Age where it is no longer appropriate for children to ride onsidewalks?

On 2/8/2017 9:07 PM, Tim McNamara wrote:
On Wed, 8 Feb 2017 13:39:37 -0800, sms
wrote:
Last night I was on the losing side of a 3-2 vote to raise the legal
age for cycling on sidewalks from 10 years old to 12 years old. I
brought in one of the top cycling instructors in California to try to
explain to the City Council why it's a bad idea. But the consensus was
that by raising the age limit we are encouraging kids to ride because
the kids and their parents feel safe on sidewalks, even though the
evidence doesn't support this feeling.

The issue I raised, that got one other council member on my side, was
the problem of fast cyclists, riding opposite traffic, on the
sidewalk, speeding down sidewalk ramps into intersections, where
drivers aren't expecting or looking for a high speed cyclist.

This was only the first reading of the ordinance. I have one more
chance to stop it. I need additional compelling arguments, ones that
non-cyclists will understand.

What about the safety of pedestrians from people operating VEHICLES on
the sidewalk? Other children, old people, people with disabilities?
Siewalks are not a one-way proposition, so it is guaranteed that
pedestrians will be passed from behind. How about people out walking
their dogs and the leash getting tangled up in the front wheel and
causing a crash?

Yes, that was raised. The rationalization against that argument was that
there is not much pedestrian use of the sidewalks.

Does your municipality have driveways that cross the sidewalk? Every
one of those is an intersection, and intersections are the most
dangerous place for cyclists.

Also raised already.


Will there be visibility provisions in
the ordinance preventing fences, shrubbery, walls, etc. from obscuring
the view for drivers crossing the sidewalk, so that they can avoid
hitting kids? I watched a guy in the car in front of me at a stop light
hit three kids on bikes who were crossing in the crosswalk- the driver
was looking left at cars to make a right turn on red, creeping forward
in jerks and stops. The kids came from the right and just as they got
in front of him he released the brakes again and knocked all three kids
over. Fortunately no injuries and the police officer in traffic on the
side street saw teh whole thing.

That is a good idea. It was raised, but not talked about much. There is
no provision in the ordinance. I might be able to get some traction with
that argument.

What are the potential unintended consequences of the law?

How about instead offering bicycle safety courses put on in schools,
churches, social organizations like Boy and Girl Scouts, etc.? Improved
skills are a more certain way to promote the safety of our children. I
remember the police department putting a couple of these on every year
at my grade school; you had to have your bike inspected, demonstrate the
rules of the road, emergency stopping technique, etc.

Yes, those are all already being done, at least in schools.

IMHO kids should be riding like adults before they are 10. The skill
set is not that difficult and the reasons I list above are persuasive to
me that riding on sidewalks is not safe.

To me too. But we are dealing with five politicians and only two of us
are cyclists.

On 2017-02-08 13:39, sms wrote:
Last night I was on the losing side of a 3-2 vote to raise the legal age
for cycling on sidewalks from 10 years old to 12 years old. I brought in
one of the top cycling instructors in California to try to explain to
the City Council why it's a bad idea. But the consensus was that by
raising the age limit we are encouraging kids to ride because the kids
and their parents feel safe on sidewalks, even though the evidence
doesn't support this feeling.

The issue I raised, that got one other council member on my side, was
the problem of fast cyclists, riding opposite traffic, on the sidewalk,
speeding down sidewalk ramps into intersections, where drivers aren't
expecting or looking for a high speed cyclist.


Good point. That should indeed be argument #1.


This was only the first reading of the ordinance. I have one more chance
to stop it. I need additional compelling arguments, ones that
non-cyclists will understand.


Argument #2: Like Tim said, this increase will result in more and also
more serious pedestrian injuries. 12 year olds have a lot of muscle
power, they can easily exceed 20mph, and they will. That is not safe.

Argument #3: If more kids ride on sidewalks this can result in more car
drivers generally expecting cyclists to be on sidewalks and not in the
lane. Just like they expect pedestrians to not be in the road. I had
exactly that happen here in town. Joe Blow in his dilapidated pickup
truck rolled down the window and hollered at me "THERE IS A BIKE PATH
THERE!", pointing to a narrow sidewalk at our Hwy 50 underpass. He
probably saw kids and some adults using it before but he didn't even
wait until I could explain to him that me riding there would be illegal,
instead he angrily gunned the engine and took off.

Just MHO: Instead of such rules city council should spend their time
thinking about where and how to build more bike infrastructure. Anything
else is unlikely getting more people onto their bicycles. At least not
in America. Well over 90% of people I know who cycle will absolutely not
do so on roads. They always truck their bicycles to where a bike path
access is located and free parking is available. This is the #1 reason
why I almost always ride alone into the valley, no bike paths until you
are 10mi down the road.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 5:28:37 PM UTC-8, DATAKOLL MARINE RESEARCH wrote:
there are miles of empty sidewalks here.

https://www.fort.usgs.gov/node/2353

On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 1:41:54 PM UTC-8, sms wrote:
Last night I was on the losing side of a 3-2 vote to raise the legal age
for cycling on sidewalks from 10 years old to 12 years old. I brought in
one of the top cycling instructors in California to try to explain to
the City Council why it's a bad idea. But the consensus was that by
raising the age limit we are encouraging kids to ride because the kids
and their parents feel safe on sidewalks, even though the evidence
doesn't support this feeling.

The issue I raised, that got one other council member on my side, was
the problem of fast cyclists, riding opposite traffic, on the sidewalk,
speeding down sidewalk ramps into intersections, where drivers aren't
expecting or looking for a high speed cyclist.

This was only the first reading of the ordinance. I have one more chance
to stop it. I need additional compelling arguments, ones that
non-cyclists will understand.

IME it don't matter much either way. As a cyclist, on one otherwise fine day, hopefully in your youth, you get bumped off your bike while crossing a driveway. After that you don't ride sidewalks anymore.

For your reference, records indicate that
sms wrote:

But the consensus was that by
raising the age limit we are encouraging kids to ride because the kids
and their parents feel safe on sidewalks, even though the evidence
doesn't support this feeling.

So what’s the procedure for when children and parents want to ride
together? Are parent’s simply not allowed on the sidewalk to ride
with their children?

The issue I raised, that got one other council member on my side, was
the problem of fast cyclists, riding opposite traffic, on the sidewalk,
speeding down sidewalk ramps into intersections, where drivers aren't
expecting or looking for a high speed cyclist.

That’s really the best argument: it should be a speed limit, not an
age limit. You just need different ways of framing it to get the
point across. It should also apply to all “use� of a sidewalk,
including things like rollerblades, electric scooters, and even the
cars crossing the sidewalk to park in the garage. Anybody looking
to go zipping around faster than, say, 10mph or 15kph should be
using the road. And, really, it should drop to *half* that when
pedestrians are present.

--
"Also . . . I can kill you with my brain."
River Tam, Trash, Firefly

On Thursday, February 9, 2017 at 12:40:41 PM UTC-8, Doc O'Leary wrote:
For your reference, records indicate that
sms wrote:

But the consensus was that by
raising the age limit we are encouraging kids to ride because the kids
and their parents feel safe on sidewalks, even though the evidence
doesn't support this feeling.

So what’s the procedure for when children and parents want to ride
together? Are parent’s simply not allowed on the sidewalk to ride
with their children?

The issue I raised, that got one other council member on my side, was
the problem of fast cyclists, riding opposite traffic, on the sidewalk,
speeding down sidewalk ramps into intersections, where drivers aren't
expecting or looking for a high speed cyclist.

That’s really the best argument: it should be a speed limit, not an
age limit. You just need different ways of framing it to get the
point across. It should also apply to all “use� of a sidewalk,
including things like rollerblades, electric scooters, and even the
cars crossing the sidewalk to park in the garage. Anybody looking
to go zipping around faster than, say, 10mph or 15kph should be
using the road. And, really, it should drop to *half* that when
pedestrians are present.

Same with motor vehicles. 3-year-olds should be able to drive legally up to 3mph.

On 2/9/2017 11:57 AM, Joerg wrote:

Argument #2: Like Tim said, this increase will result in more and also
more serious pedestrian injuries. 12 year olds have a lot of muscle
power, they can easily exceed 20mph, and they will. That is not safe.

The instructor I brought in, who is also a racer, emphasized the big
difference between 10 year olds and 12 year olds in terms of speed and
power.

Just MHO: Instead of such rules city council should spend their time
thinking about where and how to build more bike infrastructure. Anything
else is unlikely getting more people onto their bicycles. At least not
in America. Well over 90% of people I know who cycle will absolutely not
do so on roads. They always truck their bicycles to where a bike path
access is located and free parking is available. This is the #1 reason
why I almost always ride alone into the valley, no bike paths until you
are 10mi down the road.

To their credit, they are also working on more infrastructure.

On 2017-02-09 12:37, Doug Landau wrote:
On Wednesday, February 8, 2017 at 1:41:54 PM UTC-8, sms wrote:
Last night I was on the losing side of a 3-2 vote to raise the
legal age for cycling on sidewalks from 10 years old to 12 years
old. I brought in one of the top cycling instructors in California
to try to explain to the City Council why it's a bad idea. But the
consensus was that by raising the age limit we are encouraging kids
to ride because the kids and their parents feel safe on sidewalks,
even though the evidence doesn't support this feeling.

The issue I raised, that got one other council member on my side,
was the problem of fast cyclists, riding opposite traffic, on the
sidewalk, speeding down sidewalk ramps into intersections, where
drivers aren't expecting or looking for a high speed cyclist.

This was only the first reading of the ordinance. I have one more
chance to stop it. I need additional compelling arguments, ones
that non-cyclists will understand.

IME it don't matter much either way. As a cyclist, on one otherwise
fine day, hopefully in your youth, you get bumped off your bike while
crossing a driveway. After that you don't ride sidewalks anymore.


One local journalist reported it the other way around. He always rode on
the sidewalk in some areas of Sacramento. The city started cracking down
on that and he thought "Well, it ain't right anyhow, so let's ride in
the lane". He promptly got catapulted off the bike by a car and from
then on was back to riding on the sidewalk.

--
Regards, Joerg

http://www.analogconsultants.com/

one sidewalk choke point on a Palm Beach area route was an artists area of maybe 200'

there was a bullhorn with bullhorner on hand for security, broadly stated. He knew me and suggested caution...not only on the sidewalk also riding in the traffic flow expressing skepticism that was a good idea no matter what the speeds.

I walked thru the colony.

Local control of bike on sidewalk riding. the layout is tight from the late 50's.

I have J's intolerance of hi speed passes believing one day I will be a victim.

also bullhornable.

On 2/9/2017 12:38 PM, Doc O'Leary wrote:
For your reference, records indicate that
sms wrote:

But the consensus was that by
raising the age limit we are encouraging kids to ride because the kids
and their parents feel safe on sidewalks, even though the evidence
doesn't support this feeling.

So what’s the procedure for when children and parents want to ride
together? Are parent’s simply not allowed on the sidewalk to ride
with their children?

The issue I raised, that got one other council member on my side, was
the problem of fast cyclists, riding opposite traffic, on the sidewalk,
speeding down sidewalk ramps into intersections, where drivers aren't
expecting or looking for a high speed cyclist.

That’s really the best argument: it should be a speed limit, not an
age limit. You just need different ways of framing it to get the
point across. It should also apply to all “use� of a sidewalk,
including things like rollerblades, electric scooters, and even the
cars crossing the sidewalk to park in the garage. Anybody looking
to go zipping around faster than, say, 10mph or 15kph should be
using the road. And, really, it should drop to *half* that when
pedestrians are present.

One problem is that there are really no double-blind studies that can
quantify the difference in the danger between sidewalk riding and street
riding, by age. Even though we know that sidewalks are not appropriate
for anything other than small children on little bikes, with adult
supervision, it's hard to explain to non-cyclists why the sidewalk is
not the safer place to ride. I suppose that I could get our resident AHZ
to make up some studies for me, but this city` council, while not
composed of cyclists, is too smart to fall for the kind of thing.

Practically speaking, this law will have almost no effect on the number
of 11 and 12 year olds riding on the sidewalk. If they do it now they
will keep doing it. If they don't do it now, they won't start doing it.
But it sends the wrong message.

And of course, in some instances, it is necessary to ride on the
sidewalk regardless of the rider's age.