The past couple of weeks have been interesting. Action packed???
Pedaling home on a Thursday, I come across a jumble of 2 pedestrians and a cyclist by Northlake. Two women, one a pedestrian and another with her bike, peel themselves off the pile to reveal a third woman flat on her back at the bottom. Is she out cold? I shout "Howya doin?". She says "OK" and swears she wasn't knocked out -- and that her boyfriend will keep an eye on her just in case. She then apologizes profusely to the other members of the pigpile. I can only guess she walked or turned in front of them?
Pedaling in a few mornings later I come to one of the last spots where the BGT crosses a major avenue in the University District (University Avenue, in fact -- "The Ave"). I will say that perhaps my prejudices saved my life. I look east and see one car take a right across the crosswalk with room to spare, but then I see an 80s-sh Chevy conversion van (y'know, big smoked windows and stripes) sitting stationary at the intersection in the right-hand turn lane. I make a mental note: watch out.
Sure enough, no sooner than I get half way across the intersection/crosswalk, the van steps on the gas and turns in front of me. I am on a bit of a wet downhill, but I hit the brakes and stop maybe 6 inches from his bumper. (Yes, he belatedly saw me and hit the brakes). So I expend my entire month's allotment of low grade expletives. The passenger rolls down the window and stares at me dumbly. I go over my expletive quota. The driver goes "Well I had a green light!" Yes, that is true, he did. Never mind that I had a "walk" light. He really seemed like it was all good. He had a green light! Grrrr. They have outsourced driver training to Kansas.
Well, no harm. But I made a mental note that if anything like this happens in future and I am so much as *touched* by a bumper, I am laying myself and bike down, puilling out the cell phone, and holding down "9" until the cops arrive.
So last Friday, before the end of Daylight Saving Time, I am biking to work in the almost-light -- got my Vistalites blinking. And I see a pair of pedestrians on the right walking abreast walking in the same direction as me, so I look over my shoulder and see a headlight quite some ways back, and then I slowly move left to give them -- they have their back to me -- a very wide berth. (I am mindful of the recent pileup). I am just about about abreast of the abreast pedestrians with maybe 2 feet of space on my left when I hear "ON YOUR LEFT!" from behind and see a charging bike in my left peripheral vision. I go "Whoa! Yaaaaaaaah, buddy!" and squeeze maybe a foot to the right -- much closer to the pedestrians -- as this much fitter/faster commuter (MFC) goes by and answers my "Whoa!" with "Sheesh, I called out before!!"
I have a boat and I am used to this notion that the overtaking vessel does *not* have the right of way. What badness came in to my mind was that it would not be unheard of if -- perhaps spooked by the "ON YOUR LEFT!" -- those two pedestrians reacted in paradoxical fashion and *turned* to their left. Into my now-contrained path. As the MFC blows by leaving me to call the ambulance. But somehow it seemed to the MFC that -- because he had called out "on your left" some time ago (and I am far from deaf) -- that he was absolved from navigational responsibility and was entitled to blow by.
Perhaps I am too fond of the nautical Rules of the Road. Am I?
The BikeForums Team
-adv-
This is an archived thread, you can find the full version of this thread, with images, links and more content here.
[snip]Sure enough, no sooner than I get half way across the intersection/crosswalk, the van steps on the gas and turns in front of me. I am on a bit of a wet downhill, but I hit the brakes and stop maybe 6 inches from his bumper. (Yes, he belatedly saw me and hit the brakes). So I expend my entire month's allotment of low grade expletives. The passenger rolls down the window and stares at me dumbly. I go over my expletive quota. The driver goes "Well I had a green light!" Yes, that is true, he did. Never mind that I had a "walk" light. He really seemed like it was all good. He had a green light! Grrrr. They have outsourced driver training to Kansas.[snip]
I'm not able to get a mental image of who was where, but what does the "Walk" light have to do with anything? You were on a bike, right?
Bekologist
the burke gilman trail is a major MUP and a convienent commuter trail for lots of bikers into Seattle from the north. It crosses a lot of roadways, where the path crosses University a walk/don't walk light governs bike traffic about 15? feet from the actual street intersection.
I always feel like I'm riding a freak circus on the BG; ultracompetitive types, lots of walkers, some wierd anti bike bias in Lake Forest Park that results in a ticket gauntlet every summer, and a lot of roots. Too bad it's one of the few good ways to access that part of the city and suburbs north along the lake.
tippy
I'm not able to get a mental image of who was where, but what does the "Walk" light have to do with anything? You were on a bike, right?It took me a moment to visualize this too but then remembered the title to the thread " ... Trail". Based on another post, I gather this is a MUP. Generally - can't speak for this specific trail - MUP traffic is governed by Pedestrian Traffic rules. The "Walk/Don't Walk" signal is a pedestrian traffic control device, which made it revelant to the MUP user. Being on a bike does not automatically make you immune from pedestrian traffic rules.
d.tipton
sggoodri
Perhaps I am too fond of the nautical Rules of the Road. Am I?
I too am a boater. I agree that there are advantages to some of the boating rules. In particular:
- Boating rules better clarify responsibilities in places without lane lines separating traffic movements. There are many places where narrow vehicles like bikes operate in wide areas of unstriped pavement, or where additional stripes aren't advantageous, in which case rules that apply to vehicle trajectories rather than lanes are useful.
- Boating rules encourage larger passing distances and assign greater priority to the right of way of the vehicle being passed. Some motor vehicle statutes are written in ways that appear to prohibit slower vehicle operators from inconveniencing faster drivers, which is an onerous burden if inadequate passing facilities exist. Boating operators don't face this kind of prejudice, even in narrow channels.
- Boating rules encourage larger passing distances and assign greater priority to the right of way of the vehicle being passed. Some motor vehicle statutes are written in ways that appear to prohibit slower vehicle operators from inconveniencing faster drivers, which is an onerous burden if inadequate passing facilities exist. Boating operators don't face this kind of prejudice, even in narrow channels.
Interesting point. I believe you posted in my "impeding traffic" thread. Part of the reading I did while participating in that thread really disturbed me. According to the state's laws that I read, you are technically impeding traffic if you are NOT driving at the maximum post speed limit. I personally find this ridiculous. If the speed limit is a really a "limit", why should priority be given to those who drive "at the limit?" I can only assume limits are set based on safety reasons so wouldn't a little less than the limit be considered safer instead of an inconvenience to the faster traffic behind you?
Sorry for hijacking the thread. I just needed to get that off my chest and this seemed like a good time for it.
sggoodri
Interesting point. I believe you posted in my "impeding traffic" thread. Part of the reading I did while participating in that thread really disturbed me. According to the state's laws that I read, you are technically impeding traffic if you are NOT driving at the maximum post speed limit. I personally find this ridiculous. If the speed limit is a really a "limit", why should priority be given to those who drive "at the limit?" I can only assume limits are set based on safety reasons so wouldn't a little less than the limit be considered safer instead of an inconvenience to the faster traffic behind you?
Different states have different wording of three basic laws affecting slower road vehicle travel.
The stay-right law requires slower operators to use the rightmost lane headed to their destination except when passing. In some states "slower" means anybody going slower than the maximum posted speed limit. In other states "slower" means slower than most of the other traffic, which is less restrictive if the other traffic is going slowly, but more restrictive if most of the other traffic is speeding. The more onerous versions of this law require operators of narrow vehicles to hug the edge of the road so that other drivers can squeeze past them using the same lane, and the worst ones make no exceptions for narrow lanes or other conditions that make lane-sharing a problem.
The "impeding traffic" law prohibits operating so slowly as to impede the normal movement of traffic, but only applies if it is safe and possible for the vehicle to be operated at a faster speed at that time and place. It doesn't apply if the vehicle is a farm tractor, or a bicycle, or a truck pulling a heavy load uphill, or if the driver is preparing for a turn or other situation that requires slow speed. I think this law is silly, since nearly nobody who can safely drive faster drives slower than they ought to. The slowest automobile drivers I've seen are elderly, and I'd rather they drive slowly than push the limits of their abilities. Intoxicated drivers also drive slowly, but I don't think a prohibition against slow travel is really needed as a pretextual excuse to pull them over to see if they are drunk.
The "pull off the road" law requires slow drivers exempted from above to pull off a two-lane road if more than a threshold number of cars backs up behing them. It only applies on two-lane roads, since additional same-direction lanes allow passing, and does not require pulling over except where it is safe to do so. My state does not have this law.
My state does have another provision that requires operators to "give way to the right" if a passing driver gives an audible signal. Some people, like myself, interpret this as applying only after the driver has started to pass, and merely creating a burden to not move left or speed up, and to let them back in line immediately if it is a two-lane road. Others believe that if a driver behind you honks, you have to get out of their way, regardless of the circumstances. I strongly disagree with the latter.
I'm not sure why there is no equivalent to these for boating. Possibly there are too few narrow channels for it to be a major concern. I regularly find myself queued in the boat to pass under a bridge, but once out of the no-wake zone it is usually wide enough to pass without difficulty. Boaters might also be more accustomed to operating around other boats that are much slower by design, and may have learned greater patience through conditioning, and are thus willing to wait until there is an abundance of space available rather than expecting the slower boat to get out of the way. Lastly, the slowest boats are often the biggest and least maneuverable, which would prevent them from practically being able to get out of the way.
-Steve Goodridge
oscaregg
I ride the BG trail when in Seattle. Sure, it crosses arterials and also features slow riders with no sense of direction, runners in autistic mode with their Ipods, and racing cyclists with no sense of reasonable speed. Still, y'all should realize how good you have it to have the trail at all--when connected to the Elliott Bay and Ballard area bike lanes it is a reasonably complete diagonal crossing of a big part of a major city.
No other northwestern (or maybe American?) city has as usable a network of trail; not Eugene, not Portland, and certainly no town between Seattle and the Columbia River.
Bless it all, even that freakin' blind bridge in the railroad yards!
Roody
You unfortunately came upon what I see as the three major safety problems on MUPs. The only good thing is that your OP is a great illustration and reminder for the rest of us. I'm only restating the obvious when I say that MUPs are risky because:
Pedestrians are slow moving and erratic (not that there's anything wrong with that!).
Some cyclists train on trails and move much too fast for the conditions (and there is something wrong with that).
Some MUPs cross streets and roads.
I like MUPs for a slow, scenic ride in nice weather. Sometimes I hammer on them when "bad" weather keeps away the casual users. I'm pretty lucky. Here in Lansing we have an MUP that goes 13 miles without once encountering motor traffic. Also, it goes diagonally across the entire city and comes close to a lot of popular destinations (including my house :)). This makes it handy for commuting and errands, so I use our RiverTrail quite often.
Ink
I ride the BG trail when in Seattle. Sure, it crosses arterials and also features slow riders with no sense of direction, runners in autistic mode with their Ipods, and racing cyclists with no sense of reasonable speed. Still, y'all should realize how good you have it to have the trail at all--when connected to the Elliott Bay and Ballard area bike lanes it is a reasonably complete diagonal crossing of a big part of a major city.
OP here. I will say I definitely *do* realize how good I have it. My post wasn't intended to complain about the BGT, just to make some observations about that hazards/habits.
No other northwestern (or maybe American?) city has as usable a network of trail; not Eugene, not Portland, and certainly no town between Seattle and the Columbia River.
Bless it all, even that freakin' blind bridge in the railroad yards!
:)
In the late 80s and early 90s I commuted to downtown ove rthe Myrtle Edwards and over that fenced-in bridge. I thought it was pretty cool. Hey, my own bridge through a rail yard. It was an interesting commute....
....save for always having a southerly on the way in to work and a northerly on the way home :(
Ink
The only good thing is that your OP is a great illustration and reminder for the rest of us.
Well good, then. I am only figuring out what MUP and other acronyms mean, but some of the risks of multi-user dom are pretty obvious.
Years ago, on a wavy part of the Myrtle Edwards trail I started to overtake a woman running in the pre-dawn light. I rang my bell...no head movement. I slowed down.... I said "On your left" and then she just turned around 160 degrees to her left and pretty much jumped on my handlebars. We went down in a tumble on the grass. No injuries.
If you look on the bridge of any large vessel, you'll see a painted sign or placard over the wheel/helm that shows:
<<--LEFT------0------RIGHT-->>
simply because the brain of the helms...person? doesn't always connect immediately when the officer of the deck yells "left rudder" or "right rudder"
So no reason not to expect the same sort of paradoxical reflex from runners, walkers and bikers.
I jumped in my car this eve to go north and vote (at my last polling place) for the Washingtom State smoking ban. I *gingerly* pulled out into backed-up traffic heading north over the Ballard (draw) Bridge. I was slowly moving into the passing lane on the bridge when a gent on a touring bike pumped by doing maybe 25 MPH in that passing lane. No lights, no reflective anything, in the dark-dark-dark, heading on to a metal bridge grate in heavy traffic -- and I easily could have swept him into oncoming traffic as I pulled out. But he was wearing a helmet!
I don't think this is necessarily what it means to be a VC, but I think I am happy being a wussy MUP!