# Speed limit for bikes on Golden Gate Bridge under consideration



## txzen (Apr 6, 2005)

Hope some people end up going to this hearing, as this seems pretty ridiculous. 64 accidents in ten years means imposing a speed limit? Eh?

http://www.kron4.com/Article.aspx?ArticleID=809



> Golden Gate Bridge Considers Speed Limit for Bicyclists
> GOLDEN GATE BRIDGE (KRON) -- Speed limit signs might soon be going up for bicyclists on the Golden Gate Bridge.
> 
> A bridge district committee will hold a hearing later this week on erecting 10 mile per hour speed limit signs on bridge sidewalks and the pathways to get on the bridge. Cyclists would have to slow to five miles per hour around the towers and in construction zones.
> ...


----------



## singlespeed.org (Feb 14, 2006)

Interesting, the article now has the following also on it (must not have been tehre when you cut and pasted it):

"Professional bicyclists with their spandex suits are like 'Get out of the way, get out of the way.'" bridge pedestrian Evan Larson told KRON 4. "It's kind of scary for pedestrians, I would imagine, to walk on the bridge with people doing that. So slow down, you know."

I am not one who wants this law, but I also must say that not all cyclists use their common sense when crossing the bridge. For avid cyclists, it is not the place for a pace line, race pace, being on the aero bars, riding side by side when passing, etc.

Bet the cyclist incidents not involving speed were with tourists on rental bikes who think they can bike on the crowded bridge with a camera in one hand taking videos of their journey...


----------



## ratpick (Jul 31, 2008)

All of the crazy stuff I've seen on the GGB is done by rental bikes - the "spandex suited" are generally patient, even if we do speed up when there are gaps in the crowd.

They could solve this by keeping the western side open for bikes permanently.

You can send feedback on the proposal to [email protected]


----------



## Fixed (May 12, 2005)

ratpick said:


> All of the crazy stuff I've seen on the GGB is done by rental bikes - the "spandex suited" are generally patient, even if we do speed up when there are gaps in the crowd.
> 
> They could solve this by keeping the western side open for bikes permanently.
> 
> You can send feedback on the proposal to [email protected]


Last summer when I rode across the bridge and back, the problem wasn't necessarily speed, but groups of riders (the racer type) riding 2-3 abreast as if they owned the entire bridge. They darn near ran me into the railing. It was like I was playing chicken with several similar groups. This was on the southbound side.


----------



## SilasCL (Jun 14, 2004)

To me there's two issues. One, bicyclists should not be going that fast when they're sharing the bay side of the bridge with pedestrians. People are taking pictures and generally not paying any attention and going fast there is dangerous. Why they insist that cyclists share what is essentially a sidewalk with pedestrians is another issue entirely.

As for the ocean side for cyclists only, it would be nice if everyone relaxed a bit. Sometimes you get stuck behind tourists for what seems like forever, but really was only 15 seconds. I prefer that to darting around and making the trip across the bridge a death defying experience, and wish more cyclists had the same mindset.

I think a speed limit would be arbitrary and ridiculous. I regularly go 20-25 on the downhill side back to the city, especially when there are not many others around. Sure it's sensible to go slow around the towers and near traffic, but this whole argument that speed itself somehow causes accidents is idiotic.

The most dangerous part of the ride, IMO, is getting on the bridge. The paths are poorly laid out and filled with people taking pictures, traffic furniture, and steep hills.


----------



## Fixed (May 12, 2005)

*trails*



SilasCL said:


> The most dangerous part of the ride, IMO, is getting on the bridge. The paths are poorly laid out and filled with people taking pictures, traffic furniture, and steep hills.


Yes, my first time there, I felt like a rat in a maze trying to find the bridge on a bike. Combine that with wet surfaces and fog.

Here's my account from Commuting, noting some of these same issues:

http://forums.roadbikereview.com/showthread.php?t=221057&highlight=francisco


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

Considering the low number of accidents I think the study and the proposed painting and costs of enforcement would be a waste. Plus Im not sure how they could enforce or even prove your speed (I could see more accidents caused but bike cops trying to chase speeders). I do agree however there are a # of people that ride like total morons on the bridge. When I have had to take the east side during peak tourist time its can be a real bear and try ones patcince but it reall don't add much time to just wait things out. I do see lots of guys trying to ride a "crit" across the bridge which is just irrisponsible and rude. I wish tho they would also do something about the Blazing Saddles folks that weave all over the place and park their bikes in the path (uaually around corners) and wander about.


----------



## SilasCL (Jun 14, 2004)

IMO the tourists going 5mph would be better served on the east side of the bridge. It would open up the west side and I think they would enjoy it more.


----------



## Fogdweller (Mar 26, 2004)

SilasCL said:


> IMO the tourists going 5mph would be better served on the east side of the bridge. It would open up the west side and I think they would enjoy it more.


I agree with this. This topic is flying around my commuter group and one member is also high up in the Marin County Bike Col. They're teaming up with SFBC to make this go away. Interesting that they site 137 accidents in a 9 year period, over half of which were solo. with and average of 6000 bikes per day that cross, I'm wondering how that compares to traffic accidents. Either way, the double fine zone for cars certainly did nothing for safety on the bridge and I suspect this wouldn't either for bikes.

That being said, I'm off for my commute across the bridge!! Rain has cleared out and it looks like I'll see the sunrise from the deck.
Cheers,
Foggy


----------



## centurionomega (Jan 12, 2005)

What a nuisance!

Especially ridiculous is the 5 mph enforcement around the bridge towers. Between the high winds trying to blow you over and the technical nature of the turns, I am sure that I never go over 3 mph around those.

I saw on the news that if it passes, speed will be enforced by LIDAR (Light Detection And Ranging) guns, just like a normal motor vehicle speed trap. It would be cool to get in a high speed chase with a bike CHP though. A chance to see what those guys are made of. 

Any source of revenue in these trying economic times seems a possibility, so I think this is gonna go through.


----------



## chuckice (Aug 25, 2004)

I have no problem with it...I hope it's passed.


----------



## ghostryder (Dec 28, 2009)

Cops on bicycles with radar guns.  That is just wrong.


----------



## CoLiKe20 (Jan 30, 2006)

it's a bit risky especially when opposing riders pass on the narrow parts. I always slow down but the oncoming riders don't always. Makes it a bit scary.
speed limit is a good idea.
If you want a good workout, go climb the hill on the left after crossing the bridge.


----------



## thatdrewguy (Aug 7, 2009)

it has nothing to do will excessive speed, it is inattentive tourists who stop suddenly or will move to the ocean side without looking for riders behind them that cause most issues.

I patiently waiting for 3 tourists on bikes to complete their path around the bridge tower before slowly passing them on the left. I passed the first guy who shouted at his friends that a bike was passing, the 2nd guy heard his friend and veered left hitting me just as I was passing him. I guess you can't win with the tourists.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

thatdrewguy said:


> it has nothing to do will excessive speed, it is inattentive tourists who stop suddenly or will move to the ocean side without looking for riders behind them that cause most issues.
> 
> I patiently waiting for 3 tourists on bikes to complete their path around the bridge tower before slowly passing them on the left. I passed the first guy who shouted at his friends that a bike was passing, the 2nd guy heard his friend and veered left hitting me just as I was passing him. I guess you can't win with the tourists.


I disagree, while the situation you discribed is definatly an issue I see other "racer types" (yeah Im one too I guess) that hammer across the bridge weaving around and dodging between folks most of the time they clear all the situations fine but what they leave in the wake is people who are startled and swerving at I have seen that result in a low speed fall over. Yeah you could argue the tourists are responsible for being able to control their bikes enough to deal but really that is just silly as this is a toruist attaction not a bike park or course. I race cat 1,2 crits and have had guys sweep past me and chop me in ways that had I had a little less control would have made me crash or come close too it.


----------



## Fixed (May 12, 2005)

*directions?*



SilasCL said:


> IMO the tourists going 5mph would be better served on the east side of the bridge. It would open up the west side and I think they would enjoy it more.


Why don't they have bikes going north on the bay side and south on the ocean side, so they aren't riding toward each other? Just curious.


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

Fixed said:


> Why don't they have bikes going north on the bay side and south on the ocean side, so they aren't riding toward each other? Just curious.



This is a good plan in general but you still have to have a side that is open to foot traffic and you would still have a wide mix of cyclists using it tho it would be nice if they were all headed in the same direction.


----------



## slow.climber (Nov 25, 2010)

Fixed said:


> Why don't they have bikes going north on the bay side and south on the ocean side, so they aren't riding toward each other? Just curious.


The bridge crew seems to believe that they must have exclusive access to the west side of the bridge during "work hours".

Still that doesn't stop them from working on the east side at the same time and using their carts on the east side.

Rental bike riders can be a problem but in my experience, the biggest issue is mixing bikes and peds. The difference in speed seems to be a major factor.

Overall, things would work much better if people weren't so self focused. Many visitors behave as if they're on the ultimate Loney Planet adventure (hint, only people in the freaking world). Typically two people stake out the center of the path and then walk just far enough apart that they block traffic in both directions :mad2:


----------



## Maximus_XXIV (Nov 10, 2008)

Those of you envisioning chases are delusional. The POlice will just call ahead on the radio and someone will nab you at the exit. Soon they will just get you as you queue up at the toll booth.


----------



## centurionomega (Jan 12, 2005)

Maximus_XXIV said:


> Those of you envisioning chases are delusional. The POlice will just call ahead on the radio and someone will nab you at the exit. Soon they will just get you as you queue up at the toll booth.


Sorry you missed my attempt at humor. 

I do like your thought about a toll booth. That is pretty funny.


----------



## singlespeed.org (Feb 14, 2006)

Today's Comical has an article on this, which can be read online at http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/04/24/BAKE1J669E.DTL.

Interesting quote:_
Over the past decade, the study found, 164 bicycle accidents were reported on the bridge, with the most common being a solo bike crash, which occurred five times more often than bicycle collisions with pedestrians. *The most common accident site was on the west sidewalk, open to bicyclists only, and only on weekday evenings and weekends*. At other times, the sidewalk is used as a staging area for bridge maintenance work. According to the study, speed was a contributing factor in 39 percent of the accidents._


----------



## slow.climber (Nov 25, 2010)

Interesting. If they want this purposal to be taken seriously, they need to present a meaningfull analysis of the data.

I think we all remember those signs warning that there can be high winds so it's safest to walk your bike across the bridge.

It's ridiculous for them to say things like 'speed was a factor'. Golly gee, you mean if the bike wasn't moving it wouldn't have crashed?

Guess what, speed is always a factor. The question is, is it a signigicant factor. If so, are there mitigations that can be taken to enable people to get across the bridge without having to walk?

They're claiming 5 or 6 bike crashes per year and 5:6 of those are solo spills.

I wonder how many of those are people losing it on the metal expansion plates at the towers. Those things can be very slippery in the wet.

How many of those crashes were people who haven't been on a bike in the last couple of decades? I saw some poor woman panic as she was getting close to the north anchorage. It's a slight down hill and the path narrows at that point. She freaked and rode her BS bike right into concrete


----------



## singlespeed.org (Feb 14, 2006)

Oh, forgot to point out something from the Comical article (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/04/24/BAKE1J669E.DTL) in my earlier post:
_Bridge officials say the growing popularity of biking or walking across the bridge, a yearlong safety study and *a planned four-month closure of the bicycles-only west sidewalk* have convinced them of the need to slow down the cyclists._

First I have heard of this closure. Anyone know more? Will they at least plan it so that it doesn't occur during the tourist summer season when the bridge is significantly more crowded?


----------



## slow.climber (Nov 25, 2010)

singlespeed.org said:


> Anyone know more? Will they at least plan it so that it doesn't occur during the tourist summer season when the bridge is significantly more crowded?


They're doing a boat load of work. There will be multiple closures. Here's their list,
http://goldengate.org/news/bridge/sidewalkimpacts.php


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

singlespeed.org said:


> Oh, forgot to point out something from the Comical article (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/04/24/BAKE1J669E.DTL) in my earlier post:
> _Bridge officials say the growing popularity of biking or walking across the bridge, a yearlong safety study and *a planned four-month closure of the bicycles-only west sidewalk* have convinced them of the need to slow down the cyclists._
> 
> First I have heard of this closure. Anyone know more? Will they at least plan it so that it doesn't occur during the tourist summer season when the bridge is significantly more crowded?



The closure was suppose to take place over the winter but is now delayed til the busiest time of course the bridge will be its own special hell for a long while.


----------



## Fixed (May 12, 2005)

*unnecessary*

Sounds like it will be so congested that a speed limit will be unnecessary. 



singlespeed.org said:


> Oh, forgot to point out something from the Comical article (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/04/24/BAKE1J669E.DTL) in my earlier post:
> _Bridge officials say the growing popularity of biking or walking across the bridge, a yearlong safety study and *a planned four-month closure of the bicycles-only west sidewalk* have convinced them of the need to slow down the cyclists._
> 
> First I have heard of this closure. Anyone know more? Will they at least plan it so that it doesn't occur during the tourist summer season when the bridge is significantly more crowded?


----------



## 32and3cross (Feb 28, 2005)

Fixed said:


> Sounds like it will be so congested that a speed limit will be unnecessary.


Well yes and no. There will always be some one trying to get through as fast as possible but the thing this could have done that would have been good during the construction would have been define lanes of travel which may have encoraged people to be alert to the fact that there would be traffic trying to cross the bridge. The real hold up with thsi clossure will be that the bridge is a tourist attraction as well as a means of travel and during the nice weather there are tons of folks trying to enjoy the views as well as people trying to get across currently the only done to facilitate those different groups not clashing is having a bikes only side during certian times without that things well be really bad for 4 months.


----------



## singlespeed.org (Feb 14, 2006)

slow.climber said:


> They're doing a boat load of work. There will be multiple closures. Here's their list,
> http://goldengate.org/news/bridge/sidewalkimpacts.php


Saw a small sign today on the fence on the west sign at the SF entrance saying the west side will be closed from May 9 to Sep 9.


----------



## Fixed (May 12, 2005)

*early*



32and3cross said:


> The closure was suppose to take place over the winter but is now delayed til the busiest time of course the bridge will be its own special hell for a long while.


All the more reason to ride in early, at least get across one day before pedestrians accumulate.


----------



## Maximus_XXIV (Nov 10, 2008)

centurionomega said:


> Sorry you missed my attempt at humor.
> 
> I do like your thought about a toll booth. That is pretty funny.


Sorry you missed my attempt at humor. The toll booth is coming.


----------

