Consultant: Stop signs shouldn't apply to bicyclists

[n2doc]

By CHRIS GRYGIEL, SEATTLEPI.COM STAFF
Updated 12:28 p.m., Friday, May 27, 2011

A bike consultant says stop signs simply don't make sense for people on two wheels.

"You see, stop signs are placed at intersections to keep two-ton vehicles from crashing into each other. One- to two-hundred-pound riders on bicycles do not need to come to a complete stop to avoid serious injury. While stop signs are an efficient and effective way to delineate right of way for motorists, cyclists need something different," Mia Birk wrote in the Portland Tribune. "Don't get me wrong, I am not advocating for throwing out the rule book. When we bike, we should stop and remain stopped for all traffic signals. And when we drive, we should slow down, hang up, yield to cyclists and pedestrians, and chill out. In other words, we can all behave better."

Birk is the president of Portland-based consulting firm - Alta Planning + Design - which focuses on bike issues.

Under Washington State law, bicycles are considered vehicles and are required to obey all laws applicable to motor vehicles - which means stopping at stop signs and stoplights. The Seattle Bicycle Club strongly encourages cyclists to stop at stop signs, noting that the bad reputation some attach to bicyclists comes from those who cruise through stop signals.



Read more: http://www.seattlepi.com/local/transportation/article/Consultant-Stop-signs-shouldn-t-apply-to-1399107.php

[gop_equals_taliban]

1. If I don\'t have to stop for bikes

then no problem.

However if bikes and cars are going to share the road, everyone has to follow the rules of the road.

[Fumesucker]

3. Eh.. I was pulled over in my car once *because* I stopped at a stop sign..

Cop thought I was drunk, it was late at night and he told me the only people that stopped for that sign were the drunks who were trying to keep from getting pulled over and busted for drinking.

[ejpoeta]

24. lol. that's pretty sad that no one stops at the stop sign. maybe they need to stop and give

tickets to everyone there then for awhile and more people would stop. actually, we used to live by a corner with a 4 way stop... had a flashing light and everything. we thought it would mean it would be safer. we sat and watched car after car drive through it. at least they slowed down I guess. What was telling was when the cops did it too.

[adamuu]

32. wow. damned if you do, damned if you don't /nt

[backscatter712]

47. That's way too much oversimplification.

You're asking a guy riding unprotected on a 15 pound bike to "obey the same rules" as a guy in a 2,500 pound car capable of much faster speeds.

They're not equivalent, so forcing both to follow rules as if they are equivalent doesn't make sense.

In this case, and as Idaho has recognized in law, it is perfectly safe for a cyclist to roll through an intersection slowly, without making a full stop, verifying that the intersection is clear in the process.

[ejpoeta]

2. if stop signs don't apply to bicyclists, you are going to have a lot of flat bicyclists.

wtf! I think part of the problem is that many people I see on bicycles don't seem to understand that they are supposed to be following the same rules as the cars. They just go do whatever. Maybe they should just be taught what the rules are and how they apply to them (for those that aren't drivers)?

Sometimes I think there should be a bicycle lane or something. They can't ride on the sidewalks, but there are cars parked on the road and so they are riding in the middle of the street. It makes me afraid to let my daughter ride her bike. She's 12. We live in the country and I will bring her bike with us and we will park the car and walk and she will ride her bike to the park or the library. But I make her use the sidewalk. This is not a big city mind you. It is a 'city' but a small city in wny. I think it would be awesome if there were a more bicycle friendly attitude around here.

I live in the country and there will be no bicycle lanes here. I can go down the road and there are trails we can go down I guess. But for some reason I am more concerned about safety than I was when I was younger and without kids and rode my bike to work and everywhere.

[shraby]

5. I told my grandchildren to use the sidewalks for their bikes.

There aren't that many pedestrians anymore, and the sidewalks are safer. I told them if they ever get fined for it, I will pay the fine rather than have them ride on the road.

[taterguy]

8. Sidewalks are not safer

The biggest threat to a cyclist is traffic from intersecting traffic.

If you're on the sidewalk, cars on crossroads won't see you. Their eyes are focused on the road, where potential threats are.

You also won't have any time to react if a vehicle that doesn't see you pulls out.

[Capitalocracy]

9. I've been told by cops to get off the road and use the sidewalk...

and then been told by cops to get off the sidewalk and use the road.

[taterguy]

11. Police officers are not safety experts

"The average cyclist in this study incurs a risk on the sidewalk 1.8 times as great as on the roadway,"

The complete study is here: (mind-numbing boredom alert)

http://www.bicyclinglife.com/Library/riskfactors.htm

[madinmaryland]

31. +1000. That is the quote of the year, taterguy!!

:rofl:

[hobbit709]

14. If you're on the sidewalk at an intersection

You don't dart out in front of traffic any more than you do on the street at an intersection.
When I drive I not only look at the other cars, I look at what's ahead at any intersection too

[taterguy]

17. Well if every driver was like you then it would be safe to ride on sidewalks

The problem is that a large percentage of motorists don't take the time to thoroughly check to see if it's safe before pulling into a street.

And it only takes one to fuck up your life.

If I had nickel for every time a motorist pulled in front of me then I could afford a really nice car.

:toast:

[shraby]

44. Coming from the sidewalk to cross the road should be

treated as anyone crossing the road..stop, look both ways and if the traffic is clear, go on across. Just because they are on a bike on the sidewalk doesn't mean they should just scoot on across to the next one.

To say the sidewalk is not safer is wrong. I almost got doored while on a bike riding on the road..a car pulled up to the curb up ahead of me and at the last minute I realized someone is probably going to get out of that car..and barely avoided ramming right into the opening car door.

[taterguy]

48. Anecdotal evidence does not trump traffic studies

Yes, riding in the road exposes you to certain risks.

But your odds are better in the road.

Just as stopping at every intersection would be 'safe' on a sidewalk, (albeit not very practical if there are lots of driveways on your route), it's relatively easy to avoid being doored. Just don't pass within 3 feet of an occupied car.

[Golden Raisin]

16. Oh please. Seriously depends on

where you live. I live in Manhattan (extremely heavy pedestrian traffic) and there is a reason they are called side-WALKS. All those in the road: cars, bikes, etc. should obey the same rules, i.e. stopping at stop signs, red lights.

[Darth_Kitten]

19. Well, pedestrians have rights.

n/t

[Gormy Cuss]

41. Generally the recommendation is to change the law to a rolling stop for bicyclists

not abandonment of any caution at the intersection. IOW, bicyclists are required to slow down, observe the other intersections and proceed with caution.

It does make sense in that bicyclists take more time to come up to speed after a full stop and that has the affect of delaying traffic for motorists who must wait for the cyclist to clear the intersection.

It's one of about a half dozen laws where the rules for bicycles should be a bit different. Riding on the sidewalk should be allowed in areas where the road is heavily trafficked and there are no bike lanes. Of course, bicyclists would need restrictions on speed in that instance. There is a major road on my bike route where the municipality tried to mandate that bikes use the sidewalk but the state DOT told them it would violate traffic laws. Instead, the city installed signs saying that cyclists MAY use the sidewalks with some limitations and the sidewalks have been widened to accommodate both bikes and pedestrians.

[Kolesar]

4. There is one western state that allows cyclists to roll through a stop sign

Idaho, IIRC.

Cyclists should yield at a stop sign, but be allowed to roll through. It is not that complicated.

[ejpoeta]

18. there you have a point. if no one is coming, they should be able to go.

the trouble is with the people who will use that as an excuse to just go. but you get that with cars all the time and they are supposed to stop anyway.

[LiberalFighter]

6. I would have to disagree. All traffic should stop at stop signs including bicyclists.

And traffic lights too.

[YellowRubberDuckie]

7. Bicycles are considered motor vehicles according to the rules of the road.

Here people are always riding against traffic, and I wish I were a cop so I could freaking tell them how moronic they are. That is the reason the Gibbs smack (on the back of the head in NCIS?) was created. For people who are just too stupid to walk around.
Duckie

[ejpoeta]

21. i have yelled at them before. they are supposed to ride with traffic.

i have to believe that a lot of them just don't know the rules. maybe they don't realize they are supposed to ride with traffic. ride with traffic, walk against traffic. not hard to understand.

[Historic NY]

10. when you get flattened then its no problem either....most rules of the road..

at least in NY cover bicycles and other motorized vehicle and even horses. I think more than 100yrs experience in transport speaks for itself. Imagine if the traffic light was never invented.

[Ikonoklast]

12. Alta Planning + Design must own an interest in funerary services companies.

Don't stop at stop signs +
More dead bicyclist =

PROFIT1

[hobbit709]

13. Self-correcting problem.

You dumb enough to run a stop sign, you get flattened.

[ejpoeta]

22. do you know that they now have a sign below the stop signs that says

cross traffic does not stop. I was amazed when i first saw it. Is that not the definition of a stop sign? that cross traffic does not stop. unless it is an all way stop in which case it will specify that it is an all way stop? are we that stupid in this country that we need disclaimers on stop signs?

[hobbit709]

23. the stupidity index rises every day.

Haven't seen that on Stop signs around here.

[ejpoeta]

25. i was gonna take a picture and post it online because i thought it was so stupid that

they would need to explain the definition of the stop sign. it has been there awhile now... i still scratch my head every time i see it.

[Robb]

15. Disparate users on the same trail rarely understand one another well.

I'm reminded of work we did years ago on backcountry trail use, involving horses, motorcycles and Jeeps.

It took a lot of buy-in from the various user groups to get them to start seeing things from the other users' perspectives -- that, and frankly playing on each group's fear that they might be banned from using some trails if they couldn't work it out. Once that factor kicked in, people started working to educate one another.

Jeepers learned that the guy on the motorbike that whizzed by them wasn't being a jerk, for example, he just needed to keep his momentum up so he didn't keel over. Motorbikers learned that the equine set was quite gracious when other users idled their engines going by, to keep from spooking horses. That sort of thing.

It makes sense that a bicyclist is probably put more off-kilter by coming to a complete stop than is offset by the safety factor, but at the same time there needs to be traffic control that takes into account motorists' seeming inability to see bikes coming. Bicycles ideally move slightly slower, but stop less often. It's a very different use of the same "trail," and there needs to be more education.

[WolverineDG]

20. Uh, bikes are vehicles & therefore have to follow the rules of the road

You want to make car drivers even more unfriendly to cyclists? Let 'em violate all the traffic laws they want. Jaywalkers are bad enough.

Wish cops would start handing out more tickets to cyclists who ride their bikes the wrong way down a one-way street or run red lights & yield signs.....

dg

[MineralMan]

26. Well, the bicyclists think they don't apply already.

Yesterday, I was approaching a 4-way stop intersection. One car was stopped at the intersection, and was just about to pull out to make a left turn. A bicyclist who was approaching the intersection at a pretty good clip ran his stop sign without even slowing down. The car with the right of way had to slam on his brakes to avoid hitting the guy on the bicycle.

[Gman]

27. Like people on bicycles pay attention to them anyway

[slackmaster]

28. Total fucking bullshit

I almost hit a bicyclist yesterday after she ran a stop sign. It was a four-way stop. I stopped, let a car on my left go, then I started to go. The bike rider ran the stop sign. She had been in my blind spot and I didn't see her until she was right in front of me. I had to stop again. She violated my right-of-way and almost got herself hit.

If bicyclists are to have the same privileges as motor vehicle drivers, and I believe they should, they must obey ALL traffic laws.

[Bucky]

29. Moderators: please move this discussion to the Laura Bush forum.

[area51]

34. Ow.

Yes, she killed her bf, but I don't think he was on a bike.

[sofa king]

38. You and me are gonna play Tiddlywinks in Hell.

Edit: And I'll enjoy the company!

[elocs]

30. I think most are responding to the subject line, not specifically to the text in the post.

The consultant did say that bicyclists do not need to come to a complete stop at stop signs. When I read the subject line (the article title) that stop signs "shouldn't apply" to bicyclists that would mean to me that were I on a bike I could simply blow right through a stop sign without even slowing down. She does say that bikes should stop and remain stopped for all traffic signals.

As a bicyclist I can understand the logic behind this suggestion. If I come to a stop sign on my bike and in slowing down I can see a car a half block away I can easily make it through the intersection if I do not come to a stop. Myself, I come to enough of a stop at a stop sign while on a bike so it is clear that I have stopped my momentum for a moment if no vehicles are on the street I want to cross. I ride a long wheel base recumbent bike (heavy and over 6' long) and it is hard to make it across the intersection if I come to a stop where I put my feet down and another vehicle is less than a block away, depending on how fast the vehicle is moving. So when I come to a stop where I have to put my feet down I am really stopped until there is nothing coming unless it is a block away.

The yield thing is appealing, but even many motorists are clueless as to what a yield sign actually means (I've been behind many motorists who come to a complete stop at yield signs). The problem with applying a yield for stop sign rule for bicyclists is that too many people on bikes already do not obey traffic laws as well as they should, especially kids. We don't really need anyone on bikes considering whether or not traffic signs, lights, or rules fully apply to them or not. Bicyclists need to stop at stop signs. Maybe not your perfect complete stop, put your feet down on the street kind of stop, but certainly much better than if it were a yield sign.

[uncle ray]

33. the issue at hand is greater than running stop signs.

what i see happen where i live, where we see a lot of bike traffic on busy surface streets with parallel parking on the sides: a few cars will slowly pass a bicyclist on the left as they should, this process takes a while as motorists wait for a safe spot to pass the rider. the group of cars gets to a stop sign or light, and the bike rider rolls right on past the group of cars on the right and blows the stop sign, only to start the whole passing ordeal again, continuing the disturbance to traffic flow, and more importantly, endangering the bicyclists life every time he/she is passed by a motorist. i am fine with bike riders on the road, they have as much right to be there as i, but follow the damn rules of the road! i realize it's a bit of an effort to pedal up to speed from a dead stop, that's why my lazy ass drives a car.

[IDemo]

35. On the other hand,

Those motorists who have already passed a bicyclist once are aware of his/her presence, while "fresh" vehicles coming from behind won't be.

Yes, I live in Idaho, home of the stop-sign-equals-yield-sign law, and I'm fine with it. But my current job doesn't permit bike commuting like my last one did (hazardous routes only now).

[stevedeshazer]

36. Only in Portland.

[LeftishBrit]

37. I think cyclists are often badly treated by drivers...

but I also think that cyclists sometimes assume that stopping for pedestrians doesn't apply to them, and that because they are slower than cars, pedestrians will easily be able to weave their way around them. This may be true of young, agile people, but not of those who have visual problems, are slow or badly co-ordinated, or many elderly people who often have these difficulties. I knew an elderly man who died as a result of being knocked down by a bicycle,

Of course, there *are* some pedestrians who go through red lights, jaywalk, and expect everyone to automatically stop for them. Everyone should obey the rules of the road.

[hulka38]

39. As someone who spends a lot of time behind the wheel

and on a bicycle seat, I yield to bikes and encourage bicyclists to roll through intersections when I'm driving. All I have to is keep my foot on the brake an extra moment - not a whole lot of effort. People who expect bicyclists to come to a complete stop at every stop sign are unreasonable and sedentary.

[Matariki]

40. Yep, I'm in Washington and got a ticket for going through a stop sign

on a deserted intersection at night, without a car in sight in either direction. Deserted, except for the parked police car.

On the other hand, there are a contingent of bicyclists here in Seattle who are arrogant fools(two wheels good...)who come close to getting themselves killed because they seem to think traffic laws don't apply to them. So any law that cuts down on that might be a good thing.

[Dawson Leery]

42. Then get off the road!

[reorg]

43. I'm not going to stop at stop signs just for better reputation

We should be self-assertive and fight for the road instead of yielding to the chairborne divisions. I cherish the moments when I yell back, LOL.

Get your infrastructure ready for cyclists, then you have the right to complain.

http://www.hembrow.eu/cycling/photos.html

[Taitertots]

45. This is meaningless because most bicyclists don't stop anyway

And they are not likely to get in trouble for it already.

[backscatter712]

46. Idaho Stops: This is actually the law in some parts of the country.

Bicycles just have to slow down and look to make sure the intersection's clear - they don't have to make full stops under this law at stop signs.

It makes sense to me - on a bike, I'm perfectly capable of slowing to a safe speed, watching the intersection and the cars, stopping if I have to because of traffic, or going when it's obvious the intersection's clear.

It also makes sense from a physics point of view - cyclists being forced to start and stop a lot have to use a lot more energy than if they were allowed to slow, then speed up using Idaho Stop rules.