The Ann Arbor Chronicle recently published this interesting article on local bicycling history, but especially on bike law and bloomers.

The 1876 Ann Arbor city charter contains no mention of bicycles — it wouldn’t be until two years later that A. A. Pope manufactured the first bicycles in the U.S. The invention spread across the nation, threw city fathers into consternation as they scrambled for their city charters, and incited Ann Arbor’s “Bloomer War.”

The Chronicle also notes that Ann Arbor’s recent debate on banning sidewalk bicycling is not new.

In Michigan, state law does not prohibit bicycling on sidewalks though it does allow cities to prohibit it. Some have prohibited sidewalk riding citywide (e.g. Royal Oak) while others have limited the ban to their business district (e.g. Ferndale.) Often such bans provide exceptions for children.

State law also requires these city specific regulations to be adequately signed, otherwise they’re not enforceable.

The intention of these laws is not always clear, though it seems reducing pedestrian-bicyclist conflict is often cited. Are they also intended to promote safer cycling by reducing vehicle-bicycle collisions? Studies have shown that riding on sidewalks is significantly more dangerous than roads.

A recent review of police crash reports in Royal Oak and Troy found that nearly all crashes occurred on sidewalks or in crosswalks.

It should be noted that many Metro Detroit outer-ring suburbs ignore national AASHTO guidelines and best practices by designating sidewalks and sidepaths (locally known as “safety paths”) as bicycle routes. In these cases it could be argued that vehicle mobility — getting bicyclists off the road — is the fundamental justification, not safety.

We recently purchased a Detroit Police Department booklet on traffic regulations from 1929.

What’s interesting is that we have many of the same regulations today. However, there are some differences.

• Under these city ordinances, bicycles were considered vehicles. Under current state law, bicycles are devices.
• The vehicle speeds are lower: 20 MPH in the neighborhoods and 15 MPH in the business districts — rates that are much safer for pedestrians and bicyclists. Those today have been raised to a minimum of 25 MPH.
• Reckless driving appears to be a lower standard, perhaps because it includes today’s careless driving standard. Back then, if you were “to endanger or likely to endanger,” you could be found reckless and possibly lose your license.

It was illegal to drive drunk in 1929, which is interesting since America still had Prohibition. Perhaps that’s not surprising with 75% of America’s booze being smuggled through Metro Detroit at the time — the city’s second largest business after automobiles.

The booklet does include a map. While much of the street grid remains intact, we have lost some roads to superblocks, including the Renaissance Center, Cobo Hall, Comerica Park, and Ford Field.

The Lodge expressway has also done serious damage to the business district street grid. It was named after Mayor John C. Lodge who was in office at the time this booklet was printed.

Link: Detroit Police 1929 Traffic Regulations booklet (9.6 megabytes)

There’s a popular bumper sticker that says “Same Roads, Same Rights, Same Rules.”

It sounds good, but it’s clearly not true and often not even desirable..

During an internet discussion about making drivers more aware of bicyclists’ rights, someone suggested having a required question for those renewing their driver’s licenses: Do bicyclists have the same rights to the roads as drivers?

They thought the answer was “Yes”, but they were mistaken.

Similarly, some have said bicycle advocates shouldn’t pursue rolling stop or vulnerable user legislation because it would make cyclists a separate group. Too late. We are a separate group despite what the bumper sticker implies.

Same Roads?

Michigan Bicyclists have access to nearly all of Michigan’s roads, but there are major exceptions including all limited-access expressways and ramps, such as I-75 and M-14. The tunnel and bridge between Detroit and Windsor are not open to bicyclists either.

And of course you can ride a bike on state trunkline M-185 but you can drive on it. That’s the road around Mackinaw Island.

Same Rights and Rules?

While bicyclists have similar rights as motorists, there are limitations. We must ride to the far right where practicable. We cannot ride on limited-access expressways. We have no special privileges in funeral processions.

Bicyclists do have rights that motorists do not. We can generally ride on the sidewalk and in crosswalks unless prohibited by a local ordinance. We can park on sidewalks. Turning vehicles must yield to us in a crosswalk. We can ride two abreast. We can ride in bike lanes and on shared-use paths.

We don’t need a driver’s license, registration or proof of insurance. We can’t get points on a driver’s license.

State law also allows local governments to further regulate bicycle use.

Then there are the state laws that we are encouraged to break, such as passing vehicles while riding on paved shoulders.

And of course, in Michigan bicycles are not vehicles. Bicycles are devices. As a result, bicycles are generally not burdened by vehicle regulations. For instance, it’s legal for cyclists to run studded tires.

A better bumper sticker

A more accurate slogan, and one we’ve seen on the back of Windsor Transit buses is “Share the Road — It’s the law.”

This message can be reinforced with “Share the Road” signs as well.

Bicyclists are a special class and rather than advocate against it, we should advocate for regulations that encourage more cycling and safer places to ride.

There were certainly fewer rules for Detroit cyclists in July 1900. Unlike today, bells and lights were not required on bicycles.

However there was a common speed limit of 12 miles per hour (and 8 MPH around corners.) This speed limit was lower than Grand Rapids (15 MPH) but higher than Chicago’s (10 MPH.) In Des Moines, Iowa the speed limit was “a moderate gait,” which makes one think these limits were originally set for horses.

Given the road conditions in 1900, these speed limits may have been reasonable. The Michigan LAW didn’t seem to take issue with Detroit’s limits.

The League of American Wheelmen (LAW) also made these suggestions.

Wheelmen will find it advantageous as a precaution against arrest to govern themselves in accordance with the following suggestions covering points on which some cities have legislated and others have not

• Keep to the right
• Ride no more than two abreast
• Keep off the sidewalks
• Move cautiously around corners
• Ride straight keep your wheel under control sit so you have a clear view of the road and keep at least one hand on the handle bar
• Before riding on a cycle path, find out whether or not you are entitled to use it without buying a license tag
• If you collide with another wheelman or a pedestrian, dismount, and if he asks for your name and address, give it

A common message from bicycle organizations and advocates is bicyclists must follow all the rules of the road.

We believe that those who stand firm by that message (a) aren’t doing as they say, or (b) don’t live in urbanized areas with stop signs on every other residential block, which makes cycling impractical. This message is the easy way out since it puts the burden on bicyclists.

Instead, that message needs to be turned around. It should be that we need to change the rules of the road and our road infrastructure to better accommodate bicycling. This message requires more effort and puts the primary burden on bicycle advocates and local governments.

We’ve already highlighted one change to the rules of the road that would be highly beneficial to bicycling: rolling stops. Rolling stops could improve cycling safety according to a recent BBC article, which notes that “an internal report for Transport for London concluded women cyclists are far more likely to be killed by lorries because, unlike men, they tend to obey red lights and wait at junctions in the driver’s blind spot.”

And, you can’t have group bike rides without rolling stops.

Stop signs don’t calm traffic

One beneficial change to the road infrastructure includes removing unnecessary stop signs in residential neighborhoods.

Most of these signs were installed because there was a perception that it would slow speeding motorists. Studies show that that perception is wrong. Motorists actually speed more between stop signs to make up the time lost to stopping — actually only slowing in most cases. These stop signs are not warranted according to state and federal guidelines. They waste fuel, create more pollutants, and help create more noise.

And in most cases, these stop signs are irrelevant for cyclists. We’re not the ones speeding through the residential streets and putting children, pets, and pedestrians at risk. Cyclists, pedestrians, horses, and street cars were doing fine for 36 years without any stop signs. Stop signs were invented in Detroit in 1915 to deal with the mass adoption of motor vehicles.

Removing stop signs

Yesterday’s Free Press has an article on cities removing stop signs in residential areas. Livonia has removed an estimated 1,500 stop signs. Other cities are doing the same, though to a lessor extent.

Grosse Pointe Woods has removed 18 stops signs since November, and Livonia police Sgt. Dave Studt, the person in charge of his city’s traffic bureau, said Farmington Hills and Novi have expressed interest in Livonia’s efforts.

“By removing these stop signs, we’ve just made it safer for a pedestrian to cross the road,” Studt said. He noted that drivers tend to roll through intersections without stopping completely when a street is oversigned or they speed between stop signs in order to make up time.

He said signs are removed only where they are unwarranted because of traffic flow and other factors.

As a member of the Traffic Safety committee in Royal Oak, we see a half dozen requests for new residential stop signs annually. What the residents really want is a means for slowing speeding motor vehicles while reducing cut-through traffic and noise. On some streets, the majority of motorists are speeding. Royal Oak does not have the resources to police this. The residents need real traffic calming solutions, like neckdowns and roundabouts. Those can be implemented in ways that accomodate bicycling.