STORYLINE Ask Officer Michelle

This storyline has only one article

Viewing thru of

Ask Officer Michelle - Bicyclists Must Follow the Rules of the Road

by Michelle Lazark, published on November 29, 2009 at 8:04PM

No high resolution image exists...

Loading images

Posted by chriso

I ride my bicycle around downtown alot. I just heard from a friend of mine that while he was riding his bike downtown an officer stopped him and told him to get off of the sidewalk and ride in the street. Are bicylists not allowed to ride on the sidewalk? I am not very comfortable riding in the street without a bike lane.

Dear chriso,

The truth of the matter is that the sidewalk is meant for pedestrians. In other words, it is illegal to ride on the sidewalks. Bicyclists must follow the same rules of the road as other “vehicles” and must ride as close as “practicable” to the right. Sacramento strives to be a bicycle friendly city with many bicycle routes, so people are encouraged to ride their bikes, however bicyclists are always encouraged to exercise caution.

California Vehicle Code Sections 21200-21212 cover the rules of the road and what bicyclists can and can’t do. There is also a City Code section pertaining to riding bicycles on the sidewalk. City Code 10.76.010 states: Except as authorized under subsection B of this section, no person shall ride a bicycle on a sidewalk except within a residence district or where a sidewalk is designated as part of an established bicycle route. Pedestrians shall have the right-of-way on sidewalks.

Sacramento Transportation Management Association has an excellent segment on bicycle commuting including insight on other biking tips as well. Be safe.

Officer Michelle

 

Conversation Express your views, debate, and be heard with those in your area closest to the issue.

November 30, 2009 | 09:06 AM
"Bicyclists must follow the same rules of the road as other vehicles”. You’d would think they were entitled to ride on the sidewalks by the way the expect people to move out of their way and get pissed when you don’t move out of the way. A majority of bicyclists also think they don’t have to stop at stop signs or lights at intersections and end up getting hit because of it.
4 1
REPLY
November 30, 2009 | 09:20 AM
Thanks for that giant wad of over-generalization, Hunnicutt. I have been a daily bike commuter for over 20 years and have encountered good and bad bicyclists AND drivers. Attitudes like yours are dangerous, as they are accompanied by similarly arrogant driving behaviors (see how easy it is to generalize?) and contribute to people like chriso being afraid to assume their rightful spot on the roadway.
3 3
REPLY
CCC
edited on  November 30, 2009 | 06:34 PM
I could not agree more Beerzie. As a daily commuter I am very conscientious of all elements in my view, however there are times when the street is simply not an option (RR track crossings, fear of death by vehicle, double parking, delivery vans etc)due to automotive traffic and often really surprisingly and hostile bad attitudes toward bikes. I drive as well but always share the road, why wouldn't anyone else extend the same courtesy? How hard is it to allow someone on a bike a little breathing room and perhaps some courtesy in not assuming all cyclists are the same just as I do not assume are drivers are all the same until proven otherwise. I regularly experience all sorts of foul comments regarding my mode of transportation and it is boggling. Are Sacramentans as ignorant as people think they are? I would like to think not. A bicycle is valid and has much more business downtown than your automobile. It is not a big place and can be biked /walked/bused/trained very easily. I also see many cyclists policing other cyclists regarding their riding habits, this is good too unless it degenerates into a lecture rather than advice. Anyway, this is a needlessly sore subject in a city that is far more perfect for cycling than driving. The street goes both ways.
2 1
REPLY
November 30, 2009 | 08:54 PM
And you'd think motorists were entitled to break any traffic law they please if it'll get them home faster. Hunnicutt, there are bad cyclists and there are bad motorists, and lumping all cyclists/motorists together under the umbrella of a few bad apples doesn't really count as a valid argument.
1 0
REPLY
November 30, 2009 | 11:03 AM
There is an exception for "residence districts." I believe that much of Sacramento falls into this exception. Of course that depends on the definition of "residence district."

Of course, I find it funny that in business districts like downtown you are not allowed to ride on the sidewalk yet those are the streets that are the least safe for bicyclists on the road. Residential areas of Midtown have bike lanes and traffic is slower, but there bicyclists are allowed to ride on the sidewalk.
1 0
REPLY
edited on  November 30, 2009 | 04:52 PM
Just guessing, but perhaps the residential variation is in consideration of little kids who need to be on the sidwalk?
0 0
REPLY
November 30, 2009 | 02:27 PM
It's simple. Provide a bike lane & I will ride in it. When the bike lane goes away, I take each scenario as it comes. If I feel safer on the sidewalk then that is where I'm riding. I assume most anyone would do the same in a similar situation. Cyclists have just as much right to feel safe as everyone else.
2 1
REPLY
CCC
November 30, 2009 | 02:59 PM
Precisely.
0 0
REPLY
November 30, 2009 | 04:00 PM
I know what you mean, but I choose to ride on the road and take up a lane. I do this because riding on sidewalks is often not safe for pedestrians and can confuse cars who do not expect fast moving bikers like me to use crosswalks.
4 0
REPLY
November 30, 2009 | 04:22 PM
I often do the same if I feel it's safe. It's much faster to ride in the street & there are some streets where it makes sense even without a bike lane. However, on my bike ride home from work at 5:00 up 10th St? Hello sidewalk. I think one of the most common misconceptions about cyclists is that they WANT to ride on the sidewalk.
3 0
REPLY
November 30, 2009 | 04:56 PM
There needs to be pressure (read: tickets) on the automobile drivers who do not give up the lane for bikes. Riding down J street on a bike is one of the scariest rides I make. Most of the cars will not make a lane for a bike, like they would for another car.
3 2
REPLY
November 30, 2009 | 05:01 PM
absolutely
2 0
REPLY
November 30, 2009 | 06:13 PM
I tend to use the sidewalks fairly often when I ride, for all the reasons everyone mentioned above. But, when there are pedestrians, I get off the sidewalk or pull over. I've had more than one cyclist run me off the sidewalk when I was a pedestrian, which is totally not okay.

Obviously, the posters here are a little more aware than a lot of people who ride. I think of it this way...when I'm in a car, I try to be considerate of bikes. When I'm on a bike, I try to be considerate of pedestrians. When I am a pedestrian, I appreciate it when drivers and cyclists aren't trying to kill me.
1 1
REPLY
November 30, 2009 | 03:28 PM
There are sings on N street saying you can ride on the sidewalk, so that is usually the best way to head out of Downtown. I usually use the sidewalks on L on the Parkside because you'd have to be suicidal to ride your bike down L street with the way people drive.
1 0
REPLY
December 3, 2009 | 12:16 PM
Riding into Downtown on G st is a lot less scary than I st as well, and there is a bike lane. It's no big deal to go a couple blocks out of your way to keep from being squashed...
0 0
REPLY
November 30, 2009 | 06:07 PM
When I see police officers riding bicycles in the downtown area, they are always riding on the sidewalk. Is this the policy of the city's police department? Are they riding on the sidewalk because it is safer??
3 1
REPLY
December 1, 2009 | 09:35 AM
Actually, officers if acting within the scope of their duties (responding to a call, etc), are allowed to ride on the sidewalk. They don't take advantage of this authority.
0 0
REPLY
edited on  December 1, 2009 | 12:21 AM
The "okay to ride on the sidewalk in residential district/not okay in commercial district" rule breaks down in mixed-use neighborhoods. How do you judge whether or not you can ride on the sidewalk along, say, L Street or J Street, where many blocks feature a mixture of businesses and residences? I have been told that if there are more residences than businesses it is treated as a residence--or vice versa for businesses. But is a bicyclist expected to stop and count buildings at every block before proceeding? How about, say, 18th-19th on L Street--the street is almost totally commercial on the ground floor, but there are 200 or so residential units on upper floors. Is that commercial or residential?

And considering that many business streets have busy auto traffic but relatively little foot traffic, does that rule even make sense?

And what happens when there is a bike lane on a residential street? Is a bicyclist expected to use the bike lane rather than the sidewalk, or not? To me, if there is a bike lane, that is where bikes should go, whether or not the street is residential--the sidewalk is obviously for pedestrians, and bicycles have their own designated lane, so get off the sidewalk! That's what I do when I ride, anyhow.

In some ways this was less of an issue before so many of Sacramento's sidewalks were made ADA-compliant by adding ramps at corners. Before their additions, bikes had to stop and hop onto the sidewalk at curbs, now they can just roll onto the sidewalks. Making sidewalks usable by the disabled also facilitates their use by bikes--but having both wheelchairs and fast-moving bikes on a narrow sidewalk seems like it is asking for trouble.
2 0
REPLY
December 2, 2009 | 01:28 PM
Michelle, what constitutes "acting within the scope of their duties", does merely being "on the clock" allow officers to ride their bicycles on the sidewalk? I often see bicycle officers riding on the sidewalk when there doesn't seem to be any call they are responding to, I've even seen them ride on the sidewalk from the corner down to whatever cafe/restaurant they're going to.
0 0
REPLY
CCC
December 3, 2009 | 09:57 AM
One more hazard for bikes-garbage containers/leaf piles in the bike lane. Where would you have me ride in this case? Out in the street in front of cars or the sidewalk? When the bike lanes can't be kept clear of leaf piles and garbage cans (not to mention people's car doors) then it makes the situation a bit more complicated and I sure as hell do not like riding in the street
2 0
REPLY
December 4, 2009 | 04:54 PM
I need to confirm this, but I thought bikes were given the same status as cars on the road, so I think you legally have the lane to take, as any automobile would. This is what makes me wonder why the pressure is on the bike riders to obey the law, when the problem is mostly on the cars that are not showing the repect for the bike riders?
2 0
REPLY
Leave a Comment
TYPE YOUR COMMENT IN THE BOX BELOW
EDIT YOUR COMMENT IN THE BOX BELOW cancel edit

Type tags into the box below.
Use commas to separate your tags.

Cancel Submit

Please Log in or Sign up

Existing Members

Sign In Forgot Password?
New Users Create an Account Here
Verification email has been sent. To validate your account open the link provided in the message.
There was a problem sending your verification email. Please contact support@sacramentopress.com