Right where he should be

The cyclist in the above picture is riding right where he should be. I'm sure the driver of the dark colored SUV behind him doesn't think so. He probably thinks he should be another 18 inches to the right where the asphalt meets the cement gutter.

If the cyclist was riding there in all probability this driver would pass in the same lane and just about squeeze the cyclist off the road. You can see where the SUV's wheels are in relation to the edge of the asphalt on one side and the white line on the other that there is not enough room to safely pass a cyclist within the lane.

The term is called "taking the lane," which is precisly what this cyclist is doing. Any newcomer to cycling needs to learn this strategy as quickly as possible. Maybe you have decided to commute to work on a bicycle; either for economical reasons or for your health, or both.

Assert your place on the road. You are not cycling in traffic, you are part of traffic and your bicycle is a vehicle like all the other vehicles on the road. Also I should point out, subject to the same rules and laws pertaining to public highways.

You don't have to be an ass to be assertive, but at the same time you should not be expected to compromise your own safety by trying not to inconvenience others.

Returning to the above picture you can see it is only a very slight inconvenience for the passing driver to signal and move over to the other lane as the truck is doing. Let's say traffic is heavy and both lanes are full so the driver behind can't move over. Then he must wait behind the cyclist until he can move over.

It is possible the lanes will widen further on down the road; then the cyclist can opt to move over a little and drivers can pass safely within the same lane.

Car drivers need to realize that in heavy traffic you are going to be delayed anyway, and if you squeeze past the cyclist you place a human life at risk, and for what? You will be stopped again at the next light. Remember there are no fender-benders if you hit a cyclist. Bones break and people bleed.

By taking the lane the cyclist is also making himself highly visable. The most common car/bicycle accident is caused by drivers approaching from the opposite direction and and not seeing the cyclist, they make a left turn in front of them.

If the cyclist is on the extreme edge of the road and in the gutter, chances are there will be a car along side, or just in front of him hiding him from the view of the turning motorist.

By being in the position of the above cyclist, the turning driver can see him, and chances are there will be another car following closely behind the cyclist so the oncoming diver will not even consider turning at that moment.

The second most common accident is the "Right Hook." (Left Hook in the UK.) This is where the motor vehicle passes the cyclist then immediately turns right; the cyclist either runs into the side of the car, or in in a worse case the vehicle runs over the cyclist. This is less likely to happen if the cyclist is a little distance out from the curb.

By avoiding just these two most common accidents you make your cycling experience safer and more enjoyable; you can do so by taking the lane. Let me point out however, that taking the lane should never be abused and used just because you can.

If you can see traffic a hundred yards or so ahead of you then you are not really delaying anyone, you are simply making yourself visable by having that space in front of you.

Motorists need to realize there are going to be more and more cyclists sharing the road with them, and for every cyclist that means one less car which in the long run will ease conjestion.

Footnote: The excelent photo that illustrates this point so well is from Mighk Wilson's blog

Bicycles are Vehicles

On the Stanford University’s News Website is an article on bicycle safety, which begins with the statement:

Nearly 100 collisions between bicycles and vehicles were reported on campus between 2003 and 2007.

Within this opening line lies a large part of the problem. Bicycles are vehicles and until people grasp that concept, there will always be an obstacle to improving safety on public roads. "Cycling in traffic" is another common phrase. The statement is obsolete, bicycles are part of traffic.

Only when drivers of motor vehicles see a bicycle as just another vehicle on the road, another person simply trying to get from point A to point B by a different means of transport, will attitudes have a chance of changing.

By the same rule, people who ride bicycles need to see themselves in the same light and behave accordingly. How many times do I see a person on a bicycle (POB.) at an intersection, waiting at the extreme edge of the road when they intend to go straight? Then they wonder why they get “Hooked.”

Bicycles on sidewalks are another problem. Bicycles are a vehicle and belong on the road, sidewalks are for foot traffic. That’s why they are called sidewalks. They are supposed to be a safe haven for pedestrians. A place where there are no vehicles.

If everyone viewed the bicycle as a vehicle and behaved accordingly, there would be no need for separate bike lanes and other special accommodations.

When a person decides to commute to work on a bike, or even just ride as a form of exercise, most of these people have already driven a car and know the rules of the road.

The only difference is, on a bicycle you can’t afford to be a sloppy driver. You have to drive defensively, the way we are all supposed to drive our cars.

Right-Hooked: Almost

Here is a story with an interesting video clip, out of Rochester, NY. A cyclist is almost right-hooked by a police patrol car; the cop then pulls the cyclist Gabriel Zayas over, and lets him off with a warning.

I would hope the cop stopped him to apologize, although I doubt it. The cyclist did nothing wrong he was riding his bike, in the proper place on the right hand edge of the road, as required by law, when the police car makes a right turn in front of him. The police driver is clearly at fault.

To add insult to the situation, the local TV News Station ran the video as an example of police zero tolerance on crime. There was no crime, in fact there was a traffic violation against the cyclist.

The commentator states, “A patrol car is about to make a right turn when a bicyclist darts out from the side, narrowly missing the patrol car.”

Not true by what I see on the video; the cyclist is riding straight down the road and is clearly there before the police car attempted his turn.

I’m pleased that the cyclist did not get hit, and this video just goes to show how quickly the right hook can happen. When approaching an intersection like this, be aware of cars passing and slowing down at the same time; the engine sound is a clue.

An experienced cyclist would be about three or four feet from the curb at this point, making themself more visible. If you are directly in front of a car it is clear that your intention is to go straight. The best way to avoid the right hook is, if possible not let a vehicle overtake you as you approach the intersection.

I think the Rochester Police Department, and the News 10 NBC owe Gabriel Zayas an apology.

My thanks to Chuck Fujita from Rochester for this link.

A good reason not to ride on the sidewalk

An acquaintance recently started riding a bike. When he told me he was riding on the sidewalk, I explained this was not a good idea.

Most bicycle accidents occur at intersections and riding on the sidewalk actually increases the risk of being hit, because the cyclist is less visible to drivers of motor vehicles.

He said he was afraid to ride on the road because he might be hit from behind. I told him that car drivers will not hit cyclists as long as they can see them. I could tell at the time he was not convinced, and I warned him to be extremely careful.

About a week ago he was riding his bike on the sidewalk, going in the wrong direction; a car was stopped in a parking lot a short distance back from the road. As he approached, the car suddenly shot forward.

In all probability the driver was looking in the direction of traffic, saw a gap and drove forward to merge into traffic, not expecting a cyclist to be coming along the sidewalk from the opposite direction.

He didn’t actually hit the vehicle, but a combination of braking hard while trying to swerve around behind the car, sent him flying over the handlebars landing heavily on his back.

Police and paramedics were called and he was taken to a local hospital. He has severe bruising, and has since had to return to the hospital and have blood and fluid drained from a large swelling on his back.

He contacted a lawyer who checked the local city laws, and surprise, surprise, it is illegal to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk. He has no legal claim what-so-ever.

So, even though motorists will constantly yell at you to get on the sidewalk, and even though police will usually ignore you and not stop you riding there; it is not a good idea to ride on the sidewalk.

Besides being extremely dangerous, if you are involved in an accident, in most cities you are breaking the law and you do not have a legal leg to stand on. Insurance companies are not going to pay, and you may even find that you may have to pay damages.

Or, as this person has found out the hard way, in addition to his pain and suffering, he will now have to face some hefty medical bills.

Bike lanes may disappear on Coleman Blvd.

The people of my home town of Charleston, South Carolina, are proud of the new Cooper River Bridge. (Arthur Ravenel Jr. Bridge.) Opened in 2005, it is a beautiful structure, and connects the Charleston Peninsula with Mount Pleasant on the east side.

The new bridge replaced two older bridges (Since demolished.) built in 1929 and 1966. The old bridges were narrow and with no provision for pedestrians or bicycles.

Cyclists on the Charleston side, wishing to ride in the Mount Pleasant area, would have to transport their bikes across by car, and vice-versa. Commuting by bicycle or even walking the four miles across was not an option.

In the initial planning stages, the new bridge was also to be for motorized traffic only. However, local cycling advocacy groups, along with pedestrian and running groups successfully petitioned for a separate bicycle/pedestrian path to be added.

This is a tremendous triumph for these advocacy groups, because since it opened the path is used by hundreds of pedestrians, runners, and cyclists, every weekend.

Walking or riding the bridge is now one of the “must do” things for visitors to Charleston. The only way to really appreciate the view of the harbor and the old city of Charleston, is on foot or by bicycle.

The picture at the top shows the bridge from Charleston Harbor side, looking inland. The pedestrian/bike path can be seen on the near side. There is a cement barrier between the path and the motorized traffic, which is four lanes in either direction.

Recently the City of Charleston, built a bike/pedestrian path on Bay Street, leading onto the bridge path entrance.

On the Mount Pleasant side the path emerges on Coleman Blvd. This is a wide road, with a bike lane, two lanes of traffic each direction, and a center turn lane. Coleman Blvd. is the direct route to the beach communities of Sullivan’s Island, and The Isle of Palms.

Some disturbing news has just come from the City of Mount Pleasant. Together with the South Carolina Department or Transport, they are planning to remove part of the bike lane from Coleman Blvd. and reroute cyclists onto side streets.

The reason; to allow parallel parking of cars on Coleman Blvd. Once again, making provision for automobiles is more important than people. Pushing cyclists off onto side streets will only reinforce the average motorists view, that cyclists don’t belong on Coleman Blvd.

I rode Coleman Blvd. on Sunday, and I fail to see why they need to park cars on this particular road. It is a normal business district that you would see in any American city, and every business has its own ample parking lot.

Local bicycle advocacy groups are asking that they keep the bike lanes along side the parked cars. My personal view is that this is a bad idea. I must emphasize this is my view and not that of any other group.

This would not be a problem but for a certain number of drivers who can’t seem to exit a vehicle without flinging the door open with complete disregard for the passing cyclist in the bike lane.

This negligent action usually results in the death of the cyclist as he is knocked from his bicycle into the adjacent traffic lane and under the wheels of a passing vehicle. Two such deaths have occurred this month in Chicago, and in Moorestown, New Jersey.

The City of Chicago, which is trying very hard to encourage bicycle riding, has taken criticism for bike lanes next to parked cars. On their own city website, they have posted a safety tip urging cyclists to use the outside edge of the bike lane, leaving at least a four feet door zone. (Left.)

The Charleston area has precious few bike lanes as it is, we cannot afford to loose what we have. Mount Pleasant’s plans are a huge step backwards. We have this beautiful bridge with a bike path, encouraging people to ride over to Mount Pleasant. Cyclists need to be accommodated when they get there.

Here is an idea for the city planners. If you must park cars on Coleman Blvd. put a four foot “Door Zone” next to the parked cars. (Clearly marked “Door Zone.”) If necessary make the bike lane only eighteen inches or two feet wide at the point.

I feel this makes more sense than making a five-foot bike lane, then advising cyclists (On some obscure website.) to only use the outside one foot of the lane. Coleman Blvd. is a wide road; if necessary make the traffic lanes narrower and lower the speed limit.

It is my understanding that this whole parking cars issue is because of plans to make Mount Pleasant a new and vibrant town center. Lowering the speed limit and enforcing it, would ensure that motorist do not simply speed through on their way to the beach. And in doing so completely miss your new and vibrant town center.


More on the Coleman Blvd. plans here.


Footnote: In the top picture you can just see the two old bridges behind the new; as mentioned in the article, these have been demolished.