Stop Signs To Protect Cyclists Using Houston Hike And Bike Trails

[samagon]

Bikes should be riding in the lane designated for them and not the median path. Just a bad dangerous idea to ride the median one.

 

Absolutely, you've got drivers speeding and not paying attention, bicycles riding where they shouldn't, and people walking where they shouldn't. No one is (or should be) exempt from breaking laws that are put in place for the express purpose of making things safer for them.

 

It's pandemonium, and people should start paying attention to what they are doing that is contributing to the pandemonium prior to expecting the city/state to step in.

 

What good are more restrictions going to do, if no one pays attention to the ones in place now?

[Marksmu]

If those are specifically bike paths, then pedestrians should not be walking on a bike path (period).

 

If those paths are marked as hike/bike trails, then the city needs to update their signage where it crosses streets to alert drivers that there are pedestrians crossing, and not just a bike path ahead, and at least have the markings for a crosswalk on the street, and appropriate signs prior to intersect.

 

If you spend enough time on sidewalks riding your bike, you're going to get hit as someone leaves or enters a parking lot (oddly, the laws on cycling on sidewalks specifically reference that you cannot ride on the sidewalk within x feet of a retail/commercial site, and probably for this very reason).

 

If people spend enough time walking on a bike path, they are going to get run into by a cyclist, or they are going to get run over trying to cross the street. Same thing with walking in a street when there's a sidewalk. the pedestrian walking in the street will probably get hit by a car.

 

These things are completely avoidable, and the safety issue is only an issue because people don't follow the laws that are in place to keep them safe.

 

Families with children should be especially heightened to protecting their children and before expecting others to bend to their will to provide safety for them and their family, they should do everything in their power to be safe, this starts with following the rules set forth by our government which are in place to help make things safe for them!

 

Talking about it not being safe for families to walk on a bike path is like saying the sky is blue. "no duh" is my response. Maybe those families should walk over one block west to Lawrence Street where there is a sidewalk that runs for the same distance and parallel to the bike path. If you want to help make a difference, let people know they're putting themselves and their families in harms way, hell, call CPS for child endangerment.

 

The path through the Heights is a hike/bike path - not a bike path.  (except on Heights blvd which is clearly a bike path).  I frequently use the hike/bike trails...its clearly designated for walking & biking.  Ive got kids and I let them walk on the path...The law pertaining to bikes is the same as it is to cars.  Pedestrians have the right of way.  When I see a biker coming I will try to get my kids hands or pick them up to keep them from getting in a bikers way.  However, many times they come up quickly from behind, or are riding 2 across taking up the whole path.

 

I can only do so much to ensure that a bike rider is being responsible on the trail.  Many ride way too fast for a trail that is not specifically for bikes only....the really obnoxious ones like to get close to you as they zip by in their little bike-tights.  I can tell you this with authority.  I would not hesitate for one second to knock a bike rider off his bike if he was about to collide with my kids.  Not even one second...nor would I feel guilty, or take responsibility for his injuries or his bike.  Bike Riders are required to ride their bikes at a safe speed, exactly like a car is required to operate at a safe speed...if a bike rider is riding too fast on a trail with kids on it they are acting irresponsibly and will have to suffer the consequences of their boneheaded self righteousness...Pedestrians have the right of way.  Its almost ironic that bikers complain about pedestrians...its the same complaints that cars have about bikes - slow, taking up the whole road, and difficult to safely pass.

[kylejack]

The path through the Heights is a hike/bike path - not a bike path.  (except on Heights blvd which is clearly a bike path).  I frequently use the hike/bike trails...its clearly designated for walking & biking.  Ive got kids and I let them walk on the path...The law pertaining to bikes is the same as it is to cars.  Pedestrians have the right of way.  When I see a biker coming I will try to get my kids hands or pick them up to keep them from getting in a bikers way.  However, many times they come up quickly from behind, or are riding 2 across taking up the whole path.

 

I can only do so much to ensure that a bike rider is being responsible on the trail.  Many ride way too fast for a trail that is not specifically for bikes only....the really obnoxious ones like to get close to you as they zip by in their little bike-tights.  I can tell you this with authority.  I would not hesitate for one second to knock a bike rider off his bike if he was about to collide with my kids.  Not even one second...nor would I feel guilty, or take responsibility for his injuries or his bike.  Bike Riders are required to ride their bikes at a safe speed, exactly like a car is required to operate at a safe speed...if a bike rider is riding too fast on a trail with kids on it they are acting irresponsibly and will have to suffer the consequences of their boneheaded self righteousness...Pedestrians have the right of way.  Its almost ironic that bikers complain about pedestrians...its the same complaints that cars have about bikes - slow, taking up the whole road, and difficult to safely pass.

 

Cyclists shouldn't hit people, sure, but I will challenge you to cite the statute on bikes have to ride at a "safe speed", as if a safe speed for bikes has even been defined in the statutes.

[callisthenes]

People have been asking for an actual traffic signal for 11th/Nicholson and bikepath/Yale.  A stop sign would not make sense as it would force everyone to stop.  A traffic signal that was activated by users of the trail would be a great idea to make the crossing safe for everyone, not just cyclist.  People do go for walks with family.  People on the west side of Yale take the bike path to go to Donovan Park with their kids.  Crossing Yale St. with little kids is a major challenge and it does not have to be that way.

 

Waiting for pedestrians and cyclists to cross a major thoroughfare is just part of the urban driving experience.

 

Those streets can be crossed safely now.  Look at the challenge as an opportunity to teach your kids how to wait patiently and cross streets safely. 

[callisthenes]

The path through the Heights is a hike/bike path - not a bike path.  (except on Heights blvd which is clearly a bike path).  I frequently use the hike/bike trails...its clearly designated for walking & biking.  Ive got kids and I let them walk on the path...The law pertaining to bikes is the same as it is to cars.  Pedestrians have the right of way.  When I see a biker coming I will try to get my kids hands or pick them up to keep them from getting in a bikers way.  However, many times they come up quickly from behind, or are riding 2 across taking up the whole path.

 

I can only do so much to ensure that a bike rider is being responsible on the trail.  Many ride way too fast for a trail that is not specifically for bikes only....the really obnoxious ones like to get close to you as they zip by in their little bike-tights.  I can tell you this with authority.  I would not hesitate for one second to knock a bike rider off his bike if he was about to collide with my kids.  Not even one second...nor would I feel guilty, or take responsibility for his injuries or his bike.  Bike Riders are required to ride their bikes at a safe speed, exactly like a car is required to operate at a safe speed...if a bike rider is riding too fast on a trail with kids on it they are acting irresponsibly and will have to suffer the consequences of their boneheaded self righteousness...Pedestrians have the right of way.  Its almost ironic that bikers complain about pedestrians...its the same complaints that cars have about bikes - slow, taking up the whole road, and difficult to safely pass.

 

Man, the bicyclists are not trying to run into you.  If you are scared of bikes and bicyclists or hate them so much, walk someplace else besides a hike/bike trail.  Guaranteed you're gonna see bikes there.

[Marksmu]

Cyclists shouldn't hit people, sure, but I will challenge you to cite the statute on bikes have to ride at a "safe speed", as if a safe speed for bikes has even been defined in the statutes.

Bicycles must follow all the same rules as a motor vehicle...motor vehicles are required to operate at a safe speed in a safer manner and yielding to pedestrians at all times....it shouldn't be that hard to find the statute.

[RedScare]

So, you hate cyclists on the street, and you hate cyclists on the bike trail. Let me guess...your dad took the training wheels off your bike to soon when you were young, and you blame the bike for it.  

[kylejack]

Bicycles must follow all the same rules as a motor vehicle...motor vehicles are required to operate at a safe speed in a safer manner and yielding to pedestrians at all times....it shouldn't be that hard to find the statute.

 

You're right, all vehicles must obey speed limit signs. I haven't seen any on the bike pedestrian path, though!

[samagon]

The path through the Heights is a hike/bike path - not a bike path.  (except on Heights blvd which is clearly a bike path).  I frequently use the hike/bike trails...its clearly designated for walking & biking.  Ive got kids and I let them walk on the path...The law pertaining to bikes is the same as it is to cars.  Pedestrians have the right of way.  When I see a biker coming I will try to get my kids hands or pick them up to keep them from getting in a bikers way.  However, many times they come up quickly from behind, or are riding 2 across taking up the whole path.

 

I can only do so much to ensure that a bike rider is being responsible on the trail.  Many ride way too fast for a trail that is not specifically for bikes only....the really obnoxious ones like to get close to you as they zip by in their little bike-tights.  I can tell you this with authority.  I would not hesitate for one second to knock a bike rider off his bike if he was about to collide with my kids.  Not even one second...nor would I feel guilty, or take responsibility for his injuries or his bike.  Bike Riders are required to ride their bikes at a safe speed, exactly like a car is required to operate at a safe speed...if a bike rider is riding too fast on a trail with kids on it they are acting irresponsibly and will have to suffer the consequences of their boneheaded self righteousness...Pedestrians have the right of way.  Its almost ironic that bikers complain about pedestrians...its the same complaints that cars have about bikes - slow, taking up the whole road, and difficult to safely pass.

 

I got curious and checked it out on Google Maps

 

If it's meant for pedestrians as well as bicycles then all the markings on the road are wrong, all the markings on the path are wrong.

 

The markings where street crossings do not have a zebra path for pedestrian crossing, nor are there signs on the roads designating that there is a crosswalk ahead.

 

So, if it's a shared ped/cycle path, then the city needs to follow the states codes and mark it correctly. 

[callisthenes]

You're right, all vehicles must obey speed limit signs. I haven't seen any on the bike pedestrian path, though!

The trail through part of Terry Hershey has some signs suggesting bikes pass pedestrians at 10 mph. They are not "official" looking signs, maybe a park conservancy group or neighborhood association put them up.

Most bicyclist are riding 10-20mph, and if they are going to pass somebody from behind they call out "on your left" to give fair warning. I myself only do this if the situation calls for it, i.e. I can't get past without having somebody move out of my way. I don't yell at everyone I pass on a bike path just as I don't honk at everyone I pass in my car on the streets. In part that's because sometimes when I do signal my approach, walkers will make some random move rather than just moving over to let me pass, which can be dangerous for all of us.

[kylejack]

Yeah, calling out sometimes confuses people and makes them move right in your way. I only call out if there are kids acting unpredictably, or if the person already seems to notice me approaching.

[Marksmu]

So, you hate cyclists on the street, and you hate cyclists on the bike trail. Let me guess...your dad took the training wheels off your bike to soon when you were young, and you blame the bike for it.  

 

I dont hate or even dislike cyclists.  Its just that with quite a few cyclists there is an attitude about them that they are riding a bike therefore everyone else, utilizing any other mode of transportation, car, walking, skateboard, whatever it may be should get out of their way because by god they are on a bike.

 

It just happens to be that a big chunk of bike riders are very inconsiderate no matter where they ride.  If people just practiced common curtosey and common sense we would not even have to have the conversation.

 

I have....no, I had...a bike (it was stolen a few months back) but when I rode I tried not to obstruct traffic - I was conscience about my ridings effect on other people...when I was on the hike/bike trail, I slowed down when I approached kids or people walking dogs...its just common sense - minimize risk and be polite...All we actually need is for everyone, even the hard core bike crazies, to be polite and use common sense...

 

Some good tips for bike riders would include:

1.  Stop at intersections with red lights & stop signs.

2.  Slow down when you approach children/pets - especially when approaching from behind.

3.  Dont yell some snide comment when passing

4.  Dont cut between cars at a light to get to the front of the light - ESPECIALLY if the cars just spent the last few minutes trying to pass you.  Wait your dang turn.

5.  Yield to pedestrians just like you expect a car to yield to you

6.  Use a light front/back at night.

7.  Turn your headphones down so you can hear your surroundings.

8.  Drop the attitude that just b/c you are on a bike that you are morally/environmentally/whatever superior.

9.  Treat other people like you would like to be treated. 

[kylejack]

4.  Dont cut between cars at a light to get to the front of the light - ESPECIALLY if the cars just spent the last few minutes trying to pass you.  Wait your dang turn.

 

Yep, dangerous to get between the cars. It's better to come up on the right side of the right lane to get up to the light. Don't need to wait turn, though. Riders are required by law to ride as near to the right as practicable.

[Marksmu]

Yep, dangerous to get between the cars. It's better to come up on the right side of the right lane to get up to the light. Don't need to wait turn, though. Riders are required by law to ride as near to the right as practicable.

 

Its ok to ride up to the right of them if your going to turn - I dont think anyone objects to that, but if you ride up to the right to go straight, and then get in the same peoples way a second time - well then that just inconsiderate and any rudeness that occurs from the drivers towards you was earned.

[SilverJK]

i have a different perspective on all this... as a longboarder I normally cruise in the 10-15mph range... from my experience bicyclist (especially those going faster) are good about getting out of the way/making room.  Moms with strollers on the other hand... will walk side by side blocking the entire path.  My longboard doesn't do so well in the grass... so i've had to actually stop, pick up my board, step off the path and go around them.  These are probably the same people complaining about not having a sign to cross yale  or 11th while on the trail. 

[kylejack]

Its ok to ride up to the right of them if your going to turn - I dont think anyone objects to that, but if you ride up to the right to go straight, and then get in the same peoples way a second time - well then that just inconsiderate and any rudeness that occurs from the drivers towards you was earned.

 

Riders are required to ride as near to the right as practicable. Waiting behind cars when there is space on the right to move up is not riding as near to the right as practicable, as required by law.

[JCR]

 Moms with strollers on the other hand... will walk side by side blocking the entire path. 

Besides the "road hog" moms are the are the idiot dog walkers.  Standing in the right lane yakking on the cell, leash stretched across the left lane while the dog is taking a dump in the grass.  It's just best to avoid riding evenings and weekends on the path.

[Marksmu]

Riders are required to ride as near to the right as practicable. Waiting behind cars when there is space on the right to move up is not riding as near to the right as practicable, as required by law.

 

I don't think the law requires you to pass people on the right who are stopped at lights as you claim.  I believe that you are misinterpreting the law in order to put a positive spin on being an inconsiderate rider.

 

Heights blvd excluded b/c it has a designated trail, if you pass stopped cars at a light who moments before just had to slow down, change lanes, etc to get around you, then you are the inconsiderate person here.  I'm not alone in this belief.  I think most people find that to be a persistent problem with bike riders. 

[kylejack]

I don't think the law requires you to pass people on the right who are stopped at lights as you claim.  I believe that you are misinterpreting the law in order to put a positive spin on being an inconsiderate rider.

 

Well, if you will read the law, you will see that it requires cyclists to ride as near to the right as practicable. If it is practicable to do so, that is what they must do. You shouldn't expect people to disobey the law because it is more convenient for you. Share the road, and if you have to pass a cyclist a second time, well, that's just what you'll have to do.

[Marksmu]

Besides the "road hog" moms are the are the idiot dog walkers.  Standing in the right lane yakking on the cell, leash stretched across the left lane while the dog is taking a dump in the grass.  It's just best to avoid riding evenings and weekends on the path.

 

I agree with the dog walkers who take up the whole trail...I walk the dogs on the trail, but I keep them on a 3' leash.  Folks with retractable leashes are going to seriously take out a bike rider one of these days.

[Marksmu]

Well, if you will read the law, you will see that it requires cyclists to ride as near to the right as practicable. If it is practicable to do so, that is what they must do. You shouldn't expect people to disobey the law because it is more convenient for you. Share the road, and if you have to pass a cyclist a second time, well, that's just what you'll have to do.

Sec. 551.101. Rights and Duties

(a) A person operating a bicycle has the rights and duties applicable to a driver operating a vehicle under this subtitle

 

551.103. Operation on Roadway

(a) Except as provided by Subsection (, a person operating a bicycle on a roadway who is moving slower than the other traffic on the roadway shall ride as near as practicable to the right curb or edge of the roadway

 

That does not say, nor does it imply, that a person must continue past stopped cars waiting at a traffic light...If its not legal for a car to do it, then its not legal for a bike to do it.  I am pretty sure a car is not allowed to pass on the shoulder, thus a bicycle is not allowed to pass on the shoulder.  The statute says nothing more than ride close to the curb so you stay out of the way of cars that are moving faster than you are.....Its the law trying to tell you not to be an inconsiderate prick by adding congestion to the roads.  Your interpretation is not the law.  Its nothing more than your own mental gymnastics used to justify you being inconsiderate to others. 

 

Cars will happily share the road once the bike riders get the chip off their shoulder that they are special in some way just b/c they are on a bike.  You cause traffic/congestion by illegally passing a stopped car at a red light.

[kylejack]

That does not say, nor does it imply, that a person must continue past stopped cars waiting at a traffic light.

 

Yes it does! "shall ride as near as practicable to the right curb"

 

When you're driving your car, you can't pass another car in the same lane...but you can pass a bike in the same lane. It's the same principle at work.

 

As to shoulders, we're not talking about a shoulder, are we? We're talking about a street with a curb. But yes, of course cyclists are allowed to ride on the shoulder as well.

[Ross]

the shall only applies to bicycles that are slower than traffic:

 

"...who is moving slower than the other traffic on the roadway shall ride as near as practicable to the right curb..."

 

I would say that doesn't mean the bike has to move to the curb and proceed past stopped traffic. but, I am not a lawyer, nor do I play one on TV.

[RedScare]

Why are y'all arguing with marksmu about bicycle rules of the road? He is seldom, if ever, correct, and only wants to make everything the cyclist's fault. Of course a cyclist may move to the front of the line at stoplights, just as cars may pass the cyclist while moving. Only marksmu would try to suggest otherwise. There is no requirement to do so, only the permission to do so.

 

Seriously, you will enjoy much lower blood pressure by ignoring marksmu's bicycle rants. He is the driver of that pickup that gets too close to you on those weekend rides. You won't change his mind on this forum.

[kylejack]

Because I enjoy sparring with him on this topic. I think it actually lowers my blood pressure.

[august948]

i have a different perspective on all this... as a longboarder I normally cruise in the 10-15mph range... from my experience bicyclist (especially those going faster) are good about getting out of the way/making room.  Moms with strollers on the other hand... will walk side by side blocking the entire path.  My longboard doesn't do so well in the grass... so i've had to actually stop, pick up my board, step off the path and go around them.  These are probably the same people complaining about not having a sign to cross yale  or 11th while on the trail. 

So stop and walk in the grass. A woman with a stroller should be given right of way as a matter of common courtesy just like you should give up your seat on the bus to an elderly or pregnant woman.

[Marksmu]

Why are y'all arguing with marksmu about bicycle rules of the road? He is seldom, if ever, correct, and only wants to make everything the cyclist's fault. Of course a cyclist may move to the front of the line at stoplights, just as cars may pass the cyclist while moving. Only marksmu would try to suggest otherwise. There is no requirement to do so, only the permission to do so.

 

Seriously, you will enjoy much lower blood pressure by ignoring marksmu's bicycle rants. He is the driver of that pickup that gets too close to you on those weekend rides. You won't change his mind on this forum.

 

Seldom if ever correct is quite an arrogant statement, but I need not argue with you over how often I am correct.  I may not like that bicycles are arrogant jerks on the road but the statutes are the statutes and I don't see a fault in my interpretation...if you do - please use some of your superior legal prowess to show me where my interpretation is incorrect.  Oh gifted one.  

 

If a bicycle MUST follow every law that a motor vehicle must follow, then please show me the statute where it is permissible for another car to pass a car that is stopped at a stop light by using the shoulder to do so.  IF you can show that to me I will admit you are correct and I am wrong.

 

The very first statute dealing with cyclists on a roadway is quite clear - a bicycle MUST follow all rules that a car must follow...further down in the section it says that when the bicycle is moving SLOWER than the traffic it must hug the right side of the lane he is using.  Even further down it states a bicycle may move away from the curb for the purpose of passing another vehicle....Obviously that is intended to mean that a bicycle should not impede traffic by using the shoulder at all time except when passing.  It is nothing more than mental gymnastics to suggest that the reading of 55.103 allows a bicycle to pass on the shoulder.

 

We will go through statute interpretation 101 for you RED since you have apparently forgotten from Criminal Law 1 or 2 how to do that.  Every word in the statute is read literally - no word is put in the statute superfluously.  So lets do a literal reading.

 

Sec. 551.101. Rights and Duties

(a) A person operating a bicycle has the rights and duties applicable to a driver operating a vehicle under this subtitle

 

The literal reading of this is clear - a bicycle is considered a motor vehicle when operating on the roadway....They must follow all of the same rules/laws.  A car is not permitted to pass another car on the shoulder at a red light.  That will get you a ticket.

 

551.103. Operation on Roadway

 

(a) Except as provided by Subsection ( , a person operating a bicycle on a roadway who is moving slower than the other traffic on the roadway shall ride as near as practicable to the right curb or edge of the roadway, unless:

 

(1) the person is passing another vehicle moving in the same direction;

 

The literal reading of this is clear as well - a bicycle MOVING SLOWER than the other traffic shall be as near as practicable to the right edge....Subsection (1) states that to pass another vehicle the person on the bicycle may now move away from the curb for the purpose of passing.

 

This does not say its permissible to pass on the curb.  A car is not permitted to do it, neither is a bike.

 

There is no possible interpretation from these statutes when read in conjunction with the motor vehicle statutes that imply, infer, or permit a bicycle rider to pass on the shoulder at a red light for the purpose of cutting in line.

 

Now - Redscare usually ignores posts where he is proven wrong, or in the alternative states that he does not care enough to prove me wrong...If that is the case again, then I know I am right.  Now Red - lets see you use your vast knowledge of the law and criminal statutes to show me how my interpretation of the statutes is wrong.

[kylejack]

So stop and walk in the grass. A woman with a stroller should be given right of way as a matter of common courtesy just like you should give up your seat on the bus to an elderly or pregnant woman.

 

People should not be walking on the wrong side of the path, no matter who they are.

[kylejack]

If a bicycle MUST follow every law that a motor vehicle must follow, then please show me the statute where it is permissible for another car to pass a car that is stopped at a stop light by using the shoulder to do so.  IF you can show that to me I will admit you are correct and I am wrong.

 

Sure, I'll be happy to explain it to you. Bicycles are explicitly allowed to ride on the shoulder while cars are not except in certain circumstances.

 

• Sec. 545.058. Driving on Improved Shoulder. [i.e., a paved shoulder outside the traffic lane]
•  
• (a) An operator may drive on an improved shoulder to the right of the main traveled portion of a roadway if that operation is necessary and may be done safely, but only:
•  
• (1) to stop, stand, or park;
• (2) to accelerate before entering the main traveled lane of traffic;
• (3) to decelerate before making a right turn;
• (4) to pass another vehicle that is slowing or stopped on the main traveled portion of the highway, disabled, or preparing to make a left turn;
• (5) to allow another vehicle traveling faster to pass;
• (6) as permitted or required by an official traffic-control device; or
• (7) to avoid a collision.
•  
• ( An operator may drive on an improved shoulder to the left of the main traveled portion of a divided or limited-access or controlled-access highway if that operation may be done safely, but only:
•  
• (1) to slow or stop when the vehicle is disabled and traffic or other circumstances prohibit the safe movement of the vehicle to the shoulder to the right of the main traveled portion of the roadway;
• (2) as permitted or required by an official traffic-control device; or
• (3) to avoid a collision.
•  
• © A limitation in this section on driving on an improved shoulder does not apply to:
•  
• (1) an authorized emergency vehicle responding to a call;
• (2) a police patrol; or
• (3) a bicycle.

[Marksmu]

But you ignored the first sentence of the statute...I highlighted the pertinent portion here.

 

An operator may drive on an improved shoulder to the right of the main traveled portion of a roadway if that operation is necessary and may be done safely,

 

It is not necessary to ride past stopped cars to get in front of them at a stop light. Its possible - but it is not necessary.  Necessary means there is no other means...the lane is open to you and only you when the cars are stopped.

 

And FWIW - I also enjoy the sparring - I don't hate bike riders - just the inconsiderate ones.  In fact, I miss my bike.  I wish someone would return it.