Urban Planning and Retroactive Improvement
07-22-16, 11:28 PM
#1
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Urban Planning and Retroactive Improvement
I received a ticket on my ride to work for not riding far enough to the right on a road without bikelanes. Bellingham WA is a fast growing city and there is a lot of development including some bike lanes and "green ways." All this promotion for riding bicycles is great, but bike lanes are for newby cyclist, the young, and the weak who can't go 25 mph, or are too timid to take the lane and go slower for it.
What I want is equal rights for cyclist anywhere they can go the speed limit and some bike only routes. Does anyone know how to advocate for such a thing? The city cousel here doesn't often meet open to the public. Has anyone tried to advocate cycling to there city planners before? Does anyone else feel like the bike lane is the most dangerous place to be? What is a good plan for integrated traffic within city limit 25 mph speed zones?
Misanthropicly,
some one else
What I want is equal rights for cyclist anywhere they can go the speed limit and some bike only routes. Does anyone know how to advocate for such a thing? The city cousel here doesn't often meet open to the public. Has anyone tried to advocate cycling to there city planners before? Does anyone else feel like the bike lane is the most dangerous place to be? What is a good plan for integrated traffic within city limit 25 mph speed zones?
Misanthropicly,
some one else
07-22-16, 11:54 PM
#2
Cycle Year Round
RCW 46.61.770
Riding on roadways and bicycle paths.
(1) Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a rate of speed less than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time and place shall ride as near to the right side of the right through lane as is safe except as may be appropriate while preparing to make or while making turning movements, or while overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction. A person operating a bicycle upon a roadway or highway other than a limited-access highway, which roadway or highway carries traffic in one direction only and has two or more marked traffic lanes, may ride as near to the left side of the left through lane as is safe. A person operating a bicycle upon a roadway may use the shoulder of the roadway or any specially designated bicycle lane if such exists.
(2) Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway shall not ride more than two abreast except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles.
[ 1982 c 55 § 7; 1974 ex.s. c 141 § 14; 1965 ex.s. c 155 § 83.]
Riding on roadways and bicycle paths.
(1) Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a rate of speed less than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time and place shall ride as near to the right side of the right through lane as is safe except as may be appropriate while preparing to make or while making turning movements, or while overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction. A person operating a bicycle upon a roadway or highway other than a limited-access highway, which roadway or highway carries traffic in one direction only and has two or more marked traffic lanes, may ride as near to the left side of the left through lane as is safe. A person operating a bicycle upon a roadway may use the shoulder of the roadway or any specially designated bicycle lane if such exists.
(2) Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway shall not ride more than two abreast except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles.
[ 1982 c 55 § 7; 1974 ex.s. c 141 § 14; 1965 ex.s. c 155 § 83.]
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
07-23-16, 07:28 AM
#4
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Posts: 9,924
Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Tour II
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3352 Post(s)
Liked 1,056 Times
in
635 Posts
FRAP----------far right as possible is always up for interpretation. Take pictures when you appear in court and show the judge the trash and glass clear on the side of the road.
07-23-16, 07:42 AM
#5
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Metro Detroit/AA
Posts: 8,207
Bikes: 2016 Novara Mazama
Mentioned: 63 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3640 Post(s)
Liked 81 Times
in
51 Posts
I'll second what others said. Follow the law, or explain to a judge why your definition of FRAP was different than the officer's.
07-23-16, 02:42 PM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Posts: 7,048
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 509 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times
in
8 Posts
If you were travelling at the normal speed of traffic, then that is an explicit exception to Washington's FRAP law, so you already have what you asked for.
Washington's FRAP law is perverse in not having an explicit exception for substandard width lanes. They literally force you to defend in traffic court the fact that hugging the white line of a twelve foot lane is unsafe (safety being about the only exception to FRAP in Washington).
RCW 46.61.770: Riding on roadways and bicycle paths.
Washington's FRAP law is perverse in not having an explicit exception for substandard width lanes. They literally force you to defend in traffic court the fact that hugging the white line of a twelve foot lane is unsafe (safety being about the only exception to FRAP in Washington).
RCW 46.61.770
Riding on roadways and bicycle paths.
(1) Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a rate of speed less than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time and place shall ride as near to the right side of the right through lane as is safe except as may be appropriate while preparing to make or while making turning movements, or while overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction. A person operating a bicycle upon a roadway or highway other than a limited-access highway, which roadway or highway carries traffic in one direction only and has two or more marked traffic lanes, may ride as near to the left side of the left through lane as is safe. A person operating a bicycle upon a roadway may use the shoulder of the roadway or any specially designated bicycle lane if such exists.
(2) Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway shall not ride more than two abreast except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles.
Riding on roadways and bicycle paths.
(1) Every person operating a bicycle upon a roadway at a rate of speed less than the normal flow of traffic at the particular time and place shall ride as near to the right side of the right through lane as is safe except as may be appropriate while preparing to make or while making turning movements, or while overtaking and passing another bicycle or vehicle proceeding in the same direction. A person operating a bicycle upon a roadway or highway other than a limited-access highway, which roadway or highway carries traffic in one direction only and has two or more marked traffic lanes, may ride as near to the left side of the left through lane as is safe. A person operating a bicycle upon a roadway may use the shoulder of the roadway or any specially designated bicycle lane if such exists.
(2) Persons riding bicycles upon a roadway shall not ride more than two abreast except on paths or parts of roadways set aside for the exclusive use of bicycles.
07-23-16, 05:14 PM
#7
Cycle Year Round
07-23-16, 05:50 PM
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Bay Area, Calif.
Posts: 7,239
Mentioned: 13 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 659 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 7 Times
in
6 Posts
If you were travelling at the normal speed of traffic, then that is an explicit exception to Washington's FRAP law, so you already have what you asked for.
Washington's FRAP law is perverse in not having an explicit exception for substandard width lanes. They literally force you to defend in traffic court the fact that hugging the white line of a twelve foot lane is unsafe (safety being about the only exception to FRAP in Washington).
RCW 46.61.770: Riding on roadways and bicycle paths.
Washington's FRAP law is perverse in not having an explicit exception for substandard width lanes. They literally force you to defend in traffic court the fact that hugging the white line of a twelve foot lane is unsafe (safety being about the only exception to FRAP in Washington).
RCW 46.61.770: Riding on roadways and bicycle paths.
07-24-16, 03:00 PM
#10
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Hey, thanks. The distiction between practicable and possible was my defense; that and the lane was too narrow to share (i.e. riding to the right most edge gives permission to cars to drive at an unsafe distance).
I lost the case on the definition of practicable and possible being interpreted as synonymous -- which was against the brochures I had brought published by WA Bikes (a cycling advocacy group subsudized by the state) and Whatcom county's Smart Trips program. The judge reduced my fine saying I'd been mislead...
This is why I'm so unhappy: I'm being told I can get to work safely on my bike and am encouraged to do so and then being penalized for the same.
I lost the case on the definition of practicable and possible being interpreted as synonymous -- which was against the brochures I had brought published by WA Bikes (a cycling advocacy group subsudized by the state) and Whatcom county's Smart Trips program. The judge reduced my fine saying I'd been mislead...
This is why I'm so unhappy: I'm being told I can get to work safely on my bike and am encouraged to do so and then being penalized for the same.
Last edited by boyleesquire; 07-24-16 at 03:22 PM.
07-24-16, 03:10 PM
#11
Banned
Planning commissions, generally, are Nominated Volunteers , Next time there is an Opening Put in an Application.
and in the mean time Submit your issue statement to Then and ask it be put on the agenda for discussion and promote the issue so your voice is amongst Several with a similar outlook.
and in the mean time Submit your issue statement to Then and ask it be put on the agenda for discussion and promote the issue so your voice is amongst Several with a similar outlook.
07-24-16, 03:16 PM
#12
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Notice that in RCW 46.61.770 part 2 that two cyclists may ride abreast. This would effectively take up an entire lane -- any lane even were they to both ride as far to the right as could be done without concern for safety. So then why can't one cyclist take up an entire lane? how about if they're not impeading traffic? If traffic is light in a 35mph zone and there are two lanes of travel in the same direction does a vehicle really impede traffic if it's travelling at 25mph?
What I really want to know is if there is a better way to integrate traffic. I'm fast: on flat, smooth, dry pavement I can reach 36mph and thats it -- just reach it. I've pushed hard to go fast because I'm competing with cars for a space in the road; and that's ridiculous. So how can everyone ride safely?
What I really want to know is if there is a better way to integrate traffic. I'm fast: on flat, smooth, dry pavement I can reach 36mph and thats it -- just reach it. I've pushed hard to go fast because I'm competing with cars for a space in the road; and that's ridiculous. So how can everyone ride safely?
07-24-16, 03:25 PM
#13
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Planning commissions, generally, are Nominated Volunteers , Next time there is an Opening Put in an Application.
and in the mean time Submit your issue statement to Then and ask it be put on the agenda for discussion and promote the issue so your voice is amongst Several with a similar outlook.
and in the mean time Submit your issue statement to Then and ask it be put on the agenda for discussion and promote the issue so your voice is amongst Several with a similar outlook.
07-24-16, 03:39 PM
#14
Cycle Year Round
Sad you have cops and a judge more interested in funding their salary than actually learning about safe cycling and applying the law properly.
__________________
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
Land of the Free, Because of the Brave.
07-24-16, 08:33 PM
#15
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Eugene, Oregon
Posts: 7,048
Mentioned: 10 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 509 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 9 Times
in
8 Posts
I doubt if cash flow was an issue. I suspect an empathy deficit is more likely in play here. The cop and judge never ride bikes and find cyclists to be an unnecessary nuisance, so they cannot understand things from the perspective of the saddle, only the windshield.
07-31-16, 09:48 PM
#16
Junior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2016
Posts: 12
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
I agree with the empathy deficite: you might see other cyclist lit-up like christmas trees, but it isn't about visibility it's about disregaurd -- the same mistake took place in the court room. I ride where people look because being seen is not being right hooked, or left crossed, t-boned, or rearended. Itegrated traffic won't be safe unless it's equal.
