|
Re: ideal bicycle rules
|
Instr-@aol.com
|
Nov 06, 2009 11:23 PST
|
In a message dated 11/6/2009 11:14:30 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, InstrnSys
writes:
In a message dated 11/5/2009 12:58:22 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
rgsh-@speakeasy.net writes:
My brief suggestion to come up with "ideal" traffic laws was meant to
help /avoid/ generalizations. I figured the throwaway idea of drafting
a nuanced and collaborative* set of the exact sort of rules we'd like to
see enacted would help us better understand the rules we're operating
under, where we have the most conflict with the current rules, and maybe
even provide a template to someone else working over the same issues.
That sort of firm set of rules was what my suggestion was targeted at,
though I admittedly didn't bother trying to flesh it out completely in a
short list post.
Since (and only because) you asked, my opinion on allowing "Idaho
stops" is that it's probably a good idea overall -- I think bicyclists
are ill-served by the requirement to make complete stops at low-traffic
intersections, more capable of making a judgment as to the safety of
passing through than drivers, and less likely to cause significant
injury or damage if and when the bicyclist turns out to be wrong. More
importantly, though, allowing Idaho stops might help us rethink
intersection controls in general; we seem to default to using stop signs
when a signed yield might be more appropriate. There seems to be little
reason to require every vehicle approaching a calm residential
intersection to come to a full and complete stop.
--Ryan
* Hence a wiki, rather than an unwieldy e-mail thread of generalized
suggestions or a mere blog post saying "bikes are good and should be
promoted" with a few dozen comments of agreement.
I agree that, if a document is to be the end product, then a wiki would be
the way to go.
I also happen to favor the Idaho stop. This morning cycling to work I
watched as three middle-schoolers shot through the stop on L at 33rd. And why
not? They see it all the time at that location. They rarely see an adult
bicyclist actually stop. Slowing down seems not the norm there, either.
At that intersection, it's fairly easy to see when no cars are present or
nearing on either street. So, what we have now is a rule that seems
illogical. (Neither is it enforced, except the one time the fab forties folks were
up in arms about a possible bike boulevard.)
I'd prefer to see sensible rules that can be enforced and a strong
education program to follow. As to priority for any new list of rules, I'd like
sensible consensus/clarity on stop signs and stop lights, and a definitive
"which side of the street/road" that would be enforceable and enforced.
There doubtless is talent on this list to come up with some specifics to
press for but, again, a listsrv doesn't seem to be the way to reach that. I
hope those who do have the expertise will give the "host a wiki" offer
serious consideration.
Mynga
|
|
 |
|
