MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus on Twitter · Facebook · Flickr · Newsletters · Instagram 
Monday, September 22, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 52.0° F  Fair
Collapse Photo Bar

new bike-car question

If it doesn't fit anywhere else, it fits here

Re: new bike-car question

Postby Ninja » Wed Jun 19, 2013 1:34 pm

green union terrace chair wrote:The "right of way" is something that no one can ever claim as "having." The right of way is something that you yield to others.


That's just not true. Vehicles on the roadway have the right-of-way until such time as it's yielded to another party, and there's a hierarchy for how that yielding works.

Pedestrians defer to vehicles until such time as there is a safe distance in which to cross without obstructing vehicle right-of-way. Vehicles then defer to pedestrians who are in the street, crossing legally, whether there's a crosswalk or not. Getting into the street legally, however, requires that there be were no cars within about 130 feet (in a 30 mph zone) before crossing. Allowing less than 130 feet would mean the ped is violating vehicle right-of-way.
Ninja
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 926
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 12:22 pm

Re: new bike-car question

Postby Ninja » Wed Jun 19, 2013 1:42 pm

green union terrace chair wrote:I had this happen just the other day while waiting on a median. Driver in the near lane stops and waves me on, as cars stack up behind him. I carefully walk in front but am watching the far lane and sure enough, another car blasts through at full speed. Had I simply walked through I would have been flattened.


And a lot of peds and drivers don't seem to understand that a median resets the situation. Pedestrian right-of-way has to be legally established again on the other side of the median, but I see tons of drivers slam on their brakes in front of those little traffic islands on Willy for people standing there, and tons of peds who don't even stop, instead striding confidently over the median thinking they still enjoy the same right-of-way as they enjoyed on the first half of their journey across the street. Sorry buddy, your visit to the median means you have to wait for another break in traffic to finish crossing.

That's why I've never understood how those little traffic islands are marketed as making it safer for peds. Why force people to treat Willy street as two seperate roadways for ped right-of-way purposes? Another well-intentioned but clueless and counterproductive decision in Madison.
Ninja
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 926
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 12:22 pm

Re: new bike-car question

Postby jjoyce » Wed Jun 19, 2013 1:49 pm

Sorry... two-lane street, nobody around, old guy with half his wheel in the street looking eager to cross; I'm slowing way down and probably stopping to let him go every time.

I guess if he wants to be angry about that, then it's his problem, not mine.
jjoyce
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 12168
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 4:48 pm
Location: Madison, WI

Re: new bike-car question

Postby dave esmond » Wed Jun 19, 2013 2:02 pm

jjoyce wrote:Sorry... two-lane street, nobody around, old guy with half his wheel in the street looking eager to cross; I'm slowing way down and probably stopping to let him go every time.


Just so you know you're costing him more time then just driving past him. If you want to believe that's being nice so be it.

Why not take your own advice and smile and wave as you pass since he's already beat you to the stopping? Or is it only bike riders that need to be gracious when someone stops?
dave esmond
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2566
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 4:15 pm

Re: new bike-car question

Postby Stebben84 » Wed Jun 19, 2013 2:14 pm

jjoyce wrote:looking eager to cross


Just curious, what's looking eager to cross?

Ninja wrote:Getting into the street legally, however, requires that there be were no cars within about 130 feet (in a 30 mph zone) before crossing. Allowing less than 130 feet would mean the ped is violating vehicle right-of-way.


I haven't seen this before. Do you have a link for it. Not that I don't believe it's true, but there are few people I know who dart in traffic expecting a car to stop because "they" have the right of way. I'd like to show them the law.
Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4843
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: new bike-car question

Postby Ninja » Wed Jun 19, 2013 2:31 pm

Stebben84 wrote:
Ninja wrote:Getting into the street legally, however, requires that there be were no cars within about 130 feet (in a 30 mph zone) before crossing. Allowing less than 130 feet would mean the ped is violating vehicle right-of-way.


I haven't seen this before. Do you have a link for it. Not that I don't believe it's true, but there are few people I know who dart in traffic expecting a car to stop because "they" have the right of way. I'd like to show them the law.


The actual language in section 346.23 prohibits crossing when a vehicle is "so close that it is difficult for the operator of the vehicle to yield. "

That's pretty vague, but in Madison, based on past stings, it appears to mean 138.2 feet in a 30mph zone:
http://host.madison.com/news/local/foot ... 1c2c5.html
Ninja
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 926
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 12:22 pm

Re: new bike-car question

Postby jjoyce » Wed Jun 19, 2013 3:20 pm

dave esmond wrote:Just so you know you're costing him more time then just driving past him. If you want to believe that's being nice so be it.

Why not take your own advice and smile and wave as you pass since he's already beat you to the stopping? Or is it only bike riders that need to be gracious when someone stops?


As with every bike-related thing in this town, everything is so loaded with baggage. Everybody brings so much prior experience to the table.

1. I don't care if it takes more time. I'm concerned about him rolling out in front of me. I've also had enough people give me a dirty look or worse for rolling through a crosswalk that I'm cautious. I've also heard so many stories about cops trapping motorists by entering the crosswalk that I'm on my toes. But mostly, I'm worried about the old guy who's not quite balanced, leaning into the road about to roll forward.

2. Where did I say that it's only bikers who need to be gracious? Where does that even enter into the discussion? My issue is with people of all stripes who practically want to adjudicate a small claim every time there's a confrontation at an intersection. I'm firm in my belief that this is the result of aggro anti- and pro-bike people engaging in these debates for sport over the years. I mean, just the idea that there are serious discussions about pro- or anti-bike people is ridiculous. Everybody has a bike and everybody has a car... few are black/white about this issue.

But we have all witnessed people on foot, on bikes and in cars endangering others around here. Also, we've all had to deal with donkeys who'd rather have an argument than simply roll on by and continue with their days. Instead of adopting an antagonistic stance every single time, why not just co-exist, to invoke an overwrought idea?
jjoyce
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 12168
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2001 4:48 pm
Location: Madison, WI

Re: new bike-car question

Postby Stebben84 » Wed Jun 19, 2013 3:28 pm

Ninja wrote:That's pretty vague, but in Madison, based on past stings, it appears to mean 138.2 feet in a 30mph zone:
http://host.madison.com/news/local/foot ... 1c2c5.html


Thanks. That's the first time I've seen that in writing.
Stebben84
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 4843
Joined: Thu Mar 02, 2006 12:59 pm

Re: new bike-car question

Postby dave esmond » Wed Jun 19, 2013 3:36 pm

jjoyce wrote:2. Where did I say that it's only bikers who need to be gracious? Where does that even enter into the discussion? My issue is with people of all stripes who practically want to adjudicate a small claim every time there's a confrontation at an intersection. I'm firm in my belief that this is the result of aggro anti- and pro-bike people engaging in these debates for sport over the years.


The first part. Seriously Jason? It's when you called the bike rider "lame", "angry" and "bitter" for not just waving and smiling when the car driver is in the wrong. I admit I put the "be gracious" part in your mouth. But come on.

The second part I've got a big ol' hell yes for you. Totally agree.

That's why my first post was Stop if you're supposed to, don't if you're not.

It really is that simple. If everyone behaves in a fairly predictable manner we'd have a whole lot less of these situations. No more need to guess if old guy is gonna dart out in front of you on his bike. And no need to guess if old guy in his car is really gonna stop when they do the slow roll up on the crosswalk.

I know in the real world that's just never gonna happen. And I totally get why you're careful. But being overly cautious is to me just as bad as being overly reckless. Both just add to the unpredictability of the situation and that's what adds to the danger.

jjoyce wrote:Also, we've all had to deal with donkeys who'd rather have an argument than simply roll on by and continue with their days.


To me that includes the passive aggressive car drivers doing the mad hand wave and yelling at me when I refuse to play along.

As you say, simply roll on by.
dave esmond
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2566
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 4:15 pm

Re: new bike-car question

Postby Prof. Wagstaff » Wed Jun 19, 2013 3:41 pm

jjoyce wrote:Everybody has a bike and everybody has a car
Do you really believe this?
Prof. Wagstaff
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 8876
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2002 6:35 pm

Re: new bike-car question

Postby Henry Vilas » Wed Jun 19, 2013 3:55 pm

Again, a yield instead of a stop sign on multi-use paths, when they intersect a roadway, would certainly help. Back in drivers ed during the 60s, I learned to recognize the octogonal shape of the stop sign and I assumed it means something. I use the pass tense, since that assumption doesn't apply on those paths when bicyclists are blowing through them. Yes, I drive defensively because I know that many autos as well as bikes don't obey stop signs. Cyclists should remember the laws of physics trump the laws of man.
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19888
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: new bike-car question

Postby Kenneth Burns » Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:00 pm

If I'm on a bike and a well-intended driver is waving me on, and the move would be illegal or ill-advised, I usually just play dumb and sit there until they give up and drive on.

Playing dumb is not hard for me, by the way.
Kenneth Burns
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2991
Joined: Fri May 24, 2002 3:14 pm

Re: new bike-car question

Postby Kenneth Burns » Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:09 pm

Someone should write Miss Manners about this. Maybe I will.
Kenneth Burns
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2991
Joined: Fri May 24, 2002 3:14 pm

Re: new bike-car question

Postby dave esmond » Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:17 pm

Kenneth Burns wrote:Someone should write Miss Manners about this. Maybe I will.


Obscureoutofdatepopculturereference.

Image
dave esmond
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2566
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2001 4:15 pm

Re: new bike-car question

Postby Kenneth Burns » Wed Jun 19, 2013 4:19 pm

Out of date except she writes a column three times a week!
Kenneth Burns
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 2991
Joined: Fri May 24, 2002 3:14 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Catch All

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


commentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar