Advocacy & Safety - as far left as needed to be safe, as far right as practicable

these two factors help a cyclist determine their lateral position. contradictory, no. not mutually exclusive.

in a wide lane, that means as far left as needed to be safe, and as far right as is practical.

on a road with a shoulder, that means as far left as is needed to be safe, and also as far right as practical.

on a road with integrated velo lanes, that includes as far left as needed for safety, as far right as is practical.

positioning maxim #1 for maximum safety.
"As far left as needed for safety, as far right as practicable."

actually, thats #2.

Maxim #1 is: Safety First.


any commentary?

What does it mean that left is safer and right is more practicable? Or do we have to wait until you dream up Maxim # 3 to learn the answer to this?

Did you mean to post this in the state the obvious (http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=235258) thread in Foo? I was under the impression that most cyclists already understood the concept.

Did you mean to post this in the state the obvious (http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=235258) thread in Foo? I was under the impression that most cyclists already understood the concept.

In my experience, few cyclists understand the concept. Most think they're just supposed to stay out of the way of cars.

In my experience, few cyclists understand the concept. Most think they're just supposed to stay out of the way of cars.

I guess that's probably true.

hey, i thought safe riding position was all over A&S!!!

these two factors help a cyclist determine their lateral position. contradictory, no. not mutually exclusive.

in a wide lane, that means as far left as needed to be safe, and as far right as is practical.

on a road with a shoulder, that means as far left as is needed to be safe, and also as far right as practical.

on a road with integrated velo lanes, that includes as far left as needed for safety, as far right as is practical.

positioning maxim #1 for maximum safety.
"As far left as needed for safety, as far right as practicable."

actually, thats #2.

Maxim #1 is: Safety First.


any commentary?

practicable in title
practical in post
why the change?
definitions are similar but not identical

I reviewed the Florida traffic laws when I lived in Florida and it says "... as far right as practicable [safe] except when ...". So the law already implies that "as far right as practicable" is determined by being able to accomplish it safely.

So ... no matter where you are in the lane ... it can be considered "... as far right as practicable [safe] ..."

http://www.p0stwh0res.com/images/captainobvious.jpg

Sorry Bek, couldn't resist :)

I'm just trying to refine all this A&S talk of lateral lane dancing and the drunken sailor lane swerve techniques into a modified, basic technique, something that can actually be explained in simple english.

... Most think they're just supposed to stay out of the way of cars.

That's my motto !

jw

As far left as needed for safety, as far right as practicable

+ hold a steady line and courtesy to all.

practicable is just fancy engineering talk. It means essentially the same thing as practical.

As far left as needed for safety, as far right as practicable

+ hold a steady line and courtesy to all.
I don't know how I can hold a steady line when I'm always moving to the left to be safe and moving to the right to be practicable. Sounds a lot like DLLP to me, and you guys just convinced me in the other threads that DLLP is a crazy scheme cooked up by Helmet Head. How come it's a good idea when you and Bek say it, but a bad idea when HH says it? What gives? Is this another one of those dancing angels arguments?

dllp, a.k.a. the drunken sailor swerve, or DSLS, involves a lot of undue, unecessary swerving in front of overtaking cars independant of a bicyclists safe positioning on the roadway.

I dig it.

Or, for those who didn't get what I said...+1

dllp, a.k.a. the drunken sailor swerve, or DSLS, involves a lot of undue, unecessary swerving in front of overtaking cars independant of a bicyclists safe positioning on the roadway.
Whereas your method calls for "due and necessary" swerving? I mean, if you are "moving" to the left to be safe, then at some point "moving" to the right to be practicable--might that look like "swerving" to an outside observer? Or is it "moving" when some people do it, and "swerving" when other people do it?

And I forgot--how many angels did we decide can dance on the pin?

these two factors help a cyclist determine their lateral position. contradictory, no. not mutually exclusive.

in a wide lane, that means as far left as needed to be safe, and as far right as is practical.

on a road with a shoulder, that means as far left as is needed to be safe, and also as far right as practical.

on a road with integrated velo lanes, that includes as far left as needed for safety, as far right as is practical.

positioning maxim #1 for maximum safety.
"As far left as needed for safety, as far right as practicable."

actually, thats #2.

Maxim #1 is: Safety First.


any commentary?


I am confused.

Are you from England?

I'm just trying to refine all this A&S talk of lateral lane dancing and the drunken sailor lane swerve techniques into a modified, basic technique, something that can actually be explained in simple english.
Many of your post have been anything but simple english.

HH's DLLP requires that you ride way far to the left, even when there is nothing obstructing or otherwise making a more rightward path unsafe, all for the sole purpose of making yourself "conspicuous" and "relevant." DLLP requires that you believe you are not safe unless someone behind you is making a visible, physical effort to avoid you.

That doesn't have much to do with riding steady and straight, as far to the right as practicable.

In some cases, riding further to the left makes you safer in regard to traffic entering your lane from left and right, and safer in regard to oncoming traffic. In some cases, riding further to the right makes you safer in regard to traffic coming from your rear.

My maxim would be "Ride farther to the left when you're most concerned about oncoming and turning traffic; ride farther to the right when you're most concerned about overtaking traffic."

Does this make sense?

there are times the rider will have to do NEITHER of those things, Roody, so it's not entirely accurate.

although it is what a rider should do if necessary.

practicable is just fancy engineering talk. It means essentially the same thing as practical.

Practicable is fancy lawyering talk. It means feasible, but also legal and safe.

I honestly believe that the whole "practicable" language was inserted to make it seem like the law says the opposite of what it really does, to trick lawmakers into voting for something while thinking they were voting against it.

there are times the rider will have to do NEITHER of those things, Roody, so it's not entirely accurate.

although it is what a rider should do if necessary.
I know. That's why I said "in some cases." Twice. It's almost impossible to write "maxims" about dynamic processes like traffic movement on real streets. But you can come up with some useful "rules of thumb" or heuristics that cover many situations.

Like==being further left often puts you in a better position to deal with traffic coming from ahead or to the side. But if traffic is overtaking you from the rear, obviously it is often better to be further to the right to deal with that traffic. Thus, some lateral movement within the lane is sometimes required when dealing with ever-changing traffic dynamics. Thus, "dynamic lateral lane positioning". Or you can call it weaving or swerving if you like. I think it's a good way to ride, much of the time. Do you agree?

roody, your 'sometimes' rules complicate and needlessly add something already covered in maxim #2.

I know you want to defend the pet theory of 'swervy dog' riding, but making adjustments by the rider is already covered by 'as far left as is safe, as far right as is practical.'

DLLP, the DSLS "PEEK-A-BOO" techniques bandied about in A&S try to predicate a rider swerving in front of every vehicle on the roadway, and that is not part of my maxim.

stop tying to include DLLPs' "drunken sailor lane swerves" into my system.

DLLP, the DSLS "PEEK-A-BOO" techniques bandied about in A&S try to predicate a rider swerving in front of every vehicle on the roadway, and that is not part of my maxim.

If you want to be taken seriously, at least try to explain a technique in a way that approximates the original intent.

"as far left as needed for safety, as far right as practical." how about that?

I agree and disagree with roody. I am always going to be concerned with both overtakers and oncomers, but do not always have to adjust my position because of them. sometimes a bicyclist will. i don't have to weave back and forth to get cars to notice me in this system. the dsls/dllp system predicates a lot of complications that are unecessary when distilling my maxim,

"as far left as needed for safety, as far right as practical."

I know. That's why I said "in some cases." Twice. It's almost impossible to write "maxims" about dynamic processes like traffic movement on real streets. But you can come up with some useful "rules of thumb" or heuristics that cover many situations.

Like==being further left often puts you in a better position to deal with traffic coming from ahead or to the side. But if traffic is overtaking you from the rear, obviously it is often better to be further to the right to deal with that traffic. Thus, some lateral movement within the lane is sometimes required when dealing with ever-changing traffic dynamics. Thus, "dynamic lateral lane positioning". Or you can call it weaving or swerving if you like. I think it's a good way to ride, much of the time. Do you agree?

Roody, that's what DLLP used to mean. Now it means to ride in the center of the street on ruralish highways with no same-direction traffic and no intersections and only pull over after you see in your rear view mirror that from some distance someone is approaching. Then wait for an appearance of an avoidance maneuver or some other signal that they have seen you and proven you are relvant to them and that they won't forget you, and pull over to let them pass. Once they are gone, return to the center. Lather, rinse, repeat.

as far left as needed to be safe, as far right as practicable

Bipartisan Bicycling

Roody, that's what DLLP used to mean....

Well, thanks for the catch-up course in "The New Wave" in bicycle positioning. I've been doing other things with my time lately, so I've fallen behind on the A&S theological disputes. ;)

So I still don't know where the major players stand on the issues. Hell, I don't even know where I stand in the argument--maybe somebody will fill me in. I like to ride most of the time in the right tire track of the average WOL, but usually move left when I see a car waiting to pull out of a side street or driveway. At night, I tend to pull further to the left than I do in daylight, and my "default position" (see, I haven't forgotten everything) will also be further to the left. I'll often move a skosh to the right to give overtaking cars a little more room to pass. (Ain't I nice?)

I think mine is a pretty conservative riding style, but I don't know which A&S debate team I should join. Maybe somebody would be so kind as to steer me to the proper side of the aisle.....

My rule of thumb (call it a maxium if you must) is to ride near center of lane and move over for faster same direction traffic if and only if: It is neccessary, there is room for safe passing, there are no debris, there is no possible right turn and I will be able to get back into my centerish position after the vehicle passes before there is another unsafe condition. This to me fits the paraphrase "left as needed to be safe, right when practicable&safe"

Its seems to me most of the debate about DLP is about where to ride when there is no other traffic, which when one thinks about it is kind of silly.

Al

My rule of thumb (call it a maxium if you must) is to ride near center of lane and move over for faster same direction traffic if and only if: It is neccessary, there is room for safe passing, there are no debris, there is no possible right turn and I will be able to get back into my centerish position after the vehicle passes before there is another unsafe condition. This to me fits the paraphrase "left as needed to be safe, right when practicable&safe"

Its seems to me most of the debate about DLP is about where to ride when there is no other traffic, which when one thinks about it is kind of silly.

Al
Makes absolute sense to me. Can I be on your debate team?

aside from you guys ignoring perfectly acceptable bike lanes and 12 foot shoulders, that would fit my maxim as well. but it doesn't.

judging your position relative to the center of the lane is NOT part of my system. although there is relevancy, Al's 'move aside only when there is overtaking traffic' is more DSLS/DLLP than prudence dictates.

aside from you guys ignoring perfectly acceptable bike lanes and 12 foot shoulders,
Ahhh, but I/we are not ignoring perfectly good BLs/shoulders. I am very aware of them and use them to move into when they are safe and when there is faster same direction traffic that would not be able to pass me if I didn't.

Al

that's fine al. sounds like you are riding further to the left than is practical, so your sytem does not fit into my system,

as far left as is needed for safety, as far right as practical."

yours is more of the drunken sailor lane swerve, the d.l.l.p. system than lends itself to moving back and forth all the time just because of overtaking traffic.

the dynamic indecision system we'll call it, if you don't like the 'drunken sailor' connotation. we'll call yours the D.I.P. system. and i'll call mine the right system of vehicle positioning or the R.S.V.P. maxim system.

your sytem does not fit into my system,

Bek-
Have you given any time in actually practicing systems other than yours, to see how they works and feel? I mean given serious consideration, with adequate time and focus to learn?

This is something I have done, experimented with both dynamic and static positioning and have learned a lot. Even if you find it it not a system for you, I am sure you will come away with some learnings that will make you a safer rider.

Before you try and argue that you can not give this serious practical study because it is dangerous to ride center position in a WOL striped or not, keep in mind that this no different than riding in a NOL where center bias is a near required position.

Al

why do you think my system is not dynamic?

Al, riding in the center of a WOL and not allowing cars to pass until you move over is NOT the same as having to ride center bias in a narrow lane.

al, you are free to ride in the middle of the road and yield to every overtaking car if you want, that's part of your drunken sailor D.I.P. system, and NOT part of my system,

"as far left as needed for safety, as far right as practical."

Al, riding in the center of a WOL and not allowing cars to pass until you move over is NOT the same as having to ride center bias in a narrow lane.
]
Of course they are not the same, but there are similarities.
For example when riding in a NOL with no immediate same direction traffic, I ride center. This lets approaching vehicles know there is no option to pass, but unlike in a WOL I don't move right 10-20sec early to signal there is an option. However if the vehicle has not passed me and is considerately on my tail, I may move right into right tire track to make it easier for them to pass partly, but not fully, using the lane I am in. The lateral position is a careful balance between being courteous vs. encouraging an unsafe lane sharing pass.
Al

these two factors help a cyclist determine their lateral position. contradictory, no. not mutually exclusive.

in a wide lane, that means as far left as needed to be safe, and as far right as is practical.

on a road with a shoulder, that means as far left as is needed to be safe, and also as far right as practical.

on a road with integrated velo lanes, that includes as far left as needed for safety, as far right as is practical.

positioning maxim #1 for maximum safety.
"As far left as needed for safety, as far right as practicable."

actually, thats #2.

Maxim #1 is: Safety First.


any commentary?
Good topic.

Overall, I agree... "As far left as needed for safety, as far right as practicable." , except I would say, to be consistent with the law in CA and in most states... "As far left as needed for safety; when faster same-direction traffic is present: as far right as practicable".




Its seems to me most of the debate about DLP is about where to ride when there is no other traffic, which when one thinks about it is kind of silly.

Al
Half credit.

That IS what most of the debate is about, but it's not silly.

We all agree that in some situations we should keep right (particularly in the presence of faster same-direction traffic). We all agree there are situations where we should be centered (slow traffic, narrow lanes).

But the debate is about where we should be when the situation is not obvious, and whether it matters.

The choices in those situations seem to be:


Keep right to reduce crash risk from overtaking traffic. Why risk being hit from behind? If you have no reason to be further left, but you ride further left anyway, and then overlook a driver approaching from behind who overlooks your presence, the results can be dire... therefore, keep right unless you have a good reason to move left.
Keep right to be polite to overtaking traffic. If you have no reason to be further left, but you ride further left any way, and then overlook a driver approaching from behind, the result is that you're unnecessarily impeding traffic. That's rude. Therefore, keep right unless you have a good reason to move left.
Keep left to improve sight lines, visibility, predictability and conspicuity. Most car-bike collisions involve crossing movements. If you keep right, and don't notice approaching cross-traffic that overlooks you because you're not riding where they are looking, you increase your risk. Riding further left improves the odds that you'll see them earlier, that they'll see you earlier, that they're much less likely to overlook you, and that they're more likely to realize you are moving straight and not turning. If you wait until you notice them and only then think to move left, often it's too late for that further left position to be effective. Bonus: by riding further left, when traffic does not approach from behind, they too are more likely to notice and choose to pay attention to you and where they are going rather than attend to a distraction. In the rare instance that you overlook someone behind you, you'll hear them soon enough (engine, tires, honk). Better to adopt a style and habit that may make you appear rude once in a while than to adopt a style and habits that increase your risk to cross traffic crashes. Therefore, keep left/centered where you have good sight lines and are visible, predictable and conspicuous, unless you have a good reason to move right.


Am I missing anything?


Roody, that's what DLLP used to mean. Now it means to ride in the center of the street on ruralish highways with no same-direction traffic and no intersections and only pull over after you see in your rear view mirror that from some distance someone is approaching. Then wait for an appearance of an avoidance maneuver or some other signal that they have seen you and proven you are relvant to them and that they won't forget you, and pull over to let them pass. Once they are gone, return to the center. Lather, rinse, repeat.
Diane, that's just a specific "bonus" part of DLLP - DLLP in general has always meant, and still does mean, dynamic use of lateral lane position for strategic purposes while bicycling in all kind of traffic situations.

thats a lot of complications, helemt head, and introduces a flaw when there is ample space to ride not centered, like on a highway speed road with 12 foot shoulders. your D.I.P. method of swervy dog riding is not necessary and and patently unsafe when you insist on riding further to the left than is necessary and weave back and forth in front of every car.

how does all this swerving give a rider more predictability? i t is less predicatable, and less safe, in a lot of situations, when the rightish position is safe to ride in.

when its safe to ride to the right, you can ride to the right. a rider doesn't have to weave a lane position in the travel lane when there is no reason to deviate from a consistent and dynamic line elsewhere.

your system is much less safe than shooting a consistent, safe line using the maxim "as far left as is needed for safety, as far right as practical."

helemt head, your pet DIP/DSLS system is NOT simple lane positioning, it is drunken sailor riding, the dynamic indecision positioning system.

"as far left as needed for safety, as far right as practical." how about that?
But aren't "as far left as needed for safety" and "as far right as practical" really saying the same thing, more or less? So how about just "as far left as needed for safety"?

thats a lot of complications, helemt head, and introduces a flaw when there is ample space to ride not centered, like on a highway speed road with 12 foot shoulders. your D.I.P. method of swervy dog riding is not necessary and and patently unsafe when you insist on riding further to the left than is necessary and weave back and forth in front of every car.

how does all this swerving give a rider more predictability? i t is less predicatable, and less safe, in a lot of situations, when the rightish position is safe to ride in.

when its safe to ride to the right, you can ride to the right. a rider doesn't have to weave a lane position in the travel lane when there is no reason to deviate from a consistent and dynamic line elsewhere.

your system is much less safe than shooting a consistent, safe line using the maxim "as far left as is needed for safety, as far right as practical."

helemt head, your pet DIP/DSLS system is NOT simple lane positioning, it is drunken sailor riding, the dynamic indecision positioning system.
Beck, can you try to address something I actually said in this thread rather than blabber about all your misconceptions and misinterpretations?

Half credit.

That IS what most of the debate is about, but it's not silly.

C. Keep left to improve sight lines, visibility, predictability and conspicuity. Most car-bike collisions involve crossing movements. If you keep right, and don't notice approaching cross-traffic that overlooks you because you're not riding where they are looking, you increase your risk. Riding further left improves the odds that you'll see them earlier, that they'll see you earlier, that they're much less likely to overlook you, and that they're more likely to realize you are moving straight and not turning. If you wait until you notice them and only then think to move left, often it's too late for that further left position to be effective. Bonus: by riding further left, when traffic does not approach from behind, they too are more likely to notice and choose to pay attention to you and where they are going rather than attend to a distraction. In the rare instance that you overlook someone behind you, you'll hear them soon enough (engine, tires, honk). Better to adopt a style and habit that may make you appear rude once in a while than to adopt a style and habits that increase your risk to cross traffic crashes. Therefore, keep left/centered where you have good sight lines and are visible, predictable and conspicuous, unless you have a good reason to move right.
[/list]
.

Just a nit, but I said the debate seems to be 'about where to ride when there is no other traffic.' In this case C there is other traffic.

But of course the key point here you make is that one may overlook that there is other traffic if one stays to far to the right.

Al

Just a nit, but I said the debate seems to be 'about where to ride when there is no other traffic.' In this case C there is other traffic.
No, in C there is going to be traffic, or there is traffic that the cyclist has not yet noticed. Either way, from the perspective of the cyclist, "there is no other traffic".


But of course the key point here you make is that one may overlook that there is other traffic if one stays to far to the right.

Right. It's about the ever-changing dynamic conditions we constantly encounter when riding in traffic.

In other words, what habit/technique/method, keeping left/centered by default or keeping right by default, during periods of no traffic, prepares you best for what's coming up?

First to clarify things there are several cases we are talking about here and it is not fully clear to me where different techniques fall.

First there is the case of an intersection. Here I apply Destination Positioning. Centerish position thru an intersection is primarily for visibility of me from opposing traffic (reduce left hook) and same direction traffic (eliminate right hook) and x-traffic (reduce car pulling right turn in front of me). It is also for visibility for me to see other vehicles/drivers and also to increase room for evasive maneuvers.

There is also the case of intersectionless roads where Dynamic Lane Positioing applies primarily. Here I remain in center of lane, and only move right in presense of same direction traffic if safe and neccessary (i.e. space, no debris, no intersections and ability to move back to centerish before unsafe condition starts)

Now I very well and probably do have my terminologies and what techniques fall under these terminologies mis-represented (for example destination positioning probably does fall under the umbrella of DLP)

If ones default position is centerish, which mine tends to be, I don't need to move to center for desitination positioning at intersections as I am already there.

Al

First to clarify things there are several cases we are talking about here and it is not fully clear to me where different techniques fall.

First there is the case of an intersection. Here I apply Destination Positioning. Centerish position thru an intersection is primarily for visibility of me from opposing traffic (reduce left hook) and same direction traffic (eliminate right hook) and x-traffic (reduce car pulling right turn in front of me). It is also for visibility for me to see other vehicles/drivers and also to increase room for evasive maneuvers.

There is also the case of intersectionless roads where Dynamic Lane Positioing applies primarily. Here I remain in center of lane, and only move right in presense of same direction traffic if safe and neccessary (i.e. space, no debris, no intersections and ability to move back to centerish before unsafe condition starts)

Now I very well and probably do have my terminologies and what techniques fall under these terminologies mis-represented (for example destination positioning probably does fall under the umbrella of DLP)



First, to clarify to those who might not know, "destination positioning" basically means, at intersections and their approaches, to keep right if you're turning right, to keep left if turning left, or to choose a position in between if going straight. Specifically, it means do not ride in the "right turn only space" that exists at least unofficially at all intersections unless you are turning right.

Now, there is HUGE gray area between intersections and "intersectionless roads". In particular, there are "minor intersections". Driveways, alleys, farm roads, mall entrances, service station entrances, service roads, etc.

If one's habit is to ride as far right as practicable unless he has a known reason to move left, I contend that it is only a matter of time (measured in minutes of cycling) before he will cross a minor intersection without adjusting for destination positioning, much less adjusting for it sufficently early to really improve sight lines to and from him.

Worse, you can get away with that for hundreds and even thousands of miles without incident. So it's easy to get lackadaisical with respect to using destination positioning properly at minor intersections. Then, sooner or later, some bus pulls out in front of you, are someone turns left across your path into a midblock entrance, etc., and, if you're lucky, you get to tell us about it here. My favorite example of lackadaisical cycling is from Robert Hurst's book where he is riding down a quiet neighborhood street, near the right side, is distracted by a pretty girl across the street, and someone suddenly pulls out in front of him from a blind alley. Having no time or space to react, he crashes. Had he been further left, the driver would have been more likely to see him, he would have seen the car pulling out sooner, and he would have had more time and space to react.

If you do get anal retentive about using destination positioning at every intersection, no matter how minor, and then going back to speed positioning between these intersections, even when faster traffic is absent, now you really have weaving.

That's why I have found the only reasonable method is to default to a centerish position, and only move aside when necessary, safe and reasonable to allow faster traffic to pass.


If ones default position is centerish, which mine tends to be, I don't need to move to center for desitination positioning at intersections as I am already there.

Exactly. More importantly, you're guaranteed to not overlook getting into, or being too late to move to the centered position, because, as you say, you're already there.

I consider every possible turn of the road I am on to be an intersection. This includes residential driveways, business driveways, shopping center parking lot entrances, alleys, canal roads and more. Any side access that a vehicle (bike or motor) could enter/exit from.

This attachment shows for the east bound direction some of those more obvious intersections (with a BL inapproapriately paced on the road)

Al

Yes, that's booby trap central. We have gobs of roads that are just like that all over the county. And where do cyclist ride by default on these roads? As far right as practicable. :rolleyes:

Yes, that's booby trap central. We have gobs of roads that are just like that all over the county. And where do cyclist ride by default on these roads? As far right as practicable. :rolleyes:
And look where the BL to the left of the RTOL for the arterial intersection puts the cyclist. BLs to the left of RTOLs are not horrible, but certainly not ideal, but when you look at the bigger picture (i.e. just beyond the intersection) in this case it is a horrible position.
The think I really hate about this specific case (duplicated at many intersections in the region) is that they cyclist choosing to wisely use the orimary lane prior to the arterial intersection looks and feels like a total idiot lining up with cars when there is a BL right there. The alternate is to use the BL to pass all the stopped cars, then at green sprint out in front of lead car and then slow down the entire line of cars you just passed to avoid riding in the BL right hook death trap.

Al

And look where the BL to the left of the RTOL for the arterial intersection puts the cyclist. BLs to the left of RTOLs are not horrible, but certainly not ideal, but when you look at the bigger picture (i.e. just beyond the intersection) in this case it is a horrible position.
The think I really hate about this specific case (duplicated at many intersections in the region) is that they cyclist choosing to wisely use the orimary lane prior to the arterial intersection looks and feels like a total idiot lining up with cars when there is a BL right there. The alternate is to use the BL to pass all the stopped cars, then at green sprint out in front of lead car and then slow down the entire line of cars you just passed to avoid riding in the BL right hook death trap.

I'm totally with you; that sucks.

This attachment shows for the east bound direction some of those more obvious intersections (with a BL inapproapriately paced on the road)
Looks like University & Rural near ASU in Tempe:
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=E+University+Dr+%26+S+Rural+Rd,+Tempe,+AZ+85281&ie=UTF8&z=19&ll=33.421847,-111.925613&spn=0.001547,0.002602&t=k&om=1&iwloc=A