DONE!

Thanks for the hard work Todd.

JT

Todd, While agreeing that pacelines and passing are integral to cycling. I think that riding double is really not necessary and does create adversity towards cyclist from drivers out on the road.

I am a triathlete not a roadie, so I don't really practice paceling, or know all the different formations. Is there a reason that some one needs to ride a double paceline? Is it just because of the distance one must drop back?

To me it just seems alot safer to ride single unless passing or dropping back.

I understand your concerns but the bill doesn't prevent passing.

(1) A person operating a bicycle, electric personal assistive mobility device, low-speed vehicle, or moped upon a roadway shall ride as near to the right side of the roadway as practicable, exercising due care when passing a standing vehicle or one proceeding in the same direction.

Here is the bill

http://www.mileg.org/...tm/2004-SIB-1389.htm

What bothers me is this:

(7) A low-speed vehicle shall be operated at a speed of not to exceed 25 miles per hour and shall not be operated on a highway, road, or street with a speed limit of more than 35 miles per hour except for the purpose of crossing that highway, road, or street.

That means that most of the roads I ride on now, I can't ride on any more and limits me to a bike path. Hines drive is a place where I ride a lot. It has a 10 foot shoulder for people to ride on but the speed limit is 40 mph so according to this bill, I cannot ride my bike on it anymore.

jaretj

It does not make as much sense to ride two abreast on a tri bike--- Your head is down, your brakes are a long way away from your hands, and it is more difficult to control the bike. As a result, you have to keep a lot of space between the rider beside you and you can't maintain much of a conversation anyway since your head is down.

On a road bike, your hands are on the brakes and your head is up, so you can ride much closer together, look around, and talk comfortably. It is a completely different experience.

The best thing about road riding is the conversations you can have while you are out there riding two by two. There are also specific workouts you can do in a double paceline that simulate different race conditions and are very interesting.

-Marc

A thought about advocacy.

The state of Michigan is facing an enormous budget deficit for at least the third fiscal year in a row. Very few people want to hear about spending more money on improving roads to benefit cyclists when schools are cutting services and taxes are being raised (and moving the property tax payment date forward is a tax increase no matter what the press releases say). By all means explain why enacting this legislation would be a bad idea, but talking about more spending is not the kind of thing that excites the Republican majorities in both houses of the Legislature.

Todd

Thanks for the heads up, I copied my senator for district 20 Tom George.

Rocketboy

> It even removes the exemption for bicycle paths and dedicated facilities (e.g. bike lanes.)

This part is confusing to me - is that actually saying cyclists also can NOT ride two abreast on dedicated bike paths?

Like - me and my kid on our MTBs? My parents on their beach cruisers? My wife and I on the grocery getters?

-Zo

That would probably be up to the courts to decide. When passing, you do ride two abreast.

State law requires counties and cities to spend 1% of their Act 51 (fuel tax) money on bicycle/NMT facilities. The federal grant money comes from the fuel tax as well. This issue doesn't affect the state budget or property taxes. (I realize that citizens often think the government has one big pot of money. If we were selling it to the general public, we'd make sure they knew it wouldn't affect their taxes.)

At the local level, it's been found that adding paved shoulders saves tax dollars over the life of a road -- and that benefits cyclists.

I think that's a strong enough argument that we don't need to get into the fuzzier issues like the State's cost of being obese and Cool Cities initiative.

I understand your point as well as CTL's, but the two real issues are here that if this bill becomes law in its current state that we will be required to ride in a single file line, to the far right of the lane OR (what scares me the most) on an adjacent bike path (if the local governmental unit so decides). I don't know about you, but I don't think many local politicians (or managers) understand the issue, and if left to local control (another plank in the Republican platform), will not hesitate to make all bikers ride on such a path.

This is one reason why I moved from Michigan last May back out here to Hawaii (where I retired from the Navy in '99). Out here, the corruption and politicking is accepted and out in the open, unlike back in good old Deeee-troit and MI ;-) You want money for roads and facilities for biking, you pay off the local state senator or representative or city councilman :-))

Tony

Jaret, Michigan law already includes the provision that you cite. The only change being proposed is eliminating the right of cyclists to ride 2 abreast.

The provisions that you refer to about riding as far as practicable to the right and allowing local units of government to make you ride on a bike path are already Michigan law. As far as I can tell, these two provisions have been Michigan law since at least 1976 and probably before then. The only substantive change being proposed by the Senate bill is eliminating the right of cyclists to ride two abreast.

You are absolutely right. I never looked at that section of the Michigan Vehicle Code, only the proposed bill. Nice.

Thanks for the info Todd.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

Yes, CTL's correct about those be existing conditions. What I don't know about the path law is what's considered a "usuable path". Does it just have to be designated? Does it have to meet AASHTO standards? What if it's less safe? I don't know if this has been interpreted by the courts or not.

Beyond this proposed bill, Michigan is improving for on-road access. MDOT is far more open to non-motorized transportation needs than ever before. We're even starting to see some changes at the county levels. However, the city that may soon be leading the pack is Detroit. I'm serious! There are significant plans underway for city-wide on-road bike routes. There are even a couple rail-trails and other greenways that will open prior to the Superbowl. The new bike lanes on Belle Isle are just the beginning.

This is a positive trend, and one I was unaware of.

An area that also need improvement is the integration of cycling curriculum in the Driver's Education system and perhaps even a question on the license renewal test.

There is a question on there about towing a trailer. Compared to the amount of motorists who tow a trailer I would be certain a greater number encounter road cyclists while driving. Including a question about appropriate interaction with road cyclists seems more relevant than asking about towing a trailer, which something few drivers ever actually do.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

There is no test for a Michigan driver's license renewal. I was surprised at this last year and was kind of dissapointed. They just asked for a check and gave me a pamphlet.

I agree. I do believe the "What every driver must know" booklet now contains more content on cycling. I don't believe there are any bike-related questions, though some are pushing for it.

Bicycling safety is getting pushed to the forefront in Lansing and SE Michigan. I've proposed changes to the way road projects are scored and prioritized in Oakland County that would boost cycling and pedestrian facilities development. We'll know more next month if the Road Commission buys in.

Yesterday, Lucinda Means (League of Michigan Bicyclists), Nancy Krupiarz (Rails-to-Trails Conservancy), and myself met with Senator McManus and her staff. We had a great meeting. She's interested in replacing the original legislation with something more reasonable that is best for all road users. We made a list of possible actions and agreed to meet again next month to explore them in more detail. Example ideas included share-the-road signage and adding bicycle-related questions to the driver’s road test.

We’ll keep you in the loop what becomes of this. I’m very excited about where this is headed and the Senator’s enthusiasm for doing the right thing.

Todd Scott

Thanks for the update, it would be great to have my roads more bike-friendly. It would be great if they could resurface the I-275 trail too.

jaretj

"Todd, While agreeing that pacelines and passing are integral to cycling. I think that riding double is really not necessary and does create adversity towards cyclist from drivers out on the road. "

"I am a triathlete not a roadie, so I don't really practice paceling, or know all the different formations. Is there a reason that some one needs to ride a double paceline? Is it just because of the distance one must drop back?"

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jeff, The pace line is at times a side-by-side formation. Once the lead cyclist is finished with his pull, he will move slightly left and maintain enough speed so that the paceline will go by him slowly then he will jump on the tire of the last cyclist in the line. The harder the group is riding the shorter the lead cyclists 'pull' will be and therefore there will almost always be a cyclist riding next to the paceline. Hope my explanation makes since.

Todd,

As always, thanks for the link and the heads up on this. I appreciate it and will pass this information on.

-Tom.

---

Tom Demerly
The Tri Shop.com

[reply]Thanks for the update, it would be great to have my roads more bike-friendly. It would be great if they could resurface the I-275 trail too.[/reply]

The path is getting resurfaced piece by piece.

The brief history of the parth is this. During the 1973 energy crisis it seemed like a good idea to lay down a strip of asphalt along the Interstate for cyclists. It was the first bike path along an interstate in the US. Unfortunately they never engineered the path -- there was no base structure and little attention was paid to drainage. It's surprising the path lasted as long as it did.

During this time, M-DOT paid the County to maintain the path, which obviously didn't happen.

Now M-DOT is rebuilding the entire trail that's within the Metro Region (Wayne and a little of Oakland County.) The Monroe segment is in another M-DOT region, but it'll get done eventually as well.

This week our Oakland County Trails Advisory Council updated our trails master plan and hope to extend the I-275 bike path north along M-5 to Walled Lake and Commerce -- if M-DOT agrees.