Portland Bike Forums (by BikePortland.org)

Go Back   Portland Bike Forums (by BikePortland.org) > General Discussion > Tips & Advice
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 04-15-2012, 02:10 PM
Simple Nature's Avatar
Simple Nature Simple Nature is offline
Senior Member
Site Admin
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 863
Default Jogging in bike lanes?

Exactly what are the rules to running in the bike lane when there is a perfectly good sidewalk right next to the bike lane... of course, running against the direction of travel?
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 04-15-2012, 10:43 PM
wsbob's Avatar
wsbob wsbob is offline
Senior Member
Site Admin
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,755
Default

I doubt there's any ORS laws specifically regulating joggers' and runners' use of the bike lane that would be different from laws regulating use of the road by people that travel the road on foot.

And what laws would those be? Drawing from basic logic, common sense and recollection of laws having to do with pedestrians use of the road, before going to search out pertinent Oregon laws on that use, it would seem that people traveling the road on foot are obliged by law only to watch for traffic before stepping into its path, and yield to faster traffic traveling in the same direction. Someone else, please step in and say so if this doesn't sound right.

To me, this says that even if a good sidewalk is nearby, joggers are probably entitled to use the bike lane to run in as long as they use common sense in staying out the way of and yielding to faster traffic. Which can be very aggravating to people trying to ride in the bike lane, since it seems that most of the people that like to run, tend to have some sort of thing in their ears that makes it hard for them to hear announcements by people on bikes approaching them from behind.
Maybe people that jog in bike lanes should be obliged to use rear view mirrors? For joggers that happen to be particularly slow to acknowledge someone on a bike approaching them from behind, some people might suggest use of an audible device loud enough that there's no way they couldn't hear it. Use at your own discretion.

If the jogger is approaching counter-flow, a person on a bike riding the bike lane...sees the person on the bike approaching, but still does not yield the lane, this is a signal for the person on the bike to unsheathe their jousting lance, fix it in the direction of the offending jogger and allow physics or the subsequent wisdom of the jogger to take its natural course.
Actually, just joking on the last bit. I think if the jogger was running contraflow, the person on the bike would probably have to take the main lane, yielding to the person jogging, just as a vehicle traveling the main lane would be obliged to make way for a person walking counterflow along the roadside.

Last edited by wsbob; 04-15-2012 at 10:59 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 04-16-2012, 09:57 AM
Haven_kd7yct's Avatar
Haven_kd7yct Haven_kd7yct is offline
Senior Member
Site Admin
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Tigard, OR
Posts: 486
Default

Here's the link to the laws pertaining the pedestrians.

http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/814.html

I believe the laws covering a runner's use of the bike lane are part of 814.070; the code specifies "highways" but I'm pretty sure most police officers would apply this law to all arterial or collector roadways regardless of designation.

Generally, a pedestrian (includes runners/joggers) is violating the law if they are in the bike lane/shoulder when there's a sidewalk adjacent. Again, most police officers would apply this law (probably) (if asked) to a person walking or running in the bike lane (shoulder equivalent, I suppose) when there's a sidewalk adjacent.

This section of the code (814) also includes the laws pertaining to bicycles, just fyi.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 04-16-2012, 11:11 AM
Simple Nature's Avatar
Simple Nature Simple Nature is offline
Senior Member
Site Admin
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 863
Default

Thanks, I was remembering this part:

814.070 ...
(a) Takes a position upon or proceeds along and upon the roadway where there is an adjacent usable sidewalk or shoulder.

The only reason I asked is that I suggested such to the runner and the runner's partner on the sidewalk became quite belligerent upon passing. As I am riding a 3' wide trike on a 4' curbed bike lane, I'd say this presents a "hazard".

814.070...
(3) A pedestrian does not commit the offense of pedestrian with improper position upon or improperly proceeding along a highway if the pedestrian:

(a) Does not impede traffic or create a traffic hazard

I am all for the rights of runners when the alternative does not exist and I am the 1st to initiate taking the lane when I see such. But to do this when clearly seen far ahead of time when there is an alternative puts me at risk. This incident was along Evergreen west of Brookwood.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 04-16-2012, 11:54 AM
wsbob's Avatar
wsbob wsbob is offline
Senior Member
Site Admin
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 1,755
Default

The occasional jogger may be belligerent in response to being advised of the law...their using the bike lane when you need it may may put you at risk...but the likelihood of such a person behaving any differently isn't good. The cops wouldn't appreciate being called to respond to something like this. Even if they drove by while it was happening, they probably wouldn't want to stop and deal with it unless a collision was about to happen.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 04-16-2012, 01:37 PM
Simple Nature's Avatar
Simple Nature Simple Nature is offline
Senior Member
Site Admin
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 863
Default

True... this is a self re-education post
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 04-16-2012, 02:33 PM
Alan Alan is offline
Senior Member
Site Admin
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 507
Default

Legalities aside (I pretty much agree with Haven and wsbob's assessments), there was a BikePortland frontpage piece last week about runners in the street and a couple of posters mentioned that some runners find asphalt to have significantly less impact than concrete sidewalks. At least it helps me to understand why they're doing it. Several other frontpage pieces have had discussions about trying to explain laws to other riders, pedestrians or drivers, and plenty of people have found little or no success in that endeavor. YMMV, of course.

BTW, for Haven, "highway" is defined in ORS 366.005 as "(6) “Highway” means every public way, road, street, thoroughfare and place, including bridges, viaducts and other structures within the boundaries of this state, open, used or intended for use of the general public for vehicles or vehicular traffic as a matter of right."
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 04-17-2012, 01:04 PM
q`Tzal's Avatar
q`Tzal q`Tzal is offline
Senior Member
Site Admin
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Betwix logic and emotion, reason and insanity.
Posts: 354
Default Share the Road: It Goes Both Ways.

I'm more than willing to share the road with runners, joggers, walkers, strollers, automobies and zombies; I'd just like them to realize that they need to share too.
Venting ire directly at other road users is never productive but frequently cathartic, the target of your rage now spreads that to other cyclists perpetuating the cycle of attrition of civility.

Common law protects the rights of pedestrians to travel uncontrolled on sidewalks.
How about we say that it's perfectly acceptable to walk in high speed roads as long as slow users follows some rules of common public use.
If you decide that the high speed road is the place to walk than you are legally accepting the requirement to face oncoming traffic and to even yield to the primary designated user if failing to do so increases hazard to any road user in that situation.

So for example: 3 baby strollers are lazily meandering down the bike lane 3 abreast. With no automotive traffic they would be within their right to not change what they are doing. If the pedestrians with strollers observe automotive traffic they should reasonably not block it when they could easily not travel abreast or even use the sidewalk temporarily. Further, if there are cyclists in addition to autos it is incumbent upon the pedestrians not to selfishly force cyclists in to automotive traffic when their viewpoint gives them superior awareness of the traffic situation.

Basically I think it perfectly reasonable for pedestrians to use roads with the caveat that they acknowledge that this precious resource of road space IS shared by all; as such it can't be used with the same lack of awareness of their surroundings that traditional sidewalks allow.
__________________
Knowledge is NOT a crime.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:53 AM.




A production of Pedaltown Media Inc. / BikePortland.org
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.