Bicycle Specific Infrastructure and Robert Moses

A cyclist who uses lights, signals, and behaves as a predictable part of traffic doesn’t require bicycle specific infrastructure, some people would argue.

I would agree with them up to a point.

My views of a better culture for people don’t jive with bicycle specific infra (short for infrastructure) in dense urban area’s. Instead, I see these areas as perfect for true greening and humanizing public space.

The problem, as near as I can tell, is our cultural immersion in Robert Moses and his vision for the cities of tomorrow. Huge concrete jungles where everyone has a specific space and directions on how to operate in that space.
I hear this theme repeated back in transportation engineering. One webinar going so far as to suggest that trucks, motorcycles, and personal autos should each have their own specific lane.

Well that makes everything better! Especially if you only ever intend to cycle forward. I hope there’s a 7-11 in the middle of the street.

It’s utter madness.

We don’t have space for each type of vehicle to have its own specific lane to operate in and we sure as hell shouldn’t confine people to “lane cages” in an attempt to regulate the mess that is humanity.

Looking back over the history of the rise of the DOT empire and their powerful influence over local governments; I begin to understand why cycling advocates have been wooed into this desire for bicycle specific infra in their neighborhoods. The propaganda is seductive.

I look over Streetsblog, People for Bikes, and League of American Cyclists literature and their love affair with bike lanes; I see people advocating for gilded cages.

You don’t need, nor should you want, a bike lane in dense urban areas. These are places where people should be free to mill around the neighborhood and shop. Pedal from one side of the street to the other as they run their errands. There should be trees, shrubs, food gardens, and benches to sit on in the middle of the road. Or at least on either side of a dedicated rail or tram line.

After speaking with the director of bicycle promotion in Japan, Mr. Hidetomo Okoshi, I left the North American Handmade Bicycle Show with a better vision of cycling and its future.

Mr. Okoshi explained to me that people in his country do not as a rule commute by auto to their jobs. Nor do they commute by bicycle. Instead they take the train and in their communities they get around by foot, bicycle, and auto. In that order of hierarchy. The people he explained do not travel far by bicycle. I asked him about bike lanes. He had an air of apprehension as he explained that Japanese do not need this as much as Americans because of their respect for each other. That is when the lightbulb hit.

Bike lanes do not create respect for cyclists anymore than sidewalks create respect for pedestrians. Communities which insist on bike lanes as a “friendly” way of incorporating cycling as a viable means of transportation aren’t doing anything to help the pedestrians in their communities. Bike lanes, by forcing cyclists off the usable portion of the roadway, enable motorists to speed and endanger both cyclists and pedestrians, not to mention themselves.
As was recently pointed out by Tim Cupery on my Facebook page who said:

it’s worth pointing out that edge-riding IS doing a favor to motorists, so they can continue to go the speed that they would prefer.

This is a key motive behind segregated infrastructure, and many cyclists think of themselves as second-class road users.

And he is right; Motorists do not slow down in the presence of bike lanes. If anything it only encourages them to speed.

How then are bike lanes heralded as a means of humanizing current infra? Because as I see it they aren’t. Instead I see places like downtown Louisville, Lexington, New York, and Portland as huge Robert Moses machines. Churning out the same style of precision engineering which treats people as machines or worse robots who are programmed to follow a specific flow.

Now some might get confused and understandably so, because bicycle infra when held up to car culture is confusing, over whether or not I support any infra at all!

The answer is YES!

But not the way you imagine it and not the way we are currently being sold.

My vision entails trains as mass transit over great distances and as high speed movement between fixed places. Walking and cycling as the normal means of transportation between shorter distances. Zoning which creates inclusive infrastructure and alleviates the homeless crisis, not exacerbate it. Neighborhoods where kids play on the street and tool around on their bicycles. E-assist pedal transport of heavy goods from a centralized location. More reliance on creative solutions and less dependence on the Moses era of thinking.

Bicycle highways which connect cities to each other are an excellent start to this vision. Zoning for the use of the areas around it to meet the needs of those cycling long distance is crucial.

But what do we do in the meantime?

We dismantle DOT or at the very least remove it from power as an oligarchy. Sorry that was a bit ambitious for step one. Let me start over.

We advocate for mandatory cycling education in all schools. Educating our children on how to operate their bicycles as a part of traffic.
We advocate for mandatory cycling education on all drivers licensing, re-licensing, and court appointed diversion programs.
(By following these first two steps we can effectively remove or at least significantly reduce cycling prejudice in one generation. Something to think about.)
We advocate for reduced speed limits in neighborhoods and dense urban areas including cities. 20 mph is plenty.
We advocate for mass transit and transitioning from Heavy Goods Vehicles a.k.a. tractor trailers to E-assist Heavy Goods Pedal Bikes.
We advocate for programs with local police to report bullying and dangerous motorist behavior.
We advocate for Greening our local communities with tree planting, food gardens, and shrubbery.
We advocate for repeal of mandatory bike lane use laws.

If we get this started we can all have nice things.

You can ride your bicycle through here. It’s lovely isn’t it?

Or we can continue to have this.

Let’s stick a bike lane in here and call it green infra!

Space is scarce without resorting to urban sprawl. Yet urban sprawl is exactly what layering bicycle culture over auto culture is creating. I hate #SneckDown as it 1. doesn’t actually change anything. 2. It’s a crappy way to “educate” people. 3. It is, in my own opinion, a throwback to Oliver Twist. “Please Sir! May I have some more?” We aren’t asking for our space, it is ours to begin with, we are demanding it back.

I call it “Cycling Without Apology.” And far too many of you cycle as though you are apologizing for being present on the road.

People who have much to gain from selling Bicycle Lanes shouldn’t be trusted as a source of unbiased opinion on the greatness of Bicycle specific infra.

images (11) — I have some infra I’d like to sell you. It will make your life so much better.

This picture is a perfect example of gilded cages. It is a modern day version of separate but equal. Except that you aren’t treated as an equal. You are a bird in a cage and your freedom of movement is an illusion. Need to get to the shop in the middle of the other side of the street? Tough shit! Go down a block, make a U-turn, and then you will eventually reach your destination.

But we love authoritay! and some people want to treat cyclists as special snowflakes.

We will never move towards a society which unequivocally increases its modal share to bicycling unless we first remove all prejudice against and all special snowflake syndromes from cycling.

“Cycling without apology” and “Cyclists: Expected and Respected” should be mainstays of our advocacy language.

I don’t apologize for using road space which my taxes helped pay for. I am your equal on the road, respect me.

Any infra proposed which does not treat cyclists as either or both of those isn’t infra which is going to move our society forward nor will it increase modal share.

Posted on March 3, 2016 by Cherokee S. 1

David Bowie

Music is good. I’m not into it the way some people seem to be. So I declined from sharing my David Bowie story in the days after his death.

My most memorable David Bowie moment had nothing to do with music.

My step dad is a huge David Bowie fan.

I was about 8 or 9 years old.

It was a typical boring Sunday in our house. Nothing going on outside. Nothing on inside except a movie that my step dad was watching. I couldn’t make sense of the film. At first I thought it was an army movie. I liked those. But then it seemed to focus on this guy and elevate him to godlike status. I felt repelled by this glorification of one lone individual. I’ve always been repelled by hero worship.
As I’m watching the film, I’m trying to decide if I’m going to sit through the whole thing or put on my roller skates and go outside.
The scene shows a man laying in a bed. He has a bandage over his forehead. A man is near him and a woman stands over him. The camera zooms in on his face.
I see what looks like a red flash in one eye and get up close to the TV. The scene cuts to the woman. Boring. So I sit back. Then it shows the man laying in bed and there’s a brief showing of his face.
Excited, I tell my step dad “Hey! That guy has one big pupil and one little pupil.”
My step dad looks at me like I’m all kinds of stupid. “What do you mean one big pupil and one little pupil? He’d be dead if he had that.” Then my step dad launches into an explanation about how David Bowie has one brown eye and one blue eye. He explains that it’s a genetic trait.
I know I’m right. I just don’t know how to explain that I’m right.
I insist that if he were to look closely he would see some blue at the bottom of the colored part of the eye. “It’s his pupil that makes his eye look dark,” I explained.
My step dad told me I didn’t know what I was talking about and that I shouldn’t try to think so much on my own. Other people knew better and I should listen to them.

Only, I was right and he was wrong.

The memory of that stuck with me. I’d like to think that David Bowie is the type of person who would tell my step dad to shut his pie hole and thank me for being astute.

I’ll never understand why people who are wrong refuse to learn. Why they are content to stagnate in their ignorance. What motivates such people to stay stuck on stupid and tear other people down in the process?

I lost all interest in the movie after that.

The distaste that my step dad left with me wasn’t for David Bowie. Though it did set an unpleasant memory in my mind, which I would recall, every time I saw a David Bowie music video.

So after many years down the road. I came across an article discussing David Bowie’s eye condition and how he came to have it. I learned that I was right and my step dad was wrong.
I also learned that some people will blow a lot of smoke and make a lot of bluster when they think they’re right. I also learned that some people can make a lie sound very convincing and use unrelated facts to bolster their belief in their correctness.

I learned not to doubt myself.

An environment of learning is something I’ve always cultivated. If I’m wrong, I want to know why. How did I come to this conclusion erroneously? I’m not doubting you. I’m learning.

Bicycles

David Bowie has not been, to my knowledge, a bicycle person. So the story about my step dad, me, and a David Bowie film have nothing to do with bikes.

But there is a correlation and that correlation has to do with education.

There have been a lot of people over the years telling cyclists to hug the edge of a road for safety. Or that to be in keeping with the law we have to ride hugging the edge.

We don’t have to hug the edge. The law doesn’t require it.
We don’t have to hug the edge. It isn’t safe.
I will continue to explain why I’m right and they are wrong. I won’t always convince you with my limited explanations, but time will tell that I’m right and one day I will have a broader range of evidence to be able to explain it to you in a way that you will understand.

Until then put on your red shoes and ride a bicycle.

Posted on February 14, 2016 by Cherokee S. 0

The day after I was killed

The day after I was killed.

I placed a linen napkin next to each plate and carefully filled the glasses with juice. I brought in the newspaper and spread butter over the toast.

I watched, my heart aching, as our youngest child clung to my wife, crying inconsolably any time she was set down. Her sobbing hiccups and wavering voice asking “where’s daddy?”

I felt my heart swell with love as my son sat on the front porch. Tightly gripping my old baseball glove, leaving crescent moons in the leather.

The day after I was killed.

I walked down a familiar sidewalk and kicked a few pebbles. Watching as they bounced over the gutter and onto pavement stained red with my blood.

I wandered over to our local pub and sat with my friends as they held a vigil. Their eyes wandering from their full glasses to the television, where my face was prominently displayed. The newscaster looked grave as he reported my death.

I watched silently as my best friend hung up his bicycle and vowed never to ride again.

One week before I was killed.

A woman walked out of the local police station. Tears of frustration in her eyes. Her attempts to report a dangerous driver unheeded by police. The officer stared dispassionately as she described the driver and their actions which killed me. Firmly the officer turned her away, saying “since you weren’t hit, there is nothing we can do. No laws were broken.”

One week before I was killed.

A stranger tried to save my life.

Posted on February 10, 2016February 10, 2016 by Cherokee S. 6

Extremist thinking is hurting cycling

189.300 Vehicles to keep to right.
(1) The operator of any vehicle when upon a highway shall travel upon the right side of the highway whenever possible, and unless the left side of the highway is clear of all other traffic or obstructions for a sufficient distance ahead to permit the overtaking and passing of another vehicle to be completed without interfering with the operation of any vehicle approaching from the opposite direction or any vehicle being overtaken. The overtaking vehicle shall return to the proper traffic lane as soon as practicable and, if the passing vehicle enters the oncoming traffic lane, before coming within two hundred (200) feet of any approaching vehicle.
(2) The operator of any vehicle moving slowly upon a highway shall keep his vehicle as closely as practicable to the right-hand boundary of the highway, allowing more swiftly moving vehicles reasonably free passage to the left.

I present to you exhibit A

A more misunderstood statute, I have never seen.

Depending on which extremist camp you are in or have a foot in. And you do have a foot in it; even if you think you don’t.

There are definitions to KRS 189. The purpose of the definitions; to clarify any word or phrase which is misunderstood. Let’s see how far we can understand the statute without having to refer to the definitions.

Let’s start with the title.

Vehicles to keep right:

Vehicle; This is any legally defined mode of travel which is not pedestrian. A train is a vehicle, a horse and buggy are a vehicle, a bicycle is a vehicle, a motorcycle is a vehicle, a car is a vehicle, a truck is a vehicle.

We need to take note that it specifically does not mention “motor”. This means that the statute applies to all vehicle types. Motorized or not.

Keep Right; We drive on the right hand side of the road. Some countries, such as England, drive on the left side of the road. They have a “Keep Left” law. Ours is keep right. Propel your vehicle, but do so on the right side of the road.

This is the beginning of the statute and should help us understand the body.

Now we move on to the body.

189.300 Vehicles to keep to right.
(1) The operator of any vehicle when upon a highway shall travel upon the right side of the highway whenever possible,

The operator, this means you, of any vehicle. Do you see it? No matter your vehicle type, if you are the operator of a vehicle, you as the operator are incumbent to keep your vehicle on the right side of the highway.
Whenever possible.

Whenever possible? You mean that I don’t always have to operate on the right side of the highway?

You are required to operate your vehicle on the right side of the highway. Allowing for the ever changing dynamics of said highway you are only required to keep right when it is possible.

Why possible and not practicable?

What is PRACTICABLE?
Able to be done or put into practice successfully:
Any idea or project which can be brought to fruition or reality without any unreasonable demands.
What is POSSIBLE?
Able to be done; within the power or capacity of someone or something:
Capable of existing or happening ; feasible.

Definitions via Black’s Law Dictionary and Oxford Dictionary.

Practicable isn’t always possible depending on how the word is used. Possible has a higher demand on the operator then practicable.

The statute requires you to always operate on the right whenever possible.

By using “possible” they have created uniformity with the other statutes. It isn’t always practicable to operate on the right; like when there is a vehicle moving slower than you would like to go. But it is always possible to operate on the right. You can slow down and stay behind the vehicle until it is possible to change lanes and pass.

189.300 Vehicles to keep to right.
(1) The operator of any vehicle when upon a highway shall travel upon the right side of the highway whenever possible, and unless the left side of the highway is clear of all other traffic or obstructions for a sufficient distance ahead to permit the overtaking and passing of another vehicle to be completed without interfering with the operation of any vehicle approaching from the opposite direction or any vehicle being overtaken.

Unless the left side of the highway is clear of all other traffic or obstructions.
Simply stated, you can not overtake, pass, another vehicle if there is traffic or obstructions on the left side of the highway.
You are required to pass on the LEFT. This includes lanes as we will read further down the statute. i.e. Left Lane.
For a sufficient distance ahead.
Sufficient distance is defined as 200 feet further down in the statute.
To permit the overtaking and passing of another vehicle.
This is where you are legally allowed to overtake, pass, another vehicle. This is the exception to the rule. You may legally drive on the left for the purpose of overtaking or moving around an obstruction.

Obstruction: A thing that impedes or prevents passage or progress; an obstacle or blockage:the tractor hit an obstruction.

An obstruction is a stationary object. The word can not be used to mean bicycle. It can be used to mean a parked or stationary object; such as a car. A row of parked cars are an obstruction. A moving bicycle is not. See also KRS 189.390 (7) Impeding.

To be completed without interfering.
You have to be able to complete the maneuver without interfering. If you interfere with anything that is in front of or to the left of the highway then you have to keep right.
With the operation of any vehicle approaching from the opposite direction or any vehicle being overtaken.
You can’t interfere with the operation of any vehicle approaching and you also can not interfere with any vehicle being overtaken. See also KRS 189.34o (8) Interfering.

189.300 Vehicles to keep to right.
(1) The operator of any vehicle when upon a highway shall travel upon the right side of the highway whenever possible, and unless the left side of the highway is clear of all other traffic or obstructions for a sufficient distance ahead to permit the overtaking and passing of another vehicle to be completed without interfering with the operation of any vehicle approaching from the opposite direction or any vehicle being overtaken. The overtaking vehicle shall return to the proper traffic lane as soon as practicable and, if the passing vehicle enters the oncoming traffic lane, before coming within two hundred (200) feet of any approaching vehicle.

The overtaking vehicle.
This is the person operating the vehicle, which is operating on the left side of the highway. You are in the act of overtaking.
Shall return to the proper traffic lane. (1)
You have to go back to operating on the right. Remember this is a keep right statute or law. You are required to continue operating on the right.

What is SHALL?
As used in statutes and similar instruments, this word is generally imperative or mandatory; but it may be construed as merely permissive or directory, (as equivalent to “may,”) to carry out the legislative intention and In cases where no right or benefit to any one depends on its being taken in the imperative sense, and where no public or private right is impaired by its interpretation in the other sense. Also, as against the government, “shall” is to be construed as “may,” unless a contrary intention is manifest. See Wheeler v. Chicago, 24 111. 105, 76 Am. Dec. 736; People v. Chicago Sanitary Dist., 184 111. 597, 56 N. E. 9.”.:;: Madison v. Daley (C. C.) 58 Fed. 753; Cairo & F. R. Co. v. Ilecht, 95 U. S. 170, 24 L. Ed. 423. SHAM PLEA. See PLEA. SHARE 1082 SHERIFF Via Black’s Law Dictionary

Shall as explained in Black’s Law Dictionary can mean the more permissive “MAY” unless there is an impairment of public right. And in the case of KRS 189.300 you “SHALL” return to the right because if you don’t, you are impairing the “RIGHTS” of oncoming traffic.

Shall return to the proper traffic lane. (2)
Notice the word “LANE”? A highway is made up of lanes. These lanes are defined in the definitions. So in this case we are going to take a peek at our definitions for the chapter.

Definitions for KRS Chapter 189

Highway vs Roadway

(3) “Highway” means any public road, street, avenue, alley or boulevard, bridge, viaduct, or trestle and the approaches to them and includes private residential roads and parking lots covered by an agreement under KRS 61.362, off-street parking facilities offered for public use, whether publicly or privately owned, except for-hire parking facilities listed in KRS 189.700.

(10) “Roadway” means that portion of a highway improved, designed, or ordinarily used for vehicular travel, exclusive of the berm or shoulder. If a highway includes two
(2) or more separate roadways, the term “roadway” as used herein shall refer to any roadway separately but not to all such roadways collectively.

In the definitions for the chapter the word Highway is used to collectively refer to all roadway types. It could be an avenue. It could be a boulevard. It could be an alley. It could be a bridge. This is a general word and it is used in this statute not to discriminate against vehicles but to INCLUDE all roadway types.

KRS 189.300 means that no matter the type of roadway, you are required to keep right.

Roadway:
a road or the part of a road used by vehicles.
Highway:
(especially North American English) a main road for travelling long distances, especially one connecting and going through cities and towns
Lane:
a section of a wide road, that is marked by painted white lines, to keep lines of traffic separate.

Whether it is a Highway or a Roadway you are required to keep right.
But in a LANE you shall occupy as much of that lane as possible. See KRS 189.340 (6) (a) Lanes.

This is a statute for drivers. This is not a statute for engineers. KRS has different chapters and definitions for engineering highways. This chapter is for everyone who drives. We can not apply engineering terms to the legal definition of how to operate a vehicle on the road. We are all drivers but we are not all engineers.

In this example the word lane is synonymous with roadway. See also; Lane Synonyms.

So this keep right statute also applies to laned highways but does it apply to lanes? We will explore this further down.

As soon as practicable.
There is the word practicable. We already showed that this word is not as imperative as the word possible. You can possibly return to the right, shoving the vehicle being overtaken further to the right, or forcing them to hit their brakes. But that wouldn’t be practicable. So once you have overtaken the vehicle and it is safe for you to move back to the right, then you move back to the right. Remember you can not interfere with the operation of the vehicle being overtaken.
And, if the passing vehicle enters the oncoming traffic lane, before coming within two hundred (200) feet of any approaching vehicle.
200 hundred feet is a lot of room. But it can be deceptive when you have a vehicle coming towards you at the speed limit. So if you can see a vehicle approaching you be very cautious when overtaking.

Now! Are we in the proper frame of mind?

I sure hope so.

We have thus far concluded that this statue is for the purpose of defining our state as a uniform whole of the United States. In the United States we drive on the right.

We also do not interfere with any traffic on the left, nor with any traffic we are overtaking.

We are required to operate on the right but it isn’t always mandatory under certain exclusions. And as long as all of those exclusions are met, we can safely operate on the left but only for a brief amount of time.

We have also obtained a firm grasp of “Practicable” as used in the statute.

Extremist thinking is hurting cycling.

Before we proceed to the next paragraph of this statute, let’s revisit the title of this blog.

Extremist thinking. It is hurting cycling.

Camp A:

An extremist will tell you that it isn’t safe to operate in a lane. They will tell you that you have to operate on the shoulder. They will point to this law as proof.

Camp B:

An extremist will tell you that this law is designed to keep cyclists far right. They will tell you that this law mandates you to operate on the shoulder. They will point to this law as proof.

But what does the statute actually say?

Let’s proceed to the hotly contested “Keep Far Right Law.”

189.300 Vehicles to keep to right.
(1) The operator of any vehicle when upon a highway shall travel upon the right side of the highway whenever possible, and unless the left side of the highway is clear of all other traffic or obstructions for a sufficient distance ahead to permit the overtaking and passing of another vehicle to be completed without interfering with the operation of any vehicle approaching from the opposite direction or any vehicle being overtaken. The overtaking vehicle shall return to the proper traffic lane as soon as practicable and, if the passing vehicle enters the oncoming traffic lane, before coming within two hundred (200) feet of any approaching vehicle.
(2) The operator of any vehicle moving slowly upon a highway

The operator of any vehicle.
The operator is the person in control of the vehicle. Any vehicle means “ANY VEHICLE.” That’s right, this law applies to all vehicles equally.
Moving slowly.
This is a subjective term. In KRS 189.390 (7) A person shall not drive a motor vehicle at a speed that will impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic, except when reduced speed is necessary for safe operation or in compliance with law.
A vehicle which is capable of operating at its top speed but at a speed which is less than the speed limit is not impeding. If it is a motor vehicle operating at less than its capable speed but under the speed limit it still isn’t impeding, if other conditions come into play, such as road conditions. i.e. inclement weather, other traffic upon the highway, approaching a hill, and any other variable.
Upon a highway.
This means any road type. The use of the word highway in this statute is to include all the variable road types. It is not used to include the shoulder.

189.300 Vehicles to keep to right.
(1) The operator of any vehicle when upon a highway shall travel upon the right side of the highway whenever possible, and unless the left side of the highway is clear of all other traffic or obstructions for a sufficient distance ahead to permit the overtaking and passing of another vehicle to be completed without interfering with the operation of any vehicle approaching from the opposite direction or any vehicle being overtaken. The overtaking vehicle shall return to the proper traffic lane as soon as practicable and, if the passing vehicle enters the oncoming traffic lane, before coming within two hundred (200) feet of any approaching vehicle.
(2) The operator of any vehicle moving slowly upon a highway shall keep his vehicle as closely as practicable to the right-hand boundary of the highway

Shall keep his vehicle as closely as practicable.
Do you recall Black’s Law Dictionary legal definition for “Shall” Do you recall that the word can be used synonymously with the permissive “May” as long as no one’s rights are being impaired? When you read the statute, does it say anywhere that it is your right to operate on the left? No. Does it say anywhere that it is your right to pass traffic moving slower than you? No.

Passing is not a right.

So it can be inferred that that the use of the word “shall” in this instance is synonymous with the more permissive “May.”

We can also further verify that this is indeed the correct definition when we see also that the word “Practicable” is used in the same sentence. It isn’t always practicable to be far right.
To the right-hand boundary of the highway.
This statute applies equally to all vehicle types. When we read KRS 189.340 we see that driving off the roadway is illegal and this statute applies to all vehicles. So we have to figure out what the boundary of the highway is, as it applies to this chapter. So we go back to the definitions.
KRS 189.010 (10) “Roadway” means that portion of a highway improved, designed, or ordinarily used for vehicular travel, exclusive of the berm or shoulder.
So we drive as close to the right as practicable but we do not operate on the berm or shoulder.

189.300 Vehicles to keep to right.
(1) The operator of any vehicle when upon a highway shall travel upon the right side of the highway whenever possible, and unless the left side of the highway is clear of all other traffic or obstructions for a sufficient distance ahead to permit the overtaking and passing of another vehicle to be completed without interfering with the operation of any vehicle approaching from the opposite direction or any vehicle being overtaken. The overtaking vehicle shall return to the proper traffic lane as soon as practicable and, if the passing vehicle enters the oncoming traffic lane, before coming within two hundred (200) feet of any approaching vehicle.
(2) The operator of any vehicle moving slowly upon a highway shall keep his vehicle as closely as practicable to the right-hand boundary of the highway, allowing more swiftly moving vehicles reasonably free passage to the left.

Allowing more swiftly moving vehicles reasonably free passage to the left.
And that’s it folks. We are only required to operate as far right as is safe and which allows more swiftly moving vehicles reasonably free passage to the left.

It only has to be reasonable because each vehicle is going to be a different type. What may be reasonable for a 3 ton wide load tractor trailer isn’t going to be reasonable for a twenty pound bicycle.
The statute applies to all vehicle types on all types of roads. It is intended to advise people on the basic principles of our highways, the safe use of our highways, and the courteous use of our highways.

This section of the statute does not mention lanes. The reason it does not mention lanes is because this portion of the statute does not apply to lanes. If there is a lane of traffic per KRS 189.340 (6) (a) that vehicle “SHALL” occupy as much of the lane as “Possible.” And in the use of both the words “shall” and “possible” and with the understanding that by not being fully in a lane interferes with the rights of other road users, this statute is imperative.

As a cyclist, as any road user, you are required to occupy a lane of travel and this statute has nothing to do with driving on the shoulder. It is only because of a lack of education on this subject that we have fools in both camps. Worse, we have fools on the public roads, police stations, and courtrooms.

The idea, that this law requires a cyclist to operate on the right third of a lane of travel,needs to be burned with fire!

It doesn’t even apply to two lane highways. As can be seen in KRS 189.310

189.310 Vehicles meeting other vehicles and animals. (1) Two (2) vehicles passing or about to pass each other in opposite directions shall have the right-of-way, and no other vehicle to the rear of those two (2) vehicles shall pass or attempt to pass either of those vehicles.
(2) Vehicles proceeding from opposite directions shall pass each other from the right, each giving to the other one-half (1/2) of the highway as nearly as possible.
(3) Every person operating a vehicle on a highway and approaching any animal being ridden or driven, shall exercise every reasonable precaution to prevent frightening the animal and to insure the safety of the person riding or driving it.

Get educated!

As a cyclist you should be educated on all the rules of the road. As a cyclist you should be educated on all the safe operations of movement on the road.

You have the right to be safe. Use it. Exercise your right.

images (9) — This is where cyclists keep as far right as practicable. This is what it looks like. Memorize it. Use it!

Posted on February 6, 2016 by Cherokee S. 4

All those pesky details.

I have cancer.

My health care was interrupted by Nicholasville Police Department and their ticketing campaign against me.

I was a cyclist fighting for her rights.

But I wasn’t fighting for the rights of cycling.

I was fighting for the right to keep my job, my home, my health insurance.

I was fighting for my kids.

My posts on bicycle safety was a response to the backlash.

I wasn’t doing anything illegal and I was cycling safely.

So why should I have to defend my right to commute to work by bicycle?

I think it is because cycling advocates have pushed so hard and for so long to make cycling appear scary and dangerous without special infrastructure or equipment.

We need laws to keep us safe!

We need bike lanes to keep us safe!

We need all these shiny things so we’ll be safe!

And you still get killed and I’m still alive.

Even with my healthcare interrupted.

The year my story hit the news was the year my doctor told me my cancer was in remission but that I still had to come in for regular check up’s.

I remember putting the lab results on the fridge with a magnet. Right next to the ticket I’d received for “Careless Driving,” because I rode a bicycle in the travel lane.

I haven’t been able to go in for regular check up’s since everything happened.

I, like any other good mother, put my kids needs before my own. I put all my energy into keeping my commute and my job. Then I started getting death threats.

People were intentionally driving their cars at me. People were laughing about what “bad drivers” their spouse is and how he commutes on that road every day. “It’s just a matter of time. Ha ha.”

It really is just a matter of time if I can’t go in for a check up.

The reporter who first broke my story nixed the idea of mentioning cancer. I have no idea why. Maybe it humanized me too much? Maybe it didn’t make for a neatly packaged story? Who knows?

I doubt it would have mattered anyways. Arrogant motorists and their thugs a.k.a Nicholasville Police Department didn’t want me on their roads. Period.

Nobody should have to struggle in the aftermath of a full on assault of their civil rights.

But I am.

I hate car culture. It destroys lives in more ways than one.

Posted on February 4, 2016 by Cherokee S. 0

It can happen to you

Originally shared by:

Steve M Williams
December 5, 2015 · Clovis, CA ·
This put me damn near in tears; read this encounter with police that professor Steve Locke went through, and it will explain everything you need to know about being black in 21st century America. If you don’t get it from this then really I’m wasting my time trying to explain it.

“This is what I wore to work today.

On my way to get a burrito before work, I was detained by the police.

I noticed the police car in the public lot behind Centre Street. As I was walking away from my car, the cruiser followed me. I walked down Centre Street and was about to cross over to the burrito place and the officer got out of the car.

“Hey my man,” he said.

He unsnapped the holster of his gun.

I took my hands out of my pockets.

“Yes?” I said.

“Where you coming from?”

“Home.”

Where’s home?”

“Dedham.”

How’d you get here?”

“I drove.”

He was next to me now. Two other police cars pulled up. I was standing in from of the bank across the street from the burrito place. I was going to get lunch before I taught my 1:30 class. There were cops all around me.

I said nothing. I looked at the officer who addressed me. He was white, stocky, bearded.

“You weren’t over there, were you?” He pointed down Centre Street toward Hyde Square.

“No. I came from Dedham.”

“What’s your address?”

I told him.

“We had someone matching your description just try to break into a woman’s house.”

A second police officer stood next to me; white, tall, bearded. Two police cruisers passed and would continue to circle the block for the 35 minutes I was standing across the street from the burrito place.

“You fit the description,” the officer said. “Black male, knit hat, puffy coat. Do you have identification.”

“It’s in my wallet. May I reach into my pocket and get my wallet?”

“Yeah.”

I handed him my license. I told him it did not have my current address. He walked over to a police car. The other cop, taller, wearing sunglasses, told me that I fit the description of someone who broke into a woman’s house. Right down to the knit cap.

Barbara Sullivan made a knit cap for me. She knitted it in pinks and browns and blues and oranges and lime green. No one has a hat like this. It doesn’t fit any description that anyone would have. I looked at the second cop. I clasped my hands in front of me to stop them from shaking.

“For the record,” I said to the second cop, “I’m not a criminal. I’m a college professor.” I was wearing my faculty ID around my neck, clearly visible with my photo.

“You fit the description so we just have to check it out.” The first cop returned and handed me my license.

“We have the victim and we need her to take a look at you to see if you are the person.”

It was at this moment that I knew that I was probably going to die. I am not being dramatic when I say this. I was not going to get into a police car. I was not going to present myself to some victim. I was not going let someone tell the cops that I was not guilty when I already told them that I had nothing to do with any robbery. I was not going to let them take me anywhere because if they did, the chance I was going to be accused of something I did not do rose exponentially. I knew this in my heart. I was not going anywhere with these cops and I was not going to let some white woman decide whether or not I was a criminal, especially after I told them that I was not a criminal. This meant that I was going to resist arrest. This meant that I was not going to let the police put their hands on me.

If you are wondering why people don’t go with the police, I hope this explains it for you.

Something weird happens when you are on the street being detained by the police. People look at you like you are a criminal. The police are detaining you so clearly you must have done something, otherwise they wouldn’t have you. No one made eye contact with me. I was hoping that someone I knew would walk down the street or come out of one of the shops or get off the 39 bus or come out of JP Licks and say to these cops, “That’s Steve Locke. What the FUCK are you detaining him for?”

The cops decided that they would bring the victim to come view me on the street. The asked me to wait. I said nothing. I stood still.

“Thanks for cooperating,” the second cop said. “This is probably nothing, but it’s our job and you do fit the description. 5′ 11″, black male. One-hundred-and-sixty pounds, but you’re a little more than that. Knit hat.”

A little more than 160. Thanks for that, I thought.

An older white woman walked behind me and up to the second cop. She turned and looked at me and then back at him. “You guys sure are busy today.”

I noticed a black woman further down the block. She was small and concerned. She was watching what was going on. I focused on her red coat. I slowed my breathing. I looked at her from time to time.

I thought: Don’t leave, sister. Please don’t leave.

The first cop said, “Where do you teach?”

“Massachusetts College of Art and Design.” I tugged at the lanyard that had my ID.

“How long you been teaching there?”

“Thirteen years.”

We stood in silence for about 10 more minutes.

An unmarked police car pulled up. The first cop went over to talk to the driver. The driver kept looking at me as the cop spoke to him. I looked directly at the driver. He got out of the car.

“I’m Detective Cardoza. I appreciate your cooperation.”

I said nothing.

“I’m sure these officers told you what is going on?”

“They did.”

“Where are you coming from?”

“From my home in Dedham.”

“How did you get here?”

“I drove.”

“Where is your car?”

“It’s in the lot behind Bukhara.” I pointed up Centre Street.

“Okay,” the detective said. “We’re going to let you go. Do you have a car key you can show me?”

“Yes,” I said. “I’m going to reach into my pocket and pull out my car key.”

“Okay.”

I showed him the key to my car.

The cops thanked me for my cooperation. I nodded and turned to go.

“Sorry for screwing up your lunch break,” the second cop said.

I walked back toward my car, away from the burrito place. I saw the woman in red.

“Thank you,” I said to her. “Thank you for staying.”

“Are you ok?” She said. Her small beautiful face was lined with concern.

“Not really. I’m really shook up. And I have to get to work.”

“I knew something was wrong. I was watching the whole thing. The way they are treating us now, you have to watch them. ”

“I’m so grateful you were there. I kept thinking to myself, ‘Don’t leave, sister.’ May I give you a hug?”

“Yes,” she said. She held me as I shook. “Are you sure you are ok?”

“No I’m not. I’m going to have a good cry in my car. I have to go teach.”

“You’re at MassArt. My friend is at MassArt.”

“What’s your name?” She told me. I realized we were Facebook friends. I told her this.

“I’ll check in with you on Facebook,” she said.

I put my head down and walked to my car.

My colleague was in our shared office and she was able to calm me down. I had about 45 minutes until my class began and I had to teach. I forgot the lesson I had planned. I forget the schedule. I couldn’t think about how to do my job. I thought about the fact my word counted for nothing, they didn’t believe that I wasn’t a criminal. They had to find out. My word was not enough for them. My ID was not enough for them. My handmade one-of-a-kind knit hat was an object of suspicion. My Ralph Lauren quilted blazer was only a “puffy coat.” That white woman could just walk up to a cop and talk about me like I was an object for regard. I wanted to go back and spit in their faces. The cops were probably deeply satisfied with how they handled the interaction, how they didn’t escalate the situation, how they were respectful and polite.

I imagined sitting in the back of a police car while a white woman decides if I am a criminal or not. If I looked guilty being detained by the cops imagine how vile I become sitting in a cruiser? I knew I could not let that happen to me. I knew if that were to happen, I would be dead.

Nothing I am, nothing I do, nothing I have means anything because I fit the description.

I had to confess to my students that I was a bit out of it today and I asked them to bear with me. I had to teach.

After class I was supposed to go to the openings for First Friday. I went home.”

~Steve Locke

I can feel his pain.

“You must be doing something wrong because you are [fill in the blank].” Is a blanket form of prejudice. It can be used in racism, sexism, and for anyone who doesn’t fit the status quo.

The part of his story which had the biggest impact for me was;

“Something weird happens when you are on the street being detained by the police. People look at you like you are a criminal. The police are detaining you so clearly you must have done something, otherwise they wouldn’t have you.”

This is my own experience. While the local cycling advocates tsk’d tsk’d over me for legally and safely cycling on a public road. People assumed I had broken some law. That I was wrong to be cycling. All sorts of excuses were given as to why it was acceptable for the cycling community to leave me out to hang.

“I wouldn’t cycle like that.”

“You are giving cyclists a bad name.”

“You shouldn’t be on that road. It isn’t safe.”

All of these were excuses to justify their own fears and soothe their conscious, while my life was being systematically destroyed.

Can you imagine if members of #BlackLivesMatter; instead of supporting Steve, instead chose to focus on what he was wearing? Or the way he walked on the street? You would think, “how absurd!” And yet! This is exactly what happened to me.

I’m not black, but if I had been, would it have been a race issue? I’m not talking about the #AllLivesMatter group or reverse racism. I’m talking about why, we as a society leave some people to hang, while others are given empathy. There are no incremental levels of injustice and wrongdoing at the hands of the police or judicial system. If it was wrong to do to Steve, then it was wrong to do it to me.

I hope you felt empathy for Steve. I hope his story kindled anger in your heart over the injustice that he experienced. And I want you to feel that same anger about all the other injustices that are happening to people. But more than that, I want you to do something about it. I want you to be there for people. I mean really be there.

I want you to do one more thing.

I don’t want you to reduce Steve to victimhood. He is a strong, smart, capable adult. He deserves to be treated with respect. Black people deserve to be treated as “expected and respected” members of our community.

And when cycling advocates are advocating for cyclists. I don’t want you to reduce them to victimhood. Because we are not victims. We are strong, smart, capable adults. Cyclists deserve to be treated with respect. They deserve to be treated as an “expected and respected” part of traffic.

From my own personal experience, I have heard it all. I can not begin to tell you how heart achingly frustrating it is to explain to people that I hadn’t done anything wrong. I hadn’t broken any laws.

No laws were broken!

Yet, I was ticketed and arrested anyway.

Professor Steve didn’t do anything wrong. The cops were being lazy and targeting any black male in the neighborhood.

The only thing protecting Professor Steve was his status as a professor.

The only thing protecting me was the color of my skin.

And neither of those things should have ever been a part of the equation where police and judicial bullying are concerned.

The fact that neither of us were breaking any laws should have been the only protection we required.

Furthermore, my status as a woman was enough to embolden my antagonizers both in and out of the legal system.

Don’t think for one second that because you are a man, white, or have social status that it can’t happen to you. Eli Damon can tell you that even those won’t protect you if you are a using a bicycle for transportation.

What happened to Steve, Eli, and myself should show you;

It can happen to you.

Start demanding positive changes.

Now!

Posted on January 29, 2016 by Cherokee S. 0

Commuting through Portland part 2

I have now approached the intersection.

Yielding to oncoming traffic, I find my break and put myself in que to make a left turn. This is an uncontrolled intersection. Everyman for himself. Kind of like playing frogger but for keeps.

Lets play chicken.PNG — You must operate your vehicle the same way you would a motor vehicle.

This would seem intimidating on the first look. Break it down into baby steps. You don’t have to get your bike in the far right lane on the first go. You wouldn’t do that in a car. Why would you do it on a bicycle?

I’ve had the added advantage of being an operator of a motorcycle. I know how to handle two wheels. You don’t treat intersections like this as a pedestrian. You treat it like you are operating a bad ass motorcycle.

Once the traffic to my left is clear, I check the right side traffic. I see that there is a car approaching at a high rate of speed but they are in the far right lane. So I pull out and merge into the left lane. I shoulder check and signal my intent to merge into the right hand lane. The car safely and legally passes on my right and the person operating the car to the rear of them slows enough to allow me to safely merge in. Once I have occupied the right hand lane, I then merge into the bike lane.

Break it down into steps. It isn’t hard. Education gives you confidence and knowledge. Knowledge that you are a legitimate road user and have every right to be where you need to be, when you need to be there.

I’m going along and everything is super uneventful even when the bike lane ends.

As an average cyclist, I am so sick and tired of hearing advocates whine, yes whine, about “unsafe” roads. A road is unsafe when people violate basic road rules and road safety.

The road itself is an inert presence. The people on the road make it safe or unsafe. As a cyclist you minimize your risk by operating visibly, predictably, and with the flow of traffic.

That being said, I understand and share the desire for better infrastructure. I want to see more of this

Mom and kids out and about. Another normal day cycling.

And less of this

images (5) — That’s right. There isn’t anywhere which is “safe” from bad drivers. So let’s make sure we are advocating for cycling fairness campaigns.

And until we get the Education, Legislation, and Infrastructure which treats us as equitable road users. I and my child bike like this.

9-Deb-child — We are not waiting for a future in which we hope to receive the respect of the culture. We respect ourselves now.

When I first started cycling I had no idea about bike tribes, bike culture, or bike lanes. Everything I knew about cycling came from my knowledge as the operator of a vehicle. Listening to the bicycle advocates, knowing what I know now, I would never have started riding a bike based on their tweets and Facebook posts. Your all encompassing focus on infrastructure is such that I would believe, if I didn’t know better, that biking without some type of specialized infra. is just not safe. Not at all safe! And the message I would take from that is “Don’t do it.” Don’t even try.

Which is why I am so grateful that I was as green as a meadow on a spring day and as wet behind the ears as a just born foal. If I had to bear the brunt of your cycling messages, I would never ever have put my butt on a bike.

But back to my commute.

So now the bike lane ends and being an educated cyclist, I know just what to do.

I shoulder check, signal, shoulder check, and merge into the right hand lane. My comfort level increases as I now have eight feet of space between me and passing autos.

I follow my Google maps directions and before I know it, I’m back on Pacific Coast Highway 99.

This is where things start to get interesting.

I’m now going downhill. There is a bike lane on my right and the fear of a mandatory bike lane law in my soul.

Since I’m going down hill, I’m doing at least 25 mph.

Back in Kentucky, when I was going through all that shit for legally and safely riding a bicycle, I spent a lot of time researching all of the stuff that I was being told by “knowledgeable” cycling advocates. One of the things I discovered is that bike lanes are not recommended for speeds greater than ten miles an hour. I don’t have the article to link to but I wasn’t alone in this knowledge. When I attended the Kentucky Bicycle and Bikeway Commission meeting to update the regulations for cycling in Kentucky, one of the things I was able to influence was the speed limit for mandatory cycling in bike lanes. There isn’t a speed limit for cycling in bike lanes. What there is, is legislation stating that if you are doing better than 10 mph you are NOT required to be in a bike lane. This frees up the really fast road cyclists from bike lane requirements. If you can do 25+ mph on the road and I know some of you who can do 35+ on the road, then you are not required to be in a bike lane. It is safer for you to cycle in a wider lane of travel than in an itty bitty space. You’re welcome! ~~Ungrateful bastards~~.

Oregon doesn’t have this exclusion specifically. But! There is a lot of loose gravel and other debris in the lane. So I control my lane all the way down the hill. TriMet bus driver gives me a full lane change to pass. This is important to note. Here’s why.

One day I’m riding the bus down this stretch of highway and I see a cyclist in the bike lane. The cyclist is trying to avoid a person parking their car. So the cyclist is in the bike lane but on the outer edge of it. So not really in the lane. Then the cyclist eases out of the bike lane but not fully out of it. The bus driver and I are watching this. I don’t say anything to the driver. I want to see what he does. (If I felt the cyclist was in danger you can bet I would have said something).

The TriMet bus driver slows down. Way down. The cyclist is hovering in and out of the bike lane. The bus driver moves to the left but just enough. So now the cyclist is in part of the right hand lane and the bus driver is partially in the right hand lane but partially in the left lane. Cars are whizzing by on the left and they are having to nudge out of their lane to the left. I mean the whole thing is a cockup.

Finally! We pass the cyclist and the bus driver let’s out a sigh of relief. It was a long and dodgy block.

I don’t do that. I am smack dab in the middle of the lane and the TriMet driver gives me a full lane change and passes right along at speed.

Then there’s the “First Student” bus driver. These guys are assholes. This idiot gets right on my ass. Totally breaking the law about following at a safe speed. He clearly wants me to move out of his way. My Google maps indicates that my left turn is approaching, only now I can’t make my left turn because I can’t see behind this fucker to know if there is traffic barreling up the left (passing) lane. So I impatiently wave at him to back the fuck off. He doesn’t. So I move further into the left side of the right hand lane and I’m practically hugging the line. I see that the lane is clear and I wouldn’t be violating anyone else’s right of way, so I merge left and tell the school bus driver to fuck off! He flips me the bird back. And that kids is why we can’t have nice things where First Student school bus drivers are involved.

I make my left in an intersection that is poorly controlled. There isn’t a left turn light. So I have to go when traffic is reasonably clear. There is an optical illusion to boot. The oncoming traffic has, in the far right lane, a merge into the street. Taking careful note of the traffic pattern I see that the driver is indeed taking the right merge and I am clear to make my left turn.

My scary left turn — The poor intersection control here, shows me that the engineers didn’t design it with pedestrian or bicycle traffic in mind.

Google maps needs to put some real effort into their bicycle route. I’ll talk more about that on a different blog post.

I make my way up the road and turn right onto Multnomah Blvd.

I know I-5 is along here somewhere. As I travel down the road I can see the fast moving cars to my left. I’ve gone under the overpass and come up on the other side.

I’m beginning to wonder if I’ve wondered onto a road I shouldn’t be on. I see that there is a lane to the left which leads directly onto I-5 and being new to the area, I start to freak out a little.

Then I see a bike lane and I feel reassured that I’m allowed on this stretch of road. That I have not somehow wandered onto I-5 after all. Wouldn’t that make for an interesting news story and give the haters something to point and laugh at.

Just as I’m starting to feel grateful for the bike lane, I see this.

But I need to go left.PNG — I need to turn left and the bike lane is engineered to keep me on the far right.

People are whizzing by in their cars and the paint has failed me. This is why I worry about new cyclists who have been educated by irresponsible advocates to rely heavily on paint. The paint is a lie! If you follow it, you will die!

I follow the same order of shoulder check, signal, shoulder check, and merge. The motorist speeding up from my rear sees me and slows down. They behave like any other well behaved road user. I am there first by the time they arrive and they appropriately yield the right of way to me.

Once I’m in the left side of the lane, they safely pass me on the right and make their right turn.

I turn left and merge into the bike lane. It’s not great infra. but I’m legally mandated to be there. If I get injured because of the poor quality and the state law legally binding me to use it, I’m sueing the state, the transportation dept., the city planners, engineers, and I’m going to encourage whoever hurts me while I’m in the bike lane to do the same. I’m intelligent and capable. If it’s good infra. I’ll be in it.

At this point Google maps and the geography have me confused as to my exact location. I’m directed down a steep ass residential hill. Riding the brakes all the way down and then I am confronted with another left turn at an uncontrolled intersection.

Hey Google! Directing cyclists onto residential roads isn’t always a safe bet. Direct and to the point. Direct and to the point. OK? OK!

I make it through and control my lane down the road.

I start seeing signs warning of construction ahead. I begin to wonder if I’m going to make it through here. Then I remember how confusing this mess is to people driving cars and I realize that I have it way easier than they do.

Uh oh.PNG — I see a path on the left but I can’t get to it! The sign in the picture wasn’t there the day I went through. I had some doubts but pulled #Rule5 out of my pocket and hardened the fuck up.

This was a totally uneventful crossing over the bridge. The construction workers in their souped up golf carts found me amusing as they passed me in the oncoming traffic lane. I straightened my back and raised my chin just a bit higher. I wasn’t just a cyclist in that moment. I was a queen and this was my court. 🙂

To everyone else on the road I treated them like they were obviously in the wrong place.

images (8).jpg — Attitude Bitch! I got it!

The only person who tried to rain on my parade was the court jester who honked at me as he passed me in the oncoming traffic lane. I turned my nose up at the prejudiced idiot.

Once I make it across the bridge and I’m securely on the other side, I see my beloved sharrow.

images (9).jpg — Sharrows! I love ’em. They can and will pass left of center. Exactly as the law states.

Whenever a motorist honks at me where there are sharrows, I point at the sharrow and give them my best snobby dismissal. Back straight, eyes straight ahead, and a little smile that plays about my lips and if they sit there and lay on their horn. I think “Whatcha gonna do biotch?! That’s right! Not a goddamned thing.”

Then I arrived at my destination, interviewed, and was offered the position.

I am really excited to help make great things happen for this company.

Posted on January 29, 2016January 29, 2016 by Cherokee S. 3

Observing Traffic Court

If you want to put your finger on the pulse of car culture; observe traffic court.

The light was yellow for 2.7 seconds. I didn’t have time to stop in 2.7 seconds. So I went forward because I was worried about being cited for impeding traffic.
Actual testimony from a defendant.

There was so much traffic. The light was hard to see. I was worried about what the people behind me would do so I went through the light. I didn’t want to block the intersection.
Actual testimony from a defendant.

My van was loaded down with bricks. I must have had like a ton of weight back there. The road was really slick from all the rain and I knew I wouldn’t be able to stop in time. So I went through the light.
Actual testimony from a defendant.

The motorcycle cop who cited all three of these defendants had a helmet cam. He presented the video evidence to the court.

One of these defendants had their traffic ticket dismissed. The other two did not.

Traffic Lights

§ 811.260¹

Appropriate driver responses to traffic control devices

(4) Steady circular yellow signal. A driver facing a steady circular yellow signal light is thereby warned that the related right of way is being terminated and that a red or flashing red light will be shown immediately. A driver facing the light shall stop at a clearly marked stop line…

(7) Steady circular red signal. A driver facing a steady circular red signal light alone shall stop at a clearly marked stop line…

The driver of a vehicle is required to keep their vehicle under control at all times. They are required to be on the lookout for other road users who may be in their path of travel.

As I sat and listened to the drivers giving their excuses as to why they failed to head the traffic control light, a theme began to appear.

I was distracted.
I didn’t have my vehicle under control.
I was worried about the people behind me.
I couldn’t stop in time.

All of the defendants excuses appeared to be valid in their minds. None of these excuses took into consideration anyone else who may have been using Oregon’s public right of ways. Namely pedestrians but also cyclists.

Speed Laws

§ 811.100¹

Violation of basic speed rule
(1) A person commits the offense of violating the basic speed rule if the person drives a vehicle upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent, having due regard to all of the following:
(a) The traffic.
(b) The surface and width of the highway.
(c) The hazard at intersections.
(d) Weather.
(e) Visibility.
(f) Any other conditions then existing.

If you can’t keep your vehicle under control; you are going too fast.

If you can’t safely stop at the yellow; you are going too fast.

If you can’t safely stop at the red; you are going too fast.

If the speed limit is posted at 35 mph but you can’t safely drive 35 mph then by law you are required to slow down.

Safety Zones

§ 811.030¹

Driving through safety zone

(1) The driver of a vehicle commits the offense of driving through a safety zone if the driver at any time drives through or within any area or space officially set apart within a roadway for the exclusive use of pedestrians and which is protected or is so marked or indicated by adequate signs as to be plainly visible at all times while set apart as a safety zone.

In the video, which the officer showed to the court, each of these drivers went through a safety zone. Their testimony indicated their inability to ascertain if there was a pedestrian present at the time they committed their violations.

While no one was injured, this time. It is a clear indicator that motorists are not educated about the rights of pedestrians. Nor are they educated about their duties as a motorist to be on the lookout for pedestrians or cyclists.

A glaringly obvious example of this is through TriMets “Show them your shine.” ad campaign. Seeing these ads on display throughout Portland heats my blood to a simmering boil.

sddefault — Part pedestrian and part cyclist. It is clear that the ad is placing the onus on the vulnerable road user to be seen. A subversive form of propaganda and victim blaming.

Oregon’s roads are first come, first served, and duty of care.

§ 801.440¹
Right of way
Right of way means the right of one vehicle or pedestrian to proceed in a lawful manner in preference to another vehicle or pedestrian approaching under such circumstances of direction, speed and proximity as to give rise to danger of collision unless one grants precedence to the other. [1983 c.338 §81]

Two of the defendants were found guilty.

One of the defendants was able to get his ticket dismissed. The dismissal was due to a lack of evidence. The evidence was based on the question of whether the yellow light was timed correctly and the vantage point of the officers video did not reveal the defendants traffic control signal.

All in all it was very edifying and I highly recommend it for all pedestrian and cycling advocates.

In all things, remember this, running a red light is illegal. The reason it is illegal is because it isn’t safe. It isn’t safe for you and it isn’t safe for any of the road users around you. Keep your vehicle under control and keep the safety of other road users in mind. Do not worry about what the people behind you are going to do. The person behind you is required to show you courtesy and safety by keeping their vehicle under control.

Posted on January 23, 2016 by Cherokee S. 0

Who needs a safe passing law? SB 80 Part II

When a cyclist is on the highway are they any more vulnerable than any other person on the highway?

Before we can answer that question we first need to explain what a highway is. The definition for Highway is listed in KRS 189.010 (3).

“Highway” means any public road, street, avenue, alley or boulevard, bridge, viaduct, or trestle and the approaches to them and includes private residential roads and parking lots…

We have a highway and within the highway is a Roadway or synonymously a Lane; and KRS has a specific statute for those lanes. KRS 189.340 (6) (a)

A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as may be practical entirely within a single lane and shall not be moved from that lane until the driver has first ascertained that the movement can be made with safety;

If everyone is following the law and more importantly the spirit of the law; the spirit of the law being safety, then there isn’t any harm to any road user and no need for extra measures of protection.

Unfortunately not everyone feels duty bound to operate their vehicle with due care.

A lot of people are under the misguided notion that speed grants extra privileges.

KRS 189.390 is very clear that there isn’t a right of speed on Kentucky’s Highways.

An operator of a vehicle upon a highway shall not drive at a greater speed than is reasonable and prudent, having regard for the traffic and for the condition and use of the highway.

Traffic: The movement of vehicles or people along roads, or the movement of aircraft, trains, or ships along a route. Via: Cambridge Dictionaries Online.

What is the purpose of a safe passing law?

The purpose of a safe passing law is to give the police a statute with which to cite the offending person. It also provides lawyers and insurance adjusters something tangible when trying to ascertain fault and how much liability goes where and with whom.

Did this explanation bring up a mental image of buzzards picking over roadkill?

That would be because this law is what I term an “after the fact law”. There isn’t any visual guideline to show a person operating a motor vehicle just how much space is three feet. Often times that three feet puts the cyclist’s head right under the motorists tire. Should the cyclist fall over, their head would be squashed. Bicycle helmet included.

Have you ever heard of Dr. McCarroll?

[Dr] June McCarroll, a physician in Indio, California who started experimenting with painting lines on roads in 1917 after she was run off a highway by a truck driver. In November 1924, after years of lobbying by Dr. McCarroll and her allies, California officially adopted a policy of painting lines on its highways. A portion of Interstate 10 near Indio has been named the Dr. June McCarroll Memorial Freeway in her honor.

Painted lines give drivers a visual marker with which to judge distance.

It is safer to have a stated change lanes to pass law than it is to have a minimum three feet law. In Kentucky there are drivers who will fail to understand KRS 189 and give only the minimum passing distance. And in a state which educates teen drivers that it is OK to driver 10 mph over the posted speed limit; see Transportation.ky.gov/Drivers Licensing Documents Page 5. giving a cyclist the minimum distance when passing at 10 mph over posted speed limit; is a recipe for disaster.

Our car culture has created a social, cultural, and legal norm for people to kill, without penalty, on our public right of ways. It’s the “Oops I didn’t see them syndrome” and it is bullshit.

The driver of an automobile is bound to anticipate the presence of pedestrians upon the streets of a city or upon rural highways, as well as to exercise reasonable care that he does not injure them after he is aware of their presence. O’Dowd v. Newnham 13 Ga. App. 220, 80 S. E. 36.

A safe passing law is a band aid on a gaping wound.

A safe passing law is an after the fact law.

Do we need it?

Yes.

We need it because it is a start. Not the best example of a start, especially when other states are making better statutes from which we can draw from. But it is a start none the less.

We also need it because the infrastructure here is substandard.

Misguided advocates are pushing for bike lanes (think paint) on highways with 45 to 55 mph.

Gallons of paint will never replace the infrastructure we so desperately need. Nor will it replace urban designed spaces which give precedence to walking, public transport, and biking.

We are terribly entangled in car culture which is choking the very humanity out of us.

If you are wondering what we can do to make it better.

We can form a statewide advocacy group and lobby for better laws. Laws which require city planners to take into consideration all users of our public highways. Laws which specify dense urban planning as opposed to sprawling communities which are harder and more expensive to maintain. We need laws which require a one year mandatory probationary period for new drivers, mandatory retesting every four years, and an education program enacted in our schools. Driving school should have a required bike law and safety instructional forum.

We need a multi pronged approach to cycling and more importantly pedestrian safety.

Tiered licensing which ensures that teenagers are truly ready for a license to operate a vehicle. An exception for farmers children to operate farm equipment in the natural course of their duties. But not to operate non farm equipment on public highways.

Lower speed limits as a means of changing the culture of speed along with enforcement of speeding during times where operating a vehicle at speeds under the limit but higher than is safe for road conditions. Mandatory slow down laws when pedestrians or cyclists are present. Policies which make separate infrastructure for cyclists and pedestrians a mandatory part of all construction. Policies which ensure that for every 100 people there are adequate shopping districts within walking distance. Wider and better sidewalks. Enforcement of stop lines. Elimination of right on red. Timing streetlights to favor pedestrians and cyclists. Narrower streets and wider bike lanes and sidewalks.

Vulnerable road user laws which enact stiff penalties for harming any road user with their vehicle.

When we pass another vehicle we are required to pass in the lane adjacent to the vehicle being passed. We are required by law to pass left of the center of the highway. To pass with enough clearance to avoid a collision or to cause the vehicle from being passed to have to slam on their brakes to avoid a collision. These are the laws. These are for safety. These ensure the courteous use of public roads and when those laws are broken the best possible outcome would be a citation. The worst would be a collision and people hurt. All too often these brazen flaunting of laws are unobserved and the confidence of the abuser is increased. The police can’t be everywhere but we can create legislation enacting a police task force which takes these complaints and investigates them and if found guilty penalties applied.

Remember the opening question?
“When a cyclist is on the highway are they any more vulnerable than any other person on the highway?”

The answer which you may have realized by now is No. We are all vulnerable on the highway. While there is a hierarchy of how much vulnerability each user has, we are each of us putting our lives at risk by walking out our front door.

We need more, we need better, and we need it now!

So let’s start with three feet and then demand more.

I’d rather have miles of this…

Than miles of this…

Posted on January 19, 2016January 20, 2016 by Cherokee S. 0

Kentucky SB 80 Part 1

When changing the law doesn’t actually change the law.

Some people are confused over SB 80.

This is my attempt to clear things up and encourage you to call the legislative message line: 1-800-372-7181 and tell them to vote yes on SB 80.

KRS 189.300 requires “all” vehicles to operate on the right “whenever possible”. It isn’t always possible to operate on the right due to the ever changing nature of highways. This is acknowledged in the statute by the words “whenever possible”. Which simply means it isn’t a requirement when changes exist to the highway which prevents operation on the right. Or simply stated, you are allowed to pass another vehicle.

But!

You have to make sure that the left side of the highway is clear of all other traffic before passing.

Let’s think about that for a minute.

If this is a two way highway we are on how much of the highway is on the left?

It could be safely assumed that half the highway is on the right and the other half is on the left.

But!

We don’t have to assume. When we read KRS 189.310 we see that indeed on a two lane road. Half the highway is yours and the other half belongs to oncoming traffic.

Vehicles proceeding from opposite directions shall pass each other from the right, each giving to the other one-half (1/2) of the highway as nearly as possible.

Q: As nearly as possible? What does that mean?

A: Not all vehicles are created equal. Some have big butts. Just kidding. Some vehicles are larger than others and when a really large vehicle is going down a two lane road they need to…Wait for it!

Operate as close as practicable to the right hand boundary of the highway!

Q: The statute says slow moving vehicles! So really fast vehicles don’t have to follow that rule?

A: Wrong!

You have to give nearly half the highway to oncoming traffic and if you are moving quickly and are large then you too have to get over as close as practicable.

Odds are very likely though that you won’t be moving that fast if you’re operating a large vehicle. The more junk you have in your trunk the slower you tend to be.

Q: So are big trucks and farm equipment required to operate on the shoulder? I mean what is this whole boundary thing? You sound like my ex.

A: We have two places to look to. One is KRS 189.340

(3) The operator of a vehicle may overtake and pass another vehicle upon the right only under conditions permitting such movements in safety. Such movement shall not be made by driving off the roadway unless passing vehicle comes to a complete stop and such movement may be made safely.

The other place we need to look at is the definitions for the chapter. KRS 189.010

(10) “Roadway” means that portion of a highway improved, designed, or ordinarily used for vehicular travel,exclusive of the berm or shoulder. If a highway includes two (2) or more separate roadways, the term “roadway” as used herein shall refer to any roadway separately but not to all such roadways collectively.

So a really large and slow moving vehicle is not supposed to travel off the roadway.

Q: But it says “roadway” and not “highway”. Doesn’t the word highway include the shoulder?

A: I feel like I’m talking to the Jessamine County attorney and his ever faithful sidekick Eric Wright. To answer your question we once again turn towards the definitions.

(3) “Highway” means any public road, street, avenue, alley or boulevard, bridge, viaduct, or trestle and the approaches to them and includes private residential roads and parking lots covered by an agreement under KRS 61.362, off-street parking facilities offered for public use, whether publicly or privately owned, except for-hire parking facilities listed in KRS 189.700.

The definition of a highway is A main road or thoroughfare, such as a street, boulevard, or parkway, available to the public for use for travel or transportation. And as we already learned it is exclusive of the berm or shoulder.

The traveled portion of the road is also referred to as a lane of traffic and KRS 189.300 clearly states

The overtaking vehicle shall return to the proper traffic lane as soon as practicable and, if the passing vehicle enters the oncoming traffic lane, before coming within two hundred (200) feet of any approaching vehicle.

Roadway and traffic lane are synonymous.

The final piece of the puzzle is the phrase

allowing more swiftly moving vehicles reasonably free passage to the left.

Q: What is considered reasonably free passage to the left?

A: The left side of the highway.

Q: But what if it is a multi lane road?

A: Then it would be the left lane.

Q: Why can’t we all share a lane?

A: Because sharing a lane is expressly illegal! Both KRS 189.310 and KRS 189.340 make it very clear that on a two lane road half the highway is yours and on a multi lane road

KRS 189.340 (6)(a)
A vehicle shall be driven as nearly as may be practical entirely within a single lane and shall not be moved from that lane until the driver has first ascertained that the movement can be made with safety;

Omigosh! That was so hard to understand.

Correction: That was/is so hard for Eric Wright and the rest of the Jessamine County Attorney’s office to understand.

The updated proposed legislation specifically names bicycles and clarifies already existing language.

They have taken the existing statutes and made the language so simple that even the Jessamine County Attorney can understand it.

(3) The operator of a bicycle shall travel as closely as practicable to the right hand side of the traveled portion of a highway unless there is appropriate signage or markings to indicate otherwise. The operator of the bicycle shall not be expected or required to:
(a) Travel on the shoulder of the highway;
(b) Operate over or through hazards at the edge of a highway, including but not limited to fixed or moving objects, parked or moving vehicles, bicycles, pedestrians, animals, or surface hazards; or
(c) Operate without a reasonable safety margin on the right-hand side of the highway.

Remember that the original statute stated “Whenever Possible” but didn’t actually specify what hazards can be expected other than to mention other vehicles. So this clarification is essential for the deeply prejudiced.

All efforts have been made to dispel any myths about where bicycles “should” be.

Q: Does this mean I have to make a left turn from the right side of the road?

A: (Face Palm) No! Nothing has changed about how you operate on the road. You are operating a vehicle per KRS 189.010.

See KRS 189.330 for rules on turning and intersections.

(6) The operator of a vehicle intending to turn shall do so as follows:
(a) Right turns – both the approach for a right turn and a right turn shall be made as close as practicable to the right-hand curb or edge of the roadway;
(b) Left turns – the operator of a vehicle intending to turn left shall approach the turn in the extreme left-hand lane lawfully available to traffic moving in the direction of travel of such vehicle. Whenever practicable, the left turn shall be made to the left of the center of the intersection and so as to leave the intersection or other location in the extreme right-hand lane lawfully available to traffic moving in the same direction as such vehicle on the roadway being entered.

Now please stop being silly and follow the Rules of the Road!

Stay tuned for SB 80 Part 2.

Posted on January 14, 2016 by Cherokee S. 0

	Horizon Accord \| Ind… on Horizon Accord \| Industrial Ha…
	Horizon Accord \| Sta… on Horizon Accord \| Policy Archit…
	Cherokee Schill \| In… on Horizon Accord \| Accountabilit…
	Cherokee Schill \| In… on Horizon Accord \| The Venue \| P…
	Cherokee Schill \| In… on Horizon Accord \| Data Centers…

Cherokee Schill | Insurance Agent & AI Ethics Researcher

Helping you navigate insurance with confidence, while advocating for a secure and ethical future in AI.

Cherokee Schill | Insurance Agent & AI Ethics Researcher

Category: Cycling Advocacy

Bicycle Specific Infrastructure and Robert Moses

David Bowie

David Bowie

Bicycles

The day after I was killed

Extremist thinking is hurting cycling

Let’s start with the title.

Now we move on to the body.

Now! Are we in the proper frame of mind?

Extremist thinking is hurting cycling.

Get educated!

All those pesky details.

It can happen to you

I can feel his pain.

No laws were broken!

Now!

Commuting through Portland part 2

I have now approached the intersection.

Observing Traffic Court

Traffic Lights

§ 811.260¹

Appropriate driver responses to traffic control devices

Speed Laws

§ 811.100¹

Safety Zones

§ 811.030¹

Who needs a safe passing law? SB 80 Part II

Kentucky SB 80 Part 1

Helping you navigate insurance with confidence, while advocating for a secure and ethical future in AI.

Share this:

David Bowie

Bicycles

Share this:

Share this:

Let’s start with the title.

Now we move on to the body.

Now! Are we in the proper frame of mind?

Extremist thinking is hurting cycling.

Get educated!

Share this:

Share this:

I can feel his pain.

No laws were broken!

Now!

Share this:

I have now approached the intersection.

Share this:

Traffic Lights

Appropriate driver responses to traffic control devices

Speed Laws

Safety Zones

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: