to avoid that bad stretch of public road. In order to get onto Mt. Diablo Road (the start of the climb) you actually have to ride across someone's property and through a broken fence to access Mt. Diablo road. Normally you would be hard pressed to see more than one rider at a time in the Diablo subdivision but in the last few years the cut through obviously made it on to some ride sheets/routes and it is not unusual to see large packs of cyclists cruising through the neighborhood and regrettably / invariably blowing through stop signs, riding three and four abreast, etc. The road runs downhill from Mt. Diablo so cyclists heading through the subdivision are going 20-25 mph and can often be seen passing residents cars which have to slow for speed bumps on their way through.

Frankly I can fully understand Diablo's problem with the increased cyclist traffic.

Hopefully this will be a blessing in disguise as it may force the county or Danville to finally tackle what will be the tricky issue to widen the road.

[bikingshearer]

. . . including the roads that are paid for and maintained by local residents, not local government, then I would think they are within their rights to do what they wish for access. . . .

Maybe not. Cyclists have been riding through Diablo, including on the short dirt path through the "Hole in the Wall" (as we local renegade cyclists call it) that there is a good chance that an easement has been created and that the Diablo residents have lost their right to block it off (though not their right to enforce traffic regulations). I'd really rather not have to find out, though, as legal battles are never cheap.

This was discussed (using the term loosely) on another forum, with a fair amount of f**k the rich b@st@rds" and "hey, cars do Califonia stops, too" crud. I'm afraid I was was rather short with such attitudes. I agree that we, as cyclists, need to obey the rules of the road. The rules of the road are what create predictability, which is the single biggest safety factor we can promote. Plus, riding like a Lance wannabe and ignoring stop signs, blocking traffic, etc., is the best way to tick off enough drivers that we start having legal - or worse yet, legislative - battles.

[Tony T]

Cyclists have been riding through Diablo, including on the short dirt path through the "Hole in the Wall" (as we local renegade cyclists call it) that there is a good chance that an easement has been created and that the Diablo residents have lost their right to block it off (though not their right to enforce traffic regulations).

Sure, why slow down and work with the residents of the private property that they are riding through. The property owners should put up a gate, and the cyclists can take them to court and argue an easement.

And what enforcement of traffic regulations do private citizens have?

[Vientomas]

And what enforcement of traffic regulations do private citizens have?

http://diablocsd.org/index.php

http://diablocsd.org/data/minutes/23.pdf

[Tony T]

Thanks for the link.
"The Ice Cream Social was a great success." :)

[BumbleBeeDave]

An easement argument probably could be made, but it would be up to the cyclists to organize and then pursue a suit, or at least negotiations. I have my doubts that would happen.

Of course, the easiest thing to do would simply be for the cyclists to obey the traffic rules and be courteous. But there's always going to be the small proportion of cyclists who don't feel they are bound to do that, and the small proportion of homeowners who are going to be satisfied with nothing less than banning them.

BBD

Maybe not. Cyclists have been riding through Diablo, including on the short dirt path through the "Hole in the Wall" (as we local renegade cyclists call it) that there is a good chance that an easement has been created and that the Diablo residents have lost their right to block it off (though not their right to enforce traffic regulations). I'd really rather not have to find out, though, as legal battles are never cheap.

This was discussed (using the term loosely) on another forum, with a fair amount of f**k the rich b@st@rds" and "hey, cars do Califonia stops, too" crud. I'm afraid I was was rather short with such attitudes. I agree that we, as cyclists, need to obey the rules of the road. The rules of the road are what create predictability, which is the single biggest safety factor we can promote. Plus, riding like a Lance wannabe and ignoring stop signs, blocking traffic, etc., is the best way to tick off enough drivers that we start having legal - or worse yet, legislative - battles.

[Tony T]

Since there is a public main route to their destination, the easement argument would most likely fail in court. (and add this to the owners argument that they are making their private property unsafe)

[Johnny P]

perhaps if cyclists just behaved themselves ....

Cyclists should obey all laws just like motorists.

+1

[bikingshearer]

An easement argument probably could be made, but it would be up to the cyclists to organize and then pursue a suit, or at least negotiations. I have my doubts that would happen.

Of course, the easiest thing to do would simply be for the cyclists to obey the traffic rules and be courteous. But there's always going to be the small proportion of cyclists who don't feel they are bound to do that, and the small proportion of homeowners who are going to be satisfied with nothing less than banning them.

BBD

Yes and yes. I think that there is a good easment argument to be made here, as a theoretical matter. As a practical matter, it would require a level of organization and commitment (including a financial commitment) that would be difficult, although not impossible, to maintain. As with so many things in life, there is the "textbook" answer and the practical, real life answer. Somethimes they overlap, sometimes they don't.

I absolutely agree that far and away the best thing would be for cyclists to behave themselves, meaning obeying the rules of the road and givng the natives a reason to get upset with us. As I have said elsewhere on this very subject, a modicum of common sense in the past would have meant that this issue never would have seen the light of day, and a modicum of common sense now would make it go away. I'm not holding my breath because there is an irreducable number of clods out there for whom common sense isn't.

Since there is a public main route to their destination, the easement argument would most likely fail in court. (and add this to the owners argument that they are making their private property unsafe)

I'm not positive about this, as I have not looked it up recently, but I don't think California law would recognize these as exceptions to the creation of an easement. I am more sure about the nearby public road not being an exception than I am about the "safety" argument (assuming that the homeowners could support such a contention with the necessary factual evidence), but I think the residents have a real easement problem on their hands here. Again, my first choice by a mile is to defuse the situation by good behavior with any legal response a very distant second.

[bikinchris]

perhaps if cyclists just behaved themselves ....

cyclists should obey all laws just like motorists.

Where is the gd like button on this forum? +1,000,000
Cyclists are their own worst enemy. ****heads who ride like they own the planet make life hard for everyone else on a bike.

[oldpotatoe]

I agree 100% that it is their property and they ought to be able to have it their way. I also have a feeling that so many cyclists use their roads that even if they were observing all the laws, that some folks would be upset to have droves of outsiders riding through their neighborhood. Something needs to get done and it's too damn bad the public road can't be made safe for cars and bikes.

It will be interesting to see if they try some public relations thing to get cyclists to be more law abiding or they gate it and/or post guards at the entrance to stop the madness in its tracks.

This is the answer. Private road, they do what the majority there wants, case closed. BUT public road that is perceived as dangerous..that can be fixed. A shoulder would do wonders...along with knuckle headed cyclists not trying to piss people in cars off.

[InspectorGadget]

I find it curious that someone who is an otherwise law abiding driver turns into a scofflaw when riding a bike. Why is that? [rhetorical question]

I don't know this area, but it sure sounds like the time to widen the road and add bike lanes time has come.