It’s Time to Let Cyclists Use Crosswalks

We need better infrastructure. Barring that, let me cross the street with pedestrians.

Joshua Rawson Harris/Unsplash; Getty

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Sometimes, my rage gets the better of me.

To bike into downtown Denver, I need to take a left at a dangerous intersection. Despite being labeled as “cyclist friendly” by Google Maps, the crossing has no discernible bike infrastructure. There is a left turn lane but no signal; at rush hour, turning is impossible.

So, I use the crosswalk.

I was recently doing just that—rolling through the crosswalk with the pedestrian signal—when a car taking a right turn pulled in front of me. The driver rolled down his window, shook his finger at me, and said: “Not where you belong.” I was taken aback. Not where I belong? In the fucking crosswalk? With no pedestrians around, at an otherwise impassable intersection?

When I am zipping through town on a bicycle, my body protected only by a plastic sheath around my skull, I know that it is a bad idea to argue with motorists But, whoops, I yelled back at him.

After my initial fury subsided, I felt a pang of doubt. Was I in the wrong? It turns out: No. Well, actually, kind of—but not really.

In the days following, I called Andrew Phillips, a Colorado attorney with TheCyclist-Lawyer.com. He described how bicycles exist in a legal limbo, sometimes required to act as vehicles and other times as pedestrians. Colorado state law permits sidewalk riding, but some municipalities ban it. (This resource highlights sidewalk riding statutes by state.) In places where it’s legal to ride on the sidewalk, cyclists are entitled to use the crosswalk, as long as they yield to pedestrians and don’t dart out into the roadway at an unsafe speed. If a cyclist dismounts, he or she is considered a pedestrian and may use the sidewalk and crosswalk. And if a cyclist has a walk signal, Phillips said, “they’re 100 percent OK. That’s your right of way.”

That sounded like vindication to me. But then I read Denver’s Municipal Code; it turns out that sidewalk riding is, in fact, unlawful in the city, with a few narrow exceptions. The sidewalk includes the crosswalk. But just because it’s unlawful doesn’t mean people don’t do it, especially in places where biking in the roadway is impractical.

“There are times where that’s the safest place for cyclists to be is on the sidewalk,” Phillips said.

Whenever you see a cyclist riding on the sidewalk rather than the street, it’s a policy failure. Even though cyclists are allowed on most roadways in Colorado, not all streets are designed in a way that makes cyclists feel safe. Cyclists don’t ride on sidewalks because they enjoy encroaching on pedestrians’ space; they do it because they have no other options. Until we lower speed limits, calm traffic, and install protected bike lanes on most city streets, we shouldn’t punish riders for traveling in a way that they decide is safe.

“There is a minority of motorists who just think that cyclists should never be on the road,” Phillips said, “and they’re loud and dangerous to us as a result.”

Crosswalk riding has its own dangers. Phillips said that he often works with clients—either pedestrians or cyclists—who have been struck by drivers turning right while looking left for oncoming traffic. Last year, a cyclist crossing a busy street in a crosswalk was killed in Denver by a hit-and-run driver who ran a red light (though it seems unlikely that it would have made a difference if he were cycling in the roadway).

Luckily, I won’t have to let this intersection vex me for much longer. On the day of my altercation, new traffic lights had been installed, but they weren’t yet in use. Once I have a left-turn arrow, I will happily claim the whole roadway, confident that that’s where I belong. Honk away.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate