Great Parks South Section 1 Map 7 - Black Hawk, CO - 2010

[JHamelman]

The city of Black Hawk, Colorado has prohibited bicycles from being ridden on most of their roads, including those used on Great Parks South, Section 1, Map 7. Tickets are regularly issued for violating this law. Our suggestion is to walk your bike the distance across town, ~ 0.5 miles.

For more information, see our blog post pertaining to this situation: http://blog.adventurecycling.org/2010/06/ban-on-bicycling-in-black-hawk-colorado.html.


.Jennifer.

[MarthaP]

If I may update this, Route 119 IS open to bicyclists - the restriction is, according to the Black Hawk street map, only for streets that go through town and not the bypass road.

I live a few miles away from Black Hawk and it's not an issue at all to press on through town via CO 119 to the next waypoint. Frankly, the town isn't interesting enough to stop at since it's all casinos and gamblers.

The map of restrictions is here:

[JHamelman]

Hi Martha,

Thanks for your input on this situation. Unfortunately, if we were to detour cyclists on the Great Parks South route using SR 119, it would be a very long detour taking cyclists far south before returning to the current routing. There is only one paved road from Central City to the I-70 corridor the route aims for and through Black Hawk is the only way to access it. We are keeping an eye on the situation and may have to consider this longer alternative but would really rather not.

.Jennifer.

[rvklassen]

Shouldn't that read Map 6 (not 7)

As I interpret it, the trouble is that you're coming in (if coming from the south) on 279, and they have closed their portion of 279 to cyclists.

[JHamelman]

Shouldn't that read Map 6 (not 7)

If you're referring to the list here http://www.adventurecycling.org/routes/greatparks.cfm then it would be 6. I was referring to the map panel number, the number given to each piece of the route within the section, not the section in whole.

As I interpret it, the trouble is that you're coming in (if coming from the south) on 279, and they have closed their portion of 279 to cyclists.

It's an issue regardless of the direction of travel. There is only one paved road through that area and they are restricting access to it to anyone who wants to cycle through. You may walk your bike only.

More information to be be posted on our blog later this afternoon or early tomorrow morning, http://blog.adventurecycling.org/.

.Jennifer.

[rvklassen]

As I interpret it, the trouble is that you're coming in (if coming from the south) on 279, and they have closed their portion of 279 to cyclists.

It's an issue regardless of the direction of travel. There is only one paved road through that area and they are restricting access to it to anyone who wants to cycle through. You may walk your bike only.

More information to be be posted on our blog later this afternoon or early tomorrow morning, http://blog.adventurecycling.org/.

.Jennifer.

I didn't mean to imply it only affected those coming from the south.  More to clarify for MarthaP why 119 being open doesn't help.

[JHamelman]

As I interpret it, the trouble is that you're coming in (if coming from the south) on 279, and they have closed their portion of 279 to cyclists.

It's an issue regardless of the direction of travel. There is only one paved road through that area and they are restricting access to it to anyone who wants to cycle through. You may walk your bike only.

More information to be be posted on our blog later this afternoon or early tomorrow morning, http://blog.adventurecycling.org/.

.Jennifer.

I didn't mean to imply it only affected those coming from the south.  More to clarify for MarthaP why 119 being open doesn't help.

Sorry, missed the one word that should have made that sentiment clear to me.

.Jennifer.

[CraftGeek]

As I understand it, to comply with the law, we are supposed to dismount and walk our bikes in the street?

In several sections of the effected road there are minimal or no sidewalks (according to to Google Maps Streetview). Could someone who remembers that section coraborate this please?

If the above is true, that would force us onto the street, walking next to our bikes. This would increase the amount of lane we take up and prolong the time we are taking the lane.

It seems that the ordinance directly endangers cyclists.


Maybe a large group of us should get together and repeatedly travel that section of the route while strictly obeying all local laws...

[JHamelman]

As I understand it, to comply with the law, we are supposed to dismount and walk our bikes in the street?

Yes, this is our understanding as well.

.Jennifer.