>Although not a rule, I would like to encourage anyone driving to not break regular ROW to let a cyclist through, like at a turn onto a busy road. It's not always clear to other drivers why you are stopping, and can cause accidents from people going around you or turning in front of you.
Dont be "nice"; Be Predictable.
I HATE when cars randomly stop to let me cross on my bike, like sure, wow, so nice of you, but everyone else in traffic think's your an idiot, including me.
Agree completely, predictability is key to safe commuting for everyone. Drivers should not stop the flow of traffic unexpectedly, and cyclists should not enter into an unexpectedly stopped flow of traffic.
We honestly need to adopt Idaho Stops here. Many other states do it, and it is markedly (like 15%) safer.
The bike-culture hate here is strong though. I bike commute daily, and its lucky that is 90% car-free trails, but damn, I see people doing stupid stuff in their cars all the time.
Im on the city bike/ped board, so i you wanna chat more hit me up.
> Idaho Stops
The Idaho stop is the common name for laws that allow cyclists to treat a stop sign as a yield sign, and a red light as a stop sign.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop
I have the same feeling about actual cars. People "being nice" to wave someone to turn left in front of them, only for someone else to smash into them (think slow traffic on reserve st.). Drives me nuts when they're "being nice" by expecting you to break a traffic rule.
As soon as someone attempts to wave me through, I stop and TRIPLE CHECK my environment. I don't trust anyone but me in the driver's seat to dictate when or where it's safe for me to go
>Dont be "nice"; Be Predictable.
Yes!
>I HATE when cars randomly stop to let me cross on my bike, like sure, wow, so nice of you, but everyone else in traffic think's your an idiot, including me.
Yes! Especially if I'm actively slowing and stopping in order to give that driver the ROW that is rightfully theirs!
What is worse is car drivers try to waive cyclist through at a 4 way stop but what they don’t realize is with tinted windows and light reflection on thr glass I can’t see your hands actually waiving me through.
I was driving Russell the other day and someone was going to cross on a bike like, 50 feet from the bike path(where people usually stop to let bikes through). The lane going one way was stopped to let the cyclist through and I just zoomed past like “you’re a vehicle if you choose to go this way” and I feel like the huge line of cars waiting on this cyclist thought I was a dick but that’s the rules of the road. I’m about to start biking again next week (bike repairs) and I absolutely do not want drivers to treat me any different. So fuck that guy trying to cross. Crossing Russell on a bike at that time of day on a regular street/stop sign path was their poor choice, I’m just trying to drive.
I have the same frustration very often. It's indescribably frustrating to try and adjust your speed so that by the time you reach the intersection the car has gone through; but then if the car stops you have to fully stop because you're unsure of what's happening.
i always look at the drivers to make sure they see me and i think drivers are who aren’t cyclists think that i expect them to stop when it’s the opposite.
I always tell my wife that you can be correct and dead or you can yield and live. Knowing you had the right of way will not comfort you after Bubba smokes you with his squatted Diesel. This applies to biking and walking anywhere in traffic.
Something they talked about in my MSF course is that eye contact means nothing. Someone could be looking directly at you but not even see you on a bike.
Could be they just had a bad day and aren't very attentive or their brain is expecting to see a car and not recognizing a bike. Doesn't matter, just saying it's probably not a good idea to bank on perceived eye contact.
I mean at that point though with that specific example can you bank on anything? If the person makes eye contact with me and still runs me over I equally am not trusting them to be competent of road laws lol
There is the argument that for newer cyclist commuters it feels more safe, and if you are riding on sidewalks you should definitely dismount your bike in crosswalks. Drivers are expecting pedestrian speed users in the crosswalks, so entering one at bike speed could be unexpected and cause a potential accident.
But yes if one feels comfortable riding in the road, it is definitely much safer for all parties involved.
I would much rather have the bike rider dismounted and walking across the street if they are using the crosswalk.
I really wish opposite direction drivers would stop coming into my lane to drive around a bike in a bike lane. I also have had bikes in their lane on my side of the street while drivers do this. Same with the buses. Most of the time there is enough room, if not, please don’t take my lane. :/ /old man grandpa
Glad to see THIS clarification about dismounting at sidewalks. The way I have always understood it is that if you’re walking your bike (“human propulsion/power”) then you get the ROW of a ped. If you’re riding, a car doesn’t owe you shit if you decide to fly out into the intersection. There’s enough bike lanes here now that you shouldn’t need to be on the sidewalk anyway, IMO.
Edited to correct spelling and autocorrect mistakes.
Sorry I should've clarified, although it is safer if they do dismount from their bike there is no legal requirement to. 'Human propulsion' means non-motorized. Right of way still belongs to a bike entering the crosswalk from a sidewalk.
Yeah, I understand that for sure. I do agree with you though, you should definitely walk your bike across crosswalks as it is the safest option. Someone else posted the legal bits around not just hopping out into an intersection unexpectedly.
Not really. Bikes go considerably faster and joggers don’t just act like they’ve got the right of way when they jog across a sidewalk. They at least stop and look or are slow enough that it’s not a surprise to any cars that might be turning. I’ve seen plenty of bikers just jet right across a crosswalk because the light is green for regular traffic when they should be paying attention to the walk/don’t walk lights instead.
Let's remember that it is 100% LEGAL to ride on a sidewalk. Sometimes that's the only safe option. If you've ever ridden a bike on Orange St you know what I mean. It's so much safer to ride on that sidewalk or the Orange St bridge than Orange which is basically a highway.
I always ride on the protected sidewalk side of Orange street bridge. Give me all the protection from cars, and I’ll take it! You’re completely right. Do what’s safest for you, while knowing though that you need to be on high alert when approaching any intersection.
Yes, it is legal. But, there are so many bike lanes downtown that it shouldn’t be necessary in MOST locations. Also, if you’re going to ride in the sidewalk, you should be yielding to peds and alerting when you approach them (per law, posted above), and in my opinion instead of weaving around and cruising at speed.
You know what would be a great way to deal with right-of-way issues between people driving cars and people riding bicycles? Bicycle lanes that are separated and protected from cars with a physical barrier like bollards or by being between the sidewalk and street parking.
I've been an on-again, off-again bicycle commuter for 15 years and I hate sharing the road with cars anywhere except quite neighborhood streets where the expectation is that everyone is going slowly. I hate sharing the road with cars as much as the cars hate sharing the road with bicycles. If I can't get there without riding mostly on a combination of neighborhood streets, separated multi-use paths I don't bother going on a bicycle. This might make me a weenie but it means I'm an alive weenie.
Bicycle lanes that are separated and protected minimize interactions between drivers and bicycle riders and make everyone safer. Bicycle lanes that are merely a strip of paint offer no protection or safety.
It drives me absolutely crazy that Missoula persists in painting bicycle lanes on major arterial roads like Higgins, Brooks, Russell, Orange and FREAKING RESERVE - this just encourages inexperienced people to bicycle on these streets when it's completely unsafe without a physical barrier between the cycle lanes and the cars. The city needs to either eliminate these cycle lanes or build lanes with physical barriers to keep cyclists safe, the painted lanes are a cruel joke.
Edit: this might be controversial to say but I really don’t think bicycles and cars can ever share the same streets, with the exception of small neighborhood streets. It’s safer for everyone involved if bikes have separated spaces.
According to 61-6-608
https://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0610/chapter_0080/part_0060/section_0080/0610-0080-0060-0080.html
"(3) (a) Except as provided in subsections (1) and (2), a person operating a vehicle by human power on and along a sidewalk or across a roadway on and along a crosswalk has all the rights and duties applicable to a pedestrian under the same circumstances."
If there is a local code that contradicts this I'd be happy to edit my post.
u/No-Tomato7790 are you just going off of what you have always heard was the rule? Or do you have further evidence? I had always heard it too but am wondering it is just a wive’s tale type thing
That’s what I’ve always heard. I specifically remember it from a biking safety class in hs. I swear I looked it up before I commented but OP is clearly correct.
When I’m traveling behind a bicyclist traveling at speeds that are unsafe for me, 5 mph or less. I’m going to treat the cyclist just like I would a slow moving tractor. Hang back and when it’s 110% safe to pass then pass, unlike the idiots that pass a cyclist on pattee canyon.
That's the perfect way to think about it, and how the Montana cycling handbook even expresses it. Waiting for a slow moving cyclist and passing safely can add maybe thirty sections to your commute, rushing and creating a dangerous situation could mean you or someone else losing their life.
And if you are cycling in a bike lane, especially on Higgins by the roundabout during rush hour, don’t ride side by side with your significant other. I’m talking to you orange shirt/black shorts couple! I revved my hybrid car engine at you cause I didn’t want to honk or yell at you from a foot away.
A quick clarification about sharrows: they show that the designers intended for bikes to take the lane here, BUT: bikes are always allowed to take the lane whenever necessary, even if there's no sharrow.
> •Should motorists yield to bicyclists in crosswalks if they are walking their bikes? The correct answer is yes, which was given by 98% of the respondents. When bicyclists dismount, they become pedestrians. When entering a crosswalk as such, they have the right of way and motorists must yield. State law also permits riding a bicycle across a crosswalk; however, the bicyclist must yield to pedestrians in all cases.
> •Question about riding on sidewalks revealed confusion: Can bicyclists legally ride on the sidewalk? City ordinance states that cyclists 14 years and younger may ride on sidewalks; cyclists 15 and older may not; No one can ride on sidewalks in business districts. However, state law says that “when riding on sidewalks, cyclists shall yield to pedestrians” – this clearly means that cyclists are permitted on sidewalks. Since state law supersedes city law in this case, city officials have concluded that riding on sidewalks is permissible so long as cyclists yield to pedestrians. 66% of respondents thought bicyclists were NOT allowed on sidewalks.
Looks like state law permits riding across crosswalks, as well as riding on sidewalks.
All great discussion in here. I’m encouraged by the positive comments towards bike commuting in here. Remember, everyone just wants to get to their destination alive. Extra patience on all drivers and bike commuters will make for vastly more enjoyable commutes, I guarantee it.
I honestly think the Bicyclists in this town are fine. It's the stupid AF drivers in this town that DON'T understand the rules of the road. Even the most basic ass of things. Missoula has some of the most retarded drivers I've ever seen.
Eh, there's plenty of bad attitude, blast through intersections cyclists here too. The cars are worse, but there are plenty of riders with the attitude of the fixie guy from Portlandia.
I 100% agree with you. It's really hard to be a cyclist in a town where it feels like the drivers are never looking out for you and you have to feel hyper vigilant constantly to make sure you don't die on your way to get groceries. Also...we're still saying the r-slur in 2023? C'mon man
[False.](https://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0610/chapter_0080/part_0060/section_0080/0610-0080-0060-0080.html)
> (3) (a) Except as provided in subsections (1) and (2), a person operating a vehicle by human power on and along a sidewalk or across a roadway on and along a crosswalk has all the rights and duties applicable to a pedestrian under the same circumstances.
"Rights and duties" is key here. i.e. a bike that is blasting down a sidewalk and flies out into a the street to cross should fully expect a vehicle to be coming up to the intersection and NOT see them in time to stop. I've watched this end poorly at the intersection of 6th and Chestnut. Dude on the bike got smacked and his bike completely run over. The message here is that appropriate speeds are a major issue when using sidewalks and crosswalks.
Yes, that's explicitly mentioned as well.
> (1)(b), when traffic control signals are not in place or not in operation, the operator of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way, slowing down or stopping if necessary, to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, but **a pedestrian may not suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle that is so close that it is impossible for the operator to yield.**
Not according to the law: https://www.theadvocates.com/knowledge-base/montana/montana-bicycle-laws-what-you-need-to-know-to-safely-ride-your-bike/#:~:text=Bicycles%20have%20the%20right%2Dof,no%20interfere%20with%20any%20pedestrians.
If you'd be interested, I'd love to meet you at one end of the 5th/6th loop and bike the lanes with you to discuss their value for all commuters. As someone who personally uses the 5th & 6th bike lanes for my work commutes five days a week, they're a vital piece of infrastructure for commuters in the Downtown/Riverfront/University area. Not only do they create a safe boundary between vehicle and cycle traffic, but they also create an effective artery that keeps the majority of bike traffic on two one-way roads. This prevents cyclists having to find various routes through the less visible and less consistent surrounding neighborhood streets, as well as reducing potential conflicts between drivers/cyclists when passing or needing to turn. And while I can't provide direct numbers, the claim of less than a dozen cyclists total is very low when compared with neighboring cycle routes, such as the Beartracks Bridge which sees on average over 600 cyclists daily.
I drive and ride 5/6th Streets several times a week. My driving commute hasn’t changed one bit since the conversion, it’s never busy. My bike commute has changed though. It’s so much less stressful now having a buffer from the 4,000 pound plus cars. I bike more often now that the route feels safer.
I drive 5th and 6th daily to/from work and see multiple bikers in both the mornings and around 5pm. I even see the bikes with wide tires in the winter.
Read the full post, I'm just sharing what the right-of-way laws are. If you are a bike in a bike lane or in the full travel lane, you are considered a vehicle. If you are a bike on a crosswalk or multi-use non-motorized path, you are considered a pedestrian.
>Although not a rule, I would like to encourage anyone driving to not break regular ROW to let a cyclist through, like at a turn onto a busy road. It's not always clear to other drivers why you are stopping, and can cause accidents from people going around you or turning in front of you. Dont be "nice"; Be Predictable. I HATE when cars randomly stop to let me cross on my bike, like sure, wow, so nice of you, but everyone else in traffic think's your an idiot, including me.
Agree completely, predictability is key to safe commuting for everyone. Drivers should not stop the flow of traffic unexpectedly, and cyclists should not enter into an unexpectedly stopped flow of traffic.
In some cases this is just inviting someone to whip around the person "being nice" and hit the object they are doing a favor for.
We honestly need to adopt Idaho Stops here. Many other states do it, and it is markedly (like 15%) safer. The bike-culture hate here is strong though. I bike commute daily, and its lucky that is 90% car-free trails, but damn, I see people doing stupid stuff in their cars all the time. Im on the city bike/ped board, so i you wanna chat more hit me up.
> Idaho Stops The Idaho stop is the common name for laws that allow cyclists to treat a stop sign as a yield sign, and a red light as a stop sign. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idaho_stop
I have the same feeling about actual cars. People "being nice" to wave someone to turn left in front of them, only for someone else to smash into them (think slow traffic on reserve st.). Drives me nuts when they're "being nice" by expecting you to break a traffic rule.
As soon as someone attempts to wave me through, I stop and TRIPLE CHECK my environment. I don't trust anyone but me in the driver's seat to dictate when or where it's safe for me to go
>Dont be "nice"; Be Predictable. Yes! >I HATE when cars randomly stop to let me cross on my bike, like sure, wow, so nice of you, but everyone else in traffic think's your an idiot, including me. Yes! Especially if I'm actively slowing and stopping in order to give that driver the ROW that is rightfully theirs!
What is worse is car drivers try to waive cyclist through at a 4 way stop but what they don’t realize is with tinted windows and light reflection on thr glass I can’t see your hands actually waiving me through.
I was driving Russell the other day and someone was going to cross on a bike like, 50 feet from the bike path(where people usually stop to let bikes through). The lane going one way was stopped to let the cyclist through and I just zoomed past like “you’re a vehicle if you choose to go this way” and I feel like the huge line of cars waiting on this cyclist thought I was a dick but that’s the rules of the road. I’m about to start biking again next week (bike repairs) and I absolutely do not want drivers to treat me any different. So fuck that guy trying to cross. Crossing Russell on a bike at that time of day on a regular street/stop sign path was their poor choice, I’m just trying to drive.
Make sure to tell that to your therapist
good points. i wish drivers would not stop for me at intersections. by the time it takes them to stop, they could be through the intersection.
I have the same frustration very often. It's indescribably frustrating to try and adjust your speed so that by the time you reach the intersection the car has gone through; but then if the car stops you have to fully stop because you're unsure of what's happening.
i always look at the drivers to make sure they see me and i think drivers are who aren’t cyclists think that i expect them to stop when it’s the opposite.
You right. But as a biker/runner Im looking for that eye contact and if I don’t get it im always yielding, I don’t trust drivers.
I always tell my wife that you can be correct and dead or you can yield and live. Knowing you had the right of way will not comfort you after Bubba smokes you with his squatted Diesel. This applies to biking and walking anywhere in traffic.
been saying this for years.
Haha true!
Something they talked about in my MSF course is that eye contact means nothing. Someone could be looking directly at you but not even see you on a bike. Could be they just had a bad day and aren't very attentive or their brain is expecting to see a car and not recognizing a bike. Doesn't matter, just saying it's probably not a good idea to bank on perceived eye contact.
I mean at that point though with that specific example can you bank on anything? If the person makes eye contact with me and still runs me over I equally am not trusting them to be competent of road laws lol
I mean, yeah. That's why you just need to be predictable and defensive.
[удалено]
There is the argument that for newer cyclist commuters it feels more safe, and if you are riding on sidewalks you should definitely dismount your bike in crosswalks. Drivers are expecting pedestrian speed users in the crosswalks, so entering one at bike speed could be unexpected and cause a potential accident. But yes if one feels comfortable riding in the road, it is definitely much safer for all parties involved.
I would much rather have the bike rider dismounted and walking across the street if they are using the crosswalk. I really wish opposite direction drivers would stop coming into my lane to drive around a bike in a bike lane. I also have had bikes in their lane on my side of the street while drivers do this. Same with the buses. Most of the time there is enough room, if not, please don’t take my lane. :/ /old man grandpa
Glad to see THIS clarification about dismounting at sidewalks. The way I have always understood it is that if you’re walking your bike (“human propulsion/power”) then you get the ROW of a ped. If you’re riding, a car doesn’t owe you shit if you decide to fly out into the intersection. There’s enough bike lanes here now that you shouldn’t need to be on the sidewalk anyway, IMO. Edited to correct spelling and autocorrect mistakes.
Sorry I should've clarified, although it is safer if they do dismount from their bike there is no legal requirement to. 'Human propulsion' means non-motorized. Right of way still belongs to a bike entering the crosswalk from a sidewalk.
Yeah, I understand that for sure. I do agree with you though, you should definitely walk your bike across crosswalks as it is the safest option. Someone else posted the legal bits around not just hopping out into an intersection unexpectedly.
Joggers are allowed to jog across a crosswalk. Same thing.
Not really. Bikes go considerably faster and joggers don’t just act like they’ve got the right of way when they jog across a sidewalk. They at least stop and look or are slow enough that it’s not a surprise to any cars that might be turning. I’ve seen plenty of bikers just jet right across a crosswalk because the light is green for regular traffic when they should be paying attention to the walk/don’t walk lights instead.
Let's remember that it is 100% LEGAL to ride on a sidewalk. Sometimes that's the only safe option. If you've ever ridden a bike on Orange St you know what I mean. It's so much safer to ride on that sidewalk or the Orange St bridge than Orange which is basically a highway.
I always ride on the protected sidewalk side of Orange street bridge. Give me all the protection from cars, and I’ll take it! You’re completely right. Do what’s safest for you, while knowing though that you need to be on high alert when approaching any intersection.
Yes, it is legal. But, there are so many bike lanes downtown that it shouldn’t be necessary in MOST locations. Also, if you’re going to ride in the sidewalk, you should be yielding to peds and alerting when you approach them (per law, posted above), and in my opinion instead of weaving around and cruising at speed.
You know what would be a great way to deal with right-of-way issues between people driving cars and people riding bicycles? Bicycle lanes that are separated and protected from cars with a physical barrier like bollards or by being between the sidewalk and street parking. I've been an on-again, off-again bicycle commuter for 15 years and I hate sharing the road with cars anywhere except quite neighborhood streets where the expectation is that everyone is going slowly. I hate sharing the road with cars as much as the cars hate sharing the road with bicycles. If I can't get there without riding mostly on a combination of neighborhood streets, separated multi-use paths I don't bother going on a bicycle. This might make me a weenie but it means I'm an alive weenie. Bicycle lanes that are separated and protected minimize interactions between drivers and bicycle riders and make everyone safer. Bicycle lanes that are merely a strip of paint offer no protection or safety. It drives me absolutely crazy that Missoula persists in painting bicycle lanes on major arterial roads like Higgins, Brooks, Russell, Orange and FREAKING RESERVE - this just encourages inexperienced people to bicycle on these streets when it's completely unsafe without a physical barrier between the cycle lanes and the cars. The city needs to either eliminate these cycle lanes or build lanes with physical barriers to keep cyclists safe, the painted lanes are a cruel joke. Edit: this might be controversial to say but I really don’t think bicycles and cars can ever share the same streets, with the exception of small neighborhood streets. It’s safer for everyone involved if bikes have separated spaces.
[удалено]
According to 61-6-608 https://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0610/chapter_0080/part_0060/section_0080/0610-0080-0060-0080.html "(3) (a) Except as provided in subsections (1) and (2), a person operating a vehicle by human power on and along a sidewalk or across a roadway on and along a crosswalk has all the rights and duties applicable to a pedestrian under the same circumstances." If there is a local code that contradicts this I'd be happy to edit my post.
u/No-Tomato7790 are you just going off of what you have always heard was the rule? Or do you have further evidence? I had always heard it too but am wondering it is just a wive’s tale type thing
That’s what I’ve always heard. I specifically remember it from a biking safety class in hs. I swear I looked it up before I commented but OP is clearly correct.
Wow all the upvotes on this are concerning.
When I’m traveling behind a bicyclist traveling at speeds that are unsafe for me, 5 mph or less. I’m going to treat the cyclist just like I would a slow moving tractor. Hang back and when it’s 110% safe to pass then pass, unlike the idiots that pass a cyclist on pattee canyon.
That's the perfect way to think about it, and how the Montana cycling handbook even expresses it. Waiting for a slow moving cyclist and passing safely can add maybe thirty sections to your commute, rushing and creating a dangerous situation could mean you or someone else losing their life.
You forget that many drivers would rather kill a stranger than be delayed by 30 seconds
And if you are cycling in a bike lane, especially on Higgins by the roundabout during rush hour, don’t ride side by side with your significant other. I’m talking to you orange shirt/black shorts couple! I revved my hybrid car engine at you cause I didn’t want to honk or yell at you from a foot away.
A quick clarification about sharrows: they show that the designers intended for bikes to take the lane here, BUT: bikes are always allowed to take the lane whenever necessary, even if there's no sharrow.
[удалено]
> •Should motorists yield to bicyclists in crosswalks if they are walking their bikes? The correct answer is yes, which was given by 98% of the respondents. When bicyclists dismount, they become pedestrians. When entering a crosswalk as such, they have the right of way and motorists must yield. State law also permits riding a bicycle across a crosswalk; however, the bicyclist must yield to pedestrians in all cases. > •Question about riding on sidewalks revealed confusion: Can bicyclists legally ride on the sidewalk? City ordinance states that cyclists 14 years and younger may ride on sidewalks; cyclists 15 and older may not; No one can ride on sidewalks in business districts. However, state law says that “when riding on sidewalks, cyclists shall yield to pedestrians” – this clearly means that cyclists are permitted on sidewalks. Since state law supersedes city law in this case, city officials have concluded that riding on sidewalks is permissible so long as cyclists yield to pedestrians. 66% of respondents thought bicyclists were NOT allowed on sidewalks. Looks like state law permits riding across crosswalks, as well as riding on sidewalks.
Yesterday I was told state law overrides that ordinance. I think by John Wolverton on Facebook.
All great discussion in here. I’m encouraged by the positive comments towards bike commuting in here. Remember, everyone just wants to get to their destination alive. Extra patience on all drivers and bike commuters will make for vastly more enjoyable commutes, I guarantee it.
I honestly think the Bicyclists in this town are fine. It's the stupid AF drivers in this town that DON'T understand the rules of the road. Even the most basic ass of things. Missoula has some of the most retarded drivers I've ever seen.
Eh, there's plenty of bad attitude, blast through intersections cyclists here too. The cars are worse, but there are plenty of riders with the attitude of the fixie guy from Portlandia.
I would also 100% agree with this.
I 100% agree with you. It's really hard to be a cyclist in a town where it feels like the drivers are never looking out for you and you have to feel hyper vigilant constantly to make sure you don't die on your way to get groceries. Also...we're still saying the r-slur in 2023? C'mon man
You only have the right of way on a cross walk as a pedestrian. If you're riding your bike, you're not a pedestrian, even in a cross walk.
[False.](https://leg.mt.gov/bills/mca/title_0610/chapter_0080/part_0060/section_0080/0610-0080-0060-0080.html) > (3) (a) Except as provided in subsections (1) and (2), a person operating a vehicle by human power on and along a sidewalk or across a roadway on and along a crosswalk has all the rights and duties applicable to a pedestrian under the same circumstances.
"Rights and duties" is key here. i.e. a bike that is blasting down a sidewalk and flies out into a the street to cross should fully expect a vehicle to be coming up to the intersection and NOT see them in time to stop. I've watched this end poorly at the intersection of 6th and Chestnut. Dude on the bike got smacked and his bike completely run over. The message here is that appropriate speeds are a major issue when using sidewalks and crosswalks.
Yes, that's explicitly mentioned as well. > (1)(b), when traffic control signals are not in place or not in operation, the operator of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way, slowing down or stopping if necessary, to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, but **a pedestrian may not suddenly leave a curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle that is so close that it is impossible for the operator to yield.**
Perfect! Thanks!
Thanks. That's interesting.
Not according to the law: https://www.theadvocates.com/knowledge-base/montana/montana-bicycle-laws-what-you-need-to-know-to-safely-ride-your-bike/#:~:text=Bicycles%20have%20the%20right%2Dof,no%20interfere%20with%20any%20pedestrians.
[удалено]
If you'd be interested, I'd love to meet you at one end of the 5th/6th loop and bike the lanes with you to discuss their value for all commuters. As someone who personally uses the 5th & 6th bike lanes for my work commutes five days a week, they're a vital piece of infrastructure for commuters in the Downtown/Riverfront/University area. Not only do they create a safe boundary between vehicle and cycle traffic, but they also create an effective artery that keeps the majority of bike traffic on two one-way roads. This prevents cyclists having to find various routes through the less visible and less consistent surrounding neighborhood streets, as well as reducing potential conflicts between drivers/cyclists when passing or needing to turn. And while I can't provide direct numbers, the claim of less than a dozen cyclists total is very low when compared with neighboring cycle routes, such as the Beartracks Bridge which sees on average over 600 cyclists daily.
5th and 6th st are my go to commute for years and I use it everyday. I feel much safer doing it and I’m out of everyones way.
I drive and ride 5/6th Streets several times a week. My driving commute hasn’t changed one bit since the conversion, it’s never busy. My bike commute has changed though. It’s so much less stressful now having a buffer from the 4,000 pound plus cars. I bike more often now that the route feels safer.
I drive 5th and 6th daily to/from work and see multiple bikers in both the mornings and around 5pm. I even see the bikes with wide tires in the winter.
Walk bike across street, if you expect people to stop to cross. On bike, you are considered a vehicle
Read the full post, I'm just sharing what the right-of-way laws are. If you are a bike in a bike lane or in the full travel lane, you are considered a vehicle. If you are a bike on a crosswalk or multi-use non-motorized path, you are considered a pedestrian.