PDA

View Full Version : Question about stopping and bike lanes?


Mung
01-08-2007, 12:28 PM
I've been yelled at by fellow bikers for stopping at red lignts and stop signs that are located at T intersections with bike lanes where there is no white stop line.

The Oregon Drivers handbook states "You must stop at a marked stop
line or crosswalk on the pavement, if there is one. If
there is no stop line or crosswalk, stop before the
unmarked crossing area."

It seems like a no brainer to me but does anyone know if the rules are different for bike lanes without the white stop line because some have them and some don't? Note: this refers to T intersections such as northbound Terwilliger & I5 where the northbound off ramp T's into Terwilliger. There is a white stop line across the car lane but not the bike lane.

jwdoom
01-09-2007, 10:54 PM
Odds are the riders you refer to are just jerks. I see those "bicycles allowed full use of lane ORS blah blah blah" patches all the time, never see one reminding people that bicyclers are required to obey traffic laws.

PoPo
01-16-2007, 10:54 PM
You are right.
You have to stop.
The people who are yelling are wrong.

thinpaperwings
01-17-2007, 09:56 AM
There's an intersection like that westbound on Woodstock in front of Reed College. You get going fast down the hill, and then you have to stop at the T intersection, even though no one should be crossing your path (although there are pedestrians waiting for the bus right there on the sidewalk). That one irritates me a lot, but I think it would do more damage to driver's perceptions of bikes if bikes didn't have to stop there than it does to my legs that they have to work harder.

bikieboy
01-17-2007, 11:33 AM
ThinPW wrote -- "and then you have to stop at the T intersection, even though no one should be crossing your path"

... except for possibly a bicycle, pulling out from the cross street. But agreed, what one might call the "Right-Top o' the T" intersection stops, while required by law & not entirely needless, seem sort of...non-essential?

the Wumpus
01-20-2007, 12:30 AM
ThinPW wrote -- "and then you have to stop at the T intersection, even though no one should be crossing your path"

... except for possibly a bicycle, pulling out from the cross street. But agreed, what one might call the "Right-Top o' the T" intersection stops, while required by law & not entirely needless, seem sort of...non-essential?

I cross one of those on my walking commute to and from work two or four times a day. It's not a heavily bicycled road, but I've still had a few close calls with cyclists blowing the red light. Lots of kids on bikes tear through the crosswalks, too, on the way to the sidewalk. Just because cars won't be crossing your path, doesn't mean there's no cross traffic.
I know what you mean, though. I've always shot through those intersections on the bike, until having a close call or two as a pedestrian. It's long odds crossing paths with another human on foot or bike up here in Clark County, but it's still not a chance I take anymore.