bicycles banned in Colorado?

[Biciclista]

http://bicyclecolo.org/page.cfm?PageID=1042


http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_12915973

Jeffco seeks to redirect bicyclists
A proposal would let all counties have the ability to ban bikes on certain roads.
By Heath Urie
Daily Camera
POSTED: 07/26/2009 01:00:00 AM MDT

Colorado cycling groups are on edge about a proposal floated by Jefferson County commissioners that could give all counties the authority to ban bicyclists from certain roads.

The controversy began late last month when the three Jeffco commissioners denied a special-event permit for a September charity ride planned for the county's Deer Creek Canyon Road.

The ride would have attracted an estimated 1,500 riders, according to county officials, and wound through Conifer, Morrison, Evergreen and Indian Hills.

But after hearing from dozens of mountain-area residents — who officials say are growing concerned about the increasing conflict between cyclists and motorists on the winding, narrow canyon roads — the commission voted 2-1 against allowing the event.

During their deliberations, commissioners said they're working with the county attorney's office to come up with a plan to lobby state lawmakers to extend the authority to regulate bicycle use to all counties.

Most municipalities have the authority to ban cycling on specific roads, which has happened on Boulder's Pearl Street Mall, but counties do not.

"There is a growing, serious issue of safety between bicyclists and the motoring public," Jeffco Commissioner Kevin McCasky said last week. "Certain roads appear not to be safe to mix the two."

McCasky, who voted in favor of allowing the charity ride last month, said Jeffco doesn't have plans to ban cycling on any roads — but he does think counties should have the authority to do so when conditions become too dangerous.

Some motorists say a newly passed state law, which goes into effect Aug. 4, creates dangerous situations on mountain roads because cars are required to give riders three feet of space when passing. Riders are also allowed to ride in the middle of lanes, if the shoulders are unsafe.

Dan Grunig, executive director of Bicycle Colorado, said expanding "bike-ban authority" goes too far.

"I believe the commissioners in Jeffco when they say they are not interested in banning bikes," Grunig said. "But I don't know who their successors are, and I don't know who the commissioners are in the other 63 counties. We're watching it very closely."

Grunig said there's a very good reason why counties don't have that kind of authority.

"In a county setting, you have many roads that are cross-state roads and cross-county roads where there aren't alternative routes for miles," he said. In cities, he said, nearby paths and side streets can serve as easy detours around dangerous roads.

[MartianDestiny]

Most municipalities have the authority to ban cycling on specific roads, which has happened on Boulder's Pearl Street Mall, but counties do not.

This particular sentence really outlines how ridiculous the whole proposition/article is and makes me seriously doubt the knowledge of the writer.

Pearl Street mall is an outdoor pedestrian mall/thoroughfare. While it's wide enough to be a road it's FAR FAR from it. Yes, bicycle traffic is banned, but so is ALL vehicle traffic, rollerblades, skateboards, etc. That's like citing the fact that bikes are banned inside a private traditional mall as evidence that authority to ban them from public roadways is valid. Absurd!

[papaver]

Even in a bike loving countries like Belgium and The Netherlands you can't ride in every street. Very busy roads are mostly forbidden for cyclists.

[7rider]

Even in a bike loving countries like Belgium and The Netherlands you can't ride in every street. Very busy roads are mostly forbidden for cyclists.

You can't ride bicycles on interstate, limited access highways in the U.S., either.

Banning bicycles vs. denying a special use permit are two completely different issues.
It's this sentence that is the most confusing:
"During their deliberations, commissioners said they're working with the county attorney's office to come up with a plan to lobby state lawmakers to extend the authority to regulate bicycle use to all counties."
If JeffCo already has the authority to deny a permit - which, in effect, banned those bicycles from the road for this particular event, I would imagine other counties already have similar authority.
I don't see the point of this proposed plan and agree with Mr. Grunig.

[Andrea]

I can tell you from personal experience that as long as the law isn't abused by cyclist-hating lawmakers, it shouldn't impact roads you'd normally ride on. We have a major road in Memphis that runs through a large city park and has a section that's closed to bikes. It's busy enough and traffic moves fast enough that you'd really have no business riding a bike on it, but the fact that it goes through a large park and that it's a main artery to get into the east side of the city would be enough to draw some people try if it didn't have a sign saying that you're not allowed to ride a bike there.

Key phrase here being "as long as it's not abused"

[OakLeaf]

You can't ride bicycles on interstate, limited access highways in the U.S., either.

Bicycles are permitted on (parts of?) interstate 70 in Colorado.

There are some areas where the terrain means there's only one road.

The thread title does seem a bit alarmist, but it's a real issue, just as motorcyclists have been experiencing for years now.

I think a better way to resolve it would be by strict enforcement of minimum speed laws rather than banning certain classes of vehicles. A car doing 40 mph on the interstate is more dangerous to everyone than a bicycle on the shoulder of the same interstate - and yet I've never, ever seen or heard of someone being ticketed for going below the minimum speed. (Yes, it probably happens, and I'm sure someone on this board will chime in, but I've never seen it happening, and I've seen a lot of tickets written (and received my share ) for exceeding the posted speed limit by a whole lot less than 30 mph.

If a vehicle can't maintain a constant speed of 70 mph, or 65 or whatever your local limit happens to be, then it needs to stay off the interstate (except where there are designated lanes for slower traffic, such as the bicycle lanes on I-70 or the truck hill-climbing lanes in many mountain regions).

Mixed-use roads need to be open to all vehicle users regardless of speed. (Are they going to ban farm vehicles from the roads in question, too?)

That's a lot more relevant and effective than banning vehicles based on the nature of their propulsion.

I hope that LAB is fighting this on a national level, as the AMA has been doing with the motorcycle bans. Almost all roads receive some share of federal funding.

Edit: already partially in place.

* "The Secretary shall not approve any project or take any regulatory action under this title that will result in the severance of an existing major route or have significant adverse impact on the safety for nonmotorized transportation traffic and light motorcycles, unless such project or regulatory action provides for a reasonable alternate route or such a route exists." (23 U.S.C. 109(m))

[tulip]

Interstate riding depends on the state. I've ridden for 13 miles on I-10 in Arizona, although I don't recommend it. I've seen cyclists on the interstates in New Mexico, too.

I've never been to Colorado, so I can't comment specifically. But around here, the cycling groups are very careful to ride in small, single file groups so as not to antagonize motorists. We want to be safe and welcomed. I just wonder if their are large groups of cyclists in Colorado who actually do block the roads. Anyone?