Why is that idiot bicyclist in my lane?

[happyslug]

11. In most States it is illegal to ride a Bicycle on a Sidewalk

Bicycle are to be on the ROAD, not a sidewalk. A sidewalk is for PEDESTRIANS only.

Now, in my home state of Pennsylvania, that was the law till the late 1990s. In the 1990s, Allegheny County (County seat is the City of Pittsburgh PA). decided to tear down the "Experimental" Track, that had been built in the 1960s for a proposed automated mass transit system called "Sky bus" (This was fought over from the mid 1960s to the mid 1970s when someone decided to do an actual engineering study which determined the most cost effective solution to replacing the last Streetcar lines In Allegheny County was to update them to a Light Rail Vehicle System instead of replacing them with "Skybus&quot .

I have written about Skybus on DU before, if you want to read more about the project go to the following places. The worse is it would have been an idea solution between the Oakland and Downtown Pittsburgh transit spots, the third and Second most active transit spots in Pennsylvania, Downtown Philadelphia beats both out, but if someone proposed it for that route, it was shot down, buses was good enough, the problem was the remains of the old interurban Streetcar to Washington and Donora PA, the streetcar went through that transit corridor faster the you could in an automobile due to it having its own right of way, thus buses could NOT replace the Streetcars on that line without a substantial drop in service. Thus Skybus was an attempt to replace the Streetcar not Buses:


http://www.democraticunderground.com/1130241
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?

And comments from someone beside me on the Skybus Debacle:
az=view_all&address=175x3388#3627
http://journals.democraticunderground.com/Divernan/44

Anyway, when the Skybus track was torn down, the County decided to built a bike way over the same route. This was a problem for Skybus had been an ELEVATED transit system and that part had been torn down, what remain was the ground the old tracks use to over, but did NOT directly impact (i.e Skybus was a series of BRIDGES over terrain, and it was the TERRAIN the bike way was built on NOT the bridges).

At the same time the State passed a law that said that if a bike path was next to a road, bicyclist had to take the bike path.

This lead to a expensive problem. The bike path built along the old Skybus route went up and down hills that the Skybus leveled out due to it being elevated, but the bike route being on the actual GROUND, these ups and downs lead to severe turns on the path. The law saying all bikes had to use the bike path forced even high speed bicyclists onto this path, designed for at best 10 mpg travel (and in the turns 5 mph). Thus you had high speed bikes (30-50 mph) on a path where people were walking their children, dogs and pushing baby carriages. It was a narrow path, wide enough for two abreast.

You can see what I am leading up to, and it actually occurred, a high speed cyclists hit a woman pushing a baby carriage, and one of them died do to the accident. The county was then sued, but ran across some problems. First, while the County was viewed as part of the State for Sovereign immunity purposes (i.e. could not be sued) the state had passed a law that people could sue the state for up to $1 Million Dollars if they can show the "State" was at fault. Every highway designing the county contacted said you can NOT combine 30 mph high speed bikes with people pushing baby carriages. High Speed Bikes MUST be on Highways OR on bike paths design to handle high speed bikes (Rails to trails almost always meet this requirement for the Railway the Rails to trails are based on always did, the problem has been when bike Trails do NOT follow abandoned Railways or Highways, and that was the case with the old Skybus route).

The county could blame the Cyclists, but his defense was he was obeying the law, he HAD to use the bike trail, even if it was unsafe, for that was the STATE LAW.

From what I gather, rather then go to trial, the county just paid up. The State realized what it had done and repealed the requirement that cyclist MUSt use a bike path if one is available (i.e. Bicyclists can use a highway, even if next to a bike path). The purpose of this change was to remove the defense from a high speed cyclists that he HAD to use the bike path more then anything else.

Now, as part of that repeal, the state rewrote its law on bicyclists and sidewalks. For the first time in History, the state made it legal to use a cycle on a sidewalk BUT retained the ban in "business districts". What is a "business district"? That is up to a Jury to determine as a matter of fact (or a judge in a non-jury trial).

Just a comment that most states make it illegal for bicycle to operate on sidewalks and in at least one state, while it is now legal, it is illegal in any "business district".