mr_bill

You *do* realize that he was cycling through an organized holiday walk, right?

Here's commuting on the Minuteman Commuter Bikeway. Funny thing happens when it's not a sunny summer Sunday.
(You'll want a couple minutes of your life back. Nothing to fear but squirrels and bunnies.)


-mr. bill

livedarklions

I grew up near there when that was still a train yard. I miss the boom noise of freight cars being coupled.

UniChris

That's about what my rail trail is often like.

Funny thing is the one time I rode the Minuteman ages ago, I was really surprised by the number of people walking it after dark. And with the halogen lights of the era you could be right on top of them before seeing them.

squirtdad

my observation is that I startle more people when using my voice....vs using a bell and I am not talking about yelling loud..... I also don't do the bell as loud as it can do to start with...only get louder if i see no reaction. I also don't pass at speed

KraneXL

You can be hit by a car, runover and killed. The driver can then drive home without a single scratch. In fact, that can and has been done to a dozen pedestrians. Do you know of anyone that can do that on a bike? Cyclist don't generate hundreds of horsepower, nor do they weigh tons. What happens to them, happens to you.

Second, in a car you are required by law to report any accident and injury to a person (no matter how minor, and even on private property) to law enforcement and to the DMV. A cyclist on the MUPs has no such specific requirement.

You also don't need to take a driving test, report hearing, vision maladies, and received a license to legally ride a bike. Pedestrians are also prohibited by law from walking in the road, and there are specific legal instructions and restrictions for crossing the road properly.

Third, if cyclist are required to yield to every pedestrian then its not a MUP, its a sidewalk. In that case, pedestrians can occupy the entire MUP and walk in any direction, way, form, or fashion they please. Cycling would at best be inefficient, at worst blocked completely.

Finally, the MUP origins was as bikesways. The "MUP" designation developed subsequently, and as in no small amount, a measure of political correctness.

I-Like-To-Bike

SEZ you. Any credible reference to support this alleged factoid?

UniChris

It's pretty obvious many of KraneXL's opinions above are in direct contradiction with applicable law, but that's unlikely to be something anyone here can convince them of.

Paul Barnard

It's not required by law here. It's no more "directional" than my voice, and it communicates nothing to the uninitiated. With my voice, they will hear "I am easing around your left." I never have had anyone do anything unpredictable with that. I am prepared for it, but it has yet to happen. I ride with someone who uses her bell. When she comes up behind people and rings the bell, most move to the right. Some move left. Some have wheeled around to see where the noise came from. Groups have split in both directions. I suppose that could all be a function of people not using bells much here. I certainly won't be abandoning the practice that has served me well to assume one that has yielded less favorable results.

KraneXL

On the contrary, they are directly or indirectly linked to laws. Laws come first, in which case there is no debate. In their absence, these are the customs and courtesies (basically what's being discussed here) that apply.

There is no guarantee that people will move appropriately, but they do instantly recognize the bell sound as an approaching cyclist. Verbal commands, on the other hand, have to be interpreted then carried out. That is, if they're heard it clearly the first time.

Under customs and courtesies, and when no other rule or regulations are present. Of course posted requirements are always applied first.

livedarklions

I do most of my riding in MA. State law is quite clear that giving pedestrians the right of way and audibly signalling a pass is mandatory. These are not customs or courtesies, they're in the basic bicycle statute.

I'm responding to a couple of your posts here, but forgot to check multiquote and don't want to start over.

Please stop pretending expertise in areas you're not especially knowledgeable about. Reporting requirements for motor vehicle accidents are really irrelevant to responsibility for accidents, and probably have more to do with insurance company interests than with safety concerns.

Your original statement was that it was "offensive" to state that bicyclists had greater responsibility than pedestrians on an MUP. Since that was obviously stupid and contrary to law, you've now shifted your argument to "bikes are not perfectly analogous to cars". Well, duh.

Maelochs

Yup, and the laws are quoted, and prove you wrong. Sorry.
In your imagination, people always associate a bell with a bicycle. In the real world, where few cyclists use bells, that is simply not the case. And as for people understanding what a random ringing bell means but not understanding clear verbal commands---maybe that comes from your tendency to deliberately misinterpret words to have the meaning You want. I have ridden some MUPs (used to be part of the Sunday group ride) and have never seen a person move left when I or any other rider called out "On your left," though I am quite sure it does happen ... and whenever I have called out that phrase, I have slowed enough first so that whatever the person did, I was ready.

Most of the time the person or persons did Nothing, because they were wearing earbuds and couldn't have heard a bell or a shout. In that case they were always startled when I passed ... but expecting this, I never passed close enough that they could jump into my path.

Seriously, if people cannot manage riding on MUPs, they should stay home and watch TV.

As other posters may or may not notice, I usually don't bother with KraneXL because he intermittently denies reality. I do it here, not thinking I will convince him to accept fact, but for the fun of it. I assume he will do his best to post some "wicked burn" about how wrong I am and that is fine.

But yeah .. MUPs are sidewalks. Exactly that. And as with sidewalks, bicycles are allowed and Pedestrians Have the Right of Way and cyclists Must yield.

Regardless of who denies it.

livedarklions

Well, if by "political correctness" you mean they needed to be built this way because otherwise there wasn't enough political support to get them funded, yes, that might be right. That bit of history, even if true, is absolutely irrelevant to whether or not you have more responsibility for safety than a pedestrian when you ride on an MUP.

So, by law, pedestrians are allowed on MUPs, and bicycles are required to take special precautions to ensure their safety.

Tell you what, show us any law that indicates that pedestrians have any special responsibility to protect the safety of cyclists on a MUP and you might have a point. You might be able to dig something up regarding dogs and leashes, but presumably those rules would apply to cyclists with dogs as well (if cyclists are actually allowed to ride with dogs on leashes at all), so they won't count.

livedarklions

Y'know what's hilarious? All the times I've seen someone ringing a bell repeatedly on the Minuteman getting no reaction from the people ahead of them, and then having to say "passing on your left" or "please move over" to get people to move.

Never, ever have I seen the opposite occur.

A bell conveys two pieces of information--someone has a bell, and (probably) that person is behind you. The idea that it conveys a clearer message than "passing on your left" is completely illogical.

I am sure that people vary in their ability to state clearly and audibly a signal of what they're doing, and people who find that difficult might very well have a rational preference to use a bell, but that doesn't justify making ridiculous claims about noises conveying meanings better than actual words.

My experience, btw, is that bells vary a lot more in volume than do human voices, so I find it much harder to figure out the distance of a bell behind me than I do an actual human speaking.

UniChris

This depends on the locality - in many denser ones, bicycles (other than those sized for and operated by small children) are not allowed on sidewalks.

While I know of a town that is an exception in having an ordinance specifically addressing MUPs, I'm not convinced that the regulatory situation on MUPs is generally that different than it is on sidewalk-less secondary roadways where walking and cycling are permitted. Pedestrians have the right of way, yes, but also a practical requirement to remain aware of their surroundings - unpredictably jumping in front of cars does not tend to end well for pedestrians, either.


This is mostly a sign of uneducated pedestrians. Most of those on my trail are more experienced - those, and people from "cycling cultures" seem to respond quite well. But perhaps I should opt for voice more with those who are not. My bell broke off early on Thursday's ride forcing voice only but I'd repaired it for Saturday's and Sunday's, don't recall a real difference in reactions.

And I have no problem with someone routinely choosing voice over bell - even where a bell is required to be fitted, I don't recall seeing language requiring that it be used instead of voice.

In some cases however I suspect little but a foghorn would pierce the veil of situational ignorance.

mr_bill

From Arlington MA bylaws:
The Minuteman Commuter Bikeway is a MUP.
The Minuteman Commuter Bikeway allows Bicycles (shocking, huh).
The Minuteman Commuter Bikeway traverses Arlington MA.
Arlington MA prohibits bicycles on Sidewalks.

Therefore, the Minuteman Commuter Bikeway is not a sidewalk.

As far as the bell versus "on your left", Massachusetts requires an "audible signal" which can be a bell or voice or... (but not whistle or siren):

Ring My Bell:

Dance on a Volcano (fast forward to 2:30 if you wish):

-mr. bill

livedarklions

I absolutely defer to you on such things, but a definition can mean one thing in one legal code and another in a different one. Arlington's bylaws specifically outline some rules for the Minuteman in other sections. However, I can't find anything in Mass. state law that distinguishes "sidewalks" from MUPs.

Mass. law explicitly allows riding on sidewalks under most circumstances.

Arguably, the state code is drafted such that the Minuteman Bikeway doesn't fit the state's definition of a bikeway (Part 1, Title XIV, Chapter 90e Section 1:

"''Bike path'', a route for the exclusive use of bicycles separated by grade or other physical barrier from motor traffic.

''Bike lane'', a lane on a street restricted to bicycles and so designated by means of painted lines, pavement coloring or other appropriate markings.

''Bike route'', a roadway shared by both bicycles and other forms of transportation designated by the means of signs or pavement markings.

''Bikeway'', bike paths, bike lanes and bike routes.

Technically, I don't think the Minuteman is a bike path, bike lane or bike route. The latter 2 are definitely roads or parts of streets or roads, and a bike path requires the "exclusive use" of bicycles, and pedestrians are allowed on the Minuteman, hence the bicycle use is not "exclusive".

I'm almost certain I'm missing something, and you'll know what it is. But as far as I can tell, sidewalk riding rules are, for purposes of MA state law, the ones to be applied to MUPs.

Maelochs

Different states and cities have different laws regarding cycling on the sidewalk .... one of the first things I do when I move is research bicycle laws. For a while when iwas traversing two or three municipalities on my various commutes, I would be subject to two or three completely different equipment and operation requirements ... some cities required bells, which are absolutely worthless in traffic, and some allowed sidewalk cycling which is absolutely dangerous for commuters and pedestrians .... But as far as it goes, an MUP is a sidewalk where some vehicles are allowed in the sense that it is regulated according to the needs of pedestrians---people who walk. Everyone else has to accommodate the people who walk ... as on any sidewalk where vehicles are allowed.

We are both too smart to start googling different definitions of "sidewalk" and comapring laws from town to town. i think we can both understand that Anywhere pedestrians are permitted to travel, pedestrians get the right of way and other vehicles are charged with avoiding and not endangering pedestrians, while pedestrians are legally considered to be essentially harmless ... and yes, if someone chose, he or she could parse that sentence word by word and quibble over each word ....

I have never heard of any MUPs where bicycles are given the primary right of way and everyone else has to move aside for them. Every MUP I have used or heard about has signs somewhere saying specifically that all other traffic must defer to pedestrians. But then, I have never ridden an MUP in 99.9 percent of this country and never in any other country ... though I have walked in a lot of other countries. In China I got a ride in a cab whose driver went right up onto the sidewalk to make a turn around traffic. Luckily he didn't hit any Flying Pigeons. Not sure if there were signs posted about pedestrian right-of-way on those sidewalks ... but the cyclists all rode int he streets.

bakerjw

The closest thing that we have to a "MUP" around here is the Tweetsie trail. A rail to trail from Johnson City down into Elizabethton.

After the last few "MUP" related posts, I can say that I am glad that I have never ridden nor need to ever ride it.

livedarklions

I don't know that trail, but from what I can glean online, it's exactly the kind that usually is the best--between two towns, and somewhat rural. MUP riding is great depending on your expectations. I do it recreationally a lot, and depending on location and time of day, I find I can often do it quite safely cruising in the high 20-30 mph range for a few miles. You just need to be prepared to slow down when you encounter traffic, just like riding anywhere else.

Even the busiest urban path is not likely populated much before 8 a.m. on a weekend, BTW.

Most of the whining about pedestrians and slower bikes on the MUP is from people who think they're entitled to a private track. I have to ride out of the city to get roads where I can ride as fast uninterrupted for as long.

Don't let any of the nonsense on this thread keep you from trying it.

mr_bill

Maybe you need to get out more?

In Bike/Pedestrian/Horse, Bike yields to Pedestrian. Bike yields to Horse. Pedestrian yields to Horse. (Horse is the one mode that rules them all.)

Further - "every operator of a vehicle shall exercise due care to avoid colliding with any pedestrian upon the roadway." Therefore, by your "logic" roads are sidewalks.

-mr. bill

Maelochs

I have traveled one path shared by bike asnd horses but don't recal that horses had right-of-way over pedestrians .... but i do note that you took my suggestion to parse ever word and quibble. Bravo.

If you bother to read what I wrote I said every place a pedestrian may travel the pedestrian has the right of way ... I never said it was a sidewalk because pedestrians could walk on it. That is just you making up lies, looking for a petty fight.

Out of here. I was worried this would go this way. You win, you are the greatest, all bow down away from you ... or maybe they are all just mooning you. Whatever.

mr_bill

Again, free internut legal advice is worth every penny. Consult a professional. But you must consider locally the context of "exclusive," that is "motor traffic." If the phrase included "motor traffic and pedestrians" you might have an argument.

More generally, when looking at the definition, since bikeways like the Minuteman are specifically INCLUDED in the scope of the chapter, you would be wise to consider that your interpretation of the definition which EXCLUDES bikeways like the Minuteman is likely in error.

See MGL Chapter 90E, Section 2. Specifically....

Now, FINDING the regulations for the use of bicycles on the bikepaths is... ...interesting. But if you look at those signs conveniently posted, there they are. (The are *NOT* simply "etiquette.")


However, there are MANY OTHER bikeways/rail trails where the regulations come from another entity, specifically now the DCR, formerly MDC. These cover paths such as the well used Paul D. White bikepath, the Cape Cod Rail Trail, the Norwottuck Rail Trail, Alewife Brook Path, etc....


You can actually FIND these regulations at 302 CMR 12.

Specifically about the "controversial" bell/"on your left" question:

It's simple. MUPs are not sidewalks. No matter how many times people who don't ride on MUPs insist that they are.

-mr. bill

livedarklions

Yeah, there's no reason to be snide, I wasn't pretending I spent any real time on this and made it clear that I know you have expertise on this. But I know how to deconstruct a statute, I've done it successfully in front of my state Supreme Court a few times. There is no actual logical problem to interpret the "exclusive use" and "separated by" as being different requirements, both approaches are plausible. I do not think that definition was well-drafted, and have made bank on smaller statutory ambiguities than that. And your interpretation that a bikeway is not a sidewalk (why can't it be both, BTW? Most things fall into at least two legal categories at the same time) is now creating a much bigger mess than the problem of the Minuteman Bikeway possibly not being a bikeway.

If I understand you correctly, the Minuteman is not a sidewalk, therefore the provisions in the basic bike statute requiring ROW to pedestrians and audibly signalling a pass don't apply as they specifically apply to a sidewalk. You seem to indicate that the CMR section you linked to doesn't apply because the Minuteman is not under the DCR's jurisdiction, and you linked a statute indicating that the regs regarding use of bicycles on bikeways "shall" be promulgated by the Commissioner of Highways. Only one problem with this--there's no evidence that the Commissioner has ever done this--they're not in the CMR. You know as well as I do that the MA APA requires that regulations are promulgated in the CMR not just on path-side signs, and that if the Department of Highways hasn't promulgated them properly, the regulation doesn't exist. So, using your logic, we now have a situation where I am required by regulation to give pedestrians the ROW on the Paul Dudley White, but not on the Minuteman. OOOPS!
Did I miss something?

So, simple challenge now that I feel insulted, show me some actual promulgated law or regulation that clearly states the ROW rules on the Minuteman ("look at the signs" is not a correct answer).

I don't know why you think I don't ride on MUPs, btw, I do it several times a week.

mr_bill

Again, if you want legal advice, hire someone.

You can deconstruct a statute all you want, but when your “plausible” construction runs into facts on the ground....

Time for you to cite a decision that MUPs are sidewalks.

(Yes, you ride on MUPs. I ride on MUPs. The thread-hijacker doesn’t, or hasn’t for years, and pigeons in China?)

-mr. bill

livedarklions

I notice you ignored my challenge. I'm getting a real sense that the Minuteman has fallen into a regulatory gap. Am I wrong?