Letter to the Editor
Watch for bikes
Published Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Mixx
Reddit
Stumble It!May 8, 2008
To the editor:
I’d just like to give a heads-up to all the motorists in town to please be aware of cyclists crossing the street.
I’ve almost been hit twice this week from drivers who pull all the way into the crosswalk before turning right on red. I’m pretty sure you have to stop on red, then look, then go; not pull through without looking.
Summer has only started, and I imagine there will be a lot more bikers in the next month. And to the driver of the white car who almost hit me at the Airport and University intersection; thank you for backing up.
Amber Wilson
Fairbanks
Community Discussion
Newsminer.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post. Read our full user's agreement.
*grabs popcorn*
When I pull up to a traffic light that is already on "red" and want to turn right, I do "stop on red, then look, then go" and I do not "pull through without looking". That being said, I also wait for pedestrians (and bicyclists) who've entered the cross walk and are in the process of crossing. Sometimes it is inconvenient and I am in a hurry but I do wait.
I don't mind sharing with pedestrians and bicyclists - I do mind when the bicyclist is riding in the road in the middle of winter with no light and little or no reflective clothing so that they "appear out of nowhere" only a few feet (or inches) before the front of my car on a dark street or road.
How come the bikers on Farmer's Loop ride on the side of the road and not on the bike path -
That has been driving me crazy lately - I am always waiting for one to fall in front of my car.....
There should be a law to fine bicyclists that ride on roads if there is a bike path available to them. And start enforcing traffic laws to the ones that have to drive on roads such as I would get ticketed if driving too slow holding up traffic so should they.
danzop. I'm not one of those guys that yell for less laws, but really with this one I believe that its not the best solution. If we as motorist are careful and follow the rules of the road and likewise for the bicyclists, we really should all be able to drive on the same road, in a safe manor. This is an instance that we need to respect each other and both sides take responsibility for each others safety.
Its true that in a car vs. bike accident the bike never wins, but who wants that?
Danzop- how are you going to ticket them if you cant even identify them? Have you seen a new law requiring that they have a license plate on thier bikes? That one I must have missed and I have been waiting so patiently for it to happen...
Bikes do need consideration, but consideration is a two way street with both sides watching the other and pointing the mistakes they make. For every inconsiderate driver, there is an inconsiderate person on a bike who thinks that they dont have to walk through an intersection with thier bike or wear a helmet or even use hand signals (you remember those dont you?) to let drivers know where they are going. OOHHH thats right, because they are on a bike they have the best of both worlds, I forgot.
Boy, the car on bike hate here is amazing? YouMustBConfused
I know that I'd feel terrible if I ran over a bike rider. I'd feel worse if I was the bike rider getting run over.
I have no problem sharing the road with bike riders, and waiting at intersections. The ones that are difficult to see for me are the ones that ride the wrong way down a one way street, like downtown. That's as close as I ever come to hitting anybody. You can look both ways for foot traffic, start to go, and a bike comes out of nowhere.
It would be nice if a State Trooper or City Police would post a comment and give us there take one this situation.
Danzop and others, please take a look at 13 AAC 02.400. You can find it online here: http://www.touchngo.com/lglcntr/akstats/...
The short of it is that bikes are legally allowed to ride in the road. They must ride as far to the right as possible and use a maintained shoulder if one is available. When traveling in the road, they must obey traffic laws as they are considered a vehicle (stop when directed by traffic signs, signal to turn or change lanes, etc). However, they do not have to use a bike path if one is available.
I can think of at least two good reasons for bikes to be allowed to ride on roads:
1) As long as bikes and cars obey the rules of the road, the road might actually be safer. The traffic patterns are established and bikes aren't moving on a sidewalk against traffic (where they can be hit by turning traffic).
2) When riding my bike to work, I move from a residential area without sidewalks to a bike path to a residential area with sidewalks, to a main road, and then to the University. In each area, there are different challenges and rules. For example, I pass by a school on the way to work. The sidewalk is crowded with small children. In this area, I judge it better to ride in the road instead of interfering with pedestrians.
Bikes are here, they belong. Their operators should be obeying the rules, and so should motor vehicle operators.
I think bikes should be welcome on the roads ... as long as they have a motor attached to them so they're not holding up traffic.
In the summer I would frequently ride my bike to work, from North Pole to Fairbanks. It isn't because I have too many DUI's and don't have a license:0) It is to enjoy our daylight and sunshine, while we have it, and to incorporate physical activity in my day. This entails leaving home, usually, at 5:30 a.m.
How many of you have driven down the Richardson Highway on a bicycle? The ride from South Cushman St. to Airport Way is the only stretch I have found to be more dangerous. I do ride on the bike path where it exists, but from Badger Road to Fairbanks, the highway is my only choice. Fort Wainright demands a pass, which can only be acquired at their front gate.
The huge trucks facilitating our ongoing construction, motorcycles roaring by and any vehicle moving as fast as they do on the highway is intimidating, to say the least, especially when you are on a bike, with your back to the oncoming distraction. Last summer I chose to ride on the wrong side of the road, facing traffic on the highway, so I was able to at least see what was going to potentially end my life. You would be surprised to know that most AK State Troopers didn't pull into the left hand lane when passing me. I found that interesting, since last summer their big campaign for the newly enforced "pull over" law was ongoing!! I kept waiting for one of them to pull me over and ticket me for riding on the wrong side of the road.
Most of the huge dump trucks, double-decker side dump or otherwise, campers, fuel trucks etc., all roar down the road, with little consideration for others. I assure you, my one finger salute to you as you passed, was not a good morning wave.
It would be nice if some DOT monies could be used to create a bike path running between North Pole and Fairbanks. The price of gas is reaching $4/gallon, and we have more than our fair share of obese people living in our community. Creating this bike path could take care of two public health issues, personal safety and obesity.
"Bike" paths are statistically more dangerous than paths designated for bicycles on the side of a road. The bike paths here are perforated with driveways and feeder streets. Although most stop signs, when they exist, are placed before the path, few cars stop there. They pull out to the road where they stop to look. Additionally the bike paths are not maintained very well and have a variety of trafic on them from baby strollers to 4 wheelers. They are frequently in poor repair. They often take circuitous routes away from the direct path that the road takes. They are nice for recreational cyclists riding at about 10mph or less. A widened shoulder with a designated bike lane is better for bicycles and cheaper to build and easier to maintain. They help in giving percieved legitimacy to the already existing road rights that cyclists have. Bikes are here to stay and they are vulnerable, even the stupid ones that make you anygry in your car (they make me mad too). Cyclists belong and are your neighbors friends and children, please be careful.
Bike paths are not going to cure obesity. When was the last time you saw an obese person riding a bicycle? They don't get that way by excersizing...
I am -for the most part- against bikers riding on the road, especially if you cant keep up with traffic. If the speed limit is 40mph and you cant go that fast, get off the road and onto the sidewalk or bike path. I had to laugh this morning when I passed a teenager riding his bike in the road; his helmet on the handlebar, his hands to his sides, and weaving all over. The speed limit on that road is 55mph and he was no where close to that. I laughed because I thought if your stupid enough not to wear your helmet and ride that carelessly in the road, your stupid enough to get hit and I have no sympathy for you.
The reason the bikers don't use the bikepath is simple. The ATV's are controlling it which makes it more dangerous to ride on the bikepath then the road.
ffsgirl; does the speed limit mean the lower speed that you are supposed to travel? If you don't like bicyclists on the road then lobby your your legislators and congressional delegates for more money for SAFE bike trails and to change the existing laws.
I invite all you drivers to the bike paths along Ballaine, Sheep Creek , and Chena Pump roads. Bring your snorkels and dry suits, 'cause your going to need 'em!
Sherry, me thinks you have an issue with atv's... must be the law suit. I don't blame ya
This issue has certainly raised a lot of questions in the last few days, so I'll see if I can answer some. First, there is no law in Alaska that requires a bicyclist to dismount and walk their bike across a cross walk. There is a law that says that bicyclists are afforded the same responsibilities and rights as other vehicles when they are operated on the roadway. They are required to ride on the right side of the road, and when the shoulder is safe to ride on, they are required to ride on the shoulder. There is no law saying that bicycles or any other vehicle is not allowed to travel below the speed limit, although if they are holding up five or more vehicles and the roads do not allow for safe passing, they must (like all vehicles) pull over for vehicles to pass. Anyone that is making a turn onto a roadway is required to yield to any oncoming traffic, and this would include any bicycles in crosswalks, whether they are being ridden or pushed.
For those that feel that bicyclists want it both ways, to be able to ride on the sidewalk and in the road, that is exactly what the law allows for. There is no legal requirement that a cyclist use a bike path when one is available (although if it is serviceable I would certainly encourage it).
Based on what I have read in this and other comment sections, I feel that some of these laws may upset some of you. While that is not my intent, I realize that it may happen. That is fine, but recognize that from a legal point of view, it does not matter what anyone THINKS the law should be, only what it is. If you disagree with the laws, contact your legislator and lobby to have it changed. Until then, we are all bound by it.
I hope this has been helpful. I will be addressing this issue in next Tuesday's "Ask A Trooper" newspaper column, found each Tuesday on page A3 in the Our Town section. It can also be found online by going to the Our Town section at the bottom right of the DNM home page, or by clicking here: http://newsminer.com/news/2008/may/12/as...
End of shameless plug.
Hey gang, tomorrow is Bike to Work Day. I'd suggest that all you folks who gripe about cyclists ride tomorrow so you can see what it's like on the other side. All the cyclists I know drive, and plenty of us understand why drivers get mad. I've nearly hit a few people over the years while they were doing stupid bike tricks. But I've also been nearly hit a few times by people doing stupid driving tricks (cell phones are frequently involved in these).
Most cyclists and most drivers are responsible. A few aren't. Age is often a factor. Kids do dumb stuff as a general rule, and when they get on a bike and ride on the road, they tend to act their age. Middle aged types like myself are more conscious of mortality and act like it. As a rider, I've had things thrown at me from passing cars, usually driven by teenagers.
The big problems are people being in too much of a hurry, drivers and riders not paying attention (guilty parties can be found in both groups), reckless behavior (not that common from either side, but always remembered when witnessed), and the big variable, drunkenness. A drunk cyclist is as dangerous as a drunk driver, because he/she can force drivers to take sudden evasive actions that can lead to accidents.
Gas prices will not be coming down in our lifetimes, so bikes are bound to become more frequent. Bikes are a good solution to a worsening problem; cyclists reduce demand for gas. In the long run, cyclists are doing every driver a favor.
Sgt Goeden: Thank you for the clarifications.
Hey Nonpartisan, how can any of us bike to work on Bike to Work Day? Do you think we have jobs or something? I mean, if we were working, we wouldn't have so much time to post our rants here, would we?
I'll meet you halfway and bike to my TV to change channels instead of sitting on my duff and using the remote.
When you are annoyed by a bike going below the speed limit on the road, just pretend it's a tractor (or an Amish horse and buggy) with a big orange "I'm slow" triangle sign on the back, and wait patiently for your turn to pass.
"There's real people in the big big trucks
that you flip off when they get in your road.
You get *so hacked* but you pay no mind
to the great big sign that says oversize load.
You really think they can go as fast
as you in your 87 trans am?
They know you're in a terrible rush
but they're going just as fast as they can"
-- from "Big Trucks" by Pedro the Lion
Don't get us started on the Amish...
Sgt Goeden you need some one to read the bike laws to you. (lol)
Are you trying to tell me that there is no min. speed limit under the posted speed limit? (vehicle law).
Why don’t you just post the hole section of the bike law here. (post the link if you like)
This way everyone can read the section about the cross walks. (If a bike uses the cross walk they have to walk their bike across the road)
How about the one that Bikes can’t impede vehicles. They are to move over and let the vehicle by, the vehicle has the right of way.
There is no law that bikes can hold up five vehicles before moving over. (there not allowed to hold up one vehicle)
Just because people are quoting the bike laws don’t make their opinions a shameless plug. (This is a safely issue and people need to know what are the correct facts).
Bike laws are for the safety of the biker so let’s get the correct information out.
I found your information to be inaccurate.
I mean no disrespect to you but I have read the bike laws and I would have to disagree with you.
So, if I'm getting this right (per Sgt Goeden) then bikes rule & drivers drool.
Biking equals freedom.
Driving is slavery.
Here's one for Sgt Goeden. I'm on the bike path riding my bike. Out on the road is a school bus, lights flashing and picking up kids. Do I have to stop?
@0cents:
It's always interesting when an educated person interacts with an uneducated person. Most often both parties learn something.
In this case, I've learned that you don't know the law, but think your opinion to be immutable.
Here's the "hole"(sic) section of the AAC that Sgt Goeden referenced.
http://www.touchngo.com/lglcntr/akstats/...
I'd encourage you to read it and then ask questions.
Ya know, I've recently thought that I'd refrain from posting.
Sometimes, however, there are people that post things that are so inane, so vapid, and so incorrect, that it requires correction.
So, let's take 0cents post and rip it apart.
0cents said:
Are you trying to tell me that there is no min. speed limit under
the posted speed limit? (vehicle law).
Yes, that's exactly what he's telling you.
http://www.touchngo.com/lglcntr/akstats/...
However, as previously stated, when impeding more than five vehicles, the cyclist must allow traffic to pass.
0cents said:
Why don’t you just post the hole section of the bike law here.(post the link if you like)
I just did that, and Tom did it earlier. Did you miss that?
0cents said:
T